Hey friends, welcome to the first of the weekly discussions on the newsletter. In this discussion, I want to start off by talking about a big topic.
Meaning and existence. What is the meaning of life? If there's no meaning then what are we supposed to do? Is there a set path for a ‘good’ human to take? I look forward to discussing.
I think the reason this is so hard to agree on is because meaning is relative. There is no such thing as intrinsic meaning, it always depends on what people find important. Moreover, it's pegged to a dynamic person and it changes in itself.
It's a personal thing and can only be discovered when you find out what is important to you. An honest, no BS assessment.
There is no meaning otherwise because a perspective is a hard requirement.
I think there is a difference between finding meaning and holding values. Everyone has varying values which fit with our own personal moral compass and what we find important, but whether this leads us to find meaning is a different debate.
I believe we can think of meaning through the framework of our actions, and more specifically our interactions with others. By being good people (whatever that means!) who act in service of others, we can find meaning and fulfilment.
But of course, different people have different values, different priorities and different opinions, so I'd welcome any other thoughts!
It's interesting because I think we often lean towards an arbitrary norm, like "good people". A psychopath, for example, can derive meaning from the pain of others. Even though societal structures dictate that this is inappropriate behaviour.
I think values are closely coupled to meaning in theory, but not in practice. I think values are how we think we should act and meaning comes from a mixture between that and actions that align with our true desires.
So I agree in so far as definitions come from a personal whatever, but not in terms of a blanket definition, specifically being "good" or being in "service". Although, I do think that is true for a large subset -- thanks evolution.
Actually, thinking about it, I don't think meaning does rely on action. I think it relies on context. Meaning can be found in inaction should that person's paradigm call for it.
I feel like we're seeing meaning as something tied up in the personal and subjective lives of each individual. But does this meaning ever transcend us? If not then could we make the argument that it is - in the end - pointless?
In Man's Search For Meaning by Victor Frankl, the argument for an overarching goal is given as meaning in life. But what's the point in a relative overarching goal like service if we're just gonna die?
I think that in order to find the meaning of life, we must consider life generally and not just human life. This of course yields the answer that the purpose of life is to survive long enough to reproduce and further your species. If we are to distinguish humans from other life there must be good reason and I believe the fact that humans are able to ponder what the meaning of life is, is good enough to warrant a distinction. However, I think that this is only a privilege allowed to us due to the fact that for the moment we are content that the human race will continue and that we can survive with relative ease on a day to day basis. I’m sure, however, for humans in less fortunate situations survival and reproduction are the meaning of life
I see - its almost like with the luxury of not having to spend all of our time surviving we can spend time wondering if life has meaning. But at the foundations of life it's just about survival and carnal relationships.
This is something I think about a lot.
I think the reason this is so hard to agree on is because meaning is relative. There is no such thing as intrinsic meaning, it always depends on what people find important. Moreover, it's pegged to a dynamic person and it changes in itself.
It's a personal thing and can only be discovered when you find out what is important to you. An honest, no BS assessment.
There is no meaning otherwise because a perspective is a hard requirement.
I think there is a difference between finding meaning and holding values. Everyone has varying values which fit with our own personal moral compass and what we find important, but whether this leads us to find meaning is a different debate.
I believe we can think of meaning through the framework of our actions, and more specifically our interactions with others. By being good people (whatever that means!) who act in service of others, we can find meaning and fulfilment.
But of course, different people have different values, different priorities and different opinions, so I'd welcome any other thoughts!
It's interesting because I think we often lean towards an arbitrary norm, like "good people". A psychopath, for example, can derive meaning from the pain of others. Even though societal structures dictate that this is inappropriate behaviour.
I think values are closely coupled to meaning in theory, but not in practice. I think values are how we think we should act and meaning comes from a mixture between that and actions that align with our true desires.
So I agree in so far as definitions come from a personal whatever, but not in terms of a blanket definition, specifically being "good" or being in "service". Although, I do think that is true for a large subset -- thanks evolution.
Actually, thinking about it, I don't think meaning does rely on action. I think it relies on context. Meaning can be found in inaction should that person's paradigm call for it.
I feel like we're seeing meaning as something tied up in the personal and subjective lives of each individual. But does this meaning ever transcend us? If not then could we make the argument that it is - in the end - pointless?
In Man's Search For Meaning by Victor Frankl, the argument for an overarching goal is given as meaning in life. But what's the point in a relative overarching goal like service if we're just gonna die?
There can't be meaning outside of an individual because meaning requires consciousness. And consciousness is subjective by default.
I think that in order to find the meaning of life, we must consider life generally and not just human life. This of course yields the answer that the purpose of life is to survive long enough to reproduce and further your species. If we are to distinguish humans from other life there must be good reason and I believe the fact that humans are able to ponder what the meaning of life is, is good enough to warrant a distinction. However, I think that this is only a privilege allowed to us due to the fact that for the moment we are content that the human race will continue and that we can survive with relative ease on a day to day basis. I’m sure, however, for humans in less fortunate situations survival and reproduction are the meaning of life
I see - its almost like with the luxury of not having to spend all of our time surviving we can spend time wondering if life has meaning. But at the foundations of life it's just about survival and carnal relationships.
Exactly