Where does meaning come from?

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Post Reply
encode_decode
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:19 pm

Where does meaning come from?

Post by encode_decode » Wed Mar 01, 2017 11:24 pm

The question in the subject is left intentionally vague. I will offer a few statements to prime the conversation.
  • 1. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

    2. The total sum of experience from birth to the present.

    3. By asking something abstract and only using the accumulated information in ones memory it is possible to derive meaning from anything.
Number three I made up myself and now I offer yet another question slightly more elaborate than the original
  • How is it that somehow we are able to gain meaning from the unrelated?
I hope with the four sentences above and the original question I am setting a theme for what I am attempting to work out. I apologize in advance to anyone who feels I am being too vague or general.

Finally I would like to add that last night I watched a video that I will now quote from:
The fish uses its tail to swim forward. The fish uses its head to swim backwards.
The quote has been modified on purpose because I want to be a little playful and suggest that meaning may be propagated in more than one direction.

We use devices like metaphors to convey meaning and so it is that I am mixing concepts to make an attempt to get to the bottom of a more abstract mental impression of meaning.

At what point in our mental process does meaning start?

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6030
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Thu Mar 02, 2017 4:46 pm

Hello again e/d. Lets try again to add some meaning to it.

Lurking in the background is the question if it's meaningful to ask the question on meaning. For example if it might have to do with some kind of fundamental open-endedness or ambiguity of things. The question itself then would relate to a potential answer or direction, starting off in the mental realm. Meaning then as expression of direction, from known to unknown, from past to future.

That's a whole new direction for me to think in! Thanks. Until now I "simplified" meaning to be some form of expression of connection, of relating. This is based on the experience of when or how some activity, or even "life", feels meaningful or not. And it always showed itself to be a function of the amount of connections something or someone has to other activities, people and events. It also explains the well known experience of a complete loss of meaning, which seems to be a result of engaging in activities for too long all having little relation to anything, or anyone, else beyond its own confines.

Philosophy is then deeply connected to meaning giving, since all the philosophical questioning, all the philosophical exploring is aimed to connect to everything: all the finer points of existing, of language, of dealing with experiencing and deriving sense from all of it. And yet it can also lead to meaninglessness, probably when one would stop applying this thought to all sense and all times. When all thought on life would become a bubble of life, becoming isolated. Such perhaps unavoidable form of alienation could then be part and parcel of having a mind in the first place; creating limited representations as a way to reason.

But back to your question, which was not as much about what meaning was but also where it would come from. Perhaps it would simply flow out of a more useful definition. If meaning indeed flows out of complex connection making, being it physical, interactions between senses and events, or pure mentally -- words connecting with words -- then it would connect deep down to the fundamental, driving forces of life itself. From these connections, all importance and value can be derived, arriving back again at the usual dictionary definitions of meaning.

This mental pathway shows how it can be said that truth, the alchemy of philosophy, is the greatest treasure as it leads to the giving of value itself, to self-knowledge, to value-knowledge. Everything else of value would be derivative.

User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5663
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by Dan Rowden » Thu Mar 02, 2017 7:45 pm

Try reverse engineering what you mean by the concept 'meaning'.

encode_decode
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:19 pm

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by encode_decode » Fri Mar 03, 2017 12:32 am

Bear in mind I am not an expert hence why I ask the question; in hopes of encouraging dialog.
Try reverse engineering what you mean by the concept 'meaning'.
I will try my best to reverse engineer what I mean by the concept meaning(let this be a first pass attempt at inciting criticism):

The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. {Being able to see similarity in otherwise unrelated topics} Using the knowledge acquired throughout life to compare with newfound knowledge to either instantly get some meaning or with thought, work it out.

The total sum of experience from birth to the present. {Just a tool to perform step one}

By asking something abstract and only using the accumulated information in ones memory it is possible to derive meaning from anything. {accumulated information being the total sum plus the newfound}

abstract impression = total sum[derivativeSimilarities]/newfound

answer = analogy derived from: abstract impression

integrated answer = answer ∫ newfound

integrated answer = meaning

I imagine this being a driver to our imagination which may lead to the ultimate question/s and answer/s.

I am guessing that seeds of meaning initiate when the quotient is obtained from derivativeSimilarities and newfound. Skipping a step or two we can use an integrated impression to drive a question for further knowledge.

The propagation of meaning can then be drawn from the answer and question laterally.

