a new understanding of today, time and space.

Peter, by now we can perhaps talk in a manner which befits friends. And that is, our conversation. Includes certain things we may have learned from ea h other. At one point in time when we were both going to Europe , we exchanged some items relating to our families , that of our relationship ships with our respective daughters, the substance of which escapes me, thank god perhaps because my recent memory has always been very deficient in terms of instant recall.

At any rate , the reason for this mention , is that I recall principles and not particulars, and as it happens to relate to our particular discussion here.

So it struck me , that the question. of recall may effectively block existential and teleological problems, in particular the recall of fetuses and ordinary experienced people , here in this context.

The big issue here, has to do with inherited and experienced types of mindsets, and this puts am entirely different spin on our conversation .

How can we assert without doubt that the genetic inheritance does not include large general neuron pathways, which pre form functions have to do with major decisions in later life, whether and irrespective to the stage of a human finds, or, is found to be determinate in his later development?

Must the standard of Darwinian supposition preclude the mind as opposed to the brain function?

Darwin was shown to have undermined a very credible showing,neural adaptation as the primal function of.coding , as opposed to biological natural selection? : causing that particular Viennese biologist’s suicide.

These last.two paragraphs , omit as You wish, they may be out of.the general context of discussion.

So, what the fetus possesses in scripted neural pathways is not to say what the fetus ‘knows’ . but what he may come to know, if it is allowed to develop. If knowledge is qualified by what is signified as.conscious knowledge, then the objection has been properly summed into acceptable definition

Until then, we really do not know, even the minimum issue worth examining. that pertains to minimal understanding of a newborn child. There is no way as of yet to techno-interfere with living fetuses, although along the way,medical ethics objectively may overcome even that threshold.

I’m glad You brought in Trumpism, for.there’s no way any one could guess the high degree of a higher sense of public acceptance to his ideas: easily showing a new higher collusion between the general public with Congress and the Judiciary.

A year ago , this could not be even imaginable

The point taken fits Lambigous’ higher subjective notions, based on guesses that limits of tolerance to understanding may entail

These issues interface, and why not? They are philosophy, one’s perception perches on the high ground, another’s in the low, teleological AND/OR QM ( it primaryl logic)

A sensible middle has not yet developed, although by the same token, they have perhaps been already neuro scripted.

I want to answer Your next blog but since my blog and and Yours came through almost a.split minute apart, I’d rather edit my version rather than set up a faulty implication.

The Authority is suspect, because it can be scripted genetically, in many cases, and cannot be altered even with the aid of whatever: psychoanalysis, past life regression, or levels of experiencial gain of knowledge. It is not an either or logical acquisition, but an undifferentiated primal script, which can go either way.

we often understand by authority… which is to say,
we use authority to help us understand our experiences…
we might use god or the bible or Aristotle or capitalism
or communism…all of which is authority…
and which is used to explain who we are and what
is our purpose…

but is authority really an good means to use when
understanding? for example, we have the authority of
the bible…and many still proclaim its priority in leading
our lives… but, but think about the bible…the new testament
was written 2000 years ago and the old testament is much older…the
old testament was written by rural, farmers and sheep herders…

now my life today has nothing to do with rural farming…
how can the authority of the bible explain our modern age?

it was written for a rural, farming community… not our modern age
of cars and the industrial revolution and Hiroshima and Auschwitz…

I used to love this show called “connections” which followed
connections from one event to another event…
these connections were often obsure and took many different paths…
but some events and experiences are so far apart as to defy
any attempts to make a connection…and the authority of the bible
is so far apart from my experiences that to be useless…

so for me to use authority to understand my life is to
use very tenuous connections to connect my life to
said authority……. for example, to use Aristotle to understand
my life is a rather tenuous connection…… it might work if
I understand that Aristotle wrote for a Greek society over 2500 years ago…

context is everything… and context means experience……
so for me to use authority is to understand that authority
in context for me…even to use, say Descartes as an authority
is to know/understand that Descartes wrote over 300 years ago in a totally
different environment…….

