Every individual has their own perspective of what the meaning of life truly is. To be fair, no one will really ever know the answer to this complex question. To have meaning to some activity, there must be a purpose or a goal. One must do something that is fulfilling one’s life. A problem with this question is that it is not clear what sort of answer is being looked for. One common question is “what is it that makes life worth living?” There are a number of subjective answers to this question. Think of all the reasons why you are glad to be alive (assuming you are), and there is the potential meaning of your life. Some have attempted to answer this question in a more objective way, that is to have an idea of what constitutes a “good life,” or a life everyone desires. It seems reasonable to say that some ways of living are not beneficial to the growth of humanity. Another way of rephrasing the question is “what is the purpose of life?” Again, we all have our own subjective purposes but some would like to think there is a higher purpose provided for us, perhaps by a “creator,” as I will get more into detail with when I discuss John Cottingham's perspective from his book On the Meaning of Life.
In the “why are we here?” sense of the question, I believe there is no answer. It would be wrong, however, to conclude that life is meaningless. However, some individuals might argue that life is in fact meaningless and the human population is a mere speck with little to no relevance to our universe; essentially, what happens in our Earth stays in our Earth. We exist because we evolve, but we may have no purpose to life. I believe humans have made a purpose and meaning to live. If there was not a human population on Earth, would we really matter? I will argue that a life of meaning is one devoted to the pursuits we take on for their own sake, as Schlick equates these pursuits with “play.” This paper also explores the idea John Cottingham reflects on that human existence is in fact mysterious and I will disagree with the argument that without a god there would be no objective moral principles and without those principles life is meaningless. Furthermore, without a god, we could not achieve moral ends and without doing so, life is meaningless.
The Questions of Life
One of the characteristics of living a human life is that we put into question the experience of our existence. We have innate questions toward our existence and we constantly reflect on our experiences, in hopes of finding “the answer” of how we became and why we are here.We desire to make sense of life, and we want to understand its underlying purpose so we can give meaning to it; we want to know why we are here and if our existence even matters in the bigger picture. Furthermore, the nature of our existence is that we find ourselves brought into the world without having the choice of wanting to be here. We do not have complete control over our lives and the world around us. A tragedy makes us question why we are here as well. For example, when a close friend has died in a car accident, or a baby has been miscarried at the third trimester of pregnancy, we question why these things happen. We look for a meaning to these unanswered questions in order to reinstate hope in our lives. We lack the understanding of why the world presents itself to us in the way that it does. The bottom line is, the nature of existence is continually a mystery to us, as John Cottingham would argue. Although we do not have a complete understanding of life and cannot see the world from an outside perspective, there are ways in which we interpret our existence. The claims presented by disciplines such as philosophy, science, and religion offer descriptions of human existence. They all present to us a reflection of our humanity and what it means to live life. Given the variety of answers offered for the question “what is the meaning of life?” we have not come up with one universally accepted answer. However, through the process of questioning the desire to understand our existence, we can gain insight into how we interpret existence and choose to give meaning to life. This paper is not intended to present a clear, definitive answer to the meaning of life or suggest that there is only one conclusion. Instead it is meant to look at different perspectives of how we interpret life and try to understand what these perspectives have in common.
Perspectives of Life Through Science
For centuries, humans have used different perspectives to explain and analyze the experience of life, struggling to understand their existence. These perspectives have changed and evolved greatly throughout the ages. In the beginning, myth and religion were the primary ways to interpret life and give meaning. They answered such questions as “why are we here?” and “where did we come from?” They provided a spiritually based purpose for the meaning of life.
