The Meaning of Life

Standardly, when people talk about the meaning of life they are not particularly clear about what they mean – they don’t mean anything very definite or clear-cut. Rather, as usually happens with terms and concepts with a heavy philosophical weight, they have something rather woolly or nebulous in mind which nevertheless seems very important. Perceived philosophical depth is typically inversely proportional to clear-cut cognitive, factual content. Use of loose or opaque language is often a substitute for clear, testable thinking.

‘Meaning of life’ is semantically associated with finding a reasonable, somewhat objectively verifiable purpose in life which will bring a fairly lasting, resilient sense of fulfillment, validation, of your life being worthwhile. ‘Meaning of life’ is conceptually connected with self-validation, self-worth, and also with finding comfort and consolation. The question of ‘the meaning of life’ arises when your own life or contribution seems paltry given your talents and opportunities, you have made terrible mistakes, your own prospects for happiness seem rather hopeless, your present situation is not good, you have not accomplished anything like what you thought you would.

‘Meaning of life’ is semantically associated with finding a reason/justification for going on living even if your own prospects for fun, enjoyment, happiness, status, wealth, romance, health are not good. What sort of lasting inner fulfillment, satisfaction, contentment, peace of mind, together with making a contribution which others could reasonably judge as worthwhile, are still available to you even if you lack some of the common goods, benefits, and privileges? ‘Meaning of life’ as a psychological problem is not just academic, theoretical doubt that human achievement in general is significant in the cosmos. It is doubt that one’s own life has been or still is worthwhile.

If you are fairly happy, comfortable, enjoying life, healthy, with good prospects of continuing in this state the question of the meaning of life is not of great concern. You might admit that you are not contributing much to higher values and that the cosmos is indifferent to higher values but this does not disturb your equanimity. If you have money, health, status, and love it is fairly easy to laugh at life being ultimately rather pointless. Moreover, if you have money, health, status, and love it is easy to convince yourself you are making a good contribution (living a meaningful life) whether you are a civil servant, bank manager, sell cars or bottled water. It is easy to be the smug, amused, calm philosopher above material concerns when you have nearly a million dollars in assets and are in reasonable health. It is much easier to find happiness or meaning in life if you have money and good health.

‘Meaning of life’ is in part about how to be happy if you lack some of the common aids to happiness. But it is also about questioning the importance given to common aids to happiness. Sure, money and status – recognition, appreciation from others for one’s achievements, efforts, contribution – are important, but should these be the main goals in life or society? Is the main point in life to have ever-increasing economic growth, material standard of living, while ensuring that the poorest have the basics?

Examining the meaning of life even questions whether happiness itself – maximizing one’s own happiness and allowing others to do the same – is the sole intrinsic good, the only real worthwhile-making feature of life. Isn’t there more to a full, enriching, meaningful life than just the pursuit of happiness (let alone just the pursuit of wealth, fame, and pleasures)? Where do art, literature, philosophy, intellectual attainment, promotion of justice, kindness, and animal rights fit in? Is it better that everyone be satisfied consumers or that there be some dissatisfied Socrates?

Finding a meaning to life seems to have two components. On the one hand finding inner happiness, contentment. On the other a justifiable belief that you are making a significant contribution to higher values – that you are doing something worthwhile. The two are empirically, causally, psychologically connected. You are likely to have a lasting inner happiness if and only if you have a reasonably well-founded belief that you are making a significant contribution to higher values. If you find a lasting inner happiness you are likely to find life has sufficient meaning – your contribution is good enough.

Human beings have remarkable capacities for self-deception, rationalization, denial, delusion, obsession, fantasy, repression, suppression, idealizing, demonizing, etc. – protective, coping, psychological defence mechanisms. Thus, it is possible for an intelligent, well-informed person to be mistaken that she is making a significant contribution to higher values (or the best contribution she could make given her circumstances). Consider a woman who gives up a promising career as a musician and music teacher to a) watch tv soap operas; b) be a housewife; c) strive for a manicured lawn and spotless, neat household; d) play golf; d) run a marathon in under 3 hours; e) care for a severely brain damaged child; f) run a cat’s home; g) join a fundamentalist religious cult. Virginia Woolf and Sylvia Plath may have been mistaken in thinking that their lives were no longer worthwhile and that suicide was their best option.

People do make serious mistakes about what will make them happy. They may be mistaken about the source of their happiness/unhappiness. Perhaps you can even be mistaken about the extent to which you are happy/unhappy. There are layers of feelings, desires, thoughts, misgivings, doubts, hopes, regrets, anxieties, disappointments, conflicts, etc. and one can focus on the good or the bad.