so which authority should I use then? Marx or Freud or Adam Smith or Nietzsche?

or should I use some ism or ideology as authority? Capitalism or communism or
fascism or democracy? which recent authority should I use? as a modern man,
I can see the failure of the ism’s and ideologies of today…when the history books
are written about today, they will comment on the total collapse of our current
ism’s and ideologies………they, ism’s and ideologies, have failed because they are
about context and experiences which don’t match our current situation…
in other words, our ism’s and ideologies are about context and experiences
that no longer exist today…for example, capitalism has clearly failed…
how can we use that authority to base our lives upon if it is a failure…

we cannot depend upon authority because our current situation
has no other precedent… we cannot look to the past for solutions
because the past has no examples of our current situation…

we are facing problems stemming from the industrial revolution
that have never existed before… and so the past or authority won’t
solve our problems because the problems didn’t exist in the past…

the solution or solutions must come from the context/experience
of our times and not from authority……………

for example, biblical examples like, “be fruitful and multiply”
are not only no longer possible, but downright dangerous for
us… given our current situation…… we must find another solution
besides “be fruitful and multiply”…in the context of our times,
one of the overwhelming problems is overpopulation and that leads
to massive pollution and massive use of resources and the extinction of
species that we need in order for us to survive…

but ism’s like capitalism lead us to forsake intelligent solutions
in the name of the authority of the past…….

holding to authority like capitalism or the bible leads us to
take actions that endanger our generation and generations after us…

so what is the solution? learn to forsake those authorities
that we are taught like the biases and myths and prejudices
and superstitions of our childhood…

Kropotkin

Meno: Peter, by now we can perhaps talk in a manner which befits friends. And that is, our conversation. Includes certain things we may have learned from ea h other. At one point in time when we were both going to Europe , we exchanged some items relating to our families , that of our relationship ships with our respective daughters, the substance of which escapes me, thank god perhaps because my recent memory has always been very deficient in terms of instant recall.

At any rate , the reason for this mention , is that I recall principles and not particulars, and as it happens to relate to our particular discussion here.

K: ok…

M: So it struck me , that the question. of recall may effectively block existential and teleological problems, in particular the recall of fetuses and ordinary experienced people , here in this context.

K: ummm, not sure exactly what you mean?

M: The big issue here, has to do with inherited and experienced types of mindsets, and this puts am entirely different spin on our conversation .
How can we assert without doubt that the genetic inheritance does not include large general neuron pathways, which pre form functions have to do with major decisions in later life, whether and irrespective to the stage of a human finds, or, is found to be determinate in his later development?

K: these question of “inherited or experienced mindset” as of right now, lies outside
of our knowledge… we cannot assume for or against…

M: Must the standard of Darwinian supposition preclude the mind as opposed to the brain function?
Darwin was shown to have undermined a very credible showing,neural adaptation as the primal function of.coding , as opposed to biological natural selection? : causing that particular Viennese biologist’s suicide.

K: not sure again what you mean?

M: So, what the fetus possesses in scripted neural pathways is not to say what the fetus ‘knows’ . but what he may come to know, if it is allowed to develop. If knowledge is qualified by what is signified as.conscious knowledge, then the objection has been properly summed into acceptable definition
Until then, we really do not know, even the minimum issue worth examining. that pertains to minimal understanding of a newborn child. There is no way as of yet to techno-interfere with living fetuses, although along the way,medical ethics objectively may overcome even that threshold.

K: You at least acknowledge the number of assumptions made in these two paragraphs…
I try to avoid assumptions… often failing…….