Science could easily be argued to hold on to grand interpretations of existence for the Western World. It has offered us a logical explanation for existence, as well as a mechanical structure of the world we live in. It has been extremely beneficial in regard to the advancements of technology, and has heavily influenced the evolution of civilization into and through the modern era. Science has changed our understanding of reality. What was once strictly mythological and religious understanding has evolved to include a more rational and logical approach. Most of the progress made in understanding and interpreting the world through this approach has been almost exclusively within the last few centuries. To the question “why are we here?” science argues that humans are one of many species on an evolutionary path through time which started from the big bang. For example, here is a brief summary from a scientific explanation of life excerpted from John Cottingham’s, On the Meaning of Life (2009):
“About fourteen billion years ago, the cosmos – all that there is, including matter, radiation, space and time … Later, gravitational effects caused matter to clump into hydrogen masses (galaxies, stars) and the hydrogen to start fusing into helium… On at least one planet, a self-replicating molecule arose. The descendants of this molecule evolved into living organisms… which diversified into all kinds of plants, animals, microbes… After millions of years one such species became intelligent.” (p.93).
This perspective has been put together from the analysis of fossils and studying various attributes of the universe. Many scientists believe that the purpose of human life is self determined and granted through the ability to create a rational understanding of the world. It is the human population’s goal to further develop our understanding of the world. Science wants to progress our knowledge about the world, in order to enable a fully developed explanation of existence.
Life is Youth
Many famous philosophers have their own take on what the meaning of life is. Famous 19th century German philosopher, Moritz Schlick, argued that the meaning of life is to be found in activities that are intrinsically valuable. Schlick quotes Friedrich Schiller that play is the activity that carries its own purpose and work is any activity undertaken solely in order to realize some purpose. Only when we have no purpose except to play will there be meaning. Work can be play, if it is doing what you want to do. Play and creative work may coincide, and creative play is found clearly in the work of the artist. Almost any activity can be turned into art and Schlick wants work to become artistic. Schlick desires for a world in which individuals engage in meaningful, joyful, and playful work. Schlick says we don’t sacrifice by playing; life becomes meaningful if we do what we want to do. The result is joy, which is more than mere pleasure. Schlick also argues that knowing is the “pure play of spirit” and the day's necessities are “devoid of spirit.” He says the meaning of life is found in joyful play. This is an interesting take on the meaning of life; it takes a more holistic, tangible view on how to explain our existence. Schlick’s explanation for meaning is an easy concept to see and comprehend, compared to the stance John Cottingham takes on the meaning of life from a religious perspective.
Meaning Within Religion
Philosopher John Cottingham defends a “supernatural,” or religious perspective of meaning. He claims that being moral is necessary for meaning in life, but does not believe that it is enough; something else is needed for a life to be meaningful (Cottingham, 2009). Cottingham gives two reasons for thinking that a moral life is not sufficient for a meaningful life. First, Cottingham argues that life’s endeavors must be successful in order to be meaningful. Second, he argues that morality must be instilled in a god who enforces moral rules that are eternal in order for our lives to truly have significance. These two claims are used as a reply to those who would support a “naturalistic” account, or a western worldview, of meaning. He also argues that belief in their existence is necessary in order to encourage us to engage in moral activities, that is, the promise of eternal justice and eternal life inspires us to be moral, such as in an afterlife (Cottingham, 2009). Cottingham claims that life cannot be meaningful without a god or a soul, and that such beliefs motivate us to be moral. Religion encourages the moral actions and religious beliefs that give life meaning, as John Cottingham (2009) states:
… because of the fragility of our human condition, we need more than a rational determination to orient ourselves towards the good. We need to be sustained by a faith in the ultimate resilience of the good… Nothing in life is guaranteed, but if the path we follow is integrally linked…then we have little to lose… For in acting as if life has meaning, we will find, thank God, that it does,” (p.56).
To conclude, Cottingham argues that without a belief in a god, we would lose encouragement to be a person with morals, and therefore, not able to find meaning in life.
My Thoughts
For the perspective of Moritz Schlick, I agree that a life of meaning is one devoted to the pursuits we take on for their own sake, as Schlick equates these pursuits with “play.” The latter claim suggests that even older people can be “youthful,” as they can engage in the activities that Schlick calls “play.” However, I disagree with the argument that “children are the purest joy.” I think the purest joy comes from what is intrinsically good for you and what give you the most fulfillment in your life. Schlick claims day's necessities are “devoid of spirit” which I claim can be false if you find joy in those necessities, even if it is a mundane task, such as eating. Eating, although everyone must eat to survive and it is considered a day’s necessity, you can find pleasure within this task. Your job could give your life meaning if you are saving people’s lives or giving them hope and encouragement through prayer. These are examples of “mundane tasks,” yet there is room for intrinsic pleasure and happiness if you find joy in doing it.
