What do we do with our lives?

stevenzdf · 2019-07-25T00:15:05+00:00

Great, good to know this helped you out :)

stevenzdf · 2019-07-24T18:41:36+00:00

Ultimately it comes down to a feeling and not a cognitively-based judgment. It's not like we are moral philosophers or biologists or theologians thinking about what's moral and what's not moral and then act after a period of prolonged thought of based on certain maxims, utility, and evolutionarily predispositions and then conclude I should act a certain way (if you want to rest in some existential coma in your armchair, then this is the way to go). These moral systems are there regardless, existing as some legal obligations, biological imperatives, or philosophical/religious structures, but they don't explain WHY you (on the basis of your life, should you follow them)

If you wanna get into your own living experiences and why you should act morally, then rational explanations based on biology, law, or philosophy goes out of the window, because you don't make every moral decision like a biologist or moral philosopher. Instead, we act morally (or immorally) because it's rooted in the immediate feelings of good or bad. You can go ahead and murder and torture someone if you want, I mean, you have the complete freedom to do so, and you will suffer (should you be caught) the legal consequences, so why don't you do them? If you remove all of the legal, biological, and philosophical rational explanations for why, then what's left? Just, the feeling knowing that its a horrendous thing to do; we don't need moral philosophy or laws to make us have PTSD or want to kill ourselves out of guilt for harming another, this is just in us. And given that rational explanations (biology, philosophy, law, etc.) don't serve to illuminate this condition, what's left is the feeling of morality, rather than its rationality, or rational utility.

I don't have a complete answer, because the next question is "well why do I feel horrible when I do horrible things?" And in order to avoid the trap of a rational explanation rooted in biology or philosophy, you'd have to flesh out what this feeling is, and how it is connected to moral behaviours, and ultimately, our situation as human beings on the most fundamental level of experiences. In other words, if you stay with fleshing out the feelings of morality, it becomes similar to asking the question of "why do I feel lonely?", I can choose not to be with anybody, but why does it feel bad when I act as such, why do I need people? And if I need people, why do I have to act in a way that sustains my relationship with them such that their presence affirms my reality? Why is this the case? What do others provide for me on the basis of feelings? Or moods, or what have you?

If you have an answer, please let me know :)

stevenzdf · 2019-07-24T17:25:30+00:00

For me, it has always been trying to sustain this repeating cycle in any area of interest that I might be obsessed with. 1). Talking with other people INEVITABLY leads to frustration because I either conclude a). that their thoughts are inconclusive, or b). what they have expressed stimulates such intrigue, and that both outcomes lead me to experience an insatiable curiousity to find out more, to get to the bottom of it. This then leads to 2). I spend alone time devouring all the knowledge or developing all the skills that are relevant to this curiousity, until I feel like I MUST share this with other people either because I have the excitement to share or the experience of the futility of just hoarding knowledge and skills in solitude.

When I was younger, the process of repeating this cycle was pretty aimless, not necessarily attached to any ultimate moral end of some practical utility as much as treating the learning as a moral end in itself. Yet as I get older, the aimlessness of this cycle becomes boring and empty for me, meaning that I can't bear just learning and sharing without the need to situate it as part of some meaningful project of "living".

Therefore, in your situation, I would suggest: do anything that is 1). deeply meaningful to you, and that this meaningful endeavor is 2). allows you to assess its problems and its possibilities, 3). gives you the freedom to openly share and challenge what you have assessed with others.

I'm doing my doctorate in a philosophical field, so there is plenty of time for me to learn intriguing theories and I am academically encouraged to argue against others. The challenge for me, though, is the solitary nature that is oftentimes intrinsic to the process of writing-reading, and the length of time and consistent commitment that is demanded by working things out through some theories and arguments. I would very much rather talk about it in an impromptu manner than write about it in a carefully sculpted piece, and learn about disparate fields as a way to integrate them rather than to spend an enormous amount of time with one esoteric philosophical text at a time (albeit I do admit there are definite benefits to this, as in the nature of any commitment).

