Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

It is even necessary? For if we were created with meaning, surely we weren't made to know. Or is there meaning at all? Or is us finding meaning the by product of some psychological thing?

uncertainty=cognitive dissonance

language + human capacity to think abstractly = questions with no immediate answer

cognitive dissonance + questions with no immediate answer = need for meaning

Originally posted by inimalist
uncertainty=cognitive dissonance

language + human capacity to think abstractly = questions with no immediate answer

cognitive dissonance + questions with no immediate answer = need for meaning

This = great answer.

Originally posted by inimalist
uncertainty=cognitive dissonance

language + human capacity to think abstractly = questions with no immediate answer

cognitive dissonance + questions with no immediate answer = need for meaning I'm not seeing urge or need in that equation.

the brain acts to eliminate cognitive dissonance

because dissonance can be created by questions relating to existential concepts (why am I here, etc) and because those questions do not have readily available answers in the environment in which we live, the brain must act to reduce it.

Ah.

Stupid brains.

Originally posted by lord xyz
I'm not seeing urge or need in that equation.

3rd to last word.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
3rd to last word. I was refering to the other side of that equation.

Originally posted by inimalist
the brain acts to eliminate cognitive dissonance


Can I ask why? Why is this something the brain does? Is there an evolutionary benefit to lack of cognitive dissonance?


Also, what specifically qualifies as cognitive dissonance?

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
Can I ask why? Why is this something the brain does? Is there an evolutionary benefit to lack of cognitive dissonance?


Also, what specifically qualifies as cognitive dissonance?

Any instance where a person may perceive or recognize an inconsistency in their thoughts/cognition. Like holding two contradictory ideas at the same time. The actual theory implies that people try to minimize dissonance by justifying their thoughts or ideas, or even changing them altogether.

also, there is evidence that simply being in a situation that in ambiguous, or where you have little control, can cause a dissonance type state. The unknown, then, can work much like 2 opposing ideas.

Originally posted by lord xyz
It is even necessary? For if we were created with meaning, surely we weren't made to know. Or is there meaning at all? Or is us finding meaning the by product of some psychological thing?

I don't believe there is a 'defined' meaning to life, no. Everybody has their own 'meaning', if you catch my drift.

Why do people always pursue the knowledge of the 'ultimate question'? Why, to give themselves meaning, of course. We're alive, so we want to feel like we have a purpose- a true meaning in the grand scale of things. This is one of the basic human traits- self-glorification and self-importance. At least, this is the reason for asking 'what is the meaning of life' specifically.

I mean, really, you'll find it everywhere. Stuff like 'sanctity of life', and certain religions (Judaism- which I am supposedly a part of- for example) calling themselves 'God's chosen people'...

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
and certain religions (Judaism- which I am supposedly a part of- for example) calling themselves 'God's chosen people'...
...to emphasize responsibility as a role model regarding ethical behavior, not privilege as some kind of favorite of God. Biblically speaking, God had a plan, he needed people to carry it out, so he figured what the heck, those guys in that Judean Valley don't seem particularly busy... "Psst. You with the sheep. C'mere..."

As for finding meaning: at the least, there are likely evolutionary reasons. Those better able to see patterns, understand figure-ground relationships and grasp contextual cues probably had a better chance of surviving and breeding than those who didn't.

Originally posted by Mindship
...to emphasize responsibility as a role model regarding ethical behavior, not privilege as some kind of favorite of God. Biblically speaking, God had a plan, he needed people to carry it out, so he figured what the heck, those guys in that Judean Valley don't seem particularly busy... "Psst. You with the sheep. C'mere..."

Umm... no. It doesn't quite work like that, and believe me, I've studied the Old Bible. God chose the Jewish people- originally Abraham- to continue his 'legacy' and believe in him. Therefore, the Jews were continuously noted to be god's 'favorites' and the 'chosen ones', of greater importance than the other religions.

Though, come to think about it, thinking that you are the religion specifically tasked with god's work- above all others- is certainly a form of self-glorification.

Originally posted by Mindship
As for finding meaning: at the least, there are likely evolutionary reasons. Those better able to see patterns, understand figure-ground relationships and grasp contextual cues probably had a better chance of surviving and breeding than those who didn't.