Many assume that the meaning of life must consist in some overarching purpose we can ascribe to the cosmos, life, or human life in particular (apart from common biological drives and processes). This could be the conscious intent or desires of a creator God, or the inexorable development towards some higher goal of an underlying divine power, life force, or historical process. But if there is no overarching pre-ordained goal to human life it does not follow that life is meaningless, that objective meaning cannot be given to human life in general and your life in particular, that there are not some states or activities (available even to those who are relatively poor, in poor health, aging, or disadvantaged) which fairly objectively make life meaningful, worth living. To ask ‘Why are we here, what is life for?’ in the sense of what is the overarching, embedded purpose apart from biological drives is the fallacy of the false question like ‘Have you stopped beating your wife yet?’

It might be there is no ultimate purpose to the cosmos or the emergence of higher consciousness or higher values. This just happened. Perhaps, too, there is no inevitable cosmic progress or evolution towards full realization of goodness (or reabsorption into a godhead). Again, thirdly, it may be that pursuit of higher values does not lead eventually, after death or rebirths perhaps, to some kind of personal reward – heaven or more abstractly nirvana. Even without these religious props, though, it is possible objectively to find meaning in life which does not consist simply in having as much personal pleasure, fun, enjoyment, or even happiness as possible.

God is very much a human construct rooted in human psychology good and bad. There may be healthier, albeit more challenging, ways of finding meaning in life than through religion. The standard God is a Jekyll and Hyde creature. On the one hand benevolent, loving, merciful, forgiving – perhaps goodness and justice conceived as a transcendent, supernatural power independent of human activity. On the other an omnipotent, omniscient, creator law giver judge demanding absolute submission and obedience, who is vindictive, jealous, sexist, patriarchal, homophobic, anti-pleasure, anti- open critical thinking, petty, obsessed with rituals of behaviour, clothing, and diet. This second aspect of the traditional God reminds one of the worst kind of husband, father, schoolmaster, priest, or political leader – not a nice chap. Indeed the concept of God as absolute lawgiver is probably in large part a projection of primal ugly features of the male ego and id – a sexually insecure control freak wanting power over others, not tolerating disagreement. Men (and women) can regard this God monster/tyrant as great precisely because it is a fundamental part of their own natures (what they aspire to, or are familiar with). It is no psychological accident that psychopathic, megalomaniac dictators and religious leaders receive the same mass following and adulation as the traditional lawgiver God. Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, Khomeini, Kim Jong Il, Khadafy, Robert Mugabe, et al, not Jesus, are the incarnation of the traditional Godfather, the God of Abraham and Muhammad.

God devotees claim we cannot, with our puny minds, grasp the how and why of God (though they have no trouble themselves making all sorts of dogmatic pronouncements about what God wants!!) – ‘where did God come from?’ God just is eternally. But then why not suppose matter/energy just is eternally, or that it somehow popped out of nothingness? The appeal to a creator God supplies a familiar anthropomorphic model of creation and purpose but then arbitrarily forbids further inquiry. Likewise, the appeal to God as the ground of Being, or as Being in itself is a pseudo-explanation. God as Being does not explain why there is something rather than nothing, but rather affirms that things do exist and that there is a mysterious foundation, ‘support’, or sufficient reason for this but one can’t say what it is. When you want an explanation but can’t find one, just call it God (or Fate). Back this up with a powerful institution based on supposed divine revelation. Add that to question the purported divine revelation (blasphemy – blaming or slandering the Almighty) is to challenge the Divine Lawmaker and Goodness itself and hence must be severely punished.

God is not necessary philosophically, scientifically, morally, spiritually, or aesthetically. Rather God is a psychologically necessary prop for most human beings given traditional systems of education and upbringing. Religious claims (including those of quasi-religions such as Marxism, Jungianism, astrology, or Deconstruction) are questionable even when (or especially when) they hide behind supposed incorrigible insight or revelation. Similarly, it is a reasonable question whether religion in general is a force for good or rather evil. If I am not allowed to criticize religions why should the religious be allowed to criticize my atheism, humanism, or pantheism? If criticism of religion is forbidden why not ban criticism of someone’s artistic, literary, or political beliefs or tastes, or cultural practices? Is it healthy to suppress questioning or calm, reasoned criticism on the grounds that it offends or supposedly might lead to prejudice towards some allegedly disadvantaged group?

We can revere goodness without grounding it in the edicts of a supernatural Deity. We don’t need the sanction of Divine command or threat of Divine punishment to pursue goodness. Citing God’s commands to justify being moral is basically an appeal to force (and personal reward) rather than to the inherent nature of good for its own sake. Even if there is no God (at a minimum a quasi-eternal force of goodness existing independently of human activities – see my blog posting Minimalist God ) goodness still exists or can be cultivated, e.g. equality of opportunity; equitable distribution of wealth; open critical thinking, reduction of suffering; right of women to higher education and birth control; providing all with the basics; kindness; courtesy; empathy; personal responsibility. With or without belief in God there will always be room for disagreement about what policies or practices are good and just, and what goodness and justice consist in.

