What do the stars mean?

A simple question... But it led to an hour and a half of conversation.

Last night Cherry and I had to sleep on the couch. If you know me well enough, you'd know Cherry and I have insomnia and like to talk about stuff before we actually sleep. Well I thought it would be a good idea to lay out in the grass and talk there like we used to when we were kids.

Me and Cherry watched the stars talking about random shit until we were both simply dazzled by the clear night skies.

We started talking about stars and what they are doing up there... More on a spiritual / religious level and not a scientific one.

Cherry said that God probably made the stars so that he can create life elsewhere if he needs to, and that we aren't alone in the universe. She likes to think the dinosaurs after they were wiped out, God gave them a new world with thier own star and made that their heaven... This happened several times until God remade the world as we know it today in the seven days of Genesis.

And I added the theory that angels live inside the stars so that they may guide us when we need them most, and that the fire from the stairs not only give us the light needed to create life, but also protect the Angels from any Demons who travel the stars as they cannot stand the holy fires of the sun. (And Black Holes are the Demon's way of trying to get rid of soda holy fire)

This is a serious discussion? Angels, genesis and dinosaurs?

We already factually know what stars are and what they are made of, so on and so fort, you know in the 'scientific way'.

I figured religion and stuff might be involved in this discussion...

I'm not asking what the stars are or what they're made of, but what sort of things have made the Stars this sort of thing that people would worship... Like constolations and stuff, or the zodiac, or maybe stories you were told as a kid about what the stars are doing up there like how in the Lion King, the Stars were the kings of the past.

Not good at explaining it...sorry

Human stupidity and ignorance.

In this context it can also be fun or romantic. It's good to be grounded in reality but our culture would be rather dull if nobody ever looked at the sky with awe and wonder. I think this thread is more about aesthetic and creativity.

Are ga Denebu, Arutairu, Vega...

Personally, I think stars exist because without stars, the night would be dark, scary, and most importantly, boring. They are pretty, and without them, Earth would not be as beautiful, therefore they are needed. Everything exists for a reason, and most of the reason why is because someone or something needs it.

I don't think men need nipples.

You realize that stars existed way before anything living existed on planet earth or for that matter before planet earth existed?

To say stars (or anything for that matter) exists for our humans enjoinment and/or pleasure is pretty foolish and childish.

To say anything exists for any reason is pretty naive in my opinion tbh.

Well that kind of hurts, because I think almost everything exists for our human enjoyment or pleasure. My philosophy, is that we humans are born in this world for the simple reason of enjoying life and feeling pleasure. My foolish and childish idea may change in the future, but I am pretty firm with my belief at the moment.

Well just think about it, how can something exist for us if they existed well before us? I mean come on, we exist because of stars, we are made of star dust. It is not like the stars twinkle in the night sky for our amusement, it is only a coincidence that we humans even are able to understand what 'beauty' is and describe stars as 'pretty'.

Accepting the fact that nothing in the nature and the cosmos exists for us (apart from the technological achievements we create for our selves through manipulating the nature) doesn't go against your philosophy of enjoying life and feeling pleasure.

Well if we are going to throw all of the science in the world that says that it is just a ball of gas which gives light, heat, and through the food chain, life to most everything out the fucking window, I suppose the stars are fickle in nature religiously.

In religion, stars have been gods or angels or demons, what have you, so if you want to disregaurd logic, then take your pick.

Have you ever heard the saying " because the universe around us is logical and understandable, to some degree, we are are the Gods of our universe"
It went somewhat like that, not actually sure how it goes.


It's all about personal truths man, if I say that stars merely exist for my enjoyment, you, nor anyone else can rebuke that. You can try convince me, but you ultimately will not be able to destroy my 'ultimate truth'. You say that stars existed way before humanity, what if stars were just lights on a blanket? How can you say for sure that your truth is the absolute? So please refrain from using such strong words to attempt to destroy someone else's truth. You're only making yourself less communicatable to others.
edit : have you watched a movie called : the Truman show ?
I also took a notice to you saying 'imo' a lot. I don't know who told you, or taught you this, but 'imo' does not really make you politically neutral.
YOURE A DICK! but that's just my opinion. :p

No i haven't, and that quote doesn't make any logical sense. It's like saying "Because i am alive, i am the god of my universe" what ever the fuck the word 'god' means to you.