Yes, that's true. I wasn't talking about mankind's lust for knowledge in general, just the reason why the need to figure out 'what is the meaning of life'. What you are describing is intelligence.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Umm... no. It doesn't quite work like that, and believe me, I've studied the Old Bible. God chose the Jewish people- originally Abraham- to continue his 'legacy' and believe in him. But not because they were Jewish. There was a job to do, and someone had to be picked. They became 'favorites' once the responsibility was assigned.

However, you may indeed be more familiar with the Old Testament than I. I would appreciate it if you could please post the verse which clearly states that God already favored the Jews beforehand and that's why He chose them. It would be an eye-opener for me.


Though, come to think about it, thinking that you are the religion specifically tasked with god's work- above all others- is certainly a form of self-glorification. There's no doubt that religion has been abused in this fashion. Even today, this "religionism" exists, eg, it is how many Jews do see themselves in relation to other faiths, never mind the death and destruction religionism in general has wrought throughout history. It's likely a main reason why many view religion in a negative light, eg, as a form of self-glorification.

Yes, that's true. I wasn't talking about mankind's lust for knowledge in general, just the reason why the need to figure out 'what is the meaning of life'. What you are describing is intelligence. Understood. To be more specific then, I would still hold that seeking a meaning of life (which does require intelligence) must hold some survival advantage. Consider the Jewish people: it has been their very faith in God and His Plan (the Jewish Meaning of Life, if you will) that has sustained them through thousands of years of persecution.

Originally posted by Mindship
But not because they were Jewish. There was a job to do, and someone had to be picked. They became 'favorites' once the responsibility was assigned.

However, you may indeed be more familiar with the Old Testament than I. I would appreciate it if you could please post the verse which clearly states that God already favored the Jews beforehand and that's why He chose them. It would be an eye-opener for me.

Allow me to explain. First of all, I don't have an exact quote- my copy of the Bible is written in Hebrew, see. I could google it, but I don't have a load of time on the computer.

Basically, I'll grant you the basic concept; Abraham was, supposedly, given many promises by God, so long as he continued acting as an agent of his will and attempting to convert people in Judaism (although this was the only monotheistic religion at the time, so I don't know if we can use the phrase 'Judaism'). Although in the future, numerous different religions would emerge from the concept of a 'single god', the Jewish people believe that they are the 'true' people of God, and their faith is the right one.

This is clearly depicted by God's actions in the old bible, where he continuously commits acts oriented around the Jewish people and the Israelis, included displaying clear bias in their favor against other religions.

Do you follow me?

Originally posted by Mindship
There's no doubt that religion has been abused in this fashion. Even today, this "religionism" exists, eg, it is how many Jews do see themselves in relation to other faiths, never mind the death and destruction religionism in general has wrought throughout history. It's likely a main reason why many view religion in a negative light, eg, as a form of self-glorification.

It is self-glorification. While there are oh-so-many other examples than the Judaism one, I'll continue to use it to substantiate my points

Judaism teaches that their religion is the 'true' religion, and that they are closest to God and are always in his favor. I don't know if 'Chosen' is explicitly mentioned, but it's certainly implied. This is indeed the glorification of one's own religion and one's own beliefs.

Religionism sucks, yeah. I don't believe in God, but my true problems lies with God's worshippers (although, then again, perhaps God is tied to it, in a sense).

Originally posted by Mindship
Understood. To be more specific then, I would still hold that seeking a meaning of life (which does require intelligence) must hold some survival advantage. Consider the Jewish people: it has been their very faith in God and His Plan (the Jewish Meaning of Life, if you will) that has sustained them through thousands of years of persecution.

I've come across this argument before. Yes, it is inarguable that Jews were kept together via traditions and beliefs, to the point that- at the moment- they were eventually granted their 'promised' land, Israel. However, think about it for a moment- the Jews have undergone mass-prejudice, massacres, genocides, etc, from the Holocaust to the Inquisition. Even at the moment, things aren't looking too bright for us, that with our massive conflict with the Arabs, which is a result of the mixture of state and religion. I'm Israeli, I know this stuff.

If the Jews hadn't kept their faith, would things have been so bad? We would probably be members of different religions and/or atheists... but we would have avoided so many conflicts, so many wars, so many confrontations.

