If you were to apply or guess a meaning to human existence, which would it be?

[Kyriakos]

If true meaning can only be realized through ranchifying and flamifying all foods then I'm afraid the snackpocalypse seems unavoidable,

RIP, humanity. The search for meaning basted and broiled you.

Fried butter=110% Lard= Best food source

 

[gay_Aleks]

Then America is either found the meaning of life, or is this close to getting there.

 

[Kyriakos]

Then America is either found the meaning of life, or is this close to getting there.

Eating american foods consisting of nearly 100% fat will cause life to end sooner, and

The meaning of life is that it stops.

 

[gay_Aleks]

Yes, but eating food in general tends to end life. So, is the meaning of life starvation?

 

[Gori the Grey]

Try to leave the place better than you found it.

 

[Narz]

Spawn sexable offspring who don't get themselves killed before reproducin' time.

Ideally not self-destruct the planet/our species but that's asking a lot.

Or if you're a Kurzweilian the endgoal of human existence is to live in a hard drive screwing a virtual porn star on repeat for all of eternity (and every few years writing a new book with a new adjective before the word "Machines").

 

[IglooDame]

Everything, if you happen to be that one grain of sand.

Sure, we're all one big precious snowflake, completely distinct and beautiful (just like all the others), but that won't prevent us from getting melted down by a nearby grain of saltsupernova.

 

[El_Machinae]

Well, the risks to our existence aren't infinite. It's a question of our capacity and capability when those risks arrive. The threat of that supernova decreases as our might increases.

 

[Agent327]

I'm sure. Perhaps a more funadmental question is whether we need to assign 'meaning' to human existence at all.

 

[azzaman333]

The purpose of existence is merely to exist. Nothing more.

 

[Perfection]

Well, the risks to our existence aren't infinite.

What do you mean by that?

Current cosmology suggests we're screwed.

 

[El_Machinae]

Ah yes, "heat death".

We have dismissed those claims.

More seriously, I agree. But we're measuring on the trillion year timescale at that point. I don't think we can predict outcomes. We don't know enough yet. Clearly, my optimism could be wrong on that front, but I think an agnostic position is warranted right now

 

[Kyriakos]

Ah yes, "heat death".

We have dismissed those claims.

More seriously, I agree. But we're measuring on the trillion year timescale at that point. I don't think we can predict outcomes. We don't know enough yet. Clearly, my optimism could be wrong on that front, but I think an agnostic position is warranted right now

"We don't know enough yet." is quite the understatement, though.

I don't see any reason why heat death (or any analogous event), even if it will happen at X future time, has to mean the death of the universe, given i am pretty sure that not all beings even sense heat nor factor it in some meaningful manner. Would it matter to you if the city burns if you are a fish?

Taken another way: if you draw a stick figure on a piece of paper, you can then draw a blade cutting its head. The stick-figure is now dead in that progression. The paper it was drawn onto is likely useless as well. You seem to be still standing in your drawing-room, though.

 

[Kozmos]

Computation or life require energy. So yeah, you are right, it is not death of the universe but everything in it.

 

[El_Machinae]

Heat Death appears to be true, but we don't yet know if consciousness can be transmitted along dimensions. For all we know, we could travel to an area of the universe where it's undergoing new Inflation. We've more short-scale battles to fight, right now.

 

[Tahuti]

Or if you're a Kurzweilian the endgoal of human existence is to live in a hard drive screwing a virtual porn star on repeat for all of eternity (and every few years writing a new book with a new adjective before the word "Machines").

I find the Kurzweilian endgame a rather disgusting vision for society: A society without mortality is a society without life. Life needs to have an end for it to be meaningful and removing all negative aspects from life mutes all positive things in life as well. Nuclear self-destruction would be preferable to whatever torture Ray Kurzweil has in mind for humanity.

 

[Kozmos]

The self or society as you know it is unlikely to stick around for long in a Kurzweilan scenario. It is choice of being less to be something more.

 

[warpus]

Heat Death appears to be true, but we don't yet know if consciousness can be transmitted along dimensions. For all we know, we could travel to an area of the universe where it's undergoing new Inflation. We've more short-scale battles to fight, right now.

I think it's more likely for us to find a pathway to another universe, or to create our own, at that point. Like Jesus said in Corinthians 4:57 "Who knows"

 

[El_Machinae]

Keep in mind, most Singularitarians don't have long-term assumptions. We can envision hellish scenarios as well as you can

Warpus, that's where I'm at. For me, the VASTLY more important question is who is the "we" in that scenario?

 

[Tahuti]

Keep in mind, most Singularitarians don't have long-term assumptions.

If they learned to plan ahead, they wouldn't have been Singularitarians. If they still are, then they are total nutcases.