The meaning of life

True. Because our offspring are all going to die as well... So, what you're saying, or my comprehension of it, is to find understanding through death... and therefore, perhaps your only truly happy moment is at death, when you might see the reason and meaning of everything. One true moment of happiness... after so many years of seeking it... and then nothing.

And then why would you live 80 or more years before you die? Why would you suffer a lifetime for that single "truly happy moment" if you could reach it any time?

I don't think you really believe what you wrote.

I don't think you really understood what I wrote.

Well then, explain it.

Simple - because like everything including religion, nobody knows for sure yet. No sane person would kill themselves over a theory.

If you do what a theory offers, this is what is called believing. So if you don't kill yourself, although you say believe that life's meaning is to die, then you don't actually believe this, you just say this.
Belief is what we all follow in life, we believe in something and we do that, even if we say we believe in something else or if we deny it by words; if we live according to something, then that something is what we believe in.

NOT replying to anything, NOT in you debate.

Just wanted to say the author of this comment is EMO.

And I saw something like this: the meaning of life is to find the meaning of life. Great. So now what do I do? You told me what it is, so now I have to go find it but it's been found. Stop the endless circle PLEASE. It's irritating.

Also, the author is atheist.

And, this implies that Nature is conscious of its existence.

What's more, there is another endless circle of life, make babies, die.
That is so BLEAK.

And something that is can never not be, and before I go on a tirade of double and triple negatives, you might want to get my point. The law of matter conservation would adeqately, in theory, preserve our conscious minds after death.

Death has been referred to as a state of mind. Keep that in mind.

Also, Mr. Atheist, you say that is we are, we are above life and death. I am atheist too, but existence above life and death is commonly referred to as GOD. And, as you can see, humans are not divine beings.

I don't want to find an answer in the living realm. I can be critiquing my answer forever, and at least I have something to DO.

Oh, and please continue the argument. I found it quite FASCINATING.

Why do you think that humans are not divine beings? Just because we didn't find a proof for this yet? A few hundred years ago, just before the higher speed coal locomotives were invented, most of the people had a convinction that human body cannot survive that high speed. And yet, we are driving thorugh the globe with 1.000 kph, and we travel into space even faster.
Just because something was never experienced before, it may be something that is good for humans.

"something that is can never not be". I like the sound of this, although the main question for this sentence is: why to you think that there is anything?

Maybe dying in like coming into god-ness?
I was being happy for once and then that struck me after reading a happy part of a book.

Your first point indicates that you are thirteen. Bravo. The fact that someone's views seem uncool to you don't make them invalid.

As for the second part I quoted, I'd like to point out that an idea's appeal is not an indication of its veracity.

Third, your point about the law of conservation of matter proves that though you may know something about physics, you know nothing of psychology. All the chemistry that's taking place in your brain which allows consciousness comes to a screeching halt when you die. No chemistry, no conscious mind. Certainly, the atoms that make up the chemicals will continue to exist, but they will rapidly become displaced by the process of decomposition, along with all the matter that makes up your brain and the rest of your body. If you actually believe that consciousness could carry on when all the pieces necessary for its existence have been separated, I suggest you post your response to this message while all the pieces of your computer are disassembled and strewn about the room.

Finally, you claim to be an atheist, but I'm rather skeptical. The point of your post seems to be to try to insult one of the contributors to this thread, and you found it necessary to point out that the author is an atheist, as though that were an insult. Also, belief in life after death is not called "GOD," as you said it was; it is aptly named the "afterlife." You seem to believe that there is an afterlife, but no god, and you expect to be left alone with your thoughts for eternity. Having "something to DO" is not possible on that kind of scale is impossible, no matter how madly in love with yourself you may be.

Please excuse my typos in the above message.

I'm not sure whether consciousness' existence is in a cause-effect relation with the brain. Maybe it's a separated entity that only occasionally bounds with matter as long as matter shows a certain degree of coherency. If this is the case then consciousness may exist, in fact, does exist after death. However, since the ego is merely a by-product of the brain's functioning processes, it will cease to exist with death. Thus, whoever or whatever remains existent in the afterlife, it will not have a self-awareness, it will not think of itself as separated from anything else. This may be the thing called divine unity.

Believing blindly in my books. As Einstein said, God does not play dice with the Universe; I don't mean that in a critical way or anything, and I don't mean to shoot down belief in any way (because it is a good thing) - but if something is true, it should be verifiable through science and reason, which we have ultimately been given.

I think if people really investigated things such as near death experiences, etc. through a purely objective and empirical standpoint (not through speculation or belief without investigation) they might find some very astonishing things (but unfortunately these sorts of investigations are considered voodoo by the scientific community, so the stigma attached to running such an investigation can be quite detremental to one's career).