Originally posted by lord xyz
It is even necessary? For if we were created with meaning, surely we weren't made to know. Or is there meaning at all? Or is us finding meaning the by product of some psychological thing? We have urges???

edit

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Basically, I'll grant you the basic concept; Abraham was, supposedly, given many promises by God, so long as he continued acting as an agent of his will and attempting to convert people in Judaism (although this was the only monotheistic religion at the time, so I don't know if we can use the phrase 'Judaism'). Although in the future, numerous different religions would emerge from the concept of a 'single god', the Jewish people believe that they are the 'true' people of God, and their faith is the right one.

This is clearly depicted by God's actions in the old bible, where he continuously commits acts oriented around the Jewish people and the Israelis, included displaying clear bias in their favor against other religions.

Judaism teaches that their religion is the 'true' religion, and that they are closest to God and are always in his favor. I don't know if 'Chosen' is explicitly mentioned, but it's certainly implied. This is indeed the glorification of one's own religion and one's own beliefs.
God's gonna protect his home team, absolutely (otherwise why pick them in the first place? why have a Bible?). But is that because the Jews were, somehow, already "special," or did the Jews become special because they became God's home team?

Perhaps I take too much to heart how Rabbi Hillel put it, about the essence of Judaism: "What you don't like, don't do to others. Everything else is commentary." This for me, with any 'true faith,' is a key difference between being religious and being religionistic.

I've come across this argument before. Yes, it is inarguable that Jews were kept together via traditions and beliefs, to the point that- at the moment- they were eventually granted their 'promised' land, Israel. However, think about it for a moment- the Jews have undergone mass-prejudice, massacres, genocides, etc, from the Holocaust to the Inquisition. Even at the moment, things aren't looking too bright for us, that with our massive conflict with the Arabs, which is a result of the mixture of state and religion.
To put it broadly: "If there's such a loving God, why is there so much suffering in the world?" Always a good conversation starter, that.

You know when your looking for something and you have a feeling that you saw it maybe only a few days before but now you can't find it no matter where you look?

That's what humanity is thinking when it comes to these questions...

Originally posted by Mindship
God's gonna protect his home team, absolutely (otherwise why pick them in the first place? why have a Bible?). But is that because the Jews were, somehow, already "special," or did the Jews become special because they became God's home team?

Abraham made a pact with God over a big ritual. Lots of promises were given to Abraham about the future of his dynasty, if he continued to uphold and glorify god's beliefs in his original form (today, it's called Judaism). So, in a sense, God supposedly blessed the Jewish people and granted them the ability to be closest to him and to constantly be favored by him.

This is- no matter how you look at it- a method of self-glorification; 'God chose us to be his people. We're right and we're closest to him.'

The old Bible continues with many examples on how Jews were directly favored over other religions, with zero consideration for other lives. If you'd want, I could give you actual examples of such things happening.

Originally posted by Mindship
Perhaps I take too much to heart how Rabbi Hillel put it, about the essence of Judaism: "What you don't like, don't do to others. Everything else is commentary." This for me, with any 'true faith,' is a key difference between being religious and being religionistic.

Yeah, it is.

Allow me to go into a rant. Judaism is different at its core from both Islam and Christianity, in the sense that it is not a missionary religion. Judaism doesn't attempt to convert other people to it, nor does it commit conquest in the name of God, unlike Islam or Christianity, which both encourage the same act.

This is not to say that this vital difference was not, in certain cases, bad to the survival of the Jews. Throughout the entirety of history, the Jews all over the world were secluded. They inbred continuously and constantly emphasized themselves as different people. Can all the racism and bigotry against Jews throughout history be blamed on other religions? Judaism never, to the best of my knowledge, truly attempted to fit in with another society. Why is that? Their beliefs are not all that different than the beliefs of other monotheistic religions.

I believe that this is an example of a dooming 'holier than thou' attitude. Jews believe that they had been blessed by god, that they are following the path of Abraham- a path that was created by god, instigated by god, and 'endorsed' by god. And that god favors the Jews above all others. And so this resulted in the Jews forming a community that is clearly distinguishable from the mainstream community at the time- a 'superior' community in their eyes.

No, Judaism did not cause nearly as much destruction or death as either Islam or Christianity. But they, in some form, caused immense harm and destruction to themselves, and, even today, the topic of religion and Judaism gets in the way of negotiations with the Arabs.


Originally posted by Mindship
To put it broadly: "If there's such a loving God, why is there so much suffering in the world?" Always a good conversation starter, that.

