1

Except, of course, the problem that I am unable to find meaning in my life.

Suppose I consider the meaning of my life to be

A meaningful life is one that by definition has achieved choice-worthy purposes or involves satisfaction upon having done so.

Source: The Meaning of Life, Stanford Encyclopedia on Philosophy

Now further suppose I consider these to be choice-worthy purposes

  1. Alleviate suffering (physical or mental) of others as well as my own.

  2. Taking part in scientific/mathematical enquiry or any other academic enquiry, and help others to do so (by being a teacher, etc.). In this, I don't include certain philosophical enquiries, like coming to an understanding of the question "What is the meaning of life?" or "What is a choice-worthy purpose?".

I am aware that 1. and 2. are not exactly distinct, but I still wanted to seperate them to highlight the following scenario

Solution to all economic and almost all social problems have been found.

Given this scenario, all I have left to do, which I consider choice-worthy, is to engage in some kind of academic enquiry. For example, finding a solution to a particular mathematical problem. In the scenario where

There is nothing new to discover or invent in almost all academic disciplines, except say a few, like philosophy.

Of course, you still have to learn about these discoveries. But suppose this can also be easily achieved.

If one's purposes have already been achieved, what is the meaning of one's life?

  • Maybe at this point you are back to the beginning: e.g. Get the girl (or Get the girl)? :) – Drux May 30 '15 at 9:13
  • Finding a new purpose – Dave May 31 '15 at 3:33
4

You're kind of begging the question, assuming that the meaning of life depends on purposes and that all purposes already have been fulfilled.

Indeed, in such a scenario there would be no meaning to life according to that definition. If you would still like to have a meaning of life, you could:

  • Use another definition of "meaning of life"
  • Argue that that situation in which all purposes have been fulfilled is merely hypothetical.
  • issue with most questions which appear naive seems to be that they underplay exactly that, imho, how there is no longer any room for maneuver – user6917 Jan 22 '17 at 19:40
1

If you assume the definition of life as mentioned above and all your problems have been solved then after that there will no longer be any meaning to your life.

1

If I understand you correctly:

A. I define (inherently valuable, which I believe to be ‘true’) meaning as active achievement of purpose of (personal) value.

B. I have already either achieved or accumulated the means to achieve, with certainty, all purpose I value.

• How do I find meaning now, given A and B?

To rephrase one of the answers above (rework A or B), I might approach from an epistemological analysis. Instead of seemingly arbitrarily (according to and against your current value structure) reworking A and B, it might serve you well to examine certainty.

Oftentimes I’ve found myself at the edge of a similar abyss, before examining my assumption of certainty. This assumption - and its correlated expectations - is, IMHO, like almost all core presuppositions, a manifestation of certain emotional structures operating by contingency.

  1. Pragmatically - How likely is it that, at this moment, I am omniscient to the degree required to write off further learning / better understanding / more fully integrating of my value structure’s interface with the existence in which I was thrown as a foregone conclusion?
  2. Given that I rather cannot claim this knowledge, this certainty, what are the costs and the benefits of holding such a view, in spite?

Sure, it allows me to remain passive. Perhaps this is even the foundational motivation, the aforementioned emotional structure operating by contingency’s devilish and particularly convincing argument (perceived as ‘truth’).

However, within my own definition of meaning (A), would it not serve me better to remain active, at least in an attempt to maximize my certainty that I have no more acres of diamonds (purpose(s)) worthy of upending (valuable enough to make the decision to actively achieve)?

Then, you might argue, I will be back where I started (B), finding all purpose of value and the certain means to achieve.

The aforementioned above answer on arguing the impossibility of finding such certainty, to me, is compelling enough to quell my emotional structure’s hunger, at least...

I believe it was Karl Popper who argued against the future being certainly predictable on a similar epistemological grounding.

You just have to make it personal, fully integrating (beyond mere intellectualist / face-value understanding) that maybe you won’t find purpose of value / worthy of active achievement, thus meaning today. Maybe not tomorrow. Maybe never. And maybe that’s okay, even within A.

Perhaps the meaning you seek as a state of active achievement of purpose of value is something deeper than traditional value-seeking.

Perhaps you define and thus create an environment or context for your definition of Self which depends upon achievement, value being a post hoc theorized attempt to explain this dependency on striving.

What is it about the Here and Now, your present Space-time existence / Self, which is, from your current perspective, (perhaps inherently) flawed?

Without assuming where I’m going with this, I believe it was Thomas Stearns Eliot who said something along the lines of half the worlds problems are people trying to become important.

A rigidity in direct resistance to a willingness to experience feelings of:

  • Personal Meaninglessness (i.e. “no one cares about me”);
  • Inferiority, Inadequacy, Weakness (i.e. “I’m not good enough”);
  • Worthlessness (i.e. “it is right that no one should care about me, not only bc I’m currently not good enough (for love, whose first step is attention), but bc I never will be, bc I am inherently flawed / worthless, like a piece of trash floating in the solar winds”);

I do not suspect this is guiding your pursuit of meaning, nor an inferiority complex which demands constant striving in an attempt to quell the self-loathing, nor even an artifice delicately constructed to give logic to the emotional structure which demands inactivity, for fear of failure, shame, isolation, death.

However, I do find it entirely possible that, given your definition of meaning (A), and your assumption of fulfillment of such (B), that it might serve you well to examine your Self (I know I hate myself too for not being able to come up with a better phraseology), meaning, no pun intended:

• Where are A and B coming from? Or, rather, how did I arrive at A and B with such conviction?

I believe therein lies your highest hope of answering your questions of existence.

1

Traditional English-speaking Christians made this question their first entry in the "Westminster Shorter Catechism", a kind of standard guide to Christian thinking:

Q: What is the chief end of man?

A: Man's chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.

-2

In ancient Greece the Stoics maintained health and suffering to be irrelevant to living out ones life according to nature. Meaning and purpose may have had multiple layers, but most importantly was that of civil duty. In other words, meaning isn't about a single person so much as it is about the overall whole community and you can live a good life by living out your duty to the whole.

My own personal view on meaning is a inherent meaning in all things. That is to imply a simple essence. It is very easy to confuse inherent meaning with external values. External values may negate an inherent meanings truthfulness, something I believe is fundamentally in error however logical it may be.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.