h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hi and welcome to h2g2! I hope you enjoy your time here! I see you've written an introduction - a great start. You still have to choose a nickname. If you need help doing this or if there's anything else you need, don't hesitate to ask me, or any of the other ACEs at http://www.h2g2.com/A214796 . Be sure to check out the main page. You can always get there by clicking that lovely logo in the goo (top-left of your screen). Well, I don't like that point of life. I don't think there is one .
I do agree with the statement about Communism except that it only applies to Dictatorship Communism. As your next statement says, real Communism doesn't work due to Human nature - an absolute truth!

Remember, feel free to ask any questions,

Mr.Cynic

Haway lad. Welcome to Aitchtu Jeetu the world of pure thought and alcohol. Pop into the forum and firkin for a chat. Anyone will talk to you there - whether I'm there or not. My brother lives in Gateshead and I pop up to your neck of the woods from time to time.

Hi there geordie,

(And Mr. Cynic, you seem to have always got there before me )

You can find a page for newcomers at http://www.h2g2.com/A5752 , or you can visit the ACE's homepage, http://www.h2g2.com/A214796, and of course, we are all happy to show you around!

There are a number of clubs that you can sign up for around the place, you can find those where you will, and there is the POST (h2g2's newspaper) at http://www.h2g2.com/A54963. Some places I would recommend are my house at http://www.h2g2.com/A251993 , but I would say that was a good place (Grin), and the Towel Discussion Fourum (tell us about your towels!) at http://www.h2g2.com/A211609

At the ACEs we have a whole host of interesting entrys and places to go, so do drop by!

Of course, not everything on h2g2 is comical, and there is a great deal of sensible entrys as well. Just pull down the search box, and type words to search through the entrys.

Most of all, Happy Researching, and enjoy the guide!

TimJ

--- "There are no stupid questions, only stupid people. Honk." ---

Hi there, geordie. I see there isn't much I can tell you, my fellow ACEs have done the job so well.

As for that bit about space being the final frontier, I agree totally. If you ever get out there, you can locate me somewhere in the Pleiades, meanwhile I'll settle for http://www.h2g2.com/U105457. Drop by sometime!

Thanks Omicron.

Glad you agree with the space bit. It seems like we have all the technology, loads of enthusiastic people, and loads of spare money floating around that people are desperate to invest, yet we seem to be moving so slowly.
Plus, loads of people think its better to send out probes. I mean, how bloody boring is that! You spend a billion or two getting the technology together, and then you don't actually bother sending men. Space travel should be a way of shifting people about.
Its good to know there are people who do want to see people wandering about in space.

Let me add my welcome.

Welcome.

And I like your ramblings. Would you describe yourself as a Spacer? I, indeed, was once described as such by an horrific person who worked for a letting agents who ripped me off each month I grudgingly payed my rent in vastly over-priced London.

I still live in London.

Anyway, I'm one of the Editorial team here and I hope you enjoy yourself on the site.

Sam

Thanks Sam.

What sort of stuff did you say to this terrible letting agent? If you're anything like me, just about any slightly deep discussion leads on to spacetravel.

I'm not too sure what a spacer might be, but there's a good chance I am one.

Don't you think going in to space is a waste of money? (I would appreciate any arguments against this one)

Thankyou for making me feel welcome.

I'm surprised you don't feel there's any point to life.
Since you're still alive, wouldn't you be better making some sort of guess as to what the point might be?


If you do have an idea, it's possible to work out a system of morals based purely on logic, rather than on someone say "because god said so".


Assuming that someone does find a purpose in the distant future, even if you have no idea what the purpose is, you can help the people.

Someone like Hitler, for example, caused immense chaos, and people in the future will be worse off as a result. All the money wasted on warfare, all the lives lost will affect future generations. As a result, my family has had no property or wealth passed on to them, even though their parents worked hard to save their wealth. This generation suffers. Hitler, and all the people who supported him, therefore went against 'the purpose'.

So how can any one help? If you help future generations to be as happy, well educated, healthy and wealthy as possible then you will help 'the purpose'. If you assume all good people should help 'the purpose', then all morality and laws can derived from this.

