The Function Of Belief

Okay, wonderful work guys, here's the next question: is the concept of "meaning" arrogant?
 
It depends on the application. To parse meaning down to something immutable and non relative we would have to get back to the point where signs, or symbols, can be exchanged one for one with what they represent. Even if that were theoretically possible it would absolutely destroy civilization as we know it. Meaning is a floating, abstract concept. To insist on specific, unitary, finite meaning is, then, the height of arrogance. Conversely, to slip into utter relativism is to cultivate terminal impotence. Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

Chris
 
I don't think there is any chance that the bulk of humanity would come to the conclusion that meaning is relative and anthropocentric, it's enough for most people to flick on the tube and be entertained while remaining blissfully unaware of reality as it is.

I really like the way you can see the sociological impact of philosophical inqury though Chris, it adds so much to a discussion, thank you!
 
Paladin said:
Okay, wonderful work guys, here's the next question: is the concept of "meaning" arrogant?
Click to expand...

Only to the extent that "certain" meanings are emphasized over others by their advocates. The "arrogance" factor relates directly to the human(s) advocating certain meanings and just how that is accomplished.

flow....;)
 
Paladin said:
Take it easy yer honor sir, I intends ter show all these here questions are what ya call inter-related:D
Click to expand...

As long as you're not leading the Witnesses. I'm getting impatient at the lack of clear relevance to the charges.

s.
 
What attracts me to post modernism and deconstruction is its emphasis on looking at movement on the surface without buying into the supposed hierarchies of meaning beneath. I don't care so much about meaning itself, I'm more interested in how it's constructed because that's the secret back door out of the echo chamber. That's how you get behind the curtain.

Chris
 
Snoopy said:
As long as you're not leading the Witnesses. I'm getting impatient at the lack of clear relevance to the charges.

s.
Click to expand...
Okay Snoopy, just for you, the entire thread can be summed up by an extremely bad old joke:

Doc! My brother thinks he's a chicken!
Well, bring him by the office and I think we can help him.
I would Doc, but we need the eggs.
 
China Cat Sunflower said:
What attracts me to post modernism and deconstruction is its emphasis on looking at movement on the surface without buying into the supposed hierarchies of meaning beneath. I don't care so much about meaning itself, I'm more interested in how it's constructed because that's the secret back door out of the echo chamber. That's how you get behind the curtain.

Chris
Click to expand...

Chris, if you feel so inclined, I would love it if you expanded on these ideas. Especially on the idea of the secret back door, and what you see the echo chamber really is. Quite intriguing!
 
Paladin said:
is the concept of "meaning" arrogant?
Click to expand...
Darn, I go away for a few days and I miss the good stuff. I hate when that happens...

How is "meaning" arrogant? I guess what makes me wonder is the relationship between reality and meaning. I mean, something *has* to *be* regardless of how we ultimately interpret it, no? Or is that arrogant of me to presume that some reality exists independent of my preferred interpretation?

I am left trying to cipher whether or not the meaning of "meaning" is reality or interpretation, objective or subjective?
 
Last edited:
Paladin said:
Okay, wonderful work guys, here's the next question: is the concept of "meaning" arrogant?
Click to expand...
Well that would depend on what you mean by arrogant... correct?

Paladin said:
Doc! My brother thinks he's a chicken!
Well, bring him by the office and I think we can help him.
I would Doc, but we need the eggs.
Click to expand...
So if a brother lays an egg, do you believe he is a Chicken? If a person eats an egg, do you believe he becomes a Chicken?
 
Paladin said:
what goes good with green beer?
Click to expand...
Good? In what sense?

Color wise I would think red to be an appropriate contrast, though perhaps a bit Christmassy... Green goes good with black for a more formal appearance, and brown for a more casual look. Be certain shoes and belts match.

In a culinary sense, perhaps pretzels or peanuts - something salty. Red pretzels would not seem very appetizing to me though. Red pistachios or spanish peanuts perhaps?

In a moral sense if one sees beer as a bad thing to partake in, then I would think some form of repentence or pennance to be appropriately good. Public flogging seems to me a bit much to be considered good to go with green beer, but lampshades as headgear seem to be appropriate publicly self-inflicted humiliation. Then too, more than one offspring has been conceived due to the effects of indulgence of the elixir of grain. It should stand to reason that an appropriate proportion of heritable darlings must be the direct or indirect result of the consumption of green beer...although the determination of whether that is a good or bad consequence is best left to those involved, I would think.

In a physiological sense I suppose consumption of too much green beer might be relieved by a trip to the loo, my darling! One doesn't own beer, it's only on loan to us. It seems to me that green beer would lend itself to providing a new meaning for the term "green peas." Or is that "greenpeace?"

In a psychological sense I suppose there isn't really any redeeming value left to those who would lower their standards to the point of consuming *green* beer. But then, I suppose there's no accounting for taste, is there? I mean, look at the intrinsic insanity of the game of golf...yet it is the game of choice for stuffed shirts with nothing better to do, *sigh*. A sip or two of green beer cannot possibly have any lasting ill effect, or so one would hope. But once the indulgence of said green beer progresses to the point of green hair, cardboard cutout shamrocks and limerick contests, all notions of "good" as we generally think of the concept are hopelessly lost.

In an existential sense, does anyone really know what time it is? Does anybody really care?

;) :D
 
Last edited:
juantoo3 said:
Darn, I go away for a few days and I miss the good stuff. I hate when that happens...

How is "meaning" arrogant? I guess what makes me wonder is the relationship between reality and meaning. I mean, something *has* to *be* regardless of how we ultimately interpret it, no? Or is that arrogant of me to presume that some reality exists independent of my preferred interpretation?

I am left trying to cipher whether or not the meaning of "meaning" is reality or interpretation, objective or subjective?
Click to expand...


I think you're on the right track Juan. I used the word arrogant mostly as a red flag. I suppose anthropocentric would have worked but has less emotional impact.

There is a prevalent world view that sees the human race as created, having a relationship with a creator and all the rest of creation as some sort of elaborate "set" on which the play is enacted. We search for the "meaning of life" as if there is one.

I find it constantly amusing to see the elaborate machinations of those desperately trying to impute some sort of higher purpose for their own self aggrandizement. Without having this story to live out of, the existential angst is too much.
Therefore, contrarians abound skewing the argument with much sound and fury signifying nothing.
Ask about the 'meaning" of life, one might just as well ask, "what is the meaning of a tree?"
 
Information is zipped, to use a computer analogy, into signs and symbols, creating an artifact from which the original information can be accurately reassembled. That's what I'm doing when I'm typing this. I'm encoding information into these little individual letter artifact thingies. The meaning is in the symbol. You may deduce the meaning from the symbol to whatever extent you are capable. To the extent that I fashion the artifacts to be accurate representations of the information I wish to store or transfer the meaning is encoded clearly. But the meaning ITSELF forever resides in the symbols.

Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top