Difference between revisions of "Meaning of life" - New World Encyclopedia

Revision as of 14:07, 24 October 2007

The question of the meaning of life is perhaps the most fundamental “why?” in human existence. It relates to the purpose, use, value, and reason for individual existence and that of the universe.

Accordingly, it represents one of the most often debated issues in the philosophical and existential discourse. The issue affects humans even more directly and intimately than the question about the origin of the universe and the age-old question, “why is there something rather than nothing?” – though in the end all these questions converge. The immense variety of answers given to that question can be divided into three overall categories. The essentialist position states that a purpose is given to our life, usually by a Supreme Being; the existentialist position emphasizes the need for human beings to give meaning to life through their existential choices; and finally the skeptic position questions whether there is any purpose to life at all, a position that is brought to its completion in nihilism. The inherent difficulty in finding personal certainty, let alone agreement with others, on this key issue is one of the most vexing problems facing humankind. It is a major challenge to personal fulfillment and a obvious obstacle to the possible achievement of world peace and harmony.

Approaches

Nearly as important as the perspectives are the approaches through which the question is asked. The various positions can be considered from a theoretical or philosophical perspective and lead to systematic answers. More fundamentally yet, the issue is often perceived to be a matter of personal sense, belief or intuition, one that does not lead to answers that can be formulated in rational language, but to the feeling that one’s life makes sense or doesn’t.

In terms of philosophical discussion, the meaning of life issue chiefly consists of attempts to answer questions such as: "What is the origin of life?" "What is the nature of life (and of the universe in which we live)?" "What is the significance of life?" "What is the purpose of life?" and "What is valuable in life?" These questions have resulted in a wide range of competing answers and arguments, from scientific theories to philosophical, theological, and spiritual explanations.

However, when compared with the related questions about the origin and purpose of life, the specific question about its meaning is least accessible to scientific investigation. Questions about the origin and nature of the universe have long ago been acknowledged to need more than dogmatic answers from philosophy and religion. Scientific investigation of, and theories about, the origin and nature of the world have begun to take the upper hand centuries ago. Philosophy and religion were forced to take into account the data and systematic answers provided by science. Whenever they didn’t, they became irrelevant and obsolete. The role of philosophy became that of offering a meaningful explanation of possible solutions suggested by science, leading to the question of the purpose of life. Even there, scientific data and systematization could play a significant role in suggesting the possible presence or absence of purpose based on observed patterns.

Though meaning and purpose are nearly synonymous, “meaning” of life puts the emphasis on the sense one sees in life or the sense one decides to put into it. Thus, whether one considers that there is a given purpose to life or whether one believes that there is none, its meaning will always involve a subjective judgment – what life is to me. Accordingly, theories that only emphasize what the essence of life is supposed to be regardless of my perception have been met with increasing suspicion. Thus, even in the most essentialist position (e.g., a theistic belief that God gave a purpose to the world), an existential element will almost inevitably be present (e.g., what do I do with that given purpose, how do I relate to it).

Scientific approaches to the meaning of life

The question about the meaning of life can also be understood as the question about what “life” is (compared to inanimate matter). For this, refer to the article on life.

Science cannot possibly give a direct answer to the question of meaning. There are, strictly speaking, no scientific views on the meaning of biological life other than its observable biological function: to continue. Like a judge confronted with a conflict of interests, the honest scientist will always make the difference between his personal opinions or feelings and the extent to which science can support of undermine these beliefs. That extent is limited to the discovery of ways in which things (including human life) came into being and objectively given, observable laws and patterns that might hint at a certain origin and/or purpose forming the ground for possible meaning.

What is the origin of life?

The question "What is the origin of life?" is addressed in the sciences in the areas of abiogenesis (for the origins of biological life) and cosmogeny (for the origins of the universe). Both of these areas are quite hypothetical, cosmogeny because no existing physical model can accurately describe the very early universe (the instant of the Big Bang), and abiogenesis because the environment of the young earth is not known, and because the conditions and chemical processes that may have taken billions of years to produce life cannot (as of yet) be reproduced in a laboratory. It is therefore not surprising that scientists have been tempted to use available data both to support and to oppose the notion that there is a given purpose to the emergence of the cosmos.

