They who need a reason to live, have no reason to live - Do you agree?

Watch
Malorys ballsack
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
Why would anyone need a reason to live? Is life alone not a sufficient condition? If one needs a reason to live they do not enjoy life for what it is.
0
reply
queensboy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
Life is one big rat race, everyone is trying to get rich overnight.

Time is flying as well, so by the time they do get rich (that's if they do), it's all over.
0
reply
Everglow
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 6 years ago
#3
I dislike that expression and dispute it entirely.

How can anyone take true satisfaction simply from existing? If we did not seek reasons to live, don't you think this planet would be in a state of anarchistic dystopia? As the likes of Aristotle would have said, living is one thing but living well and flourishingly is something totally different.

If you're saying people don't enjoy life for what it is - what do you mean by that? What is life if it has no purpose? There might not be an innate purpose for humankind, but it seems entirely rational for humans to seek their own purposes. The modern world would be nothing like it is if everyone thought with such a nihilistic rationale.
0
reply
Malorys ballsack
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#4
(Original post by Reluire)
I dislike that expression and dispute it entirely.

How can anyone take true satisfaction simply from existing? If we did not seek reasons to live, don't you think this planet would be in a state of anarchistic dystopia? As the likes of Aristotle would have said, living is one thing but living well and flourishingly is something totally different.

If you're saying people don't enjoy life for what it is - what do you mean by that? What is life if it has no purpose? There might not be an innate purpose for humankind, but it seems entirely rational for humans to seek their own purposes. The modern world would be nothing like it is if everyone thought with such a nihilistic rationale.
Ah but you see this isn't a nihilistic rationale. It's a refutation of such. Why do we need a reason to enjoy life? Are the wonders and mysteries of life alone not sufficient to cure such nihilism? I do not dispute that things have meanings (like flowers are symbols for romance and love) only that the concept of life does not have to have a meaning, because life is meaning. To live is a purpose in its own right.
0
reply
Everglow
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report 6 years ago
#5
(Original post by Malorys ballsack)
Ah but you see this isn't a nihilistic rationale. It's a refutation of such. Why do we need a reason to enjoy life? Are the wonders and mysteries of life alone not sufficient to cure such nihilism? I do not dispute that things have meanings (like flowers are symbols for romance and love) only that the concept of life does not have to have a meaning, because life is meaning. To live is a purpose in its own right.
The wonders and mysteries of life involve terrible things. How can one not be nihilistic when horrible things happen to those who live as honestly and truly as they can? The wonders and mysteries of life would only be sufficient if humans did not have emotion to become nihilistic from and / or bad things didn't happen.
Life isn't meaning; it is a state of existence which bears little significance unless something is done with it. If we all lived and did literally nothing at all in our lives, we would have achieved nothing and proven that existence is meaningless without purpose. Humans don't function properly without structure and purpose. Every little choice someone makes is with something in mind: a purpose.

If we went back to the beginning of time and were told that simply living was a human's purpose, what would humans then spend their lives doing? Merely existing but doing nothing?
0
reply
Malorys ballsack
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#6
(Original post by Reluire)
The wonders and mysteries of life involve terrible things. How can one not be nihilistic when horrible things happen to those who live as honestly and truly as they can? The wonders and mysteries of life would only be sufficient if humans did not have emotion to become nihilistic from and / or bad things didn't happen.
Life isn't meaning; it is a state of existence which bears little significance unless something is done with it. If we all lived and did literally nothing at all in our lives, we would have achieved nothing and proven that existence is meaningless without purpose. Humans don't function properly without structure and purpose. Every little choice someone makes is with something in mind: a purpose.

If we went back to the beginning of time and were told that simply living was a human's purpose, what would humans then spend their lives doing? Merely existing but doing nothing?
What's wrong with just existing? It seems you don't value nature for what it is, it may be terrible and beautiful at the same time, but I don't see why one needs a purpose to live.
0
reply
saalih
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#7
Report 6 years ago
#7
among the many things we differ with animals from, reason to live is another.