It also looks like this reverse engineers itself; in some obscure fashion.

So that covers the stuff that is kind of baffling me and I think I am making some sort of mistake and that is why I am not getting the result I want.

Classically:
When an equal amount is taken from equals, an equal amount results.

meaning = meaning

Analogy on the other hand is just confusing; how we can somehow end up with an invention based upon some partial derivative knowledge.

-----

If on the other hand I go with my mixing of concepts here, then it would possibly be where the concepts intersect or correlate.

-----

@Diebert van Rhijn -> yes indeed, lurking in the background is the question if it's meaningful to ask the question on meaning. "Right on" with the ambiguity in that we seem to use a lot of interpretation to derive meaning. So if interpretation is where meaning lies then there seems to be more than one version of truth(please disagree if you feel the need). The direction on the other hand may arrive at the definite like 1 + 1 = 2.

Mathematically I think it is like a system of equations where each equation or part of the system has the flexibility to be just a little different from its counterpart peers ending with some sort of normalization in the system. The resulting normalization being the derivative meaning.

Do you think that there is a limit to the representations anyway? ; for each individual? ; Meaningful ones I mean!

I am thinking that meaning is derived in some purely mental manner but I can see how this could be different depending on the factors involved ending up at such conceptual states like; did the tree in the woods really fall if no-one was there to witness it?

I am guessing meaning is somehow intertwined with the driving forces of life itself; possibly a bunch of quanta that somehow link. Apparently in the "quantum world" - correlation can imply causation.

The question is intended to be of the open type(ambiguous). Maybe I don't even understand the meaning of the question that I seek the answer to. My attempt at some poorly delivered humor. Maybe the question and answer are circular dependencies.

:)

jufa
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by jufa » Fri Mar 03, 2017 9:43 am

Reverse application is the threshold for this topic, if a plausible result for conversation is to be had. The beginning view, from what I see, falls upon being able to definitively give an answer to
How is it that somehow we are able to gain meaning from the unrelated?
The answer is we cannot.

Meaning is relative to individual experiential conditions, circumstance, and situations. Meaning is as a flowing river, relative only at the point of what is acknowledged instantaneously. This is saying meaning is relativism, it has no sense of definitive comprehension from all angles, just from singularity of personal observation.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - just

encode_decode
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:19 pm

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by encode_decode » Fri Mar 03, 2017 4:14 pm

@jufa - thank you for joining in on the conversation. A plausible result is definitely what I am after. I see what you mean from the beginning view falling upon being able to definitively give an answer.
The answer is we cannot.
I am interested to know whether you think analogy holds any meaning from say a relativistic point of view.
Meaning is as a flowing river, relative only at the point of what is acknowledged instantaneously.
I really like this - I do however see a way to tap the point of what is acknowledged instantaneously.
This is saying meaning is relativism, it has no sense of definitive comprehension from all angles, just from singularity of personal observation.
Would you say that this points to meaning being an individual byproduct of personal experience?

If meaning is a personal byproduct does it somehow change when thought of again in the future? ; I mean hindsight.

It seems I am approaching the question in a pragmatic sense and the answer I want is more theoretical. In the end I am happy with a "close enough is good enough" that I can break down and apply to my problem but on the other hand if I obtain some enlightenment here I can use that to understand the fallibility and avoid the futility of my predicament.

jufa
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by jufa » Sat Mar 04, 2017 2:41 am

@encode_decode. Analogy only from clarity of subject. Relativism does not define because meaning is of many mask interpretations which comes from singular personal points of views. Categorizing is generalization, but not definitive.

Tapping knowledge is inevitable for its appears, then it is no more. It is as the second. the very instant a second is, is the very instant it is no longer. Now you see it, now you don't. Knowledge sticks to the mind prepared with the adhesive to catch it, but then move aside to receive that incoming. Nonetheless, it has been attached to the cords of memory.

All life is of personal experience. Yet, it is the byproduct of the whole which defines what one thinks and project what is meaningful to them to live that life personally in according to what is attached to their consciousness.

If, to me, one settles for anything they become stagnant to leaning, which halts expansion.

Of course this is opinionated, which prompts the question: does opinions beyond ones own experience give true definitions?

