> > Why do you need God to give your life a purpose? Why can't it be valuable because it is valuable to you? Or to the universe? Or to chaos. Or, I don't know, atoms? Why can't the meaning of life be based on its creation by the big bang? Why is God so different from these things?
>
> You are shifting between the word "purpose" and the word "valuable" as if they were the same, but you are using them differently. You clarify below:
>
> > I don't understand why you think the only way to have a purpose in life is if someone says, "This is your purpose. I decided. You figure out what I decided for you.". Perhaps my definition of purpose is different. You say that only a supreme being could give the universe a meaning, and make it work. But you also say life is random. So why can't the purpose of life be random? Or randomness? Or maybe to ultimately not exist. I don't know. I want to find out.
>
> What do you mean by "purpose" then? You seem to be both asking for an objective "meaning of life" kind of thing while at the same time saying that subjective definitions are okay.
>

Um. The only answer to this is Yes. Sorry

> The problem, as Brunnen-G has pointed out, is that offering an objective purpose of life is not possible without presupposing that the universe itself was created for some purpose. Those of us who believe the universe exists simply because it does (and by extension humans), do not believe there is *any* purpose. To me, the only way the life could have a purpose is if *anything* had a purpose, and that assumes that it was *made for a purpose*.
>

Yes, so your purpose is purposelessness. Which I accept, but do not agree with. But, then my word doesn't mean what I say it means(purposelessness is not purpose, logically your purpose cannot be purposelessness... I am not completely simple), and therefore is confusing, so I don't really mean purpose. And I am left in a difficult position, because I don't know what word to use. Instead I say this: Why not die today? If there is no purpose, then what is it that keeps you going? Besides God. I know that keeps a lot of people going. I think that is a good way to keep going(although kind of shallow, living because of someone else... but only my opinion). I just already know that perspective. I want to see what the other ones are.

> Let me use an analogy. If I am an Olympic swimmer my purpose in the race is to win. It is my purpose in this race because it is the nature of that system (the race) that its contestants' purposes are to try and win. The thing is, this race is not a naturally ocurring phenomenon; it was created specifically by conscious people who are capable of giving it meaning.
>

And what if your purpose is to lose? For your own reasons? Or to do something silly, make people laugh, like swim in a circle. You have gone against the rules set up by the creators of the contest. Do those purposes not count?

> Now, if I happen a lake I can swim if I want, but my swimming can not be said to have any objective purpose. I may choose to swim and thus my purpose is to bring me pleasure. The lake simply is; any purpose I have in it is subjective, relative solely to myself.
>

Or there could be someone who forces you to cross the river. Or you might not actually cross the river, and only think you did. Yes, all of these things are possible. They are all different definitions of purpose. They can all be the same definition of purpose. And different people think different ones of those answers are true, or that they all are, or none. I want more to see what those ideas are then to prove any one of them. Which is bad arguing to win, sort of. Oops :(

> Is this clear? I fear it is not. But the point is, if you want life to have some objective purpose, then the universe must have a purpose which implies it was created by some conscious being. Presupposing the existence of a Creator (be it a god or a spiritual force or whatever) is religion.
>

Yes.
And no.
I don't want to know what the ultimate purpose of life is. I want to know what other people think the purpose of life is. That is, I think, what people are not understanding. I am not saying there is a purpose, or there is not one. I am just asking. Again, a bad way to win, but a very Socratic way.

> Now, this does not mean that we cannot choose for our own lives to have meaning relative to us. If I decide my purpose in life is to eat a cupcake in every country of the world, then it is as valid as the person who believes his purpose is to help others. You seem to be asking for an objective purpose that applies to everyone, though. I do not believe such a thing exists, nor could it conceivably exist without a creator of some sort.
>

No. I don't want to know what is really the purpose of life again. You suppose that I think we can find an answer by arguing. That is not the case. I, myself, have my answer which makes me comfortable. It is very unlikely that you can change my answer, because I am set in my ways. So asking you for the answer when I will not take your answer would not be helpful to me(unless I like hurting you and proving you wrong, which I don't). But I am interested to know how my opinion and yours differ, so I can see what other kind of viewpoints there are, and thus not be stagnant and unchanging. Again, I know what the religious viewpoint is for the most point, or I have had enough people tell me that point to have a general understanding of its various forms. And I am thinking more and more I shouldn't have said religious at all, but should have simply said, "Don't post that this is not worth arguing about because there is one answer and then not explain". Because religion is not the only thing I don't want people to talk about. That also kind of shows my disregard for religion(saying that people will say "God is the purpose. Wow. That was easy, let's go get some ice cream now", and then tell everyone else that their opinion is obviously wrong, because God is ultimate, so therefore there is no other question but "What is God?"). Of course, I also included the bit about a side thread in case there are people who do believe that they have a new, fresh perspective on how God gives life purpose, and who don't want to just end the debate.

> Perhaps what you should ask is this: "What sorts of things should we do so that we are happiest? How can we maximize our own personal satisfaction and fulfilment?" This is the question tackled by so much philosophy (how to lead the "good life" was a popular subject among the Greeks).
>

Yes. All of those things too. I want to know the answers for all of those questions. Do people have ideas? This is already fun.

> Stephen




Melanie