John Cottingham’s argument states that without a god there would be no objective moral principles and without those principles life is meaningless (Cottingham, 2009). Also, without a god, we could not achieve moral ends and without doing so life is meaningless. A criticism of Cottingham’s argument is this may be helpful and beneficial for people who believe in religion or a higher being, by giving them a sense of hope, but what happens to those individuals whom do not believe in a “higher power?” I think there can definitely be a meaning to life without a higher power, as well as being a moral human without a belief in a higher power. Morals and ethics are based on the individual’s personal beliefs. Some people believe it is moral and ethical to help everyone in a group setting during a catastrophe, while some individuals, such as philosopher Nietzsche, attacks any morality that supports values that harm the ‘higher’ type of person and benefits the masses. These types of individuals believe only certain people should be saved if they have reached a higher power. Whatever your perspective on morals and ethics may be, the meaning of life should derive from what gives you the most intrinsic pleasure and happiness. I disagree with John Cottingham that meaning is only given to life through a god. God is a figure that has been created through ancient stories and used as teachings. These teachings were passed on and made into a practice that people have chosen to follow for thousands of years, for example Christianity and Catholicism. The idea that religion is the only way to have morals and ethics is absurd. Afterall, religion has the power to cause mass destruction and wars as it has for centuries. Many people have been killed and ousted due to religion.
Cottingham’s argument that objective morals derive from religion is a bold argument to make considering religion is very controversial and versatile. People have their own perspective and take on religion, but it is not necessary to believe in a higher power in order to have morals and ethics. John Cottingham’s argument appears to be saying that if we did not have religion at all, then there would be no morals or ethics in existence. This is also an absurd statement because morals and ethics give meaning to life. For example, a doctor is given a patient who needs a kidney within one week or the patient will die. This is where the morals and ethics aspect comes in; the doctor is not going to let the patient die without doing everything he can first. This gives meaning to the doctor’s life. The doctor’s sole job for the rest of his life is to save people while morally and ethically doing whatever he can to protect, help, and save his patient’s life. In contrast to Cottingham’s argument, religion is not necessary to have the objective principles for living a moral life. A great example of this is food; food give you intrinsic pleasure, it is not necessarily religious, and it is an everyday task, yet people get great pleasure of food. You can have meaning to life as long as what you do becomes a joy for you, not a mundane task.
Closing Statement
As this paper explores the idea of if there is a meaning to life and what that meaning may be, it is important to establish that everyone has their own way to find a meaning, however, I would argue that some people do not ever get the chance to establish what the meaning in their life is. This would result in suicide; their meaning is never found and therefore what do they have to live for if there is nothing for them to live for. There is the argument that they may have children, and there is the universal thought that your own children are “worth living for,” but how can someone tell a parent that they must live for their children when the parent cannot find meaning in their life to live for their children. I believe meaning is always found eventually, but sometimes it is not found soon enough, which wold therefore potentially lead to suicide.
Although both Schlick and Cottingham’s arguments have many flaws to them, I believe that both of their arguments make great points. The conclusion of these arguments is that everyone has the ability to find a meaning to their life, however sometimes meaning is not found “fast enough” before that individual ceases to exist due to death. I believe there is a spectrum to meaning, and this spectrum depends on your welfare. The meaning of your life positively correlates with your lifestyle, despite f you pick up garbage the rest of your life or you save lives for the rest of your life. Everything is relative as long as it is intrinsically good for you and gives you the most pleasure and enjoyment in your life. This can differ for the individual, as I stated earlier in this paper, there is no definitive answer to what the meaning of life is. I believe everyone has a meaning in their life, however, some individuals figure out what their meaning of life is before others do. Sometimes meaning comes through in the most random way, but everyone has meaning to their lives. What is our point to exist if we have no meaning to fulfill. After all, we have kept our population growing and evolving for millions of years. Surely there is meaning to our existence.