|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
So, what's on the Moon?
On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 23:44:26 -0400, Davoud wrote:
Davoud: I think that the notion that the Universe is beautiful is purely sentiocentric; it wouldn't be beautiful if if no one were in it to say that it is beautiful. Chris L Peterson: That's true. But it's beautiful while there's something sentient to make that observation, and it's all meaningless when there isn't. Sometimes I take the nihilistic view‹that on a sufficiently large scale it is all meaningless in any case. Strangely, perhaps, that view is sometimes comforting, at odd moments. While it superficially appears to meet the definition of "nihilism", I don't myself adopt that terminology for the simple reason that I don't think the philosophy itself is adequately developed to be useful, in that it rests on other concepts which are themselves poorly defined, such as "meaning" and "value" as "intrinsic" things. That sentience is an objective "thing" like any other property that things in the Universe can possess isn't important. What's important is that I have it, and can therefore reflect on my observations. Why should I care if that's nothing special in terms of the Universe as a whole? |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
So, what's on the Moon?
Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 23:44:26 -0400, Davoud wrote: Davoud: I think that the notion that the Universe is beautiful is purely sentiocentric; it wouldn't be beautiful if if no one were in it to say that it is beautiful. Chris L Peterson: That's true. But it's beautiful while there's something sentient to make that observation, and it's all meaningless when there isn't. Sometimes I take the nihilistic view‹that on a sufficiently large scale it is all meaningless in any case. Strangely, perhaps, that view is sometimes comforting, at odd moments. While it superficially appears to meet the definition of "nihilism", I don't myself adopt that terminology for the simple reason that I don't think the philosophy itself is adequately developed to be useful, in that it rests on other concepts which are themselves poorly defined, such as "meaning" and "value" as "intrinsic" things. That sentience is an objective "thing" like any other property that things in the Universe can possess isn't important. What's important is that I have it, and can therefore reflect on my observations. Why should I care if that's nothing special in terms of the Universe as a whole? That's verging on solipsism/ |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
So, what's on the Moon?
On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:13:02 -0000 (UTC), Mike Collins
wrote: Chris L Peterson wrote: That sentience is an objective "thing" like any other property that things in the Universe can possess isn't important. What's important is that I have it, and can therefore reflect on my observations. Why should I care if that's nothing special in terms of the Universe as a whole? That's verging on solipsism/ Well, it's also important to me that other sentients experience the Universe... assuming there are any. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Moon water found, might also be trouble for the Giant Impactor theoryof Moon formation | Yousuf Khan[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 12 | September 27th 09 11:00 PM |
United Nations 1979 Moon Treaty -- Prohitbiting the militarization of the Moon, Mars and asteroids. | J Waggoner | Policy | 12 | July 31st 08 09:34 PM |
Watch: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon: The $100 Billion Moon Landing Fraud. | [email protected] | History | 37 | November 3rd 07 04:24 AM |
Space Engineers Plan Possible Moon Base at the Moon's South Pole: On the Ice! | Double-A | Misc | 0 | January 2nd 07 12:46 PM |
Will Bush nuke the moon? Will the black hole bomb be tested on the moon first? | Jan Panteltje | Astronomy Misc | 3 | December 6th 03 06:41 PM |