Personal truths? Which means personal perception of reality. Your personal perception of reality doesn't change the actual reality. All you are talking about is semantics, giving things their own meaning.



Personally i couldn't care less what individuals delusional believes are as long as they don't try to control or subjugate others into it.



What if every time you see a rainbow it was created by unicorns hopping around and farting? What if the theory of gravity is bullshit and what actually keeps us bound to the ground are angles holding us down?

Like i said, you can give what ever meaning to anything if it makes you happier, but all you spew is semantics.



Care to show at what point did i claim what i said was absolute? Factual and absolute are two different things if you didn't know. And it should (at least i assumed, but i guess not) be obvious that scientific theories aren't absolute, but theories that are universally accepted, studied, reasoned, argued for and agreed upon are called scientific facts, like evolution for example.



You say i use 'imo' a lot and supposedly know what i means, and then you also claim that i said what i said to be absolute. Odd huh?

You do know this is Serious Discussion right? Am i not allowed to discuss here, because princesses like you get offended too easily? Aren't we supposed to discuss here and not simply state our thoughts like in the Random section? I am not trying to be politically neutral, i am trying to be correct.

@coconutt I really can't be bothered to reply this by the usual quote and rebuke way, so do forgive me. However my arguments should be in a chronological order that will be interpretable by yourself. If not, my apologies and also the quote button is there for you to clarify.

1. You hit the nail on the head. A simpler way to say that is, "I think, therefore I am." I am the God of my observable universe. Please refrain from using uncouth words, but in response to what 'God' is to me, well I believe we can both agree from the dictionary's definition. Being :
The creator and ruler of the universe. Source of all moral authority.

2. I do agree it is semantics, however, can you prove that your actual reality exists? I can prove that my reality exists to myself, because I am experiencing it right now. Your reality is also what you interpret from this 'actual reality', that supposedly exists.

3. Neither do I, and I guess we can both agree on that. A little hiccup though, if you live in a world where there is 7 billion supposedly delusional people, are you the sane one?

4. This is probably a repeat of what I said in point 1, but yes, semantics again. What I don't understand is, why do you seek to correct others for theirs? (Which is somewhat an indirect violation of code that you live by, mentioned in point 3)

5. I was not aware that they were 2 different things, but since you brought it up, it seems like they are. Fine, we will go by that. One thing that irks me abit, is your mentioning of 'universally accepted'. There are a number of ways I can target that, but my main issue with it is: Who else is out there who shares the same 'theory' as us? Moving on, fine example indeed, however I would not be so hasty as to assume evolution is a fact,that is if your definition of universally accepted, reasoning, studying, arguing and agreeing upon still applies to 'fact'. Alas, we are not here to talk about evolution, but the topic at hand. I do admit that I did not specify/ was not specific enough in my argument, and I do agree with your scientific theory even with the flaws I pointed out earlier. The main thing that strikes me here again, is your violation of the code you mentioned in point 3. As I was addressing your factual demands, I noticed that you do what you hate, correcting and forcing others to believe your universally accepted facts.

4. Perhaps the tone of my argument was not able to convey across technology, but I was in fact, mocking your 'absolute truth'. For your sake, and for mine, I would like to bluntly point out, that there was some subtle sarcasm in my statement. Also, I need your explaination on how 'imo' and 'absolute truths' are linked, and how they are odd. I personally do not find anything odd with mentioning those 2 things, so I seek clarification.

