and yet, after much toil, we still die.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Indeed

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Our drive for survival is still a subjective drive for we are alive. The entire universe, however, is not a living thing trying to grow and produce offspring so it's species will survive. The universe didn't have to be able to produce life. It just did. That's my view of it.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I think there is a purpose of life, but I'm not sure if it works like that. Only really depressed people are not going to fight for their lives.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Yup.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

lolwut!? This is most most ludicrous thing I have read in a while. People need to get over the brainwashed ideas that: 1) they need a reason to want to live 2) that other living things have a purpose 3) that lack of knowledge does not mean purposeless (there may be a purpose but it cannot be known) Does a spider have knowledge of its "purpose" in life? Yet if you threaten it it seems to demonstrate a will to live - it will run and hide. As far as your graphic... your precious gun seems to more powerful than an illegal child immigrant's will to live, so there is that. Bang bang

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Ludicrous and brainwashed..........interesting words from one who knows nothing. I don't believe you. Why are you still alive? Because you choose to stick around purely for the fun and pleasure of it all? And would you have the exact same outlook if you were say a quadriplegic? You dismiss so much of reality so quickly and easily that it truly is amazing. Those who get all forms of cancer want to fight and become survivors. There are countless people who live with horrid diseases and disabilities, when checking out would seem to be so much simpler or easier. But, guess what, they have a WILL and DESIRE to live above all else. And your spider example only proves that life itself and the will to live is built right in to all living things. The spider does not have to have a knowledge of its purpose to display the will or ability to fight for life. All living things fight to LIVE, not to DIE. Please tell me you have not personally observed this during your life time.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

the fear of pain and suffering. I somehow get what mr. VicZinc is trying to say. Something that gives away a brainwashed mentality is when you say "fight to LIVE, not to DIE", your word - fight, poses a ton of question, why do you fight, what do you fight? Death? Isn't death the greatest gift there is? Or is it pain, the one thing other living things fear. A sign of brainwashed mentality is when you start thinking that pain and suffering is something you can escape. This leads to a desire to live longer. But then again, this is pure illusion, that somehow living longer= less pain and suffering. The greatest force there is , is death. And that wishful thinking that you can conquer it, is illusion.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I respect your opinion but disagree completely. If death were the dominant force, we would all kill ourselves immediately to enter your supposed reality of pain and fear. If you wish to play out and act upon what you just stated as something you feel so strongly about, then become an advocate for world wide suicide. Bring everyone your misguided gift. Also, how are you going to convince law enforcement that killing people is more desirable than helping to keep people alive? Murder and assisted suicide are still considered illegal actions. And please tell me how you are going to convince the entire medical and health community to go against the Hippocratic oath that they take to save and preserve life at all costs.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Maybe we have miscommunicated here. Lacking knowledge and seeking knowledge are not mutually exclusive. Plenty of people seek things that don't exist.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Are you speaking from experience or miscommunicated random brain farts?

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Both actually. I seek knowledge yet perceive that I will never obtain it. I know people who seek fame and fortune yet suspect they will never find it. People have sought the Holy Grail and the "missing link" for generations neither of which they are likely to find. Dark matter? Good luck with that too. Also: all thoughts are probably nothing more than brain farts, in case you had not quite discovered that out for yourself.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

So if you are learning from or by experience, then you are taking in knowledge. You may never attain ALL knowledge, but knowing simply involves learning, reasoning, and experience. If knowledge can not be attained to any degree whatsoever, then again, communication is a vain endeavor and we should cease all education immediately. Let's stop training doctors, lawyers, judges, military personnel, or any other trades people that serve and help us. They are not acting from or upon knowledge, they are all just pretending that they know certain things.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Define "Knowledge? " I am making observations. I am correlating events. I am gaining experience, But I still don't "know" what it all means.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

How do you know you don't know?

