From: leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas)
Subject: Re: Gerry Roston, I'm sorry.
Organization: Integrated Measurement Systems, Inc.
	<LEET.92Oct2101243@dove.ims.com> <5792@tuegate.tue.nl>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 16:47:59 GMT

>>>>> On 3 Oct 92 15:50:25 GMT, wsadjw@rw7.urc.tue.nl (Jan Willem Nienhuys) said:

Jan> In article <LEET.92Oct2101243@dove.ims.com> leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas) writes:
>
>Jan> I remember discovering the liberating idea that life is
>Jan> meaningless (even if God does exist). 
>
>But what happens when life ceases to be enjoyable - and one is either
>certain that enjoyment is gone permanently, or one cannot be certain
>that it will ever return?  If life is meaningless, then death is not a
>tragedy.

Jan> Enjoyable, meaning etc. are all personal matters. *I* can think *my* life
Jan> hopeful, enjoyable, meaningful (h.e.m. for short),  and *you* can think
Jan> *yours* to be h.e.m. or not.  But there's no way in which *I* can judge
Jan> *your* life to be so.

Why not?  And, "hopeful" for what?  "Enjoyable" on what basis?

Jan> Those judgements have to be carried out by those who live that
Jan> life themselves.

Why?

>Jan>           If God exists and is good and infinitely good at that,
>Jan> (let's *assume* that) then He would surely not have saddled us
>Jan> with the task to discern those unfathomable meanings in life.
>
>If (since) He is good, He would provide it (the meaning) for us,
>written down, and we could then look it up as needed.  This dovetails
>us nicely back into our other ongoing debate. :-)

Jan> No. The judgement is strictly personal.  Therefore it can't be in a
Jan> book.

On what basis can you make a universal assertion like that?

>It's not the random events that I was referring to, but rather the
>overall trend.  If life itself is truly meaning-free, then the world
>is neither better off nor worse off if I cease to exist.

Jan> True.  As the human race will probably go the way all species go,
Jan> maybe helped a little by ourselves, and as the Earth will be
Jan> incinerated after some billions of years anyway, this seems
Jan> rather evident.  But our acts are not measured by the effect they
Jan> have on the ultimate fate of the world.  So this is irrelevant.

What are our acts measured by, then, and where does the "m." in
"h.e.m." come from, if not from acts of eternal significance?

>                In fact, if life is meaningless, there is no
>difference between a doctor saving a life and a murderer taking one,

Jan> There is a big difference.  The first one enables the patient to
Jan> continue judging the patient's life to be h.e.m., whereas the
Jan> second does the judgement for his victim, and rather summarily at
Jan> that.

If the patient/victim sees life as meaningless (as you do), then there
is no difference.

Jan> The more interesting contrast is between a doctor helping a
Jan> terminal cancer patient with euthanasia and a concentration camp
Jan> guard taking care not to kill his victims while torturing them,
Jan> even if they beg him to get it over with.

This issue has the potential for a flame war, so I won't respond to it.
--
Lee Thomas,  leet@ims.com      | "O death, where is thy sting?  O grave,
Integrated Measurement Systems |  where is thy victory?" 
9525 SW Gemini Dr.             |  - 1 Corinthians 15:55
Beaverton, Or 97005            |                            
(503) 626-7117, ext. 1558      |                                         THUMP!