Not quite, actually. You said 'Judaism kept a nation together and it eventually paid off.' I say, 'Would it have been so bad had Judaism dissolved into the other religions?', and then I gave examples of why that might have prevented conflict.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
I believe that this is an example of a dooming 'holier than thou' attitude. Jews believe that they had been blessed by god, that they are following the path of Abraham- a path that was created by god, instigated by god, and 'endorsed' by god. And that god favors the Jews above all others. And so this resulted in the Jews forming a community that is clearly distinguishable from the mainstream community at the time- a 'superior' community in their eyes.

As opposed to all those other religions that say, "Hey folks we're a nice alternative but those other people could be right."?

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Abraham made a pact with God over a big ritual. Lots of promises were given to Abraham about the future of his dynasty, if he continued to uphold and glorify god's beliefs in his original form (today, it's called Judaism). So, in a sense, God supposedly blessed the Jewish people and granted them the ability to be closest to him and to constantly be favored by him.

This is- no matter how you look at it- a method of self-glorification; 'God chose us to be his people. We're right and we're closest to him.' I understand all of what you're saying. Yes, Biblically speaking, the Jews have been favored. I only maintain that it's because the Jewish people were assigned a special task: this is what made them favored. Nothing inherent/decided by God beforehand. Just, somebody had to be picked. To see otherwise: that would be self-glorification. A truly pious individual does not see him/herself as superior, regardless of task assigned. If anything, they humble themselves before the weight of their responsibility.

Allow me to go into a rant. Judaism is different at its core from both Islam and Christianity, in the sense that it is not a missionary religion. Judaism doesn't attempt to convert other people to it, nor does it commit conquest in the name of God, unlike Islam or Christianity...Interesting you should mention that. Maimonedes' idea was that since Judaism doesn't proselytize, it had to 'transform' in a way. Christianity and Islam, therefore, became like Judaism's missionary arms, reaching out to spread the Word (albeit, not in the nicest fashion).

This is not to say that this vital difference was not, in certain cases, bad to the survival of the Jews. Throughout the entirety of history, the Jews all over the world were secluded. They inbred continuously and constantly emphasized themselves as different people. Can all the racism and bigotry against Jews throughout history be blamed on other religions? Judaism never, to the best of my knowledge, truly attempted to fit in with another society. Why is that? Their beliefs are not all that different than the beliefs of other monotheistic religions.

I believe that this is an example of a dooming 'holier than thou' attitude. Jews believe that they had been blessed by god, that they are following the path of Abraham- a path that was created by god, instigated by god, and 'endorsed' by god. And that god favors the Jews above all others. And so this resulted in the Jews forming a community that is clearly distinguishable from the mainstream community at the time- a 'superior' community in their eyes.

No, Judaism did not cause nearly as much destruction or death as either Islam or Christianity. But they, in some form, caused immense harm and destruction to themselves, and, even today, the topic of religion and Judaism gets in the way of negotiations with the Arabs. My only comment here is that the final responsibility for a person's behavior (or group of people) rests with that person/group. Eg, Could the Jews have done more to protect themselves during, say, the Holocaust, as in pretending to be Christian? Absolutely. But their pride (and their sense of 'being special') discouraged them from doing so. But the final responsibility for Germany's behavior rests with Germany.

Not quite, actually. You said 'Judaism kept a nation together and it eventually paid off.' I say, 'Would it have been so bad had Judaism dissolved into the other religions?', and then I gave examples of why that might have prevented conflict. I said the Jewish people's faith in God and His Plan helped them to survive times of hardship, and that what you had posted was a more specific example of the Loving God/Suffering in the World paradox. I also maintain that given all the persecution throughout history of a small, dispersed minority, there must be something with strong survival values in Judaism, otherwise the Jews would've been wiped out long ago.

Clearly, as an Israeli, you have a perspective on this - and very strong feelings - that I can only understand as an American Jew. You make excellent points, but I can't help but feel your POV is mostly a reaction to all the religionism you must see. On the same token, I have my bias, perhaps viewing the story of the Jewish people (and religion in general) in a more idealistic light.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
As opposed to all those other religions that say, "Hey folks we're a nice alternative but those other people could be right."?

As I've said; Judaism caused far less destruction than Islam or Christianity. That being said, it did- due to the feeling of self-importance- bring much of the destruction upon itself, due to lack of efforts to integrate into the mainstream community.

Of course the actions committed by the other religions are far more evil and destructive. But the Jewish attitude is far from saintly.