What is the nature of life?

Toward answering "What is the nature of life (and of the universe in which we live)?", scientists have proposed various theories or worldviews over the centuries, including the heliocentric view by Copernicus and Galileo, through the mechanistic clockwork universe of René Descartes and Isaac Newton, to Albert Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, to the Quantum Mechanics of Heisenberg and Schrödinger in an effort to understand the universe in which we live.

Near the end of the 20th century, equipped with insights from the gene-centered view of evolution, biologists began to suggest that in so far as there may be a primary function to life, it is the survival of genes. In this approach, success isn't measured in terms of the survival of species, but one level deeper, in terms of the successful replication of genes over the eons, from one species to the next, and so on. Such positions do not and cannot address the issue of the presence or absence of a purposeful origin, hence meaning.

What is valuable in life?

Science may not be able to tell us what is most valuable in life in a philosophical sense, but some studies bear on related questions: Researchers in "positive psychology" study factors that lead to life satisfaction (and before them less rigorously in Humanistic Psychology), in Social psychology factors that lead to infants thriving or failing to thrive, and in other areas of psychology questions of motivation, preference, and what people value; economists have learned a great deal about what is valued in the marketplace; and sociology examines value at a social level using theoretical constructs such as value theory, norms, anomie, etc.

What is the purpose of, or in, (one's) life?"

Natural scientists look for the purpose of life within the structure and function of life itself. This question also falls upon social scientists to answer. They attempt to do so by studying and explaining the behaviors and interactions of human beings (and every other type of animal as well). Again, science is limited to the search for elements that promote the purpose of a specific life form (individuals and societies), but these findings can only be suggestive when it comes to the overall purpose and meaning.

Analysis of teleology based on science

Teleology is a philosophical and theological study of purpose in nature. Traditional philosophy and Christian theology in particular have always had a strong tendency to affirm teleological positions, based on observation and belief. Since David Hume’s skepticism and Immanuel Kant’s agnostic conclusions in the 18th century, the use of teleological considerations to prove the existence of a purpose, hence a purposeful creator of the universe, has been seriously challenged. Purpose-oriented thinking, the challenge goes, is a natural human tendency which Kant already acknowledged, but that does not make it legitimate as a scientific explanation of things. In other words, teleology can be accused of amounting to wishful thinking.

The alleged "debunking" of teleology in science received a fresh impetus from advances in biological knowledge such as the publication of Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species (i.e. natural selection). Best-selling author and evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins puts forward his explanation based on such findings. Ironically, it is also science that has recently given a new impetus to teleological thinking by providing data strongly suggesting the impossibility of random development in the creation of the universe and the appearance of life (e.g., the Anthropic Principle).

Philosophy of the meaning of life

While scientific approaches to the meaning of life aim to describe relevant empirical facts about human existence, philosophers are concerned about the relationship between ideas such as the proper interpretation of empirical data. Philosophers have considered such questions as: "Is the question 'What is the meaning of life?' a meaningful question?"; "What does it really mean?"; and "If there are no objective values, then is life meaningless?" Some philosophical disciplines have also aimed to develop an understanding of life that explains, regardless of how we came to be here, what we should do now that we are here.

Since the question about life’s meaning inevitably leads to the question of a possible divine origin to life, philosophy and theology are inextricably linked on this issue. Whether the answer to the question about a divine creator is yes, no, or “not applicable”, the question will come up. Nevertheless, philosophy and religion significantly differ in much of their approach to the question. Hence, they will be treated separately.

Essentialist views

Essentialist views have this in common that they start with the assumption that there is a common essence in human beings, human nature, and that this nature is the starting point for any evaluation of the meaning of life. In classic philosophy, from Plato’s idealism to Descartes’ rationalism, humans have been seen as rational beings or “rational animals.” Conforming to that inborn quality is then seen as the aim of life.