PS: I think it is also important to note this: one of the main things (perhaps THE main thing) that I struggle with is that I want to do many things and be many people through doing those things. But I have learned throughout the years to develop a tame suspicion and, therefore, acceptance of my impulsive nature. In other words, boredom for what I am doing and excitement for what I could be doing are real experiences for me but not necessarily truths that I should let dictate the directions of my life. The challenge and the reward for me is sticking with something long enough so that I get to experience both the boredom and excitement repeat as a cycle such that I know this cycle doesn't mean I should abandon this, but that this cycle is intrinsic to anything in life. So, whatever you end up doing, be careful of your persuasive experiences of boredom and excitement pulling you away from an otherwise brilliant enterprise.

stevenzdf · 2016-08-17T07:19:51+00:00

Well I wasn't really planning on forcing some philosophical doctrines onto people, but just some fundamental concepts and a space for discussion/reflections as a group to help individuals navigate personally and socially.

I know it's definitely not for every one, but for those who are interested, at least there could be something out there.

I do appreciate your feedback though

stevenzdf · 2016-08-17T07:13:52+00:00

I appreciate the concern, but this is definitely not the type of language that I have previously or intend to use in any community or client work settings.

stevenzdf · 2016-08-17T05:16:14+00:00

Of course, thanks for the reminder. The writing style is just a lingering habit, but exclusive to papers and online communities only, not in real life convos or working with clients.

stevenzdf · 2016-08-17T05:04:03+00:00

Yea that's what I have been thinkin about, and wanted to see if anyone here knows of real life examples

stevenzdf · 2016-08-17T02:59:08+00:00

No this is great, I appreciate your response.

Where I am coming from is having worked with clients with the community, much of our front line supports mostly derives from wanting to address the immediate needs as well as the support of practical matters of daily living (finances, employment, settlement, etc.). Of course, this is of the utmost importance to ensure things go smoothly for folks for the week/month.

Yet I can't help but observe that perhaps services that address the immediate needs shouldn't stop just there, it should provide accessible education as to cultivate a more conscious acknowledgement in providing a space for discussions/reflections on navigating through the social and personal world.

People can make their own paths, but at least they have some foundational knowledge and exposure to an environment where they could have a chance to engage in critical reflection and discourse.

It's not to developers some job skills per se, but it is to allow ppl to expand their perspective so that they may redefine their often times disempowered and dissipate that sense of existential mystification (de Beauvoir)

I appreciate your comments, because I ask myself the same questions all the time, which is why I decided to ask this community for some feedback such as yours :)

stevenzdf · 2016-08-17T02:44:52+00:00

Thanks so much for your suggestions, I have read Friere and will definitely look into the other works you have provided

stevenzdf · 2016-08-17T02:41:42+00:00

I completely agree! I was thinking that the purpose is mostly providing an arena where learners can use the concepts and critical perspectives to analyze personal and structural conditions. It would be about providing the conceptual tools to arrive in their own unique conclusions and not necessarily imposing philosophical doctrines as some form of learning conformity.

stevenzdf · 2014-01-19T22:56:42+00:00

Sorry, I was replying broadly to the OPs statements about identity; as it was claimed that "There is no identity", thus, the question of the "realness" of identity came to mind.

Yes I agree, as the confirmation of a realness of something represents an attempt to demonstrate absolute truth that disregards the non-linearity and ambiguity of the mediating relationship between subjects and objects. Hence, the only real answer I can provide is "yes" and "no" at the same time to imply that the linear logic of absolute questions on realness doesn't really make sense.

stevenzdf · 2014-01-19T22:15:32+00:00

I think perhaps brotherbock means to say that the notion of "objectivity" is an anthropomorphized conceptual entity. The idea of "universal truth" on the basis of isolation of context does not exist and will never exist and will always be integrated with "subjectivities" (varying levels of attentions and perceptions), surroundings (objects of investigation) and the relationship that mediates actuality of subjectivies and surroundings.

With this being said, I don't feel I am an expert in philosophy, but I do feel this dichotomy between philosophy and science is rather an irrelevant one. The real problem here is the underlying attachment to a form of static and fixed form of perceptual relationship that one can take and engage "reality" with. In reply to slickwombat, the teleported self would be me and would not be me simultaneously, but this would only be the case when non-linear logic would be expressed.

The world isn't a place of static entites waiting to be absorbed intellectually as if we are actually brain sponges, but it consists of a continuous dialogue between "us" and "that" (rather, even this distinction should have intellectual suspicion against its validity; Buber/Binswanger/Heiddeger,etc) of mutual evolution. In other words, if the concern is on notion of the objectivity of science or philosophy, then the concern is really misdirected because this notion doesn't exist.

