[removed]

Also there is such a thing as a personal moral identity: my "reputation" with myself: how I feel about myself morally. There is pressure to maintain a good (public) moral identity because it means I'm more likely to be cooperated with by others.

Why don't you agree with this Nietzschean assessment?

>Most people dont really care about the meaning of life, they just want the positive experience while they are here, as little suffering as possible before they become fertilizer. lol

I would argue that's why the meaning of life is important. People want purpose to feel fulfilled in their life. The meaning of life isn't a blanket term everyone should strive for but is unique to the individual. If your meaning of life is to chase good experiences then sure, it would line up, but not for everyone. If people truly only wanted experience the feel good while minimizing the bad, we'd all be doing heroin

Maybe it's immoral for the author and his reality.

Interesting, this is pretty much the way I see things as well. Also not surprising as of course my views are almost entirely based on existing existential writings, combined with real life experience

This is essentially Nietzsche's Birth of Tragedy. Greek tragedy was the pinnacle of art because it addressed and accepted the pessimism of life for what it was instead of trying to cope or run away from the issue through dissimulation. I don't necessarily agree with this assessment, but I do find it compelling.

But this is not ash attempt at rigorous definition. It’s an attempt at special pleading for God.

For example what does it mean for something to exist outside of time? There is no definition of exist which doesn’t depend on time. If I have a billion dollars for zero seconds or if my billion dollars is outside of time can you claim it exists?

This is people who believe in God trying to redefine words so that their absurd belief seems a little less absurd.

[removed]

This is a really common thing in philosophy though--we need rigorous technical definitions in order to make sure we're discussing the same thing.

There is a lot of discussion in the philosophy of time about the nature of eternity and infinity. You might find this article interesting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_space_and_time

I haven’t read the academic paper, for those that have. How does he deal with the autonomy to harm oneself? To actively make decisions, rational or non-rational, that will cause harm to your person.

Furthermore, what about intervention when someone is say, about to get scammed? About to join a known cult? Behaviors that are 100% destructive, how do they contend with that?

thats a hard no from me

Proverbs 19:20 Listen to advice and accept discipline, and at the end you will be counted among the wise.

Proverbs 19:20-NLT Get all the advice and instruction you can, so you will be wise the rest of your life.

hmmm, I think people are more concerned with actual physical and mental suffering than obsessing over the meaning of life.

This is why we have antinatalism vs pro natalism and absurdism vs pro mortalism.

Most people dont really care about the meaning of life, they just want the positive experience while they are here, as little suffering as possible before they become fertilizer. lol

[removed]

Absolutely, I rather deal with bad advices… Also categorizing “self authorship” as a right seems pretty inaccurate.

a distinction without a difference but thanks for your interesting addition. Have you never heard of a board of directors removing a CEO based on shareholder votes? That's running the company by the people who own it.

Including VACCINES!

Mind your business

I guess family wisdom has no utility these days. “Dad, how come you never said anything?” “Well, I didn’t want to be that guy.” “Sheeessh!”

Agreed, and for that matter, I’m not even sure if “self-authorship” could have a satisfactory definition here that describes anything truly possible… I can’t immediately think of an opportunity which can be taken without first having been offered in some way, by somebody. Devoid of influence from others, the stories most of us would be left to write with our lives would be empty, boring, and short.

This is pretty silly. I might agree if the tactics were manipulative, but simply offering advice? No. What seems to be overlooked here is that advice from others is really just additional information available in one's environment. It's up to the person receiving advice to decide how to weight, interpret, and apply it. We have impressionable, stubborn, and contrarian types among us. Those are ways of describing set biases in the ways people treat such information. But the most important part is that information is not coercion.

It's also important to learn how to handle such advice, because you're absolutely going to be receiving it. Even if this moral stance against coaching people on their life choices made any sense, it would still be ignoring that fact. If you ignored the fact that reading is an essential life skill, you could easily make the case that it's immoral to force children to learn it. But that's cutting the context short; in the full context, it's immoral not to.

Not even too much advice, just advice they don't agree with.

I agree. So often the results of our choices are influenced by just luck so it's foolish to use that information to influence others.

My parents were deeply against a university education for me. They thought anything beyond a certificate program to be a waste of funds.

My parents barely finished high school and were successful and so they were adamant that my experience would be the same. It wasn't.

I worked hard, got decent reviews, got promotions but never earned above poverty wages.

They were furious when I went to college and didn't attend a single graduation. They still refuse to acknowledge they were wrong instead taking my failure to achieve success as evidence of my laziness.

They heavily influenced who I dated as well which also went horribly.

I'm encouraging my daughter to make the educational decisions that make the most sense to her. For me the right choice was a university education, but for others it's trade school. She needs to examine everything and make the choice that feels right to her because it's her life.

I think any advice we might give should be limited to how we did something if someone else is curious- but never whether or not someone should do something.

She has no novel idea, says nothing of value. Run of the mill academic with no exposure to reality. I was shocked she didn't get Sam's joke on the type of food they offer at gatherings to get consensus on controversial religious topics..

It was the word preffered in the English translations of Aristotle I read.

Why did you use the word niggardliness?