Reason, in that context, also has a strong value-oriented and ethical connotation. Philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, Descartes, Spinoza, and many others had views about what sort of life was best (and hence most meaningful). Aristotle believed that the pursuit of happiness was the Highest Good and that such is achievable through our uniquely human capacity to reason. The notion of the highest good as the rational aim in life can still be found in later thinkers like Kant. A strong ethical connotation can be found in the Ancient Stoics, while Epicureanism saw the meaning of life in the search for the highest pleasure or happiness.

All these views have in common the assumption that it is possible to discover, then practice, whatever is seen as the highest good through rational insight, hence the term “philosophy” (love of wisdom). With Plato, the wisdom to discover the true meaning of life is found in connection with the notion of the immortal soul that completes its course in earthly life once it liberates itself from the futile earthly goals. In this, Plato prefigures a theme that would be essential in Christianity, that of God-given eternal life, as well as the notion that the soul is good and the flesh evil, or at least a hindrance to the fulfillment of one’s true goal. At the same time, the concept that one has to rise above deceptive appearances to reach a proper understanding of life’s meaning has links to Eastern and Far Eastern traditions.

In medieval and modern philosophy, the Platonic and Aristotelian views were incorporated in a worldview centered on the theistic concept of the Will of God as the determinant factor for the meaning of our life, which was then seen as achieving moral perfection in ways pleasing to God. Modern philosophy came to experience considerable struggle in its attempt to make this view compatible with the rational discourse of a philosophy free of any prejudice. With Immanuel Kant, the given of a God and his will fell away as a possible rational certainty. Certainty concerning purpose and meaning were moved from God to the immediacy of consciousness and conscience, as epitomized in Kant’s teaching of the categorical imperative. This development would gradually lead to the later supremacy of an existentialist discussion of the meaning of life, since such a position starts with the self and its choices, rather than with a purpose given “from above.”

The emphasis on meaning as destiny, rather than choice, would one more time flourish in early 19th century’s German Idealism, notably in the philosophy of Hegel where the overall purpose of history is seen as the embodiment of the Absolute Spirit in human society.

Existentialist views

Main article: Existentialism

Existentialist views concerning the meaning of life are based on the idea that it is only my personal choices and commitments that can give any meaning to life since, for me, life can only be “my” life, and not an abstractly given entity. By going this route, existentialist thinkers seek to avoid the trappings of dogmatism and pursue a more genuine route. That road, however, is inevitably filled with doubt and hesitation. With the refusal of committing oneself to an externally given ideal comes the limitation of certainty to that alone which one chooses.

Presenting essentialism and existentialism as strictly divided currents would undoubtedly amount to a caricature, hence such a distinction can only be seen as defining a general trend. It is very clear, however, that philosophical thought from the mid-19th century on has been strongly marked by the influence of existentialism. At the same time, the motives of dread, loss, uncertainty, and anguish in the face of an existence that needs to be constructed “out of nothing” have become predominant. These developments also need to be studied in the context of modern and contemporary historical events leading to the World Wars.

A universal existential contact with the question of meaning is found in situations of extreme distress, where all expected goals and purposes are shattered, including one’s most cherished hopes and convictions. The individual is then left with the burning question whether there still remains an even more fundamental, self-transcending meaning to existence. In many instances, such existential crises have been the starting point for a qualitative transformation of one’s perceptions.

Søren Kierkegaard invented the term "leap of faith" and argued that life is full of absurdity and the individual must make his or her own values in an indifferent world. For Kierkegaard, an individual can have a meaningful life (or at least one free of despair) if the individual relates the self in an unconditional commitment despite the inherent vulnerability of doing so in the midst our doubt. Genuine meaning is thus possible once the individual reaches the third, or religious, stage of life. Kirkegaard’s sincere commitment, far remote from any ivory tower philosophy, brings him into close contact with religious-philosophical approaches in the Far East, such as that of Buddhism, where the attainment of true meaning in life is only possible when the individual passes through several stages before reaching enlightenment that is fulfillment in itself, without any guarantee given from the outside (such as the certainty of salvation).