M: I’m glad You brought in Trumpism, for.there’s no way any one could guess the high degree of a higher sense of public acceptance to his ideas: easily showing a new higher collusion between the general public with Congress and the Judiciary.
A year ago , this could not be even imaginable

K: I try to connect my thoughts with current events/experiences…

M: The point taken fits Lambigous’ higher subjective notions, based on guesses that limits of tolerance to understanding may entail
These issues interface, and why not? They are philosophy, one’s perception perches on the high ground, another’s in the low, teleological AND/OR QM ( it primaryl logic)

K: once again, I admit to failing to understand what you are saying…

M: A sensible middle has not yet developed, although by the same token, they have perhaps been already neuro scripted.

K: this is not clear to me…

M: I want to answer Your next blog but since my blog and and Yours came through almost a.split minute apart, I’d rather edit my version rather than set up a faulty implication.
The Authority is suspect, because it can be scripted genetically, in many cases, and cannot be altered even with the aid of whatever: psychoanalysis, past life regression, or levels of experiencial gain of knowledge. It is not an either or logical acquisition, but an undifferentiated primal script, which can go either way.
[/quote]
K: people like to follow authority because it is far easier to follow someone else
then to take control over one’s life… it is easier to follow someone else because
then blame can be shifted to the authority instead of where it belongs, at one’s
doorstep…this is the battle of the Enlightenment all the way through
existentialism…taking responsibility for one’s life…often begins with
denying authority and seaching for oneself as what is the correct path to
follow…in part, in part, is why I reject god and the bible and any
religious authority… because to follow the authority of god or the bible
or of religion is to abdicate my own personal responsibility for my actions…
to follow god or the bible or the koran or any religion is to give that authority
the right of judgment over me…now, I am not going to even accept the
authority of biology to determine my actions… be it the programming I
have within me… be it mental or be it DNA…I am more then my programming…

to become fully human… one must rise above DNA or the genetic programming
we have… we must become more then our base lower level of behavior
that is let loose by IQ45… we are more then that… much more…

following authority is to follow the previously written script by others…

I will not do that…I would rather fail on my own terms then
succeed on other’s/authority terms…

that is why I am not a fan of programming or genetic DNA or
following authority… my success or failure lies with me…
not the authority…………

I view success far differently then other people…
I have never pursued money… I haven’t pursued titles or fame
or even love… love just sort of found me…….

my success and failure comes from my search for understanding
of the world and of understanding myself… which for Kierkegaard
and Nietzsche and Socrates was the same thing.

I record my findings and I post them here…

and that for me is success… I ask for nothing more…

just let me live long enough to understand who I am and
to understand the problem of existence…

Kropotkin

All I can say is, that I totally accept and agree with most of Your opinions.

K: ok, but why? it is not about who, what, when, where or how, but why?
why do you accept anything I say? I could be completely batshit crazy…
but if you know why you accept my opinions, then it doesn’t matter if I am
batshit crazy…

Kropotkin

Because it sounds like Your ok with them. Apart from Your understandable dissatisfaction with current political affairs, I see you as a pretty functional and satisfied human being. If I didn’t approve you’re ideas., You could accuse me of having unrealistic assessments of You based on misrepresentations.

In particular, it is the problem with authority that concerns you above, and it is particularly to that I am responding to. That rejection of authority, gives rise to going your way as an independent, and I agree with that in today’s political climate.

There is problems with being an independent , as well, only today, someone high up in Trump’s organization, which I believe was a family member, said, that if an election was held today, he would vote independent.
Others say Trump may as well run on his own independent party next time around, if there was a next time, since his own party is so divided about him.

I’m bringing in Trump to square away with your independent stance, on account for your opinion against authority, and that you are warranted to such, in today’s climate.

This is mostly why I said I approve of what I thought of Your position as fitting.

As far as the why under the more general why of the great changes taking place , umderneath personal opinions, that question is not yet readily available, and and they are unfolding under our eyes, as a day to day event, in one of the most important times we ever lived in.

Other then that, I can have no other answers as to the why of having the opinions.you are having. That is for You to examine
as long you don’t start to try to figure out why do I have the opinions about why I am having the opinions about your opinions. That would involve us in an endless chain of why’s.

