Existence: What is the point?

I numbered your points for ease of reference.
1. Life either does, or does not have meaning, objectively. Necessity is unproved.
2. Why? Because you believe so? That is just your religious opinion, with no basis in reality, if you hold to a material worldview.
3. Ad hom, again. I present arguments, and you avoid them with fallacies.. but what else is new?

 

I don't know about you guys but my purpose is to love and serve. I have ability, like most of us do, but most of us choose to waste that ability on materialism, vanity and brain dead activities.

Help your neighbours, help your friends, give generously when you can, do good in the world, spread love and find a partner to share the world with.

 

Thats just my personal reason and its works pretty well for me.

 

You really need to read other Wisdom Poetry from other sources, both contemporary, or earlier than Proverbs. And we don't really know who wrote Proverbs - despite the attribution.

The study of the so-called wisdom literature of the Hebrew Bible has flourished spectacularly in the past half century. Wisdom is typically conceived as an international literary category (much broader and vaguer than a genre), the Hebrew exponents of which manifest a worldly, non-parochial character. For that reason, wisdom books like Proverbs, Job, and Qohelet pay little if any attention to specifically biblical concerns like the covenant, its laws, and its rituals, and the historical traditions of Israel (see, e.g., Murphy 1992, pp. 921–22).1 The international character of biblical wisdom is often underscored by reference to the impact of foreign literatures upon it. Conventionally, it is the influence of Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Hellenistic literature that is cited. Accordingly, the article on “Wisdom in the O[ld] T[estament]” in the standard Anchor Bible Dictionary (Murphy 1992) includes sections on Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Hellenistic literature in its chapter on “Extra-biblical Wisdom” (ibid., pp. 928–30). In a similar vein, the volume Wisdom in Ancient Israel (Day, Gordon, and Williamson 1995) has chapters on Egyptian, Babylonian, and Aramaic wisdom (the proverbs of Aḥīqar) in the part entitled “The Ancient Near Eastern Setting [of Israelite Wisdom]” (ibid., pp. 17–52).2 The fact that an Egyptian text, the Instructions of Amenemope (see, e.g., Emerton 2001), and certain Mesopotamian texts — such as Ludlul bēl nēmeqi (“Let Me Praise the Lord of Wisdom,” sometimes called “the Babylonian Job”) and the Dialogue between a Master and His Servant (sometimes called “the Dialogue of Pessimism”) — would seem to have had a direct influence on works of biblical wisdom (viz., Proverbs, Job, and Qohelet, respectively; for the last see, e.g., Greenstein 2007) bolsters the significance of the somewhat remote neighbors of Israel, Mesopotamia, and Egypt on the development of biblical wisdom (cf., e.g., Perdue 2008, p. 49). Evidence of a far more local breeding ground for biblical wisdom — the Syro-Canaanite cultures of the mid- to late second millennium b.c.e. — has been sporadically acknowledged but widely neglected. As late as 1999, a scholar of biblical wisdom could assert, “with the probable exception of Ahikar [sic], we know nothing of the wisdom literature which may have been produced in the nations close to Israel, and which may have served as a conduit for Egyptian and Mesopotamian material” (Weeks 1999, p. . And yet, not only have various scholars called attention to the likely sources of biblical wisdom in earlier Canaanite culture (e.g., Albright 1955; Thompson 1974, pp. 54–57; and see below), but also several works of Sumero-Akkadian wisdom have been found at Ras Shamra-Ugarit and brought to light (see esp. Nougayrol 1968, pp. 265–300; Khanjian 1974; Arnaud 2007, pp. 139–93).3

In addition to a short set of proverbial sayings (Nougayrol 1955, pp. 311–24; Lambert 1960, p. 116; Khanjian1974, pp. 140–43; Kämmerer 1998, pp. 174–75; Arnaud 2007, pp. 139–40),

