Well I crossed the river
Fell into the sea
Where the non-believers
Go beyond belief
Then I scratched the surface
In the mouth of hell
Running out of service
In the blood I fell
-See The Light, Green Day
Once again I have an exam that I really can't be bothered studying for, so I decided to write a blog about the things I'm supposed to be studying. Luckily for my readers, this time it's Philosophy: The Big Questions and not Latin again.
Personal Identity: What makes us 'us'? What makes us the same person through time? There are a few main theories. The Animal Theory, we're the same animal; the brain theory, we have the same brain; CESINS (Continued Existence of Souls Is Necessary for Survival), we have the same soul; and stream theory, we have psychological continuity (memories, personality, and stuff) with ourselves. The usual problems include things about brain transplants, cyborgs, amnesia, not having a good definition of a soul, and copies of people. I like stream theory, with the revision that any form of copy doesn't count as you. Oh, and there's bundle theory, which states that we have no personal identity, we're just bundles of experiences. It's stupid.
The Good Life: What is the best life for the person living it? Main theories include hedonism, the best life is a happy one (quantitative hedonism = lots of pleasure and not much pain; qualitative hedonism = lots of higher pleasures); objective-list theories, the best life includes having a bunch of stuff on a list (such as mutual love, comfort, health, blah blah blah); desire-fulfillment theory, the best life is getting all your desires fulfilled; and success theory, the best life is getting all your desires about yourself fulfilled. I like hedonism, specifically preference hedonism, which states that the best life is one in which you're happy because you get lots of the types of pleasures you prefer and little pain.
The Meaning of Life: This one's obvious. There can be no objective meaning of life, nothing means anything in the long run because nothing lasts. Lots of people try to argue for subjective meaning, but that means nothing to anyone else. So, do whatever the hell you want with your life. It won't matter when you're gone, but you won't care once you're dead anyway. Take life as seriously as you want, and make up your own meaning if you feel the need to.
The Philosophy of Religion: Does God exist? The most important argument here is the ontological argument: We can conceive of something greater than anything else we can conceive of; therefore this thing exists at least in understanding; things that exist in reality are greater than things that only exist in understanding; if this thing didn't exist in reality we could conceive of something greater than it (that thing in reality); therefore this thing exists and is God. Just, no. You can't prove that something exists by playing with words (try replacing thing with island). There are other arguments based on the fact that something had to be the first cause of changes, something has to be the 'best' thing ever, and something has to direct all the non-sentient things (such as plants) towards their goals. I don't see why something has to be the 'best' of anything or how it leads to God. I also don't see how evolution can't explain everything else. Why can't the universe have evolved like everything else? Maybe it failed thousands of times before our universe came into existence.
Free Will: Do we have free will, or are all our actions directed by external factors? The general argument for no free will is that society and our environments shape our experiences and therefore our brains, therefore controlling all our actions. The argument for free will is that we can choose what we do or don't do at many points, and could have always chosen a different path. A sort of combination of these is called soft determinism and states that we have free will because we could have chosen a different path if we had wanted to. I think it's probably true that we are slaves of our brains, but that doesn't mean anything since are brains pretty much are us. We can't stop holding people responsible for their actions without the world turning to shit anyway.
Metaethics: Are there moral facts? Basically, are our morals based on anything objective? Some say they can't be because morals are so different in different societies; plus, what exactly could a moral truth be and how would we know what it was? Others say that there are moral facts, that are set by God. I think morality is hugely influenced by society, based in human empathy. We think causing pointless suffering is morally wrong because we know what it's like to suffer (except psychopaths who don't really have morals).
There we go, six big problems in life solved in one blog (obviously my opinion is right /sarcasm). And I deem myself sufficiently prepared for tomorrow's exam.
Stay tuned for more Pathetic Tales From A Broken Doll.
xx