Besides most of my opinions of Your views are based on an appreciation of common sense and a gut level feeling on where You’re at , politically, in the broadest possible meaning.

My own belief is that 42 is as good an explanation as anyone is ever going to ultimately get for anything, providing an explanation for quantum mechanics implying things like consensual reality. We inhabit and even help create our own “singular-infinity” with the subconscious mind being in connection with the collective unconscious, or dreamer, and the conscious mind applying normalization to the, otherwise, less reliable subconscious mind. Classical logic and physics are rapidly proving to be tautological, implying that the particle-wave duality of quantum mechanics expresses the Two Faces of Janus, or paradox of existence. That makes space-time as much a personal matter as it is an abstract one, and looking up at the stars we can often feel like a small infant looking up at its mother, while looking down from a height we can literally crap our pants.

It is the juxtaposition that matters and that can be considered to express the Two Faces of Janus. Similarly, gravity appears to be magical, while inertia is more real and in-your-face even, but the two can exchange identities. More to the point, gravity and inertia describe all the varieties of motion we are aware of in the world around us, making it just as meaningful to say we can’t imagine a universe without the magical appearing action of gravity. This is what Allan Watts first popularized as “God plays peek-a-boo” where the identity of everything appears to vanish down the nearest convenient rabbit hole or toilet of your personal preference. Gravity simultaneously appears to occupy space and not occupy space, and to pull things towards it and not pull them, as if its identity is somehow spread out like the wave in a particle-wave duality.

The same thing can be seen with the arrow of time, where neither a backwards, random, or utterly fated universe is more than a vaguely conceivable concept, implying that if it were not for the arrow of time, we would see almost nothing happening.

I would agree, but only by the use of the most absolute of principles, which can never be discovered, demonstrably.

Time and space are related such by transfer, and its based on -in-through an approximated gravitational reality, and I think that’s right.

That’s what I thought, before I accidently figured out a way to prove it. Assuming 42 actually is as good an explanation as any other, then its possible to make unique predictions and establish that quantum mechanics rule the universe. For example, one implication is that reality and the dream are indivisible, and that reality and fiction must become indistinguishable at times. Life must have a humorous side that expresses the lowest possible energy state and begs the question as to whether we possess free will or life is fated. I discovered there are any number of ways to prove 42 is as good an explanation as any other, because it is the self-evident truth.

Think of everything as ultimately making no sense whatsoever (the only thing I can know is that I know nothing) and humanity as being unconsciously aware that it ultimately makes no sense, but we pretend it does make sense, because its more useful. This explains the Quantum Observer Effect and local and nonlocal effects as due, in part, to how easy it is for the individual to fool themselves in any specific situation. The more removed the observer, the more their observations should differ a closer observer, because the principle of identity is an infinite regression (explaining the Simultaneity Paradox). That means the repeated patterns over vast scales of fractal geometry reflect how we perceive things as becoming more or less real which is something that can be measured and used to establish that the self-evident truth is paradoxical and metaphorical.

A recent examination of cosmic whirlpools revealed that the Schrodinger equation applies and modern science is beginning to amass evidence for the fractal symmetry that applies to everything, and next generation computers should be able to crunch all the numbers required.

a problem of existence…

we see and have seen injustice, which I have noted is
actually about inequality… justice is about being treated equal
but we have seen, generation after generation after generation,
injustice and inequality… the wealthy and the powerful have
always had the ability to avoid consequences and use their influence
to manipulate situations and events for their benefit…
this injustice, this inequality has been seen before… Kings who
act tyrannically and churches that favor those with wealth
and we have seen events like the Holocaust, all of which are acts
of inequality/injustice…….