There are three major works of wisdom among the Akkadian texts from Ugarit. One is a relatively lengthy instructional or advice piece in dialogue form
with versions known at Emar and Boghazkoy as well — the Wisdom of Šūpē-awēli (Nougayrol 1968, pp. 273–90;Khanjian 1974, pp. 148–76; Dietrich 1991, pp. 33–68; Kämmerer 1998, pp. 176–207; Arnaud 2007, pp. 148–79); the father–son exchange is reminiscent of the classical Mesopotamian work, the Instructions of Šuruppak (cf., e.g.,Nougayrol 1968, pp. 275–76; Seminara 2000, pp. 527–28; Alster 2005, pp. 41–42). This Akkadian work from Ugarit
displays a number of parallels in theme and formulation to the biblical books of Proverbs and Qohelet (see, e.g.,
Smith 1975; Hurowitz 2007). A second major Akkadian text from Ugarit is a concise version of the Babylonian classic a pious sufferer’s complaint and his restoration by Marduk (Nougayrol 1968, pp. 265–73;Khanjian 1974, pp. 191–206; Dietrich 1993, pp. 62–67; Kämmerer 1998, pp. 160–63; Arnaud 2007, pp. 110–14).This text, like its apparent Mesopotamian prototype, displays numerous affinities to the book of Job (see, e.g.,Khanjian 1975; Ben Basat 200. The third Akkadian composition from Ugarit that can be classified as wisdom isa Mesopotamian classic, known in Sumerian (Alster 2005, pp. 288–311; cf. Klein 2000), and found at Emar as well(Arnaud 1987, pp. 359–65) — the Ballad of the Early Rulers or “A Life without Joy” (Nougayrol 1968, pp. 291–300;Dietrich 1992; Kämmerer 1998, pp. 208–13; Alster 2005: 312–19; Arnaud 2007, pp. 142–4. Its sober reflection on the ephemeral existence of even the greatest of men recalls the fatalistic outlook of Qohelet (cf., e.g., Lambert
Despite the clear existence in second-millennium
...
Syro-Palestine of literary works similar in type andcontent to biblical wisdom, some biblicists adhere to the old notion that wisdom literature must be a late develop-
ment in the formation of the Hebrew Bible (e.g., Toy 1916, pp. xx–xxxi; Scott 1965, pp. xxxv–xxxix). It is assumed
that such a development — cosmopolitan in character — could only have taken place through the influence offoreign wisdom in the mid-first millennium
...
(cf., e.g., Westermann 1995, p. 5).
7
Works of wisdom among theSyro-Canaanite scribes of the mid- to late second millennium
...
could well have passed from their largelyMesopotamian sources — or, in some cases, like the poem of the pious sufferer (the Ras Shamra
Ludlul
text), sources
of inspiration — to the Canaanite cultural-literary heritage (cf. Gray 1970; Wiseman 1977, pp. 86–87; Mattingly1990, p. 325; Perdue 2008, p. 39). Scribes who were trained in the Mesopotamian cuneiform tradition and who
produced the Akkadian wisdom texts at Ugarit wrote — and transmitted texts — in the local Ugaritic language
as well (see, e.g., Saadé 1988; van Soldt 1995a; Márquez Rowe 2008; cf., e.g., Horwitz 1979; Mack-Fisher 1990b, p.115; Hawley 2008, esp. pp. 60–61).
8
The wisdom literary traditions — both written and oral (see, e.g., Carr 2005,pp. 27–29 and passim) — represented in the Akkadian texts from Ugarit could well have been conveyed throughsome form of Canaanite intermediation to the early Hebrew scribes. Throughout the land of Canaan, scribes were
educated in the Akkadian tradition (e.g., Demsky 1990; Horowitz and Oshima 2006), a situation that enabled theeasy transmission of culture; and the transparent continuities between Ugaritic literature of the late second mil
-lennium
...
and Hebrew and Phoenician literature of the first millennium
... (e.g., Cassuto 1971; Greenfield1971; Greenfield 1987; Greenstein 1996) make it necessary to assume an unbroken literary chain of tradition
from Canaanite to later biblical literature.
9
The fact that the unique Ugaritic alphabet was adapted and utilized
4
The text is a Hurrian bilingual; for the Hurrian text, see E. La
-
roche in Nougayrol 1955, pp. 313–24. Another important studyof this bilingual text is Dijkstra 1993. This text is passed over in
the survey of Syrian precursors to Proverbs by Fox (2000, p. 23).
5
For additional and very helpful analyses of this text, see also
Seminara 2000; Hurowitz 2007. For the Emar text, see Arnaud
1987, pp. 377–82. For an analysis of the Hittite version, see Key-dana 1991.
6
On the relationship of the Ras Shamra
Ludlul
to Job, see Crai-
gie 1985; Ben Basat 2008. Dietrich (1993, pp. 62–63) and Arnaud
(2007, p. 110) categorize the Ras Shamra version of
Ludlul
as ahymn. Although there is certainly a component of praise forMarduk in this piece, as there is in
Ludlul
(‘Let me praise!’), evenin the section of praise, the erstwhile suffering of the speaker isstrongly evoked.
7
Westermann, like Pfeiffer (1948, pp. 653–59), discriminates be
-tween secular wisdom, which he attributes to an earlier popularprovenience, and religious proverbial wisdom, which he attri-butes to later foreign influence. Pfeiffer ascribes the emergenceof religious wisdom to Deuteronomistic theology. The presenceof “religious” wisdom along with “secular” wisdom at ancient
Ugarit undermines the assumptions of such opinions; see fur
-ther below.
8
For the significance of the scribal invention of the alphabeticcuneiform writing system for writing Ugaritic — and occasionally
other languages — see Sanders 2009, pp. 54–58. Of course, the Ak
-kadian written at Ugarit, while generally similar to other formsof “peripheral Akkadian” in the Middle Babylonian period, also
exhibits unique local features; see Huehnergard 1989; von Soldt1991; von Soldt 1995b. And, as is well known, scribes at Ugaritwriting Akkadian frequently inserted Ugaritic glosses in theirtexts; see Sivan 1984; Huehnergard 1987.