Though not generally categorized as an existentialist philosopher, Arthur Schopenhauer offered his own bleak answer to "what is the meaning of life?" by determining one's visible life as the reflection of one's will and the Will (and thus life) as being an aimless, irrational, and painful drive. The essence of reality is thus seen by Schopenhauer as totally negative, the only promise of salvation, deliverance, or at least escape from suffering being found in world-denying existential attitudes such as aesthetic contemplation, sympathy for others, and asceticism.

20th century thinkers like Martin Heidegger and Jean-Paul Sartre are representative of a more extreme form of existentialism where the existential approach takes place within the framework of atheism, rather than Christianity. Gabriel Marcel on the other hand is an example of Christian existentialism. For Paul Tillich, the meaning of life is given by one’s inevitable pursuit of some ultimate concern, whether it takes on the traditional form of religion or not. Existentialism is thus an orientation of the mind that can be filled with the greatest variety of content, leading to vastly different conclusions. For a detailed analysis, see separate articles on existentialism and these authors.

Skeptical and nihilist views

Skepticism

Skepticism has always been a strong undercurrent in the history of thought, as uncertainty about meaning and purpose has always existed even in the context of the strongest commitment to a certain view. Skepticism can also be called an everyday existential reality for every human being, alongside whatever commitments or certainties there may be. To some, it takes on the role of doubt to be overcome or endured. To others, it leads to a negative conclusion concerning our possibility of making any credible claim about the meaning of our life.

Skepticism in philosophy has existed since Antiquity where it formed several schools of thought in Greece and in Rome. Until recent times, however, overt skepticism has remained a minority position. With the collapse of traditional certainties, skepticism has become increasingly prominent in social and cultural life. Ironically, because of its very nature of denying the possibility of certain knowledge, it is not a position that has produced major thinkers, at least not in its pure form.

The philosophy of Ludwig Wittgenstein and logical positivism, as well as the whole tradition of analytical philosophy represent a particular form of skepticism in that they challenge the very meaningfulness of questions like “the meaning of life,” questions that do not involve verifiable statements.

Nihilism

Whereas skepticism denies the possibility of certain knowledge and thus rejects any affirmative statement about the meaning of life, nihilism amounts to a flat denial of such meaning or value. Friedrich Nietzsche characterized nihilism as emptying the world and especially human existence of meaning, purpose, comprehensible truth, or essential value. The term nihilism itself comes from the Latin nihil, which means "nothing".

Nihilism thus explores the notion of existence without meaning. Though nihilism tends toward defeatism, one can find strength and reason for celebration in the varied and unique human relationships it explores. From a nihilist point of view, morals are valueless and only hold a place in society as false ideals created by various forces. The characteristic that distinguishes nihilism from other skeptical or relativist philosophies is that, rather than merely insisting that values are subjective or even unwarranted, nihilism declares that nothing is of value, as the name implies.

Religious views

Main articles: Religion and Religious humanism

Religion is such an integral and fundamental part of every culture that all views about life, philosophical or not, are rooted to some extent in religious belief, theological doctrine, or mystical experience – even if it is to deny them. However, the religious traditions of the world have offered their own doctrinal responses to the question about life’s meaning. These answers, which were elaborated upon by thinkers and philosophers, also remain independently as core statements based on the claim to be the product of revelation or enlightenment, rather than human reflection.

Probably the most universal teachings concerning the meaning of life, to be followed in virtually all religions, are the "The Golden Rule" (do unto others…) and the requirement not to indulge in the material aspect of life. It is important to note that these two constitutive elements of any religious view of meaning are common to all religious and spiritual traditions, including the non-theistic ones, such as Buddhism and Confucianism.

God and the purpose of Creation

The meaning of life and the afterlife

There are many different interpretations to the sacred texts of Judaism, Christianity ad Islam. Therefore, one also finds many interpretations to the meaning of life. However, reaching Heaven in the afterlife can be seen as a universal meaning of life or goal for followers of Abrahamic religions.

The question of eternal life is related to that of the purpose for God’s creation of the world and humankind. The notion of self-destruction at one’s death indeed creates a practically insuperable obstacle to a wholly optimistic outlook and to the full and complete affirmation that there is meaning in life – precisely because life’s meaning would appear to be destroyed along with life itself. Even the belief that one lives on through one’s good deeds and through one’s descendents eventually refers us to the question of their own mortality. The sense that one’s good actions (whatever may be defined as such) have value and meaning as such, regardless of any further consideration, can remain as an intuitive certainty, but does not offer an explanation. Hence, the immense significance of religious teachings about the afterlife.

