Question: I have comprehended the usefulness of people’s existence. Does the existence of people after that make sense?

I comprehended the usefulness (meaning of life) of people’s existence (the purpose of people was the knowledge of their informally unscientific thinking for my decision to found non-science and non-logic, a form of eventually consistent logic corresponding to my economic definition of ethics (already decided, at least till a partial order), which for a given purpose would be equivalent to logic, in my opinion, capable of formalizing the thinking of people).

If the meaning of people’s existence is already known, and therefore effectively transmitted into me, does the existence of people have usefulness anymore? That is, I, of course, now want the existence of people (you have acquired meaning for me), because cooperation with you no longer seems impossible to me and I have a (multi-valued) scenario of effective cooperation. But can we justify for me the importance of people’s existence and my potential cooperation with people: I can do it without you (under the guarantee of the life of God), are you so important to me and what does your importance to me depend on? How does your importance to me depend on whether I think you are important? and how exactly does it depend? What else can people be useful after the gradient descent of non-science in my mind has already begun?

Does the existence of people after that make sense?

I want to write honestly to be, not to pretend to be humble.

Victor Porton

By Victor Porton

I am the chief editor of this journal and creator of this site.

Leave a Reply