Originally posted by Mindship
I understand all of what you're saying. Yes, Biblically speaking, the Jews have been favored. I only maintain that it's because the Jewish people were assigned a special task: this is what made them favored. Nothing inherent/decided by God beforehand. Just, somebody had to be picked. To see otherwise: that would be self-glorification. A truly pious individual does not see him/herself as superior, regardless of task assigned. If anything, they humble themselves before the weight of their responsibility.

That's not the 'Jewish attitude' (hey, I've invented a new term! ). Yeah, you're one of the Jews who does not see themselves as superior, which is great. You're not the source of the problem. Y'see, the Bible- at least the old (and Jewish) one- maintains the idea that God favors the Jews over other religions. Why is that? Because of a promise made by Abraham. They were in a sense, given a task, but I am operating on the belief that the Bible is a fictional book written by a fallible mortal. If this is true, than clearly what that person teaches is that Judaism is a task from god, and committing that task made them superior to other religions. So it's as thus; if you're a practicing Jew, you get treatment above other people.

The events in the book of Judges supports what I am trying to say. It is basically a singular book divided into multiple 'serialized' stories with virtually the same plot; the Jews have control of Israel, they sin, an invader attacks, conquers Israel, the Jews pray, God sends a human being (a Judge) to unite the Israelis and kill the invader. As you can see, the plot is as I've described above; the moment they start sinning, they lose God's favor, but the instant they start practicing Judaism again, God essentially kills the invader for them. Directly showing bias in favor of Jews.

The departure of the slaves from Egypt is also an example. While what God did was clearly just, think about it... after the Israelis crossed the desert, they were given God's power to kill the current inhabitants of Israel and make it their own country.

The Bible constantly maintains, implies, and displays the superiority of the 'Believing Jew' over other people.

Originally posted by Mindship
Interesting you should mention that. Maimonedes' idea was that since Judaism doesn't proselytize, it had to 'transform' in a way. Christianity and Islam, therefore, became like Judaism's missionary arms, reaching out to spread the Word (albeit, not in the nicest fashion).

Yeah. Religious conquest is ultimately religion's biggest problem and fault.

Originally posted by Mindship
My only comment here is that the final responsibility for a person's behavior (or group of people) rests with that person/group. Eg, Could the Jews have done more to protect themselves during, say, the Holocaust, as in pretending to be Christian? Absolutely. But their pride (and their sense of 'being special') discouraged them from doing so. But the final responsibility for Germany's behavior rests with Germany.

Of course Germany's problem lies with Germany. What the Nazis did is assault a helpless minority, simply because they made an easy scapegoat.

The problem with the Jews... they made it too easy to cast them as the scapegoat. They constantly displayed themselves as a separate society, refusing to merge or to associate with the mainstream German people. Why? Well, the Bible certainly encourages the beliefs the Jews will always get special treatment, and that their way is the right way and the way of god. This leads to a possible feeling of superiority among the Jews.

You want a modern example of the Jewish superiority complex? One of my teachers- who I, incidentally, have great respect for (despite his clear right-wing views)- noted that the Jews always had a disproportionate amount of people within the intellectual and influential subjects of the world; philosophy, science, literature. This is very much true. Then, I asked him "So... do you honestly think Jews are smarter than everybody else?". He didn't give me a straight answer, but he did seem to imply that he considers the fact that we Jews may be smarter than everybody else. Pure bullshit.

Originally posted by Mindship
I said the Jewish people's faith in God and His Plan helped them to survive times of hardship, and that what you had posted was a more specific example of the Loving God/Suffering in the World paradox. I also maintain that given all the persecution throughout history of a small, dispersed minority, there must be something with strong survival values in Judaism, otherwise the Jews would've been wiped out long ago.

You're correct. I'll simplify my opinion on why the Jews survived so long, against tremendous odds; the keeping of the Sabbath's holiness. This created a way to keep the Jews from spreading into chaos and disorder, and create a form of unity among all of these Jews- a simple tradition kept them together as a single nation.

However, all I'm asking is thus; had the Jews converter into Christianity, or made greater attempts to merge into the mainstream society, would things have been so bad? Yes, it is possible that there would be no country of Israel at the moment. But think about the conflict it would have prevented.

Very difficult question, honestly.