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I don't I might know but how would I know if I knew? What would be my clue that I actually knew? Clearly many people have thought they knew something only to discover they were wrong. So I am willing to learn, what test shall I perform to determine if I know something? I am ready, let's test my knowledge.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Willing to "learn" what? You can't learn if you can't know. A test is irrelevant - you know nothing, so we can't see if you do or not.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

What nonsense. Clearly we have different definition of "know". I "learned" that Columbus discovered America, didn't you? Now I don't **know** that to be true, as there were people already here when he arrived. Learning and knowing are two VERY different things.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

If you don't know something to be true, then you did NOT learn it! Talk about nonsense. You have said yourself that you don't know anything to be true or correct, so you possess neither learning or knowledge. When I used basic examples of things you should know about yourself, you said you were not certain about ANY of them - you only suppose all things.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Again I ask (nay beg) you to define "knowledge". Clearly you are using this word to mean something very different than I mean when I use it. I have defined it before but for the record here it is again: 100% certainty. That is how I use it and that is what I mean when I say there is **no** knowledge. There is nothing that can be known with **100% certainty.**

by Anonymous 9 years ago

You don't even follow or adhere to a standard dictionary's definition. Here are 3 online definitions for the word KNOWLEDGE: noun noun: knowledge; plural noun: knowledges 1. facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. 2. awareness or familiarity gained by experience of a fact or situation a (1) : the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association (2) : acquaintance with or understanding of a science, art, or technique b (1) : the fact or condition of being aware of something (2) : the range of one's information or understanding <answered to the best of my knowledge> c : the circumstance or condition of apprehending truth or fact through reasoning : cognition d : the fact or condition of having information or of being learned <a person of unusual knowledge> I have consistently used this view of knowledge throughout my argument with you, and now you act surprised as if you have no dictionary or way of checking basic definitions or meanings of words at your disposal. And herein lies another breakdown and impossibility of having a coherent debate with you. When all else fails, you default to a "no knowledge" or ability to be certain about anything as your back door and escape. It is totally clear that you would rather avoid reality than face it. I get that and have no problem with it. But stop pretending to be ignorant or stupid when you full well know that you have chosen a system of thought that allows you to hide behind it. Even empirical knowledge allows for knowing things based on first hand observation and experience. Your world view does not even allow for this kind of knowledge to exist, so you have excluded yourself completely from the entire process of thinking, learning, knowing, reasoning, or understanding. You want it both ways and that is purely and simply illogical and unintelligible. You know nothing, claim to believe nothing, and don't want anyone to believe you. With a scenario like that, what is there to honestly talk about?

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Likewise I have consistently told you that my definition of knowledge for the purpose of discussion is 100% certainty. I stand by that. I cannot (and I suspect you cannot) know Anything with 100% certainty. But you would rather avoid reality than face the idea that //anything// is possible, it is //possible// that everything is the exact opposite of what I think is real. It is possible, albeit unlikely, that a man can fall off the empire state building and **live.** It is not "known" that he will die, it is not 100% certain that he will die, he probably will but we cannot know until he falls, and after he falls we still don't know if it was a trick or not. By the way here is a list of people who claimed, as I do, that knowledge is impossible: Zeno of Elea Plato Aristotle Epicurus Seneca Voltaire Nietzsche Sartre Mark Twain Marie Curie HL Mencken Frank Lloyd Wright Clarence Darrow Susan B. Anthony Albert Einstein Carl Sagan Stephen Hawking So I feel like I am in good company here. It is when you think you know something that you stop asking questions.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