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6030
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Sat Mar 04, 2017 8:44 pm

encode_decode wrote:So if interpretation is where meaning lies then there seems to be more than one version of truth(please disagree if you feel the need). The direction on the other hand may arrive at the definite like 1 + 1 = 2.
Even "1+1=2" would for ever remain meaningless if it would remain unrelated to anything else. The abstract, algorithmic formula, is derived, as some kind of summary, from a lot of less abstract meaningful transactions involving additions, counting, weighing -- all processes we can relate to. Even when invoking higher algebra, for the mathematician at least, all terms will relate back to theory, all the way down to the foundations of numbers, counting, geometry and so on. For the non-mathematicians the notations remain thoroughly meaningless because they simply cannot relate.
Mathematically I think it is like a system of equations where each equation or part of the system has the flexibility to be just a little different from its counterpart peers ending with some sort of normalization in the system. The resulting normalization being the derivative meaning.
Such normalization of massive equations, being called formally equivalence relations would imply that meaning emerges out of high degrees of those, a certain density of relations having formed. In the end it's true: the more we relate to X, at various levels, the more meaningful that generally becomes. Not everything is suited to relate to at many levels. Like living, responding beings generally allow for relations at various levels. A stamp collection or dry formula, way less so. It's not a surprise some can find easily meaning in the inner world of dreams, thoughts and feelings. But others seek larger complex external systems, like a religion, community or some soap opera binging. One could wonder about the relation between meaning and attachment.
Do you think that there is a limit to the representations anyway? ; for each individual? ; Meaningful ones I mean!
It would seem the limits are part of the causality, in this case what forms the individual, or how we define that. For example if all brains in the world could be connected with a fiber to form one "individual", surely the limitation to representations and thereby "meaning" would shift. But never it would become unlimited (by definition) as that would imply randomness of everything.
Maybe the question and answer are circular dependencies.
They are certainly always related as they arise out of the same context. Some would say the only real activity is formulating questions. And when a question is thorough enough, describing the context and the limitation, the answers fall as ripe fruit. Including answers like "the question is based on erroneous assumptions" or "there's not enough information available".

jufa
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by jufa » Sun Mar 05, 2017 2:49 am

Even "1+1=2" would for ever remain meaningless if it would remain unrelated to anything else. The abstract, algorithmic formula, is derived, as some kind of summary, from a lot of less abstract meaningful transactions involving additions, counting, weighing -- all processes we can relate to. Even when invoking higher algebra, for the mathematician at least, all terms will relate back to theory, all the way down to the foundations of numbers, counting, geometry and so on. For the non-mathematicians the notations remain thoroughly meaningless because they simply cannot relate.


Man, being a unit of one is always a unit of '1'. And irrespective of what appears to be a twin, or abstract, algorithmic formula, abstract logic, concerning the above quote, is gaped by not understanding irrelevant of 1+ 1= 2, one always end up with 1#. Meaning, then, from this POV is not predicated on the #2 (which is 1#) result, But always on the #1. Finding the cause of #1 product is finding the effectual intent and purpose it produce. But meaning always boils down to individual perception of comprehensive experience. Meaning is liken to holding sand in a open hand with the wind blowing.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6030
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Sun Mar 05, 2017 6:13 am

jufa wrote:Man, being a unit of one is always a unit of '1'. And irrespective of what appears to be a twin, or abstract, algorithmic formula, abstract logic, concerning the above quote, is gaped by not understanding irrelevant of 1+ 1= 2, one always end up with 1#. Meaning, then, from this POV is not predicated on the #2 (which is 1#) result, But always on the #1. Finding the cause of #1 product is finding the effectual intent and purpose it produce. But meaning always boils down to individual perception of comprehensive experience. Meaning is liken to holding sand in a open hand with the wind blowing.
The numbers, with or without dashes, are irrelevant to the whole question. They stand for any randomness. The meaningfulness in this case would be the "=", the equivalence relation. Or perhaps also the "plus", the principle of any addition or measured augmentation. One defines the two being equal, for all ends and purposes in the context of simple numbers. It makes sense because we as humans can relate to addition and equivalence in our experiences. Now if you want to discuss 'A=A', that's a bit different since it equals just raising "A". It's a self-reflective, self-affirmative statement and in such equivalence format it only means to reflect upon a certain way of thinking. It's meaningless as much as it reflects all meaning.

encode_decode
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:19 pm

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by encode_decode » Sun Mar 05, 2017 12:17 pm

That leads me to wonder if the words we speak and write are sufficient to give any meaning and yet they seemingly provide a level that is satisfactory enough to get by. Despite this we continually seek higher meaning.