Originally posted by Mindship
Clearly, as an Israeli, you have a perspective on this - and very strong feelings - that I can only understand as an American Jew. You make excellent points, but I can't help but feel your POV is mostly a reaction to all the religionism you must see. On the same token, I have my bias, perhaps viewing the story of the Jewish people (and religion in general) in a more idealistic light.

You make a lot of good points too. Pretty tough-provoking.

You know, it's funny. One would think that Israeli Jews- such as myself- would be more close to their religion than American Jews. Studied prove entirely different; American Jews are actually more religious and traditional, in general. I believe this is because that, as an Israeli, we are constantly exposed to the harmful effects of excessive religionism. So it's no wonder I'm more alienated with religion than you are.

By the way, are you actually religious? Like, devoutly religious?

Why do we have an urge to find the meaning of life?
so we can impress the smart chics with intellectual conversation mix them a couple drinks and bone all night...other than that I cant think of anything

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Then, I asked him "So... do you honestly think Jews are smarter than everybody else?". He didn't give me a straight answer, but he did seem to imply that he considers the fact that we Jews may be smarter than everybody else. Pure bullshit. Nothing like putting a religionist on the spot.

However, all I'm asking is thus; had the Jews converter into Christianity, or made greater attempts to merge into the mainstream society, would things have been so bad? Yes, it is possible that there would be no country of Israel at the moment. But think about the conflict it would have prevented.

Very difficult question, honestly. Indeed.

By the way, are you actually religious? Like, devoutly religious? In the traditional sense: not at all. I very, very rarely go to temple, I identify with the history and traditions (in large part because that's how I was raised), and certainly with the values (especially as Hillel put it, what I see as basic human values). But in terms of any actual spiritual practice, I'm a meditator, the closest style being the Zen Buddhist form called zazen, because it's the least structured and has the least dogma attached to it.

Originally posted by Mindship
Nothing like putting a religionist on the spot.

Yeah.

Originally posted by Mindship
Indeed.

I bet we could spend hours discussing that.

Originally posted by Mindship
In the traditional sense: not at all. I very, very rarely go to temple, I identify with the history and traditions (in large part because that's how I was raised), and certainly with the values (especially as Hillel put it, what I see as basic human values). But in terms of any actual spiritual practice, I'm a meditator, the closest style being the Zen Buddhist form called zazen, because it's the least structured and has the least dogma attached to it.

Ah, I see. Let me put it differently; do you believe in God?

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Ah, I see. Let me put it differently; do you believe in God? Depends what you mean by "God." As depicted Biblically? I think that's a well-meant but overworked metaphor. As to what the metaphor points to...that's another topic we could likely spend hours discussing.

Yeah, we probably could.

T'was a good debate, mate. (Rhyme intended)

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Yeah, we probably could.

T'was a good debate, mate. (Rhyme intended)
Aye, lad. Aye that it was.

I don't think I was ever called a lad before.

"Aye, man," didn't sound as cheery.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
I don't think I was ever called a lad before.


first time for everything have a beer beer drunk goto Queeqs milk bar!

Originally posted by Mindship
"Aye, man," didn't sound as cheery.

It didn't sound as Irish, either. 'Aye, lad' sounds hella scottish/Irish/Norwegian/something.

'Sides, I'm not a lad. I'm a dude.

Originally posted by Jack Daniels
first time for everything have a beer

But.. but... I'm underage...

Oh, **** it. I want A-L-C-H-O-L.

Originally posted by Jack Daniels
goto Queeqs milk bar!

And I suppose you expect me to join Queeq's droogs, right!?

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
It didn't sound as Irish, either. 'Aye, lad' sounds hella scottish/Irish/Norwegian/something. TV Scottish, actually...

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a222/avengemycat/250px-MontgomeryScott.jpg

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
It didn't sound as Irish, either. 'Aye, lad' sounds hella scottish/Irish/Norwegian/something.

'Sides, I'm not a lad. I'm a dude.



But.. but... I'm underage...

Oh, **** it. I want A-L-C-H-O-L.



And I suppose you expect me to join Queeq's droogs, right!?
urrr u better have a fake ID dude..lol...theres one old guy at the bar I werk at (in real life) that I know hes way over age but since we have to card everyone and his licence got pulled he went and bought one of those celebrity id's and flashs that to me so I'm seen on camera checking his id...lol...and its not so bad being in Queeqs gang...hes a kewl dude

Originally posted by Mindship
TV Scottish, actually...