we wish we had the power to end or change these acts of inequality/injustice
but we lack the power… we are helpless in the face of tyranny, injustice, inequality…

and so, we create in our helplessness, some means of gaining justice, equality…
we create the notion of gaining justice and inequality in the next life…
heaven is simply a wish fulfillment to end the injustice and inequality we see
in this life… or said another way, we see injustice and we want
some Deus ex Machina to correct the injustice………

I have an idiot boss and I wish I had some means to overcome his
unjust and bonehead actions…… I wish for some means to create
justice and equality, but I can’t… so I hope for some Deus ex Machina
to drop on that idiot’s head… but no… the injustice goes on…

and we see this every day… IQ45 and his tyranny and it is tyranny…
for if a president doesn’t follow the law, disregards the law…
that is tyranny… for IQ45 to claim he is above the law…
and that he cannot be indicted for anything he does including
shooting Comey, is simply wrong and a case of injustice…
and their isn’t anything I can do…the power to change his tyranny
is outside of my control, so I am left with some vague hope of
of outside forces, Deus ex Machina, to right these wrongs…

and so we see the birth of superhero’s… like Superman or Batman
or Spiderman… we see that they fight the wrongs of the day…
but our superhero’s no longer fight political battles or rights the wrongs
of an unjust political system…… no our superhero’s fight some
evil forces trying to destroy the earth or the universe…
so we are left without any means to correct our current unjust
and unequal political system…… we are left hopeless……
so millions don’t bother to vote and millions have simply
vacated the political sphere…… they are more interested
in who wins crappy TV shows like America idol and dancing with
the stars…or watching the idiots Kardashian…… hoping to be like
them, make millions and be famous without any effort or talent or skills……

and we still see injustice and despair and inequality every day in the news
and we know that acts of injustice and inequality happen every single
day to millions and we can’t do anything about… where are the superhero’s that
fight for justice and equality for people who are just trying survive the day…

have we lost our compassion for those who are less fortunate then we are?

have we truly lost the ability to have pity for those less fortunate then us?

or has the capitalistic system so infested us that we can only believe
in “every man for himself”… without concern for our fellow human beings…….

a problem of existence: how can we become human if we cannot
have pity or concern or compassion for those who are less fortunate then us?
or have we passed beyond the point of truly caring for others???

Kropotkin

Fun fact. Hillary Killary is romantically in love with the Leader of the KKK and she calls jews a bunch of k-words.

now before you ban me, let it be known, i did not call jews k-words, i did not kiss the leader of the kkk, that was hillary. i am simply stating the facts.

Fun fact. Trump increased black employment so who’s the racist?

I know most of you liberals are closet racists.

I know you want to vote for hillary because you are a heterosexual male and you love womens. You love strong powerful womens in power. But due to feminism, you, as a male, are persecuted and shamed for your lust, so the only way you can satisfy your urges for strong, womens, of a woman in power, is through the vote.

K: I can’t tell if this is some new brain dead idiot or an old ILP poster
who has changed his name… inquiring minds really don’t want to know…

Kropotkin

Typical lib response, ignores the facts and insults me directly, retreating back to its narcissistic droning and safe-space.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fv2ZMN3T18E[/youtube]

another problem of existence……

we have millions of people who live
“lives of quiet desperation”…….

we see them everyday, including here at ILP…

these small, insignificant people who have nothing to offer, nothing about
them is geared toward being greatness… and why?

because they lack anything but anger and bitterness and hate…
that is it… that is all they offer, so they lead lives of desperation…

they are so far from greatness and intelligence or wit, that they
cannot reach those traits given a million years and they know it…

thus they hate any who does approach intelligence or greatness or wit…

these ignorant, insignificant people can only offer up hate and anger
and despair, that is all they have… and these irrelevant people
in their hate can only hate those who have thoughts or are original
or bring in the light of love and peace and charity……

haters can only hate and lead lives of quiet desperation………
and they bring the hate toward those who have intelligence or greatness
and wit and bath in the light of love and peace………….

and it galls those small people because they too want to
have intelligence and greatness and wit but their hate and anger
stands in the way……….