(Ponders: lower meaning for a moment) . . .

So if I may offer something symbolic: Take the game minesweeper where the idea is to stay away from the hidden "mines" and the only clue you get is the number of neighboring mines in each field represented by a number. Here we have a type of communication that conveys meaning.

Lets say that the question is the hidden "mines" and the answer is all the other squares that contain no "mines" then how would you differentiate between the squares that contain information(number representations) and those that don't(the blank squares)? I would guess that the blank squares also contain meaning in that they are telling you that there are at least no "mines" in the next square. Yet still nothing is nothing and something is something.

So if we treat deduction, induction, and abduction as the numbers on the minesweeper grid then what are the blank squares?

Now don't get me wrong I am not saying that our reasoning is based on anything numeric necessarily but I am certain each form of reasoning that we employ has some degree of magnitude toward efficiency. So what I am saying is that there may be some quasi states of reasoning that are efficient and others that are not.

What I love about minesweeper is that the squares communicate with me - but that is beside the point - do I have a point?

I am trying my best to stay away from unavoidable reductionism, eliminationism, emergentism, et cetera but at the same time I see that these things matter so I have to take them into account to provide some basis a priori.
Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Meaning then as expression of direction, from known to unknown, from past to future.
I still however see the sense in meaning to be some form of expression of connection, of relating. So maybe meaning is relative and directional at the same time in each instance and that is provided time exists at all. Relative could imply some form of analogy and direction might suggest a flowing nature to meaning. You suggested in your first response that Philosophy can also lead to meaninglessness, probably when one would stop applying this thought to all sense and all times and in this case I would posit that meaning then is also a result of thought; So therefore meaning is possibly relative, directional and thought-based, which would indicate some multi-directional propagation on the part of relations that is dependent on thought.

I like the idea of being able to, and I quote myself here "get some meaning" which I equate its underlying basis of "getting" akin to "get some water". I would also like to reassert that the propagation of meaning can then be drawn from the answer and question laterally however that would indicate that meaning is then reliant on questions and answers instead of thought, direction and relations. I will say nevertheless that the answer and the question are simply reliant on each other to provide meaning to the user of these thought devices.

@jufa - I totally agree with you that we should not settle for anything(including some form of definite) as for certain this would halt our learning. I think metaphorically speaking at the end of the day a good philosopher is still happy not to get an answer as long as the logic employed is not flawed. When I build a cyber droid with some form of intelligence, I would like it to provide any given person with some meaningful interaction, therefore it would benefit for it to be able to provide some form of opinion along with other artifacts that come with thinking.

@Diebert van Rhijn - Oh I agree that mathematics is dependent on relations - I also think that if we were to arrive at the infinite then we may be back at zero(purely opinion with no substantial facts to back myself up). I can see there is some sort of order in life - I see a lot of people making unconscious attempts at bringing chaos - I also think entropy is inevitable - One more opinion is that: we should make the most of it(whatever it may be).

Personally I would disagree with those who say the only real activity is formulating questions, due to the fact that I have already gleaned so much information from this forum alone without even asking a question, but that is just me.

Strange as it may seem I agree with both of you(jufa and Diebert van Rhijn) on the relevance/irrelevance of the symbols 1+1=2 but for two different reasons that I will not go into here. I would suppose that relevance/irrelevance is like disparate reflections but then so is the case when we look in the mirror.

I really enjoy the different angles presented here and would like to express some gratitude for being alive at this moment; thanks!

jufa
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by jufa » Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:04 pm

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:
The numbers, with or without dashes, are irrelevant to the whole question. They stand for any randomness. The meaningfulness in this case would be the "=", the equivalence relation. Or perhaps also the "plus", the principle of any addition or measured augmentation. One defines the two being equal, for all ends and purposes in the context of simple numbers. It makes sense because we as humans can relate to addition and equivalence in our experiences. Now if you want to discuss 'A=A', that's a bit different since it equals just raising "A". It's a self-reflective, self-affirmative statement and in such equivalence format it only means to reflect upon a certain way of thinking. It's meaningless as much as it reflects all meaning.
There is nothing equivalent to the #1, and Diebert is correct
The numbers, with or without dashes, are irrelevant to the whole question
Because with or without dashes, there is only 1# which justifies, and give meaning for the presence of the 2, 3, etc, etc. This then also justifies the statement:
Finding the cause of #1 product is finding the effectual intent and purpose it produce.
for when 2, or 3, or 4 are seen, the viewing is only of 1#. Therefore
meaning always boils down to individual perception of comprehensive experience


Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

jufa
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by jufa » Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:28 pm

Take the game minesweeper where the idea is to stay away from the hidden "mines" and the only clue you get is the number of neighboring mines in each field represented by a number. Here we have a type of communication that conveys meaning.
I find no meaning in the above statement, only comprehensible directions to reach a goal.