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a222/avengemycat/250px-MontgomeryScott.jpg

Haha! I was right!



Originally posted by Jack Daniels
urrr u better have a fake ID dude..lol...theres one old guy at the bar I werk at (in real life) that I know hes way over age but since we have to card everyone and his licence got pulled he went and bought one of those celebrity id's and flashs that to me so I'm seen on camera checking his id...lol...and its not so bad being in Queeqs gang...hes a kewl dude

Overage? What the hell is that? I've never heard of that term.

And the problem is, I couldn't get away with saying that I'm 18 (that's the legal age of drinking here). I'm less than that, and I look it. So I have to be content with sneaking some of my dad's booze and drinking it while I skip class.

And I will never join a sociopathic gang like Queeq's evil, vicious droogs.

Shall we return to the topic, gentlemen.

Yessir, yessir.

Originally posted by Jack Daniels
Why do we have an urge to find the meaning of life?
so we can impress the smart chics with intellectual conversation mix them a couple drinks and bone all night...other than that I cant think of anything You better go and tell wifey that.

Originally posted by inimalist
the brain acts to eliminate cognitive dissonance

because dissonance can be created by questions relating to existential concepts (why am I here, etc) and because those questions do not have readily available answers in the environment in which we live, the brain must act to reduce it. Why does the brain act to eliminate cognitive dissonance?

Nature or nurture?

The meaning to life is finding meaning in/to life.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
The meaning to life is finding meaning in/to life. Thats good stuff.

I thought the meaning of life was to be happy, isn't that what everyone is trying to do?

meaning of life is to end all life

We are curious creatures and like to figure things out. That is why we question everything, or should at least.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Why does the brain act to eliminate cognitive dissonance?

Nature or nurture?

Glib: It is evolutionarily beneficial to not believe two things that are contrary to each other.

It is nature, as it probably exists in all animals. Think about it, without cognitive dissonance, the brain would be unable to predict the outcome of events, as doing so requires forming some theory of causation. Cognitive dissonance requires that an organism resolve the ambiguous, thus allowing it to continue behaving and setting a pattern for dealing with similar situations in the future. Also, prevents an organism from questioning its decisions. An organism that sticks with a less wise choice is better than one that constantly is questioning and restarting a marginally wiser one.

Cognitive dissonance has lots of cool applications to like, "meaning" and other social/philosophical issues, but at its core, it is a basic mental principal motivating even the simplest behaviour.

because we fear absurdity.
the problem is that since the dawn of time we have always looked at life and death as opposites. and death becomes the negative, the bad, the evil. life, obviously, becomes positive, good and right. but its not. esoteric wisdom tells us that life and death are one as are all the seeming opposites in this world. light and dark, man and woman etc. but we have opposites and one side is good and the other is bad.

death is tricky because we lump it up with "end" which is another negative and make it even worse. almost ANYTHING that is bad then automatically gets placed in the same corner as death. thus life is everything and death is nothing. life is good. death is bad. life is joy. death is sorrow. life is light. death is darkness. life is beginning. death is the end. and so on....to the point that we just want to separate from this negative half of the binary opposition as much as possible. because we don't want our lives to "end". human ignorance prevents us from seeing that like all opposites, end and beginning also go hand in hand and are inseperable.

the funny (and tragic) thing is that in avoiding death we are avoiding the inevitable. death can't be escaped. in trying to preserve life, we are going on a doomed expidition because death is its counterpart. one can't live without the other. thus what should really be "an end to one phase and the beginning of another" is simply seen as "the end". period. and to escape this inevitablility we keep looking for ways to go on living. to preserve ourselves and our lives.....just because we keep seeing the world as something split in halves, one of which is good and the other as bad.

so we have to seek to give meaning to our life for it to remain good (and so on the positive half) because "meaningless" is in the same corner as death. why we look for meaning to life is to keep it on the positive side of the dichotomy because we just don't understand that life and death are one and the same. there is meaning and truth in everything but we only try to see it in the positive halves. ironically these halves even exist.

btw, that's the same reason we try to give death meaning too. that's our last ditch attempt to try and wean over death into the positive side

~Sado

the birth of religion came when we wanted to return to the source. event the word "religion" basically means "return to the source". i don't mean this in the Freudan "death instinct" way but we seek to return to where we came from. call it god or whatnot.

Another interesting thing to consider in this question is if animals and other non human living things want to know the meaning of life, or just get on with it as it would appear, but you never know.

