<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: My Apologies&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.miloco.com/2007/05/my-apologies.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.miloco.com/2007/05/my-apologies.html</link>
	<description>Why do I have a Blog?  When I find out, I'll tell you.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 04:33:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Milo</title>
		<link>http://blog.miloco.com/2007/05/my-apologies.html/comment-page-1#comment-13006</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Milo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 17:18:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.miloco.com/2007/05/my-apologies.html#comment-13006</guid>
		<description>Hey Trinten,
Thanks for stopping by and speaking up!  Alternate views are always welcome here…
Actually however, it was the guy whose post I was originally responding to who invoked the second definition of Meaning.  So, blame him, not me.  :^)

Yet, I still say that everything has meaning.  Every action, every thought, and every accidental carbon chain reaction – they all have meaning, because they are all distinct, defined aspects.
You say a system of order is not “meaning”, it is a “system”.

Yet, I say it is impossible to have one without the other.

&lt;blockquote&gt;1st definition of Order: an authoritative direction or instruction; command; mandate.
1st definition of System: an assemblage or combination of things or parts forming a complex or unitary whole
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

How is it possible to be authoritative without meaning?  How is it possible to form a “whole” without meaning?    The simple act of being authoritative provides meaning.  And, to form an assemblage, the assemblage must have a definition.  Even if it is defined in terms of what it is NOT.  It is NOT chaos.  It is NOT disorder.  Those attributes give it meaning.  They give it definition.



&lt;blockquote&gt;1. the act of defining or making definite, distinct, or clear.
2. the formal statement of the meaning or significance of a word, phrase, etc.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

There is an undeniable cohesiveness to anything that is ordered that necessitates the separation of itself from that which is unordered.  Something formed commands more attention than something that is unformed.  There is no way around that.  Take all of the complex molecules that make up my body and scatter them and you’ll no longer take notice.  Form them into me, or even into something else, and you will still take notice.  It is the form that provides true meaning.  The absence of form is simply potential, which is still a sort of meaning.  Everything has it.

Which, gets me to the first definition of meaning:



&lt;blockquote&gt;What is intended to be, or actually is, expressed or indicated; signification; import
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

“Intended to be expressed” – something specific that is to be conveyed.  A cohesive expression. 
“Signification” – something that has Significance
“Import” – something that has Importance

It seems that this too supports my primary thesis, that everything has meaning.  The original person’s comment that we are just a more complex carbon chain reaction than a dog says that we have meaning.  A complex carbon conglomeration has meaning, because it has form.

What that meaning is however, is up to the complex carbon conglomeration.

In the case of your conglomeration, it seems that the meaning is simply to be happy.

I get that, and I relate to it.  In fact, at one point when I was directly asked the question “what is the meaning of life,” I responded with “To be happy and to help other’s be happy”.

So, I’m with you…

At this point in my life however, I believe that there is more to it than that.

Lincoln said “Most folks are about as happy as they make their minds up to be,” and I’m certainly inclined to agree with him.  Heck, you can improve your attitude simply with the physical act of smiling.  I think happiness is a decision, and that there is more out there to discover.

