Why does anything reproduce if it doesn't sense a future?

It doesn't need "to sense a future". All that needs to happen is arousal, insertion, ejaculation, sperm meets egg, egg turns into offspring, voila: reproduction. A sense of some future is irrelevant. Egg hatches, pup is born, mama and papa feed it, it gets big, arousal, insertion, ejaculation, sperm meets egg, egg turns into offspring, rinse and repeat.

Is the 17 year old girl getting screwed silly by the idiot bastard's son§ thinking about the future? Not at the moment. Not until she's unmistakably pregnant. Then what? Dither dither, hither thither, can't afford an abortion; morning after pill is 4 months too late. Looks like reproduction is sliding down the chute.

Future? What future?
Ob-la di, ob-la-da, life goes on, bra
La-la, la-la life goes on.

No need for future sense.

§ Frank Zappa lyrics proceed along the lines of...

The idiot bastard son:

allegorically — Michael Ossipoff

I've never committed allegory -- I swear!

[Delete] @Baden

If you had no more memories there would be nothing to regret. — René Descartes

True, of course. Nothing to regret, nothing to be happy about. And that is my belief: death is nothingness.

Babies, especially lobotomized babies, would have a rather nebbishy time of it, but by another sign of God's skimpy mercy, infants would only spend a year in this limbo. Nothing to think about, and nothing to think with.

The greatest sign of God's larger mercy is that non-human animals are spared all this rococo rigamarole. they just drop dead and that is that. Which, btw, is what I believe happens to our animal species: We just cease and desist and that's it. There are no second acts in America or in eternity.

[Delete] @Baden

Nihilism is tiresome. What makes you think I am not against nihilism?

[Delete] @Baden

Here's Wikipedia's definition of existential nihilism:

Existential nihilism is the belief that life has no intrinsic meaning or value. With respect to the universe, existential nihilism posits that a single human or even the entire human species is insignificant, without purpose and unlikely to change in the totality of existence. The meaninglessness of life is largely explored in the philosophical school of existentialism.

I suppose somebody might think I was a nihilist because I have, on a number of occasions, said that "the universe is meaningless and does not provide us with meaning". The universe is meaningless, it can't give us meaning. We can impose meaning on our world, in our lives -- or on the entire universe for that matter. We are meaning makers. We are where meaning comes from. A theistic believer holds that God provides meaning, but if one is not a theist, and not a nihilist, one has to provide meaning.

We have gone so far as to actually create God, and describe God as the Creator of the Universe and all things in it. This isn't merely colossal chutzpah on our part; it's our greatest task -- to find ways of imposing meaning on the cosmos, on down to our own lives.

So, I don't think that life is meaningless. A consequence of failing to maintain meaning is anomie: "Anomie is a "condition in which society provides little moral guidance to individuals". It is the breakdown of social bonds between an individual and the community, e.g., under unruly scenarios resulting in fragmentation of social identity and rejection of self-regulatory values. It was popularized by French sociologist Émile Durkheim."

I suppose many people feel nihilistic at times: Life just seems bleak, meaningless, flat, uninhabited. It's a bad feeling. No, I don't think it's a mental illness, though depressed people feel pretty bleak at times. It's a philosophical illness, something that decreases one's fitness to live in this world. I understand that people become deeply disenchanted with life, and then it looks like ashes. It's always in our best interest to resist nihilism, and the anomie that it can engender.

[Delete] @Baden

One probably wouldn't become an atheist in order to overcome nihilism; indeed, having an anchor in a faith tradition helps one deal with nihilism more effectively. Yes, reason can lead to nihilism -- it's one of the possible positions, and a questing mind is likely to discover it sooner or later -- though most people get a whiff of it and keep moving.

There are more advantages to being anchored in a faith tradition than there are disadvantages. And being "anchored" leaves plenty of room for interpreting, reinterpreting the tradition as changing circumstances arise. "Time makes ancient good uncouth." A faith that worked as a child cease working later in life, but the "tradition" remains, and with it one's social guides, morals, ethics, liturgies, and so forth.

But... I'm glad you overcame your brief encounter with nihilism.

Everyone is a nihilist at least once in their life. It's a natural side effect of human reason. I underwent a period of nihilism, but I managed to overcome it without becoming atheist and rather remaining Christian. — René Descartes

Why were you a nihilist, and how did you overcome it?

non-stop orgy — Bitter Crank

Mmmm, from the British I learned that this is called a shagathon. You know, like a marathon, but for shagging, not for running >:O (though I guess that just like you can run a marathon, you can also run a shagathon!)

What do you think BC, do the ladies like a man who has good shagathon stamina?

[Delete] @Baden

Indubitably.

It's entirely unclear how the non-physical mind obtains information while embodied, so the decay of the body doesn't bring on new problems. My guess is that once disembodied, your mind can float around invisibly, gaining all sorts of previously unavailable women's locker roomish information. That's what my mind would do I'm pretty sure. 1000 years of ladies showering. Might get old.

You're a disgusting pervert....nah...just kidding...you're beyond disgusting... ;)

Without eyes to see or ears to hear, how would you even know you were in a women's locker room? For all you would know, you might be hovering in a diesel engine repair shop or in a swamp or in the middle of a black hole (wouldn't affect you since you would be entirely incorporeal).

[Delete] @Baden

This is just an emotional response, which is bullshit, because it has no place in a philosophy forum, which is supposed to be more about correct reasoning than emotion.

Maybe you missed the tongue-in-cheek tone of that initial exchange, or maybe it wasn't clear by way of my responses.

So how should I have responded instead? Thanks for the feedback, but it seems like a small post in the scope of a 4-page thread for you to make a response towards.

Also, if emotion has no place in a philosophy forum, then I want no place in such a catatonic place.

Well, if that is the case, then my response is bullshit. :D

Emotion is something that naturally occurs as we present arguments, but good arguments have nothing to do with emotion, and everything to do with evidence or good reasons.

Disagree. Evidence and good reasons without emotion are husks with no corn.

Well, all emotion does is cloud the issue, and logic is similar to mathematics; as such, it needs no emotion to come to a correct conclusion, you simply follow the rules.

Well, all emotion does is cloud the issue, — Sam26

No, emotion can do that, but, ideally, emotion drives the issues. Emotion is, in that sense, primary, and comes before reason; bias, for instance, comes before reason. And bias is emotional. But there is a right bias and a wrong bias, I think.

and logic is similar to mathematics; as such, it needs no emotion to come to a correct conclusion. — Sam26

What does "similar" mean there? Something being mathematically correct has no bearing on something being morally correct, for instance, and morals and emotion are inextricable. Again, there are right emotions and wrong ones.

I'm not sharing an opinion, which is what you're doing. I'm telling you what logic is, and logic by definition has nothing to do with emotional responses.

For example,
Modus Ponens in logic...
If P, then Q.
P.
Therefore, Q.

If I am human, then I am a person.
I am human.
Therefore, I am a person.

The conclusion is devoid of emotion and rightly so.

I'm not sharing an opinion, which is what you're doing. — Sam26

No, you shared this opinion:

Well, all emotion does is cloud the issue, — Sam26

Thanks for the refresher on logic.

That refresher doesn't have anything to do with my contention that emotion plays a primary role in arguments.

[Delete] @Baden