The law against murdering someone can be seen to be bad to 'the purpose', unless the victim is a cause of chaos which in itself is bad to 'the purpose'. So by mudering this person, you are preventing further bad happening to 'the purpose'.


Through this reasoning, if everyone agreed, you would have universally accepted standards of morality and justice. Justice could be made fairer may taking a wholly practical view on each situation, with the outcome determined by pure logic, which can be analysed, rather than an entirely subjective judge or jury.

I'm sorry this is a bit of a long post, especially in reply to just one little comment. I think using logic like this is essential fo removing the pointless rituals and superstition from religion, and a starting point, like 'how can I help the purpose of life' is essential.

(just a small aside, I have to argue with your nickname. You don't seem "daft" to me )

Then you seem to be saying that the point of life is prosperity - to live wealthy, longer lives. I don't see that a very useful point of life as I can still ask "What's the point of that?". Nope. I'm not satisfied. Some say the point is reproduction, some say it's development but all these can still be asked my question. I just don't see the point in those goals.

Okay. You obviously don't find this satisfying in any way.

I would like to explain this thinking in more depth. This is where I started from. I don't know the point to life. I asked people. Most couldn't tell me. The rest side stepped the issue by randomnly quoting people and sticking in god every so often for good measure. I still don't know the point to life.


Now, look at the insurance people. They don't know what will happen. All they can do is give the options, and then decide how likely each one will be, and then account for that. And somehow, without being omnipotent beings, or soothsayers, or leaving it in the hands of god, they can make a business out of the future.


This works. I don't know what purpose there is to do in the future, but I can look at the options with the knowledge I have, and then try to handle them as best I can.

So this is what I came up with:

1. I don't know the purpose of life, becuase there isn't one. I can see a rock infront of me. It is dead. It has no purpose, it just sits there in an indifferent rock-just-sitting-there kind of way. Which is what I'm doing. With no purpose, life is no different to death. I may as well die.


???? Hang on, if there's no difference between death and life, it surely doesn't matter which I choose? But if I do choose to live, it should be because there is a purpose. A purpose is what life is about. Rocks sit there. If you kick a rock, it may move, but it doesn't really care.

If someone kicks you, you do care, you kick them back, and hard, in order to punish them so that they are less likely to do the same again. You eat because you need food to live, you breath to live, you earn to get food, you don't simply do, you do to... or you do because ....

So since I'm alive, I'm going to make one small assumption. There is a point to life. Why? Simply because I've nothing better to do.


There are the following reasons why there may be one, but I don't know about:


1 Someone does know, but it isn't essential for 'the purpose' for me to know, in fact it would be a waste of time and energy to tell me, and so would interfere with 'the purpose' to tell me.


2 No one knows yet, and either:

i) A human will work out 'the purpose'. This human will then inform as many people as he sees necessary to achieve 'the purpose', and a few more to check his reasoning.

ii) Someone non human will work it out. Then, as above.

iii) there isn't a purpose which is intrinsic to life in this universe, so someone makes up a good one which lots of people agree with.


In each case, anyone can help this purpose simply by furthering the cause of humanity, as I explained earlier. This doesn't necessarily mean becoming prosperous, or living long. All it does mean, is that in your life you help sustainable general prosperity and well being for humanity as a whole. People who give up their possesions and comfortable lives to work for charities in third world counties help 'the purpose', though even by doing so they will become considerable poorer, and have a shorter life.


This is not satisfying. In fact I find in some ways it is depressing. But neither is life. A long time ago, we had the cosy view of earth being the centre of a small cosy universe. We then found it was infinite, and we have no special place. That's depressing, and terribly unstatisfying. The truth often is.


As a cynic, I assume you have abandoned the simple, feel good message of religion, which is something like 'let god handle stuff like that, you're too thick'.

As a cynic, although you keep an open mind, you doubt whether there really is a god looking after us.

As a cynic, the message is clear. We're on our own.


This purpose is deeply unsatisfying. I want a nice, clear, unambiguous point. I don't expect to get it.

This purpose is purely pragmatic and rational. It is not easy to follow, but I feel it reflects life, which is not simple or deeply, consistently satisfying.