what is life without a purpose? a goal?
0
reply
Everglow
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report 6 years ago
#8
(Original post by Malorys ballsack)
What's wrong with just existing? It seems you don't value nature for what it is, it may be terrible and beautiful at the same time, but I don't see why one needs a purpose to live.
So do you, yourself, consider your only purpose being to live? You would have to be a total free spirit to live in the way you're suggesting which is totally impractical and idealistic. What makes you get up in the morning?
0
reply
Malorys ballsack
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#9
(Original post by Reluire)
So do you, yourself, consider your only purpose being to live? You would have to be a total free spirit to live in the way you're suggesting which is totally impractical and idealistic. What makes you get up in the morning?
Nothing and why should it. Why should I not just get up because I like living? What a revolutionary idea.
0
reply
Everglow
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 6 years ago
#10
(Original post by Malorys ballsack)
Nothing and why should it. Why should I not just get up because I like living? What a revolutionary idea.
You're being so vague and indirect, though. What about living do you like? How do you spend your time?
0
reply
Malorys ballsack
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#11
(Original post by Reluire)
You're being so vague and indirect, though. What about living do you like? How do you spend your time?
Doing what I want to do, I go to work and college and then go home and play games / musical instrument / read / a multitude of other things like speaking to people (also revolutionary). I don't need a reason to do these things, I enjoy them for what they are.
0
reply
Everglow
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#12
Report 6 years ago
#12
(Original post by Malorys ballsack)
Doing what I want to do, I go to work and college and then go home and play games / musical instrument / read / a multitude of other things like speaking to people (also revolutionary). I don't need a reason to do these things, I enjoy them for what they are.
If you take away all those things, then what do you have left? You'll still live, just without everything you know and love. Then what would make you get up in the morning?
0
reply
Malorys ballsack
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#13
(Original post by Reluire)
If you take away all those things, then what do you have left? You'll still live, just without everything you know and love. Then what would make you get up in the morning?
Well that's a silly trick question because it wouldn't be living would it? Some people have terrible conditions and might need a reason to live yes, but most people don't need a reason to live, they simply get on with their lives.
0
reply
Everglow
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#14
Report 6 years ago
#14
(Original post by Malorys ballsack)
Well that's a silly trick question because it wouldn't be living would it? Some people have terrible conditions and might need a reason to live yes, but most people don't need a reason to live, they simply get on with their lives.
Of course it would. It might not be a nice or pleasant way of living, but it would be living. Just by existing and breathing you are living.

Where do you draw the line between acceptable and bad living conditions which warrant people to seek purpose? Your idea of life only seems to work for those in fortunate circumstances. You're not describing life as a universal concept.
0
reply
Malorys ballsack
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#15
(Original post by Reluire)
Of course it would. It might not be a nice or pleasant way of living, but it would be living. Just by existing and breathing you are living.

Where do you draw the line between acceptable and bad living conditions which warrant people to seek purpose? Your idea of life only seems to work for those in fortunate circumstances. You're not describing life as a universal concept.
Yes those who actually enjoy life don't need a reason to live despite philosophers constantly speaking about the 'meaning of life'. Like I said remember, those who need a reason to live have no reason to live, those who starve in Africa don't really have a reason to live because they don't live and there's no justification for their conditions.
0
reply
Everglow
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report 6 years ago
#16
(Original post by Malorys ballsack)
Yes those who actually enjoy life don't need a reason to live despite philosophers constantly speaking about the 'meaning of life'. Like I said remember, those who need a reason to live have no reason to live, those who starve in Africa don't really have a reason to live because they don't live and there's no justification for their conditions.
I think you need to make a distinction between living and living well. Of course those who starve in Africa live - they just don't live well. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but what you have just said could be a justification of genocide.
0
reply
Malorys ballsack
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#17
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#17
(Original post by Reluire)
I think you need to make a distinction between living and living well. Of course those who starve in Africa live - they just don't live well. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but what you have just said could be a justification of genocide.
Have you never heard of rhetoric? Clearly I mean those who need a reason to live don't live satisfactory lives.
0
reply
Chlomc
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#18
Report 6 years ago
#18
No I don't agree. Everyone has a reason to live, just sometimes for some people it takes a while to find it or the reason gets lost.
0
reply
Malorys ballsack
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#19
(Original post by Chlomc)
No I don't agree. Everyone has a reason to live, just sometimes for some people it takes a while to find it or the reason gets lost.
Why do people have reasons to live though? It's only the unhappy who live for something other than life itself.
0
reply
Nogoodsorgods
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#20
Report 6 years ago
#20
Malorys, I completely disagree.

You're basically saying that it is better to be a pig satisfied than Socrates dissatisfied.

Except you're saying it in way that would be far more harmful to less famous but intelligent, caring or sensitive people lacking in confidence. People don't generally claim that Socrates had no confidence- at least to tell people what he thought.

You say 'Why would anyone need a reason to live?' but then 'Is life alone not a sufficient condition?'

You encourage apathy with your idea. Without forming reasons to live, people need not necessarily be anything more than opportunistic voyeurs throughout their entire life. So you encourage a consumerist society and yet you don't encourarge anyone to have a particular work ethic that might actually give them the money to be able to afford them to do what they want to do.

Your idea gives the impression that you're a welfare state supporting liberal on the whole. Which only means liberalism to those who enjoy not having clear work aims in life that, if they'd had them, might have enhanced other people's experiences.

You basically suggest that life should or could be uniformly enjoyable to all regardless of circumstances.
But to be so sometimes means temporarily reducing our own selfishness. If we're always selfish sooner or later all the more balanced people will hopefully furrow out their more balanced brand of selfishness with other like minded people instead of being the trusting fall guys at the mercy of wholly selfish people.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you experienced financial difficulties as a student due to Covid-19?

Yes, I have really struggled financially (26)
14.53%
I have experienced some financial difficulties (50)
27.93%
I haven't experienced any financial difficulties and things have stayed the same (73)
40.78%
I have had better financial opportunities as a result of the pandemic (25)
13.97%
I've had another experience (let us know in the thread!) (5)
2.79%

Watched Threads

View All