The arguments of Morrow 2008 and Rainey 2008 to the effect that the Canaanite sources were drawn upon by Hebrew writers. Wisdom in Ugaritic within Canaan, as far south as Beth Shemesh, in the late second millennium (see, e.g., Sanders 2006, andthe references there), means that the earliest Hebrew scribes, who emerged in that same period, could even have read Ugaritic unmediated (Greenstein 1996, pp. 26–31). But we need not assume that much in order to allow that
Syro-Canaanite wisdom literature in Akkadian flowed into the stream of the biblical tradition



Despite the clear existence in second-millennium Syro-Palestine of literary works similar in type and content to biblical wisdom, some biblicists adhere to the old notion that wisdom literature must be a late development in the formation of the Hebrew Bible (e.g., Toy 1916, pp. xx–xxxi; Scott 1965, pp. xxxv–xxxix). It is assumed
that such a development — cosmopolitan in character — could only have taken place through the influence of foreign wisdom in the mid-first millennium
. Works of wisdom among the Syro-Canaanite scribes of the mid- to late second millennium could well have passed from their largely Mesopotamian sources — or, in some cases, like the poem of the pious sufferer (the Ras Shamra Ludlul text), sources of inspiration — to the Canaanite cultural-literary heritage (cf. Gray 1970; Wiseman 1977, pp. 86–87; Mattingly1990, p. 325; Perdue 2008, p. 39). Scribes who were trained in the Mesopotamian cuneiform tradition and who
produced the Akkadian wisdom texts at Ugarit wrote — and transmitted texts — in the local Ugaritic language as well (see, e.g., Saadé 1988; van Soldt 1995a; Márquez Rowe 2008; cf., e.g., Horwitz 1979; Mack-Fisher 1990b, p.115; Hawley 2008, esp. pp. 60–61).