I could name names of those here at ILP who only bring the hate and anger,
but it would be pointless because they can do nothing about it…
and so they lead lives of quiet desperation…

the question of existence asks, do these small, insignificant ones
have any hope to become something greater then they are…….
which is really rising to average at best… can they rise
to this modest level of being average or are they condemned to live out their
lives of hate and anger and being small and insignificant? lives of quiet desperation…

I don’t know… that is the question of existence… can these little
people become something more?

Kropotkin

it is now my third year or 4th year, ummmm, I can’t remember,
anyway, I now have reached Kant in my look at the history of philosophy……
I expect this to take a while…

I remember the first time I read his critique of pure reason…
I was driving from Chicago to California in 1986? and my car broke down
in between Springfield ILL and St Louis… It was Easter Sunday and I was
in some small dinky town called Atlanta Illinois…and nothing but nothing was
open because it was easter sunday……and my car broke down on Rt 55 which meant
I couldn’t get the part I needed to fix my car… so I was in my car on the side of the freeway
for a day and a half…waiting for my brother in law to come and get me the part…
so, as I sat in my car, I did the only thing I could do, which was read and that is
where I first read Kant’s critique…I still have that very book…

I admit, I didn’t understand a word of this book… later, I bought some
books which helped me to understand it better, especially Norman Kemp Smith’s book…

and now 30 years later, I am ready to face Kant again…….

we will see if I have better luck with it this time…

Kropotkin

the problem of existence

for human beings, one of the basic problems is this question of
experience…how do we judge/understand experience…

for example, I see a black and white box…this box is about waist high…
it has a flat top with 4 metal round things on it…above
the 4 metal round objects in a L shape is a black surface with knobs that
turn…this black and white box seems to get very hot if I turn one of the knobs…

so, what is this? A stove… but how are we to experience this stove?

according to some thinkers, we have an image of the stove already…

but the reality is, we learn what a stove is from experience…
someone, most likely our mother, has told us to stay away from the stove
because it is hot… and not being sure what hot is, we go ahead and touch it…
and we find out what hot is…the stove is just one device and we soon learn
that by putting food into the stove, we get cooked food out of the stove…
we see this just by being in the kitchen and seeing the results and then
if lucky, eating the results…soon we hear of a word, appliance…
ummmmm, we are not really sure what an appliance is… but our dear
mother explains that an appliance is a stove, an appliance is also a dishwasher,
a fridge, a washer and dryer… we soon understand that there is a series of
machines called appliances… we have a category of appliances…

Now philosophers would have you believe that somehow we have mental
categories that allow us to place the stove into context… but context means experience…
and we don’t envision the stove from categories, we learn about the stove from
experience…

Philosophers like Kant seem to forget that we have a lifetime of experiences
that we use to understand our world……. we know time and space, not because
of some mental categories but because we have existed within time and space
all our lives… we have experienced time and space, every single second of our life…

how do we learn space? studies have shown that babies that miss the crawling
stage of childhood have more trouble with spatial understanding… we learn
space by experiencing space with such events like crawling…and reaching out to
grab things… simple trail and error leads us to our understanding of space…
if we fall down as a child and children fall down all the time, it is because
they haven’t gotten used to space yet………

I see a book, Kant’s critique of Pure reason on the table, I reach over and
grab it…because of the many years of existing within space, it is an easy
task…I am able to grab it on the very first try…my body and spatial sense
is up to the task of grabbing the book because I have done so, literally a million
times…there is no sense of a mental operation involved in the physical act
of grabbing the book… now a mental sense was involved in my thinking
about grabbing the book… but not in the actual grabbing the book

is space a mental construct? once spaced is experienced and understood
as experience, then space can be a mental construct, but before it
is a mental construct, it is first experienced…now, we can experienced
space, but it can’t be explained to us…describe space……
you would be hard pressed to be able to describe space…
experiences are often explained to us… as in the stove…
mom says the stove is hot, but we don’t know what hot means
or what is the purpose of the stove is… and by experience, we begin
to understand what hot is or what the stove is for…