Meaning to anything comes when it is realized the answer is before the question. If not true, how then could an answer ever be found? which is to say, when one finds themselves without questions, there is no meaning to discover or expand, for meaning is always that aha moment.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

encode_decode
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:19 pm

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by encode_decode » Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:54 pm

@jufa - you will get no argument from me that meaning always boils down to individual perception of comprehensive experience - I think that when we pass information on to others that their perception is also subjective when they receive it and this can also be the case with numbers. I am doing my best to remain objective and not let my own feelings stand in the way of the procurement of knowledge. I enjoy listening to what others have to say, but there is fun to be had in the debate.

One has to ask oneself the question sometimes, whether one is still the same person now as in the past and from that I agree with your meaning flows like a river statement and changes with time. For practical purposes I do find placing some faith in rules temporarily, to be useful particularly with mathematics and programming, however I do not believe in artificial neural networks providing a good model to base intelligence or meaning on. Neural models that do show some real promise are very slow and I believe there is always a better way.

As with physics, no one model is applicable in all areas of existence and therefore I have some problem believing in the grand unified theory. I do however see the sense in string theory even though we can not experiment to prove it yet, and even if we could you would still have to place some faith just as we do with the electron microscope.

So even with subjective experience we seem to be able to get the job done.

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6030
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Sun Mar 05, 2017 9:37 pm

jufa wrote:Meaning to anything comes when it is realized the answer is before the question. If not true, how then could an answer ever be found? which is to say, when one finds themselves without questions, there is no meaning to discover or expand, for meaning is always that aha moment.
That only holds true if you position some actual answer having to "exist" somewhere, being before or after a question. In other words, you're defining reality, ordinary or supernatural, even the absolute, as something "waiting to be found" if only the right questions are asked and blinders are taken off. That sounds basically like the usual religious position in clever disguise, some metaphysical teleology . However such ideas are built on shifting sands : it cannot stand and won't hold under further, sincere scrutiny and questioning.

There's no one to be found "without questions" since the mind itself only functions in that open ended fashion. It questions, wonders or entertains. It's never satisfied unless under the influence of a drug, affliction or strong emotion: attempting belief in facts, things and states as some end point of a journey. Which in itself forms a stop to further inquiry.

Before the question, there' s indeed a context to that question, a causality. This will shape the form of any proposed answer or follow-up question. The ultimate meaning therefore is only causality. But then again, such notion would be "meaningless as much as it reflects all meaning".

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6030
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Sun Mar 05, 2017 9:54 pm

encode_decode wrote: So therefore meaning is possibly relative, directional and thought-based, which would indicate some multi-directional propagation on the part of relations that is dependent on thought.
I can see there is some sort of order in life - I see a lot of people making unconscious attempts at bringing chaos - I also think entropy is inevitable - One more opinion is that: we should make the most of it(whatever it may be).
Order appearing as stubborn dream against the inevitable evening out. In the past I've turned that somewhat around experimentally: the "past" as the inevitable, the direction of time, the entropical "law" of nature or God. But it's the future, or to be more precise its horizon where the interesting, unpredictable, spontaneous stuff continues to happen: the eternal restlessness. Life -- and thought, truth, consciousness -- as some kind of surf at the tip of the wave: tiny, temporary, near chaotic, full of patterns and yet crashing easily into oblivion in the wink of an eye.
Personally I would disagree with those who say the only real activity is formulating questions, due to the fact that I have already gleaned so much information from this forum alone without even asking a question, but that is just me.
This might be more about certainty. It's easier to be certain about ones questioning than about any proposed definite answer.

jufa
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by jufa » Mon Mar 06, 2017 4:23 am