The wisdom literary traditions — both written and oral (see, e.g., Carr 2005,pp. 27–29 and passim) — represented in the Akkadian texts from Ugarit could well have been conveyed through some form of Canaanite intermediation to the early Hebrew scribes. Throughout the land of Canaan, scribes were
educated in the Akkadian tradition (e.g., Demsky 1990; Horowitz and Oshima 2006), a situation that enabled the easy transmission of culture; and the transparent continuities between Ugaritic literature of the late second millennium and Hebrew and Phoenician literature of the first millennium make it necessary to assume an unbroken literary chain of tradition from Canaanite to later biblical literature.
9
The fact that the unique Ugaritic alphabet was adapted and utilized
4
The text is a Hurrian bilingual; for the Hurrian text, see E. La
-
roche in Nougayrol 1955, pp. 313–24. Another important studyof this bilingual text is Dijkstra 1993. This text is passed over in
the survey of Syrian precursors to Proverbs by Fox (2000, p. 23).
5
For additional and very helpful analyses of this text, see also
Seminara 2000; Hurowitz 2007. For the Emar text, see Arnaud
1987, pp. 377–82. For an analysis of the Hittite version, see Key-dana 1991.
6
On the relationship of the Ras Shamra
Ludlul
to Job, see Crai-
gie 1985; Ben Basat 2008. Dietrich (1993, pp. 62–63) and Arnaud
(2007, p. 110) categorize the Ras Shamra version of
Ludlul
as ahymn. Although there is certainly a component of praise forMarduk in this piece, as there is in
Ludlul
(‘Let me praise!’), evenin the section of praise, the erstwhile suffering of the speaker isstrongly evoked.
7
Westermann, like Pfeiffer (1948, pp. 653–59), discriminates be
-tween secular wisdom, which he attributes to an earlier popularprovenience, and religious proverbial wisdom, which he attri-butes to later foreign influence. Pfeiffer ascribes the emergenceof religious wisdom to Deuteronomistic theology. The presenceof “religious” wisdom along with “secular” wisdom at ancient
Ugarit undermines the assumptions of such opinions; see fur
-ther below.

For the significance of the scribal invention of the alphabeticcuneiform writing system for writing Ugaritic — and occasionally
other languages — see Sanders 2009, pp. 54–58. Of course, the Ak
-kadian written at Ugarit, while generally similar to other formsof “peripheral Akkadian” in the Middle Babylonian period, also
exhibits unique local features; see Huehnergard 1989; von Soldt1991; von Soldt 1995b. And, as is well known, scribes at Ugaritwriting Akkadian frequently inserted Ugaritic glosses in theirtexts; see Sivan 1984; Huehnergard 1987.

The arguments of Morrow 2008 and Rainey 2008 to the effect that the Canaanite sources were drawn upon by Hebrew writers within Canaan, as far south as Beth Shemesh, in the late second millennium. means that the earliest Hebrew scribes, who emerged in that same period, could even have read Ugaritic unmediated (Greenstein 1996, pp. 26–31). But we need not assume that much in order to allow that Syro-Canaanite wisdom literature in Akkadian flowed into the stream of the biblical tradition.

Excerpt from 'Wisdom in Ugarit' on Academia.

Several of the Psalms were simply adapted from Ugaritic sources; the story of the flood has a near mirror image in Ugaritic literature; and the language of the Bible is greatly illuminated by the language of Ugarit. Quartz Hill School of Theology.

The Bible is not all it seems.

 

Sounds exactly like the point. Ya determine what works for you.

OTOH, seems to me there is a collective purpose to sapience. Striving to understand our existence and our universe and achieve the ultimate epiphany.

 

Existence: What is the point?

To Become More.

 

I think there are several collective purposes of sapience. First, as you said to understand our existence and our universe. Second, to maximize quality of life and happiness. Third, to best prolong the existence of humans.

 

Good points.

I think maximizing quality of life and happiness is a consequence of pursuing understanding so I would suggest those are "goals" as opposed to "purpose". Semantics perhaps but I discern a distinct difference. Propagation of the species is not unique to sapience, its a fundamental of all life.

 

Very incisive.. this concept of 'more' seems to dominate humans, in every aspect of their lives. I touched on it briefly, in the OP:

I see this angst as the motivation for the pursuit of 'more'. There is a dissatisfaction with life.. our existence.. that we mask with 'more'.

1. Stuff
2. Sex
3. Recognition
4. Validation
5. Money
6. Power
7. Influence
8. Significance

The recurring theme in this thread, is 'enjoy life & have fun!', as we have to constantly remind ourselves to do that, and not be nagged by the inner desire for more. Yet no matter how we try.. or how we reassure our psyches of the wise and balanced path we have chosen, an undercurrent of desire.. a hole in our souls.. belies our bluff of contentment.