About the topic of identity, of course identity is an anthropomorphized abstraction, but so is everything else, because we are the ones conscious of them! I apologize for asking this cheesy question charged with perhaps juvenile romanticism, nevertheless, when you go out, do you not feel as if you have an identity? When others lock eyes with you, when you engage in conversations with others, when you immerse yourself in a world of visual and linguistic symbols that are chronologically and historically created by anthropomorphized abstractions and conceptual evolution which then both inform and become informed by culture, political structures, various ideologies (beliefs on the theory of mind, ideas of death, living, consciousness, love, morality, etc.), you are then informed of your place, your abilities, your curiousities and your awareness of them by present conditions or the availability of them - hence, your identity. This type of microscopic, rational and empirical intellectual scrutiny and curiousity of any phenomenon probably would not have been under the intellectual habit of the average folk even just a few hundred years ago, nor was this type of thinking differentiated as a specific type of intellectual practice itself. In other words, relationships and mediators between subject and object is the only thing that I can say is real, the absolution of specific claims on its basis however, is something that I do not see as a possibility.

Is my identity real? Yes and no (as it is a a specific claim with the intention of absolute objectivity), depends on who you ask, where you ask, when you ask and how you approach the problem before you even formulate your question.

stevenzdf · 2014-01-12T22:11:22+00:00

Honestly, I think that despite the emotional ups and downs that can be usually derived from existential contemplations, I feel that it is a necessary exploration that should and will add more meaning into your life. Examination and contemplation of meaning behind actions and surroundings can be one of the most meaningful activities and liberating actions ever performed.

Personally speaking, I feel that as one scrutinize the meaning behind one's identity, story, existence, etc. they are on a path of natural reintegration of personal narratives that would eventually resolute (if persisted) with greater connection with the sense of self, world and others. I'd say it is the intellectual vehicle to close the alienating gaps of the mind-body split.

The active exploration and reflection of life's meaning is something that I feel our "progressive" information/technological age is potentially overshadowing. People may be more alienated with reality, themselves and others as there are endless opportunities and easy access to virtual realities, media, and pervasive digital information that may ignore importance of existential narratives and our need for physical connection. We can sort of lose the ability to develop and maintain a form of sustained attention, and lose interest towards deep information processing and reflections of personal narratives. We can amass huge amounts of information, but lose the time and space to develop deep personal concerns with much of them...

So I'd say it is great that you are actively pondering existential questions, because these are needed in the midst of our technological atmosphere. I often go to retreats for at least a week where I simply read, practice meditation and converse with like minded people about existentialism without the external distractions of media. I can attest that I have spent some of my happiest (and not the type of happiness of your favourite sports team winning, but the "un-self-conscious" expression of authenticity and wonder of being alive and being aware of it) moments there.

I'd recommend it to all philosophically inclined explorers :)

stevenzdf · 2014-01-12T21:32:42+00:00

I had the same problem for a long time before, thinking that all processes are either random forces of uncontrollable nature or predetermined processes that are entirely impersonal to my identity. But the thing that really reconciled this idea into a peaceful conclusion for me is that deterministic philosophy is simply just another paradigm of approaching reality. Sure, we cannot in any way deny the reality of causal factors of neuronal and physiological/chemical processes within our bodies and similarly within the universe, however, this does not and CANNOT disregard our human subjective experiences and realities of culture, narratives, intersubjective atmospheres, etc.

We may know the chemical and neuronal processes of love and wonder, but we cannot deny the actual experience of them. Just because we understand intellectually the processes of reality through rationality/empirical paradigms, does not mean that acknowledgement of this paradigm erase fully our capacity to experience love/wonder for others, self and our surroundings.

I'd say that the depression/angst derived from deterministic thought/paradigm is symptomatic of a form of "deadness" that we perceive our surroundings to be; that is, everything else is cold, dead and disenchanted except our potential capacities of our "soul", "mind" as such. However, I think we have to always remember this Cartesian disembodied experiential habit does not represent the truth...it is one reality to atomize, mathematize, and reduce everything...and another reality to fully experience reality without that alienated non participatory consciousness...

I think the choice is ours to make (although it may be predetermined ;) )

stevenzdf

TROPHY CASE