If you have abandoned religion as being the cushy, easy way out, This is the best there is.

Another serious thread.
*combs hair and tucks vest neatly into y-fronts*
If you use the word "purpose" don't you presume a creator.
When I make something new and someone says "What is it for?" They mean "What is it's purpose?" What did _I_ want it to do?

I'm sure someone more widely read than me would describe what philosophy you are expounding, but I think that you may be looking at "What method of living offers the greatest possible good to humankind as a whole?"

This does not rely on "purpose" but could be the basis on which rules are founded.

*frizzes hair and pulls out vest*

Anyone coming to the Forum and Firkin?

I'm not sure exactly what 'expounding' means, nor am I sure if this has anything to do with a particular philosophy. This is purely my own thinking, my own logic, my own way of approaching moral decisions.

It depends on your own thinking whether there needs to be creator. A creator isn't necessary for this thinking to hold true, but if you want you could include it.

Suppose you see a stick on the ground. You can pick it up, examine it and decide that it would be best used as an 'argument winning device'. It may have been fashioned by someone, but it isn't absolutely necessary for this to be so if, it is to be useful. In the same way, caves were formed purely by accident. Our early ancestors found them perfect for shelter.


By the nature of a caves existence, it has uses intrinsic to its form. They are still created by accident.


In the same way, I think its possible for a human to come into being by accident. That same human can still have a use, or purpose which is intrinsic to its form.

I just decided to add an extra thing, along the same line of thought.

It may be that we must find our own purpose.

If so, what should the purpose be?

Well, it should be to bring about change. When you do something, it's to change something. If you kick someone, to start with they are in a state of not-being-kicked, and you bring them into a state of being-kicked-and-probably-about-to-kick-you-back.

But what can we change on a big scale?

The chaos of the universe woorks to cover over our tracks, to undo the things we do. Even when we pollute a vast area of land is cleared and polluted, chaos means the pollutants diffuse away, plants grow, and any buildings fall apart and turn to dust.

But there is one change we can bring about.

Life can only appear on a planet at certain point in the life of a planet. It is also probable, that advanced life can only develope at a certain time in the life of the universe, when densities and levels of radiation are just right.

If you kill most of a population, those that remain will fill in the gaps. If you kill all the population, they will be extinct. Their place in the environment will be filled by another population. But this will not happen if you kill all the populations.

So, if life is completely killed, it can not come back, because the necessary conditions will never occur again.

Pain, anguish, distress are intrinsic properties to intelligent life. If you have life, it will become intelligent. If you have life, you have suffering.


So we can make a difference. We can end all suffering. We can use all our ideas, all our technology to bring about destruction which is beautiful in its completeness.


I understand that this may seem depressing, but there is no need for it to be so. It is a definite, final, clean end to life. When someone dies, it is said for those who are left. When there is destruction, people mourn this blotch on life.

This complete, intelligent destruction leaves no mourners behind. I'm not suggesting we go on to any sort of afterlife, though if you do believe it, so be it. There will be no sadness.


However, this is only beautiful if it is complete. Just some primitive bomb leaves mourners, the death is slow. Even if my reasoning is correct, which I doubt, there is no need to do it in the near fututre.

*smooths down hair and tucks in vest*

Imagine you fall out with someone and you pick up a wheelbrace and knock lumps out of them with it. You have found a use for it but it is not the purpose of a wheelbrace.

The word purpose means that something had a reason for existing that was decided by its creator. Use doesn't mean purpose.

I think I agree with your philosophy of logic by and large and really don't want to argue with someone I find more in common with than I disagree with. But I think you have to be wary of using the word "purpose" if you aren't saying there is a creator.

I, funnily enough, am happy with the idea of a creator so I look for purpose in life - but it would be dishonest of me to join in a conversation on "How could humans be more creative, joyous or loving to one another and make the world a better place," without making a difference between "purpose" and "use." It's not just different words for the same thing.

I can find a use for said wheelbrace but it may not be its purpose. I can find a use for a rock but it may have no purpose at all.

Are you sure you won't join me at the Forum and Firkin?