Maybe its the unique thing that makes us human, apart from our cancerous destructive nature in some situations of course.

depends which side of the argument you fall on: if you feel that consciousness could only exist in human brain then i highly doubt animals would worry about these things.

Originally posted by inimalist
Glib: It is evolutionarily beneficial to not believe two things that are contrary to each other.

It is nature, as it probably exists in all animals. Think about it, without cognitive dissonance, the brain would be unable to predict the outcome of events, as doing so requires forming some theory of causation. Cognitive dissonance requires that an organism resolve the ambiguous, thus allowing it to continue behaving and setting a pattern for dealing with similar situations in the future. Also, prevents an organism from questioning its decisions. An organism that sticks with a less wise choice is better than one that constantly is questioning and restarting a marginally wiser one.

Cognitive dissonance has lots of cool applications to like, "meaning" and other social/philosophical issues, but at its core, it is a basic mental principal motivating even the simplest behaviour.

I dont know this cognitive dissonace sounds like a fancy words.

you know when you have certain beliefs or attitudes in life but at some points you do actions contrary to those beliefs or attitudes? yeah well the feeling you get at those times is called cognitive dissonance.

~Sado

I have read you answers and it's obvious to me that a group of teenagers on a movie forum are obviously the most likely to solve great philosophical questions.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
I dont know this cognitive dissonace sounds like a fancy words.

its social psych, so maybe not as robust as Action Potentials or whatever, but there is a very large body of literature about it.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&cmd=DetailsSearch&term=cognitive+dissonance&log$=activity

and PubMed isn't a social database

can't you just answer his question in plain english, mate?

which part of that aren't you following?

Cognitive dissonance is a social theory about human behaviour, and thus, will be less robust than a biological theory of behaviour, like action potentials.

the Pub Med link lists at least a few hundred articles that are related to Cognitive dissonance (all from peer-reviewed scientific journals), showing how robust the phenomena is (ie- not just fancy words).

That pub med has so many is also significant, as it is a medical/biological database, thus for a social theory to show up and be supported so often in that literature, shows it is certainly not just fancy words.

i know what it is. i'm saying why couldn't you just explain it to him in plain english.

Originally posted by Sado22
i know what it is. i'm saying why couldn't you just explain it to him in plain english.

no reason I couldn't...

It would take me a while and I'd want to cite at least 2 or 3 studies... Not to mention I gave a brief description when I brought it up.

I didn't think anything more than proving it wasn't fancy words would be necessary, as he wasn't asking what it was but rather suggesting it was nonsense.

like, what do you want? Do you want a post about cog-dis? Are you just giving me shit?

a little description was more than enough. as is the case in god knows how many books about general psychology.


my point is the same as before. the man asked a question and you could just answer it in plain english that everyone would understand. the average joe doesn't want to write a thesis on the subject when he asks what something means. if someone asks you what final fantasy is do you tell him the breif general description or do you go into a lengthy monologue over the plotline, loopholes, PIS and cultural impact? when you bring up words like cognitive dissonance you're only going to intimidate the average person who is trying his best to follow the argument. these words just wind up miscommunicating more than they communicate. that's why its called Jargon...which is a form of doublespeak.

that's what i mean. and calm down, mate, i didn't mean any offense.

~Sado

Originally posted by Sado22

~Sado

so, from page one (admittedly it was Kosta who gave the initial definition):

Originally posted by Kosta
Any instance where a person may perceive or recognize an inconsistency in their thoughts/cognition. Like holding two contradictory ideas at the same time. The actual theory implies that people try to minimize dissonance by justifying their thoughts or ideas, or even changing them altogether.

Originally posted by inimalist
also, there is evidence that simply being in a situation that in ambiguous, or where you have little control, can cause a dissonance type state. The unknown, then, can work much like 2 opposing ideas.

also, note that Phantom Zone is not asking what cog dis is, he is asking about its reliability as a phenomenon.

lol, and don't worry, I'm chill like a cucumber

okay, glad that's out of the way

Originally posted by lord xyz
It is even necessary? For if we were created with meaning, surely we weren't made to know. Or is there meaning at all? Or is us finding meaning the by product of some psychological thing?

I think it's the same reason we seek to know anything is simply apart of the human need for conquest. As for whether or not we are meant to know, the more obvious question, in my mind, is why were we built to question?