It is probably psychologically more challenging to find meaning in life without the solace of traditional religious belief. If there is no personal afterlife or rebirth there is diminished capacity for making amends for one’s own grievous errors, making it up to someone you hurt. At some point, too, there is little chance for further personal happiness. No more chances – this is it mate. For instance, when you are 60 years old you realize you love someone deeply (someone you mistreated and did not appreciate), that she/he is a wonderful person just right for you. Before you can tell her and enrich her life and yours she is killed or dies prematurely. You will never meet again. You will likely never have another soul mate. Again, if there is no arbiter God or karmic law then there is no guaranteed tangible personal reward for your efforts towards goodness - all the suffering, deprivation, and striving you may go through. The possibility of simply greater inner peace may seem insufficient reward. Also, without an arbiter God or karmic law, it is harder to bear the unfairness of life – sometimes good things happen to bad people and vice versa. Even in a just society some people will have a better chance at happiness than others – some have better genes and parenting than others.

There are several different paths by which people commonly seek meaning in life (consciously or unconsciously). Many seek meaning through individual personal achievement and distinction. This could be artistic, intellectual, athletic, physical feats, career, business, profession, or in politics. Others are oriented more towards the goal of personal pleasure or happiness as supplying the meaning of life – romantic love, material standard of living, financial security, sex, thrills, eventual reward in paradise. Third, some find meaning in the pursuit of virtue, community service, good works, being a good person for its own sake. Fourth, some people find meaning in life largely through supposed spiritual development – cultivating compassion, letting go of anger, resentment, material desires, the ego, being more aware of the putative transcendent, deep, consoling mystical states, qualities, and apprehensions which allegedly go beyond ordinary, utilitarian, logical language. Fifthly, people can find meaning in life by pursuing knowledge, greater understanding or clarification largely for its own sake (or artistic creativity for its own sake). Sixthly, some people in effect get their meaning in life largely by merging with or identifying themselves with some cause or group. This could be a religion, ideology, ethnic group, sports team, pop star, or literary celebrity. Submitting oneself unquestioningly to the supposed will of God might be included in this sixth path.

There is a seventh route to meaning in life which is unduly neglected. This is the path of emotional development – being more aware of one’s own feelings and emotional processes including triggers, investments, and those of others. Being more able to admit one’s own biases, privileges, and flaws. Being curious about one’s own emotional processes, and those of others. Exploring, imagining, what it would be like to be of a different gender, sexual preference, ethnicity, religion, class, philosophical or political outlook, have different aesthetic preferences.

This elucidation, analysis, and exploration of the meaning of life has several implications. One: it may be a mistake to look for some one all-encompassing meaning or comfort in life whether through Jesus, Allah, Virgin Mary, Jung, Marx, or Dalai Lama. Two: it may be a mistake to look for some fairly straightforward foolproof recipe for finding meaning (or happiness) in life which fits people of all temperaments, abilities, and interests.

Nonetheless one can point to some general aids to finding meaning (and happiness). First, pay attention to basic biological and psychological needs. Second, allow time for fun, enjoyment, and relaxation. Third, develop the whole person – intellectual, athletic, artistic, emotional, social, spiritual, and moral. Fourth, stop thinking mainly or solely of your own well-being, welfare, just treatment, or interest (wealth, health, security, opportunities, rights) or that of your family, tribe, or ethnic group. Have regard for the well-being and happiness of those outside your group. Fifth, switch your energy and focus to simple goods which are available even if you don’t have money, good health, or romantic partner e.g. kindness, friendship, beauty, literature, art, music. Sixth, remember there are others who have gone through similar suffering who would be sympathetic to you. Seventh, remind yourself there will always be some unfairness and mistakes in life – others have suffered far greater misfortune and injustice, and made worse mistakes than I. Eighth, let go of having to be right. Instead focus on developing tentative views which are plausible and reasonable

The meaning of life is that there is no definite, demonstrable, certain meaning to life. You have to make it up, work something out for yourself, as you go along. Some ways of finding meaning harm others or yourself. You can be mistaken about what is worthwhile even for yourself. Learn to live with doubt, uncertainty, disagreement, mistakes, disappointment, rejection, sexual frustration, loneliness, unfairness. Develop flexible mechanisms for coping with life’s inevitable setbacks. Life is messy and frustrating. Accept your weaknesses and strengths.

You are just one amongst billions of humans, and one amongst billions upon billions of sentient beings. Yes you are unique but so is every snowflake, blade of grass, leaf, or bacterium. You are part of the flow of life and so are those you dislike or who dislike you. You (and those you dislike) are more wonderful and intricate than a butterfly or sparrow. You have a capacity for nobility lacking in an eagle, lion, or killer whale. The nobility you attain depends on you. If you are lucky you will have a lover and best friend who challenges, encourages, and treasures you. If you are unlucky you can be an unsung, unknown treasure. There will always be some conflict and flaws. Heaven is when you realize there is no heaven.