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:
jufa wrote:Meaning to anything comes when it is realized the answer is before the question. If not true, how then could an answer ever be found? which is to say, when one finds themselves without questions, there is no meaning to discover or expand, for meaning is always that aha moment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That only holds true if you position some actual answer having to "exist" somewhere, being before or after a question. In other words, you're defining reality, ordinary or supernatural, even the absolute, as something "waiting to be found" if only the right questions are asked and blinders are taken off. That sounds basically like the usual religious position in clever disguise, some metaphysical teleology . However such ideas are built on shifting sands : it cannot stand and won't hold under further, sincere scrutiny and questioning.
Diebert, your immediate respond is far-fetched, or reaching for opposition which is not corner stoned. Life advancement from the very moment of birth is seeking to discovery that which is already known, or in the process of being investigated to find why this is this. Therefore the question is always predicated on that which is known before a question of formulated and discovered is issued forth into the mind. It does not matter what label (ordinary or supernatural, even the absolute) one apply, the reality of life is there are no two object, or elements in the known universe alike, and thus Omar Khayyam got it right in "The Rubaiyat" when stating "The moving finger writes, having writ, moves on." This tell us discovery to find answers which already exist is the only way of expanding what is known now to the sentient being. Life has no future, for the breath of life is its only a reality second by second by second.

Anticipation, which is anticipating something which does not yet, exist except in a mind, voids the position of things holding "true if you position some actual answer having to "exist" somewhere, being before or after a question," being the only somewhere is only in the moment of breathing now.


There's no one to be found "without questions" since the mind itself only functions in that open ended fashion. It questions, wonders or entertains. It's never satisfied unless under the influence of a drug, affliction or strong emotion: attempting belief in facts, things and states as some end point of a journey. Which in itself forms a stop to further inquiry.

This is not true, for you are the seeker of finding why you exist, which is saying you are to be the finder of you. The reality is there is no logic for the existence of existence to be had by the human mind in this world, and this is why it can never be satisfied. Should it be able to break through the wall of humanism, and go beyond the mind, who knows what results can be had?

Before the question, there' s indeed a context to that question, a causality. This will shape the form of any proposed answer or follow-up question. The ultimate meaning therefore is only causality. But then again, such notion would be "meaningless as much as it reflects all meaning".
The context to any question is the fullness of it being realized whole, perfect, complete, and pure Principle. The human mind only deals with fragmented interpretation of that which the human mind cannot penetrate because the mind only deals with outer objective visions and inner subjective feelings. In other words, the object of causation cannot be found in the effect, unless the two become one.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

jufa
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by jufa » Mon Mar 06, 2017 7:34 am

encode_decode wrote:@jufa - you will get no argument from me that meaning always boils down to individual perception of comprehensive experience - I think that when we pass information on to others that their perception is also subjective when they receive it and this can also be the case with numbers. I am doing my best to remain objective and not let my own feelings stand in the way of the procurement of knowledge. I enjoy listening to what others have to say, but there is fun to be had in the debate.

One has to ask oneself the question sometimes, whether one is still the same person now as in the past and from that I agree with your meaning flows like a river statement and changes with time. For practical purposes I do find placing some faith in rules temporarily, to be useful particularly with mathematics and programming, however I do not believe in artificial neural networks providing a good model to base intelligence or meaning on. Neural models that do show some real promise are very slow and I believe there is always a better way.

As with physics, no one model is applicable in all areas of existence and therefore I have some problem believing in the grand unified theory. I do however see the sense in string theory even though we can not experiment to prove it yet, and even if we could you would still have to place some faith just as we do with the electron microscope.

So even with subjective experience we seem to be able to get the job done.
@encode_decode, I see everything subjective because what we know are assumptive guesses, and what we receive is always a incomplete puzzle subjective to personal opinion received and passed onward. This is saying we do not know whether the object of reality needs a subject to express itself, and therefore evidence duality by splitting itself in half, or whether the object is itself the effect, which keeps everything balance and in order as gravity does. What I don't see is the neural elements of the human anatomy being artificial, for there is nothing artificial about the life of being.

Life itself is applicable to all areas of existence, even in conscious thinking. When ones thoughts touch a subject, even imaginative, it gives life to it by awareness. This is applicable to the string theory also. One thing is sure, you can't get out of life alive, and you can't die is you are not alive.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

encode_decode
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:19 pm

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by encode_decode » Mon Mar 06, 2017 6:34 pm

Here is a thought experiment(I am too lazy to offer an hypothesis):

I want to imagine a new universe called "chaos" - "chaos" is full of triangles and all of the triangles combined is objectivity - so objectivity in this universe is all of the triangles that "chaos" contains which is infinity. This universe is a type of field that only contains blank triangles.