Significantly, since rational investigation of this theme is very difficult if not impossible due to lack of available experiments, even Christian philosophers have often refrained from engaging this topic too deeply.

To "be fruitful, and multiply; fill the earth, and subdue it"

An example of how religion creates purpose can be found in the biblical story of creation in the Old Testament of the Bible: the purpose for humankind comes from their relationship to God and the fulfillment of God’s purpose for creation, "Be fruitful, and multiply; fill the earth, and subdue it" Genesis 1:28. These first three divine commands as expressed in the biblical text indicate that there is a direct relationship between our goal in life and the expectation of the divine Creator. A lack of clarity ensues from the fact that, in biblical language, humankind fell from grace into sin and lost the ability to fulfill that goal. Seen with secular eyes, this means that it is difficult for people to accept the ideal of such a purpose or meaning of life based on simple observation of the world situation. Also, the notion of a God-given purpose that has become impossible to achieve leads to the problem of Theodicy, i.e., the question how an omnipotent and benevolent God has not been able or willing to prevent evil from coming into being.

Atheistic views

Main article: Atheism

Atheism in its strictest sense means the belief that no God or Supreme Being (of any type or number) exists, and by extension that neither the universe nor its inhabitants were created by such a Being. Because atheists reject supernatural explanations for the existence of life, lacking a deistic source, they commonly point to blind abiogenesis as the most likely source for the origin of life. As for the purpose of life, there is no one particular atheistic view. Some atheists argue that since there are no gods to tell us what to value, we are left to decide for ourselves. Other atheists argue that some sort of meaning can be intrinsic to life itself, so the existence or non-existence of God is irrelevant to the question (a version of Socrates’ Euthyphro dilemma). Some believe that life is nothing more than a byproduct of insensate natural forces and has no underlying meaning or grand purpose. Other atheists are non-cognitivist towards the question, believing that talking about meaning without specifying "meaning to whom" is an incoherent or incomplete thought (this can also fit with the idea of choosing the meaning of life for oneself).

Humanistic views

Humanism covers a variety of positions that exceeds any possible discussion in the present context. Secular humanism, as expressed, for instance, in the Humanist Manifestos is a vision based on the assumption that life emerged through an entirely unguided (hence, not divine) mechanism and that meaning and values are to be derived from human needs. It has been said that enlightened self-interest is at the core of such forms of humanism. The original doctrine of this type of humanism is set forth in the Humanist Manifesto and has been revised and refined in A Secular Humanist Declaration, the Humanist Manifesto II, and the Humanist Manifesto III (in which humanism is referred to as a life stance).

Sapiential meaning of life

In some esoteric strands of world religions, one encounters the meaning of life as "play". The most notable of this is Hinduism's notion of lila (literally, "play"). This is the suggestion that the meaning of life is not a final goal which can be arrived at in time, but rather a sort of game in which every being is unwittingly playing. Although it is pleasurable or fulfilling to 'win' the game of existence (at the end of one's life or at the end of time), the game itself, like music, dance, or sport, creates meaning as it moves through time. Play can also be understood in the sense that humans are the helpless objects of the playing of God(s). Such notions can be found in various traditions, notably in the biblical book of Job.

The notion of life as a play, or the play of God(s) can have a very pessimistic overtone, as in the Ancient Greek notion of fate, since play and especially being the object of playing excludes any meaningful purpose or direction. However, as found in the works of German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, playing like a child also has the connotation of freedom from the bondage of intentional, willful striving. It can be seen as the symbol of fulfillment in the eternal now. It also serves as a counterpart to the often decried matter-of-fact understanding of the teachings of salvation, where that state of fulfillment is seen as the automatic result of a merely formal move into the “right” direction. Meaning in playing can also be understood as expressing one’s condition when the purpose of creation has bee fulfilled through one’s moral responsibility, resulting in the total freedom of timeless enjoyment.

