Jack Symes

The reason mine's more meaningful is because I'm doing something that's morally right and you're doing something which... I'm not willing to concede that it doesn't have meaning.

That the world doesn't have meaning.

That the world doesn't have meaning.

That the world doesn't have meaning.

You're not sponsored by Samsung, are you?

You're not sponsored by Samsung, are you?

You're not sponsored by Samsung, are you?

I want to separate the meaning, though, there from the thing we do. Define meaning. Well, in the thing that you're giving there, it's called the is-ought fallacy, right? It is the case that certain things do this thing, so they ought to be doing it more. So you might run a similar argument.

I want to separate the meaning, though, there from the thing we do. Define meaning. Well, in the thing that you're giving there, it's called the is-ought fallacy, right? It is the case that certain things do this thing, so they ought to be doing it more. So you might run a similar argument.

I want to separate the meaning, though, there from the thing we do. Define meaning. Well, in the thing that you're giving there, it's called the is-ought fallacy, right? It is the case that certain things do this thing, so they ought to be doing it more. So you might run a similar argument.

Imagine you come down to Earth as aliens ages ago, let's say like 30,000 years ago, and all the humans you interacted with were just eating berries and loads of sugary food. What are the humans? They just eat sugary food. That's their meaning. That's their purpose or something.

Imagine you come down to Earth as aliens ages ago, let's say like 30,000 years ago, and all the humans you interacted with were just eating berries and loads of sugary food. What are the humans? They just eat sugary food. That's their meaning. That's their purpose or something.

Imagine you come down to Earth as aliens ages ago, let's say like 30,000 years ago, and all the humans you interacted with were just eating berries and loads of sugary food. What are the humans? They just eat sugary food. That's their meaning. That's their purpose or something.

You'd go, no, like the meaning or the purpose of them or their natures isn't simply a description of the things they've done in the past. Right. It's the thing given to you by the thing that's created you. It's imposed from elsewhere. It's quite odd to think about what it would be like outside of religious beliefs because that's the problem of agnosticism. It's an absence.

You'd go, no, like the meaning or the purpose of them or their natures isn't simply a description of the things they've done in the past. Right. It's the thing given to you by the thing that's created you. It's imposed from elsewhere. It's quite odd to think about what it would be like outside of religious beliefs because that's the problem of agnosticism. It's an absence.

You'd go, no, like the meaning or the purpose of them or their natures isn't simply a description of the things they've done in the past. Right. It's the thing given to you by the thing that's created you. It's imposed from elsewhere. It's quite odd to think about what it would be like outside of religious beliefs because that's the problem of agnosticism. It's an absence.

Or better put, I keep saying that the world is meaningless. What I really mean is... It's seemingly meaningless, like it's not obvious to what the meaning is when it ought to be like or it feels like it ought to be. So it's not the case that the world is meaningless. But I think maybe our disagreement here or the point in which we're both diverging in this conversation is.

Or better put, I keep saying that the world is meaningless. What I really mean is... It's seemingly meaningless, like it's not obvious to what the meaning is when it ought to be like or it feels like it ought to be. So it's not the case that the world is meaningless. But I think maybe our disagreement here or the point in which we're both diverging in this conversation is.

Or better put, I keep saying that the world is meaningless. What I really mean is... It's seemingly meaningless, like it's not obvious to what the meaning is when it ought to be like or it feels like it ought to be. So it's not the case that the world is meaningless. But I think maybe our disagreement here or the point in which we're both diverging in this conversation is.

I think, as you mentioned earlier, you're quite a fan of these pantheistic views where the world is moving towards a purposeful end, which is technological progress or the flourishing of all its creatures and the like. So if you hold that view, then, yeah, it looks like life can have a meaning if there is a consciousness underlying the physical reality that we engage with.