How about this then - I cited 3 specific things that ANY person could KNOW for 100% certainty in a comment just below this comment. I cited the strychnine, the Empire State Building, and cutting a major artery wide open. You conveniently did NOT respond to any of the 3 and totally avoided them. Gee, I wonder why? So to prove my point and to yourself that you can in fact find out if any of these are true or knowable, how about you taking the challenge of trying any one of the 3 and then getting back to all of us and letting us KNOW that it did not happen as I said it knowingly would. If you can do any of those 3 and live to tell us all about it, then you are correct, and nothing is 100% absolutely knowable or true. If we never hear back from you, we will all KNOW that yes, there are things that are 100% certain and knowable and can even be predicted BEFORE they occur. Some things never have to be experienced to KNOW the outcome. For example, we all KNOW that if we were to chug down a fifth of vodka or whiskey, we would be knocked on our asses and become drunk. That is KNOWABLE and certain. We don't have to TRY or DO it to find out if it will actually happen. Also, everyone knows if they stand in the middle of railroad tracks and wait for a train to come, we will for certain and without a doubt become nothing but mush once contact occurs. Do we actually need to try it out to see if it is true? Absolutely not. You continue to deny simple truths of reality that can be proven and known by every single human being on the planet. There is no way any comment you could make or any list of people you could supply that would ever change the reality of simple and/or complex things that ALL people know for certain. And along the lines of me not knowing shit - I do know that if I take one, it will smell extremely foul and is unpleasant to most people. I have not personally met anyone who claims they love or enjoy the smell of shit, but I am sure there is someone out there who does. I also know that if I don't wipe my ass after taking one, I will set myself up for a very large brown stain in my underwear that will be nearly impossible to wash out when I go to launder them. It would be cool to see you join the land of reality, but something tells me you have no intentions of ever doing so. You go to extremely great lengths to maintain your views of nothingness. I am certain I know many things (not everything or even most of everything), and my not knowing many, most, or all things is MY drive and desire to keep asking questions and seeking answers. If I knew that I could never actually know anything at all, then I would stop asking or seeking anything. There would be absolutely NO reason or basis to seek anything that can not ever be found. That is sheer waste and madness.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

And therein lies one of the problems we face when dealing with those who seek to destroy all the progress the human face has made: people who think they know with "certainty." I just shake my head in utter disbelief that you, of all people, someone who actually believes in the possibility of miracles and the potential intervention of your god in your daily life would dare claim that the outcome of any event is "are 100% certain and knowable". Well it is on your head. I cannot be held responsible if you choose to drink strychnine and your god decides to intervene and save your sorry butt. You will have to live with that. One last attempt before I give up on this line of reasoning: there **is** a difference between //extremely high probability// and //certainly//

by Anonymous 9 years ago

God gave my sorry butt the ability to choose and use common sense. Did He forget to equip you with the same capabilities? No, but you have chosen to specifically and intentionally ignore them. If I decided to walk out in 3 lanes of traffic at rush hour, why does my God have to stop or save me? Where ever did you get that notion? Where does His word teach that a miracle is used for someone making poor or wrong choices and decisions? God allows people to choose foolish, crazy, harmful, and destructive behaviors and practices every single day, but you want to blame HIM for that - when in fact, He has already put the blame and responsibility on the individual who made the choice. It is something called accountability. And atheists do not want to be held accountable for any actions, words, or deeds they do (or don't do) in this lifetime. And yes, certainty exists. Sorry you fail to acknowledge or accept such. I am guessing then that you will not be accepting my challenge to engage one of the 3 certainties to prove to us that there will in fact be a 100% certain result. I shake my head in disbelief (a rare time that I am an "unbeliever") and shame that you would continue denying or accepting the fact that some things can be known for 100% certainty. And as long as you continue holding to such failed logic, I suggest that you cease using logic itself as a basis for trying to know or understand things of "certainty" or truthfulness. If there is NO school of thought on this planet that can lead a person to a sense of 100% knowledge, certainty, or truth about some things, then there is no thought process worth engaging or entertaining. But alas, if there is no grand scheme, then who the hell actually cares anyway? With that, I am sure you would agree.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

1) your god does not "have" to save you. Are you saying he could not? If he could save you then my point is made. If he could not then your case becomes stronger and I will reconsider my stance. 2) a positive result on any experiment does not prove that a negative result will never happen. If I died your point would not be made. You would need to try the experiment an infinite number of times and find not one single exception to prove your rule. Perhaps you don't really understand the meaning of the phrase **"100% certain"** It does not mean something works one time, or 100 times, or a 1000 times, or even a million times, it means it can never-ever-ever-ever-ever-ever fail.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