*pulls out vest and really frizzes up hair*

I agree that if there is no point to life there is no difference between life and death and that is what I think. And as they are both the same it does not matter which you choose, in which case I choose life as I am not sure I'll have another after trying out death .
This does not mean there is a point to life though. But just because I don't think there is a purpose to life, doesn't mean that I will do nothing. I get my ambition from other sources - I don't need an overall goal or the prospect of one to spur me on (No puns intended). And so what if when you kick a rock it won't retaliate? How does that mean there is a point to life? I don't get it! .
And your points about a cynic - perfect . I follow the first two fully and am pretty sure of the last. I don't expect to find a point to life though I don't mind looking for one. Though I see no point to life, I don't think there will be an afterlife and I am convinced there is no God, I still want to live and I do have ambition - I just don't need soothing stories to keep me content .

Okay, I think you've forced me to make an admission. This vague 'purpose' is pretty much a way of giving myself added direction.

My argument is not proof that there is a 'purpose'. It is saying that if we choose to live, we should try to do our best.

It's playing the odds to best affect. If life is meaningless then it doesn't matter what I squander it on.

Suppose you look at horse racing. You assume you are a sensible person. There are four horses, with odds 1:1, 1:1, 1:1, 1:5. Since betting is not a sound investment, it is of no concern whether you lose the money. If you bet on a horse with odds 1:1, and it wins, you haven't gained anything. If it loses, it's of no significance. If you put your money on the horse with odds 1:5, you gain, if it loses it's of no significance.

I would compare the horse with odds 1:5 winning with the chance of their being a 'purpose'. It's least likely, but I've nothing to lose and nothing better to do with my life.

I'm sorry this is not very satisfying. If it turned out there was a 'purpose', and I had worked against it, I would be ashamed, and feel stupid. If it turns out there isn't, I haven't wasted it any more than any one else.

In this way, I'm guarding against all the possibilities.

The advantage of using this approach, is that if anyone does have a 'purpose', for example due to a particular religion, this approach and reasoning means that I can sympathetic to all schools of thought, all religions, and in fact help them. I see this line of reasoning as a way of tying together an increasingly secular society with religious or political extremists, in a way that is not imposing my beliefs on others.

However cynical I become, this reasoning will mean I shouldn't interfere too much with others. It is a flexible, inclusive way of defining morality, which is hard to disagree with.

It is not rock solid proof of anything. It is simply a way of grouping together secular beliefs, in order that are not contradictory. If you follow this line of reasoning through (that everyone should help 'the purpose'), the justice and morals it points to are very fair, and would help when laws contradict each other.


I'm not happy with people, who don't believe in god, going round with a mish mash of a moral system in their head. Justice and fairness is hard to achieve.

Mr Cynic, what do you base your system of morals on?

Well Sam, the word 'Spacer' sounds like something out of Isaac Asimov's 'Foundation' and 'Robot' novels. As I recall, the Spacers were the second wave(or maybe the first) of colonizers from Earth. Of course, the strange thing seems to be that in his stories, there never were any aliens in the Galaxy, just a whole bunch of humans...I suppose that he wanted to illustrate how humans keep fighting each other for useless reasons...oh well, back to the mundane trappings of everyday life.

Sorry but I totally disagree. You don't need a fictional sentiant character and the belief that if you disobey his moral code you will be damned to hell. Neither do you need a couple of books with outdated statements and many stories with sacrifices. You don't have this "mish mash of a moral system" just because you don't follow these guides. Being brought up with a basis or a moral system you should be able to judge right from wrong. I have a very defined and pretty strict moral system - not this "mish mash" you claim. I am atheist yet I have a moral code - how can this be?!? . I get guilt - I do my best (how shall I put this) not to "sin". Even though I wasn't raised Christian and I am now atheist I have managed to develop this from a mixture of my upbringing and my own experiences. And let me tell you this. I am the only person in my class to admit to being an atheist but I probably have the most Christian-like moral code. So I do disagree with you; Atheists often have a better moral code to those with faith - many of us believe there is only one life and so it becomes much more precious.

Mr C, talk to me a bit more about your moral code. Do you have a view on the lesser of two evils approach to life. E.g. killing is wrong but it is better to kill one person than allow them to kill many.