but you can’t do that with space or time…
space/time must be experienced to be understood…
you can’t explain it…you must experienced it
and we do, all of our lives…every single second of our life
is spent in space/time…

so is space/time a mental construct? as it cannot be explained or understood
outside of experience, I would say no…it seems to be something experienced
but not a mental construct………it has a reality to it that we can experienced

now is space/time one of Kant’s “thing in itself”? something that is a concept
that are objects as they are independent of observation…but space/time is
is really only understood by us as experiences… they might be independent of
observation but how would you go about showing this? you can only explain
space/time by using experiences as a means of understanding space/time…

so as an thought experiment, try to explain space/time without any reference
to experience………… I don’t think it can be done…so is space/time independent
of observation? it doesn’t look like it…

Kropotkin

The problem of existence is that we simply exist.

according to Kant, every human being has a conscience,
every human being has a common sense grasp of morality,
and every human being “has a firm conviction that he or she,
is morally accountable”…

let us think about this……. my experience as a human being
of 59 years tells me that this is not true… I have seen
human being without conscience and ones without a firm grasp
of morality and no conviction of any kind that they can be held accountable…
for anything… think of narcissistic psychopaths like IQ45…people
who don’t have a conscience and don’t have any kind of grasp of morality
and believes that they can shot people on 5th ave in NY and still not
be held accountable……….

the other point Kant makes is that he believes that people are rational
creatures and once again my experience tells me otherwise…
people will often behave and act totally irrationally to their
best interest and behave and act totally irrationally to others
best interest………

you see this when people vote against their best interest in the
name of some misguided principle like voting for the GOP because
of their mistaken impression that the GOP is pro-life… it isn’t…
but that is a erroneous impression given by the GOP to get people
to vote for them over people following their best interest. This false
impression by the GOP is to get people to vote for the party that
put party ahead of country and the party that commits treason, like the GOP………
instead of voting for one’s best interest which is for the Democrat’s…

you see this misguided irrational action of people’s all the time…
with actions that defy any rational thought…

people are not rational and don’t act upon rational thought…
they act upon emotions and quite often act upon misguided principles
offered up by those who benefit from those misguided principles
which often stems from those myths, biases, habits, prejudices
and superstitions preached by society/the culture/the state and family…

they aren’t rational, those myths, the biases, habits, prejudices, ism’s,
and superstitions taught to us from the day of our birth…
and so this is often why people don’t act rational… they
are lead astray by those myths and biases…
instead of thinking for themselves, they are lead astray by
beliefs of the past…….so Kant is wrong… because people don’t
often think rationally, they think in terms of the myths and biases
and ism’s………. of their childhood…that is why the Enlightenment was
so important…it emphasis the thinking for oneself instead of following the
authority of myths, biases, ism’s, habits………

and following authority is not rational… is it is simply following what you are
told…and this is true in the case of people in terms of morality…
because people accept the given morality of society, the idea of morality
is driven by people’s understanding of what the society/state/church idea of
morality is…………conscience is not independent of what the ism’s and myths
and biases we are taught as children… morality/conscience is simply what society has
deemed it to be, morality/conscience isn’t independent of a society… but an aspect of
society…

experience tells me Kant is wrong… people do act irrationally,
people quite often don’t act morally, and people rarely believe
they will be held morally accountable…

Kropotkin

K: and now what? what does it mean to exist? how are we to act? what
is the point of existence? who are we and what is our possibilities
as human beings? by simple existening, we face a whole series of
questions… that demand answers…

Kropotkin

What it means to exist?

To me, it means to overcome obstacles from finding out what it means.

Once found the meaning, Your other question may reveal themselves.

If not, then slowly, will eliminate the need to find out.