1) He could do anything, but since He gave us the freedom of choice, He allows us to do as we choose. He did not stop Eve from eating of the fruit that He told her and Adam not to eat. He did not make us as robots or machines. Choice is required in order for us to willingly decide to love or even follow Him. Jesus could have saved Himself from going to the cross, and plenty tried to get Him not to - but He specifically had a purpose to fulfill and had He not, then there would not have been any way for the world to be saved (that according to God's plan and Word - someone you don't believe in). 2) If what you are saying is "true" or has the ability to be "known" then you are clearly using an incorrect definition of knowledge. I showed you that knowledge has nothing to do with 100% of anything, and yet you continue pushing forward with that concept as your "knowledge." And you are deliberately being obstinate and objectionable just to show us all your back side! Chop off the heads of 1, 10, 100, 1,000, 10,000, 100,000 people and carry on in to infinity, and tell me there will be a survivor! Please oh please tell me you believe there will be a survivor. You my friend, have outsmarted yourself and entered the realm of foolishness. I do not seek to emulate or aspire to attain your version of "knowledge." I see nothing knowledgeable or worth pursuit in such an intellectual endeavor. Good luck and best wishes at finding absolutely nothing that can be absolute or believable.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Mike the headless chicken lived 18 months. He was supposed to be dinner but alas he did not die so he went on tour and made his butcher thousands of dollars. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_the_Headless_Chicken But whatever you say... http://data.amirite.net/user_images/53f96df8eaced.jpg

by Anonymous 9 years ago

and of course I do not believe there would be a survivor, I do not believe anything. What I think is that I cannot "**know**" if there would be a survivor and therefore I cannot claim there would **__not__** be one.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Why does that bother you so much?

by Anonymous 9 years ago

And if we could know nothing with 100% certainty, then we could never formulate any accurate schools of thought to help us make informed choices or decisions. I know with 100% certainty that if a person guzzles a gallon of strychnine, and seeks no medical assistance, they will in fact be dead very shortly. I know for 100% certainty that if a person jumps off of the Empire State Building without any aids, when they hit the pavement or concrete below, they will no longer be among the living. I know for 100% certainty that if a person cuts a major artery wide open and does not get to a hospital very quickly, they will in fact bleed to death. There are many many things that can be known for 100% certainty and yet you fail to acknowledge or accept such information. You have no grounds or basis then to even discuss matters of substance with people who do know there are things that can be known.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

with all due respect, you don't know shit... http://metro.co.uk/2010/09/16/man-impaled-by-metal-rod-for-11-hours-513994/ http://data.amirite.net/user_images/53f55e938a9a2.jpg

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I would call that a miracle, as the article pretty much referenced at the bottom by stating - "God was definitely on his side." And this has absolutely NOTHING to do with anything I said! I do agree with you that I don't KNOW shit. I take shits often, have looked at it and smelled its odor, and know that it goes by several names - but to say I know it would be absurd. It never talks to me and we have never had a serious or casual discourse. I am glad you pointed out something that I could finally agree with. You are learning!

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I don't think a species survives without a will to live, with or without a purpose for existance. People like johnjillky, viczinc, and myself should be proof enough that purpose is not needed to have a will to survive. We do not subscribe to a beliefe that there is any greater purpose that we are here, yet we keep truckin' on. There are many others out there.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I'm not sure that I follow. I agree that the will to live is an extremely important instinct that almost all living creatures share. If you are saying this suggests the purpose/meaning of life is to survive and reproduce, then I agree. I'm not sure what other conclusions can be drawn though.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Define "purpose" What if "purpose" means - the reason it was created by god? What if purpose means - objectives of the participants? What if it means - raison d'etre? What if purpose means - nothing - because there is no purpose? He point is that without a god we would just all wither and die because we would have no "purpose."

by Anonymous 9 years ago

There are two elements to our propensity to survive. Instincts are the things that contril our reflexes when danger comes suddenly. The will to survive is different and varies greatly between individuals.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

this is true. i learned this a while back and im upset it took me so long to realize.

by Anonymous 9 years ago