Hacker News Reader

Comment by 3rd3 | Hacker News Reader

I cannot understand why people still decide to base their motivations on slippery concepts like the meaning of life or on some romantized, conjectured intrinsic values of our species. It seems to me that there are much better mental models of our existence that can help us to organize our thoughts and lifes, most notably things that are derived from the theory of evolution, neuroscience and from behavioral biology.

View on HN

"The very meaninglessness of life forces man to create his own meaning."

"The most terrifying fact about the universe is not that it is hostile but that it is indifferent; but if we can come to terms with this indifference and accept the challenges of life within the boundaries of death — however mutable man may be able to make them — our existence as a species can have genuine meaning and fulfillment. However vast the darkness, we must supply our own light."

– Stanley Kubrick, http://genius.cat-v.org/stanley-kubrick/interviews/playboy-1...

I choose to use nonrational (not irrational or rational, necessarily, but indeterminate) thoughts like "My life has purpose" as sources of motivation since it shortcuts the process of extracting meaning from theories that take a great deal of time to research and internalize.

I am not a rigorous accountant of truth in my worldview. I choose a worldview that works for me since I don't have the time or energy to truly consider all options.

In this case, probably because when you're being tortured, it's small comfort to know how the synapses of your tormentors' brains are firing. Things like defiance in the face of adversity or finding meaning in life seem to be universal across cultures, and a lot more fundamental to the way our brains work than something like scientific understanding.

If scientific validity were our lone motivation, than yes, it would make sense to ignore these "slippery concepts," as you describe. But this is not the case. I, for one, dread the mechanization of human behavior, even if it may seem accurate. The same goes for others, too. In general, people will not reduced themselves to mere cause and effect; they want to exist as more than than.

Having verifiable evidence against my beliefs means nothing, because my intention is not factuality. That's why creationism and evolution may coexist in the theologians mind. And that's why the utilitarian ideology will never become widespread.

The sciences are valuable in all tangible senses, but these "models," as you describe, are just that - models. And I feel no obligation to model my existence. Honestly, I prefer not to understand myself. Life's more amusing while unpredictable.

Because such slippery concepts make it more possible to survive adversity. It's almost as if it was a trait selected by evolutionary pressure because those were the mental models that helped their users survive.

My guess is that those mental models don't provide much comfort to people suffering from depression. Our brains evolved over many years and they require certains things to be present to be able to work at a normal mood elevation. Research suggests that the ability to find meaning or living according to "core values" is a necessity for most of us to escape depression. Whether or not it's logical or rational is irrelevant, it's how our brains work and it's just as important as sunlight, physical movement, and normal Vitamin D levels.

My dad once dropped this wise gem:

If you are under 20 and a capitalist - you have no heart.

If you are over 20 and still a socialist - you have no brain.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com