I might have clicked on the wrong link, but I am quite sure I landed in serious discussion, thank you for caring. Yes you are allowed to discuss here, but not on your terms. People seek for discussion, not words thrown around that agitate or infuriate others. Also, on behalf of the large male demographic here, it is impossible for a male to be a princess, in case you didn't know.
( we can have another discussion about that another time, if need be.) Again, you are allowed. However, our thoughts are the discussion. Every single word here should be typed out with meticulous care and thought, for discussion.
On one very second last note, correct to who? Correct to yourself? (Please do note there might be a hint of sarcasm here, but it is up to your interpretation)
On the last note, despite all the rebuttals, you failed to answered the most important one that I think was embodied in my last post, have you watched 'the Truman show' ?

Edit: I realised point 3 might be misleading, but it refers to the response of the 3rd quote in the post above.

You are the source of all moral authority for yourself? Sure.

The creator and ruler of the universe? No.

You didn't create the universe you occupy currently. You have no control of what happens in the universe you occupy currently (apart from your own actions). You didn't have any control over what so ever in deciding whether you would become to existence. Do you think once you die all of existence seizes to exist? I can assure you we all will be here once you have passed away.



There is no 'my' actual reality. I simply live and exist in the reality that is. My world view is based on what science tells us, not what makes me feel better. Anybody can say that "i enjoy watching stars" and feel good about it, but once you say or claim that the stars in the sky exist so that we humans could enjoy it, that is a false statement and contradicts science. It is a claim you can't prove, it is purely subjective.



If the 7 billion people are actually delusional by the standard established by medical scientist for example, and i am not delusional then yes, i would be the sane one.



This is a discussion board where we discuss variety of topics where we can either simply state our own opinion on the matter or we can directly quote others and correct them through our own opinions. Those who care to respond to the corrected arguments can do so, but if they don't want to they don't have to and the conversation ends.

Me not caring what other people think for one is a broad statement meant for people who i don't know or who don't effect my life, and even to my friends. If my friends ideology doesn't effect our friendship, it never comes up in our way, whether i agree with him or not doesn't matter, and therefore i don't care what his/her personal beliefs are and i even respect his/her right to have the belief.

Second, it is not a code i live by. Just because i don't care which team wins in a football game, doesn't mean i can't enjoy the game. Just because i don't care what other peoples personal beliefs are, doesn't mean i can't enjoy debating about ideas with them.



I don't know. I don't know what you mean by that question.



Evolution is a scientific fact, not an absolute fact.

"Universally accepted, studied, reasoned, argued for and agreed upon" as in there is a scientific consensus that evolution is the most reliably established theory to explain how animal species evolved to their current state. The wording 'most' means it is not an absolute fact.



You haven't pointed out any flaws.



Firstly, it is not a code i live by.

Secondly, i don't do what i hate, i do what i like.

Thirdly, i don't force anybody to believe anything. I have no control over what so ever as to how people judge my arguments.



I have not mentioned any absolute truths.



If i state somewhere in the sentence that "this is my opinion," that is a direct contradiction to saying something is absolute. It is odd for you to claim i state both, even more odd when i have never stated anything i have said in this topic to be an absolute truth.



I am discussing on the terms of this website.



It is not my fault certain words agitate or infuriate others. Don't participate in discussions that agitate or infuriate you.



The words you just threw that implies that i didn't know males cannot be princesses agitates and infuriates me, should you therefore be removed from the discussion?

(I would like to bluntly point out, that there was some subtle sarcasm in my statement.)



I do just that, type with meticulous care and thought.



Correct to reality.



No

The stars were being placed in the heavens for a reason, but Coyote came along and stole the stars, ran across the sky spilling them as he went. That is why the reason why they are there makes no sense to anyone. Or that is just simply the visible part of the Universe that exploded out from the big bang...or spill.

A star is a luminous sphere of plasma held together by its own gravity. (taken from Wikipedia)

There really isn't more to it. Why are they there we have no definite idea why, but they are there and stars are stars. You can say for human enjoyment or some other crazy thing but that is an individual belief not a truth.

Actually I think this is the point of the thread. If there is a child in you, what does that child want to believe about the night sky? NutritiousGoop was talking about spirituality which isn't the same thing but looking at it this way is at least closer to what she meant. People are taking it a little too seriously.

If that's the case then the title and the forum section need a change.