Now subjectivity is "magically" seeded - we are not going to care about the details. Subjectivity turns a blank triangle into a black triangle to form veins of subjectivity throughout this infinite universe called "chaos".

Now lets imagine the triangle and lets refer to the points as atoms instead.

Where:
a = answer
q = question
m = meaning

(a,q,m)

This triangle allows all three atoms to connect to each other and by placing other triangles in connection to the original triangle a more defined being of triangle takes places.

Now if we change the question and answer parts to other "things" that give meaning we can eventually connect all meaning.

We start out with all the triangles at once(a big triangle universe) and get some sort of arrangement that resembles veins moving through the chaos and it is these veins that connect meaning in all its forms. Entropy then is when all the blank triangles become black. Once all the triangles become black the very next cycle they all become blank again. The transition between all black and all blank we call death or recycling.

Now I am imagining a "bigger universe" that has infinite copies of the aforementioned universe and its name is "meta". So "meta" contains infinite copies of "chaos" and each chaos is a being of sorts. When one "chaos" correlates in any way to another "chaos" we end up with what we call "defined objectivity".

That is my mental lapse of reason for today.

jufa
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by jufa » Tue Mar 07, 2017 2:23 am

I like this mode of conversing, for it matches point for point as the art of communication has been slated to without attitude. And your hypothesizing of the triangle is a point of beauty. But the triangle is none existent, even in what you imagine, for there is no definitive point of connection to draw chaotic, nor non-chaotic conditions from, unless you are saying the atom is chaotic, which would then leave our bodies out of order at all times.

I find the circle a more conclusive portrayal of the issue here, for the circle offers a definition, even if by repetition of what has been is what is, and shall always been. The circle offers a line which defines itself within and without itself. The circle -O - can be seen as the arc of the universe which, by human intellect, contains all knowledge of awareness, which represent the -O-. There is no chaos, nor peace, only a stilled definition which represent, also, thought activity of human repetitiveness. All the human mind attest to is upon and within the dimensions of the -O-.

But wait, by the -O- defining that within and without itself, and when acknowledged, one can see there is no separated, no gulp, which is saying the void as the -O- are one. So then the answer is in the questioned emptiness of the void, and the void's emptiness is in the answer of -O's- definition, which has no reason to exist except by hypothesizing of the human mind, which cannot pose a question to that which it is unaware of. Thus, your hypothesis is flushed down the drain.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

encode_decode
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:19 pm

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by encode_decode » Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:07 am

@jafa - I totally agree with you and I feel my hypothesis was futile given that I also agree with what you originally said:
The answer is we cannot.
It makes an interesting toy in code and the code actually uses tetrahedrons instead of triangles; even that is futile in its search for meaning. But hey sometimes we have to try these things :)
But wait, by the -O- defining that within and without itself, and when acknowledged, one can see there is no separated, no gulp, which is saying the void as the -O- are one. So then the answer is in the questioned emptiness of the void, and the void's emptiness is in the answer of -O's- definition, which has no reason to exist except by hypothesizing of the human mind, which cannot pose a question to that which it is unaware of. Thus, your hypothesis is flushed down the drain.
This made me smile :)

I only added the references to chaos for fun, so no the atom is not chaotic in this story either :) I am intrigued by your circle mode though - I will enjoy contemplating your response.

jufa
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Where does meaning come from?

Post by jufa » Tue Mar 07, 2017 6:27 am

@ encode_decode - Ahhh! the beauty of a conversation when neither party is expecting to prove their positions, but find expansion of them through each others words.

Language is a toy, and the serious taking of words - when all intents, and purposes and meanings are relative -, tell me we are to abrasive about our positions of guessing.

A peek of the Circle position. All situations, circumstances, conditions and even the environs come and go fluently in all individuals lives unnoticed because memory keeps man locked within and without a supposed definition of a circle. To define a circle, one has to define nothingness or zero. Nothingness and zero are absolute only because the definition of the circle is recognized. Is it not the definition of the circle which makes the void within and without of its definition appear to be equal? Is not the definition of the circle the form one sees and ride its wave of repetition? But what is the meaning of riding the wave when the outcome is already known?

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

Post Reply