so you could solve the ultimate dilemma and reach god through pure logic?

Not pure logic, more dialectic.

how do you call it a value then and how can you fathom the idea?

If you are solely rational and only see that the material world exists, you get to a point where you see that all events are the same, all meaning is the same, or that there is no ultimate meaning. You have to move forward from this point of nihilism. Then you realise all you have is yourself and what makes it up. Your body continues to life. How to find meaning now, when everything material will one day all be gone? What is the point? etc.

You are damned but you are free from ultimate responsibility in this situation.

But to move forward, you have to make your own meaning somewhere.

i think i understand the reasoning behind your logic

let me copy a text from another server, tell me what you think about it

Let me finish.

alright

Then I realised that there was no meaning I could have that would be enough. An ultimate reality did not exist for me. And so I was back to the beginning, realising all mean is the same, transitory emptiness. Neitzsche wants to try to make a bridge across the abyss, but not even knowing there is another side, this is desperate and optimistic for its own sake. I realised then, that the only true meaning must transcend material and rational thought. It must, because there is nothing else to build meaning on. From the point of view of the self, it is really a soul. The ultimate meaning is Absolute, therefore the only meaning must be God.

But like I said, this is intellectualised, not yet understood.

Now post your thing.

let me grasp your rationale first

has the question of "why, why is there a **thing** at all" played a big role in your transitory thought process?

No. The thing already exists. It was not in my mind why. Why is not a necessary condition of existence.

Meaning is not the same as asking why. Purpose is the spark that motives you to do thinks beyond the minimum to exist, or exist at all.

don't you think this is centralized on your own consciousness and therefore is selfish, in a way?

I'm not sure how to answer it. Is there another way to exist outside of consciousness?

how do you get over the skepticism of your consciousness being authentic, as in if you indeed exist by any means or not, are you a believer of the argument of cogito ergo sum?

Definitely not. My epistemology basis was materialism. Only the material world exists. Consciousness arises from matter. It is just a subjective arises from physical processes.

what makes you so sure you're not a part of my dream of this reality, what makes you think you are not coded in a way and your reactions towards certain things are genuine?

If this is a dream, what difference does it make? Also, I think we **are** coded to react a certain way. But again, this is where we find ourselves. There is no other way to proceed. We have to just make sense how we are able.

what difference does it make when you're essentially nothing at all? to proceed, to where? will you be able to break the fourth wall?

Exactly. There is no where else to go. Welcome. Now your first step is constructing meaning somehow.

This is existentialism 101.

haha, but i am already here

Yes, eixstence before essence.

This is the dreaded problem. You see yourself in the mirror for the first time, as it were. Now you are conscious of something you never were before. What is the meaning of this?

i mean, i still don't understand your take on "finding a meaning behind finding a meaning", like what is the point of finding a meaning of anything at all? true, i have thought about it and realized i better make lemonade of the lemons life is giving us, like this is where i find myself no matter what and i must make something of it, but then, what is the point of making a meaning? this is a void that's impossible to resolve

Maybe I am not like you. To me this was a crushing realisation. I mean, to truly internalise it. Nothing is exceptional.

It is driven by the rational mind, training to pursue things to its logical ends.

Objectively, a rock and a princess have equal value.

No

from a scientific point of view

if we turn a Princess into energy, we can extract more than a rock

brb

@Vic Chong Measuring relative energy is a kind of meaning which you constructed. But objectively, a thing is not more or less meaningful according to its 'energy' or anything else.

Oh shoot

we have a philoshiper here

err....