We are not satisfied with meeting our basic needs, but want more.

 

Man is brought into the world and will eventually die. They are both natural functions. My parents brought me into the world They had their own reason for having children. They could neither choose the day on which I would be born or the day I would die. The meaning of my life was my choice. There was no meaning for my life other than that of my parents decision to have a child.

The very implication of the term 'meaning for life' implies that it has a predetermined purpose. That also implies a creator.

In the event of evolution we simply have a natural function to produce to prolong the species. As we have evolved we have used our brains in creating a better life on terms of medicine, science etc.
The involvement of gods has brought positive and negative effects.
Positives we are told are down to God. Negatives are down to man's sin. Poor old 'Adama' gets a lot of stick for being human.

 

knowledge

 

..one of my favorite quotes.. from Camus, illustrates the desire for 'more'..

We come into the world laden with the weight of an infinite necessity.
– Albert Camus

 

That is what i have been saying, in this and other threads. Without God, life and existence has no purpose or meaning, except what you arbitrarily choose. With God, there might be a reason, a soul, and a destiny.

 

When you're a small child it's to kill ants with magnifying glasses.

 

Overthink much....I just mean better.

 

To what end?

What difference does it make if we die happily ignorant, or endowed with omnipotence? What good is knowledge, if we cannot live in contentment?

Ecclesiastes 1:18 For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increases knowledge increases sorrow.

 

More, or 'infinite necessity' fits, though. This is a philosophical thread.. can you really overthink in those?

Nothing like some nice existential angst, to get the day started!

 

I prefer "Be better today then you were yesterday" but hey, whatever you want. Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone...you are the one who burns~The Buddah

 

The recurring theme in this thread, is 'enjoy life & have fun!', as we have to constantly remind ourselves to do that, and not be nagged by the inner desire for more. Yet no matter how we try.. or how we reassure our psyches of the wise and balanced path we have chosen, an undercurrent of desire.. a hole in our souls.. belies our bluff of contentment.

It's this inner desire for more that has given man the science, medicines etc he has today. The rest of the above is philosophical nonsense that means very little in real terms. We are here on earth for '3 score years and 10'. Most people, except philosophers, take life as it comes. I enjoy life. I take the opportunity to improve my situation when possible. I help others where I can, and accept help when I need it. All the philosophy in the world will not change matters. Nature and man will continue to evolve with or without philosophers. Unless, of course, some aliens or angelic beings decide to invade.

 

I know. That's why this thread is pointless. It's all assumption that there is a god, and therefore a meaning to life. I reject the idea of a god for several reasons.

 

This thread is not only pointless, so is every thread, conversation, and quest for purpose. There can be no objective purpose in life, if you exclude God. That is the consequence of belief.

Philosophical opinions have unintended consequences.

 

Depending on "God" for life to have meaning seems counter productive and self defeating....it is almost cheating.

Cheating yourself.

 

ANY meaning, purpose, or destiny can only come from a God or supernatural entity. Atheistic naturalism has no such offer. Why pretend a theistic style 'purpose!' in life, when the whole concept is absurd? Either embrace your beliefs, and all their conclusions, or pick another. You cannot have 'purpose!', 'souls!', 'destiny!', or any such theistic lure in an atheistic system. Why even try to compete?

Life has no meaning a priori… It is up to you to give it a meaning, and value is nothing but the meaning that you choose. ~Jean-Paul Sartre

 

To each there own....my life has great meaning regardless of your uninformed opinion.
Life has no meaning a priori… It is up to you to give it a meaning, and value is nothing but the meaning that you choose. ~Jean-Paul Sartre

 

Why do you view philosophical conclusions as a personal affront? I have not examined your life, or made any judgement about you. You can believe whatever you want. These threads examine the consequences and conclusions about belief, and the basis for those beliefs. Is that only for theists, or Christians? Why should atheists get a pass, when it comes to examining beliefs and their implications?

You're quick to judge theists of 'cheating!' with their beliefs, but become indignant if your beliefs are followed to their rational conclusions.

The grand thing about the human mind is that it can turn its own tables and see meaninglessness as ultimate meaning. John Cage