An old proverb says:  “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings.”  Sounds like there is probably some neat stuff out there too...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Trinten,<br />
Thanks for stopping by and speaking up!  Alternate views are always welcome here…<br />
Actually however, it was the guy whose post I was originally responding to who invoked the second definition of Meaning.  So, blame him, not me.  :^)</p>
<p>Yet, I still say that everything has meaning.  Every action, every thought, and every accidental carbon chain reaction – they all have meaning, because they are all distinct, defined aspects.<br />
You say a system of order is not “meaning”, it is a “system”.</p>
<p>Yet, I say it is impossible to have one without the other.</p>
<blockquote><p>1st definition of Order: an authoritative direction or instruction; command; mandate.<br />
1st definition of System: an assemblage or combination of things or parts forming a complex or unitary whole
</p></blockquote>
<p>How is it possible to be authoritative without meaning?  How is it possible to form a “whole” without meaning?    The simple act of being authoritative provides meaning.  And, to form an assemblage, the assemblage must have a definition.  Even if it is defined in terms of what it is NOT.  It is NOT chaos.  It is NOT disorder.  Those attributes give it meaning.  They give it definition.</p>
<blockquote><p>1. the act of defining or making definite, distinct, or clear.<br />
2. the formal statement of the meaning or significance of a word, phrase, etc.
</p></blockquote>
<p>There is an undeniable cohesiveness to anything that is ordered that necessitates the separation of itself from that which is unordered.  Something formed commands more attention than something that is unformed.  There is no way around that.  Take all of the complex molecules that make up my body and scatter them and you’ll no longer take notice.  Form them into me, or even into something else, and you will still take notice.  It is the form that provides true meaning.  The absence of form is simply potential, which is still a sort of meaning.  Everything has it.</p>
<p>Which, gets me to the first definition of meaning:</p>
<blockquote><p>What is intended to be, or actually is, expressed or indicated; signification; import
</p></blockquote>
<p>“Intended to be expressed” – something specific that is to be conveyed.  A cohesive expression.<br />
“Signification” – something that has Significance<br />
“Import” – something that has Importance</p>
<p>It seems that this too supports my primary thesis, that everything has meaning.  The original person’s comment that we are just a more complex carbon chain reaction than a dog says that we have meaning.  A complex carbon conglomeration has meaning, because it has form.</p>
<p>What that meaning is however, is up to the complex carbon conglomeration.</p>
<p>In the case of your conglomeration, it seems that the meaning is simply to be happy.</p>
<p>I get that, and I relate to it.  In fact, at one point when I was directly asked the question “what is the meaning of life,” I responded with “To be happy and to help other’s be happy”.</p>
<p>So, I’m with you…</p>
<p>At this point in my life however, I believe that there is more to it than that.</p>
<p>Lincoln said “Most folks are about as happy as they make their minds up to be,” and I’m certainly inclined to agree with him.  Heck, you can improve your attitude simply with the physical act of smiling.  I think happiness is a decision, and that there is more out there to discover.</p>
<p>An old proverb says:  “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings.”  Sounds like there is probably some neat stuff out there too&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trinten</title>
		<link>http://blog.miloco.com/2007/05/my-apologies.html/comment-page-1#comment-13005</link>
		<dc:creator>Trinten</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:53:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.miloco.com/2007/05/my-apologies.html#comment-13005</guid>
		<description>I fully disagree. A system of order is not &quot;meaning&quot;, it is a &quot;system&quot;. What you are trying to superimpose on the system is the second defintion of the word &quot;meaning&quot; (according to dictionary.com) - which is:
2. the end, purpose, or significance of something: What is the meaning of life? What is the meaning of this intrusion?  

The meaning of a system is to maintain an order, but to maintain order is not the meaning of life. One can be derived from the other, but not the other way around. 

I personally agree with the initial comment. We won the universal mathematical jackpot. At least for the remaining few trillion years of this universe until it rubber-band-snaps back on itself and starts over. 

The &quot;purpose&quot; of my life? The &quot;meaning&quot; in my life? I would say the closest thing I have to such existential questions is to live my life in a way that I am comfortable and accepting of - to the limits of the system of society, regardless of other peoples thoughts or views or actions. 

While you find such a concept &#039;sad&#039;, I find in that, the ultimate freedom. Mainly because if I find I can not be happy within the limits of this society&#039;s system, I can try to find a society in which I can be happy. If I was a psychopath, this might mean going to some third-world, war-torn country, and offer my gleefully sadistic services to whatever warlord I wished. 

Thankfully I&#039;m not, and I&#039;m extremely happy with my technical job, my computers, taking care of my modest home, and working on my project cars.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I fully disagree. A system of order is not &#8220;meaning&#8221;, it is a &#8220;system&#8221;. What you are trying to superimpose on the system is the second defintion of the word &#8220;meaning&#8221; (according to dictionary.com) &#8211; which is:<br />
2. the end, purpose, or significance of something: What is the meaning of life? What is the meaning of this intrusion?  </p>
<p>The meaning of a system is to maintain an order, but to maintain order is not the meaning of life. One can be derived from the other, but not the other way around. </p>
<p>I personally agree with the initial comment. We won the universal mathematical jackpot. At least for the remaining few trillion years of this universe until it rubber-band-snaps back on itself and starts over. </p>
<p>The &#8220;purpose&#8221; of my life? The &#8220;meaning&#8221; in my life? I would say the closest thing I have to such existential questions is to live my life in a way that I am comfortable and accepting of &#8211; to the limits of the system of society, regardless of other peoples thoughts or views or actions. </p>
<p>While you find such a concept &#8216;sad&#8217;, I find in that, the ultimate freedom. Mainly because if I find I can not be happy within the limits of this society&#8217;s system, I can try to find a society in which I can be happy. If I was a psychopath, this might mean going to some third-world, war-torn country, and offer my gleefully sadistic services to whatever warlord I wished. </p>
<p>Thankfully I&#8217;m not, and I&#8217;m extremely happy with my technical job, my computers, taking care of my modest home, and working on my project cars.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Linoge</title>
		<link>http://blog.miloco.com/2007/05/my-apologies.html/comment-page-1#comment-10256</link>
		<dc:creator>Linoge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2007 22:01:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.miloco.com/2007/05/my-apologies.html#comment-10256</guid>
		<description>... And now I am just not going to sleep tonight...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230; And now I am just not going to sleep tonight&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