Spiritual and mystical views

The view of mysticism varies widely according to how each speaker describes it. In general the view is broadly that life is a happening, an unfolding. It is a non-dual worldview in which subject and object (notably God and the believer) are the same. This view is central to Buddhism, and is also found in Hinduism. In the Western tradition, it appears with mystics like Meister Eckhart.

The saying attributed to Lao-Tzu, “the Tao that can be named is not the real Tao” well summarized the position of non-dogmatic spirituality and mysticism towards the meaning of life. It is the position that genuine meaning cannot be named or explained, but only lived. In that sense, this orientation can be considered an extreme form of existentialism.

Mythologist Joseph Campbell, in his The Power of Myth interviews answered the question in the following way:

People say what we're all seeking is a meaning for life. I don't think that's what we're really seeking. I think what we're seeking is an experience of being alive so that the life experiences that we have on the purely physical plane will have resonances within, that are those of our own innermost being and reality, so that we actually feel the rapture of being alive.

Artistic and entertainment media treatments

Since the meaning of life is largely a matter of personal experience, it is not surprising that life’s meaning (e.g., joy, beauty) or absence thereof has often been portrayed in art. In Paul Gauguin's painting, Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going? the topic is even expressed explicitly.

The concept of life having a meaning has also been parodied in popular culture. These parodies may be seen as attacks on sincerely held beliefs about life’s purpose. More often than not, it would probably be more accurate to understand them as a satirical description of the self-contradictory, nonsensical and often ridiculous ways in which many people cover up their mediocre and selfish aspirations by “meaning-of-life” talk. An example:

Monty Python's The Meaning of Life: In this comedy, it is suggested that there is no meaning to life. At the very end of the film, Michael Palin is handed an envelope, opens it, and says "Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try to be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try to live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations."

Bibliography

Ayer, A. J. The Meaning of Life. Scribner, 1990. ISBN: 978-0684191959.
Baggini, Julian. What's it all about? : philosophy and the meaning of life. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. ISBN: 9780195300086.
Cameron, Donald Allan. The Purpose of Life. Woodhill Publishing, 2001. ISBN: 978-0954029104.
Dalai Lama; Hopkins, Jeffrey; Gyatso, Tenzin. The Meaning of Life. Wisdom Publications; Revised edition, 2000. ISBN: 978-0861711734.
Darwin, Charles. The Origin Of Species. Signet Classics, 2003. ISBN: 978-0451529060.
Davies, Paul. The Fifth Miracle: The Search for the Origin and Meaning of Life. Simon & Schuster, 2000. ISBN: 978-0684863092.
Dawkins, Richard. The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design. W. W. Norton; reissue edition, 1996. ISBN: 978-0393315707.
Eagleton, Terry. The Meaning of Life. Oxford University Press, USA, 2007. ISBN: 978-0199210701.
Frankl, Viktor E. Man's Search For Meaning. Pocket; 4th edition. December, 1997. ISBN: 978-0671023379.
Goodier, Alban. The Meaning of Life: The Catholic Answer. Sophia Institute Press, 2002. ISBN: 978-1928832614.
Haisch, Bernard. The God Theory: Universes, Zero-point Fields, and What's Behind It All (Preface). Red Wheel/Weiser, 2006. ISBN: 978-1578633746.
Lewis, Louise. No Experts Needed: The Meaning of Life According to You! iUniverse, Inc., 2007. ISBN: 978-0595429714.
Lovatt, Stephen C. New Skins for Old Wine: Plato's Wisdom for Today's World. Universal Publishers, 2007. ISBN: 978-1581129601.
McGrath, Alister. Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life. Blackwell Publishing Limited, 2004. ISBN-13: 978-1405125383.
Vernon, Mark. Science, Religion, and the Meaning of Life. Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. ISBN: 978-0230013414.
Walker, Martin G. LIFE! Why We Exist...And What We Must Do to Survive ([1] Web Site). Dog Ear Publishing, 2006. ISBN 978-1598582437.

External links

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

143160381 ^history

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

History of "Meaning of life"

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.