I've wondered about purpose, some times, myself. We have the blessing, as it were, to choose our purpose; but that seems to have become turned into that since anything can be a purpose, nothing really holds that weight that purpose should hold.
Does that problem reside with us or with the universe? A very high standard would be that purpose is true only if it's somehow given by the universe, otherwise it's just something that we have invented and so doesn't carry the required weight. By that standard, it would seem like the universe is indifferent to what we do, and thus the problem is not us, since there's nothing we can do that will make a true difference any more than any other action. However, that standard may be too high.
Animals (and perhaps some of my creatures) simply have their purpose defined for them. Perhaps a purpose is better than none, even if it isn't "true" by any high standard. "They know why they are there", we don't. Yet, it's possible for people to create false purpose (I think), but maybe that too is because we don't already have any and so we put our standards low indeed.
I'm mostly just thinking loudly here.
-
For the later part, would there be different solutions for different animals? I think so, but I can't at the moment see what other animals would represent these other solutions. It might be possible to divert the raw desire or drive; it would not be logic, but simply a redirection whenever it occurs...
Common to such solutions would be that they require a certain indirect strength of being: not the strength of power or repression, but the strength of, when finding out that there are no final victories, to persevere - to keep outwitting (or redirecting, or what the solution may be) those forces, that the sum of the temporary victories keeps said forces from advancing.
no subject
I've wondered about purpose, some times, myself. We have the blessing, as it were, to choose our purpose; but that seems to have become turned into that since anything can be a purpose, nothing really holds that weight that purpose should hold.
Does that problem reside with us or with the universe? A very high standard would be that purpose is true only if it's somehow given by the universe, otherwise it's just something that we have invented and so doesn't carry the required weight. By that standard, it would seem like the universe is indifferent to what we do, and thus the problem is not us, since there's nothing we can do that will make a true difference any more than any other action. However, that standard may be too high.
Animals (and perhaps some of my creatures) simply have their purpose defined for them. Perhaps a purpose is better than none, even if it isn't "true" by any high standard. "They know why they are there", we don't. Yet, it's possible for people to create false purpose (I think), but maybe that too is because we don't already have any and so we put our standards low indeed.
I'm mostly just thinking loudly here.
-
For the later part, would there be different solutions for different animals? I think so, but I can't at the moment see what other animals would represent these other solutions. It might be possible to divert the raw desire or drive; it would not be logic, but simply a redirection whenever it occurs...
Common to such solutions would be that they require a certain indirect strength of being: not the strength of power or repression, but the strength of, when finding out that there are no final victories, to persevere - to keep outwitting (or redirecting, or what the solution may be) those forces, that the sum of the temporary victories keeps said forces from advancing.