WHAT IS THE MEANING OF LIFE?
..Philosophical Perspective..
(YET TO POST)
Monday, January 21, 2008
RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVE [draft 2]
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF LIFE?
..Religious Perspective..
OUTLINE
I.INTRO
II.MY BRIEF RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVE
III.HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF ISLAMIC VIEWS (quote koran)
IV.ISLAMIC WOMAN GUEST SPEAKER (quote)
V.FRIEND INTERVIEW PERSPECTIVE
VI.HOW IDEAS CONFIRM OR CONTRADICT WITH EACHOTHER
VII.COMPARE WITH OTHER RELIGIONS
VIII.CONCLUDE
--HOW IT CCOMPARES TO MY OWN PERSPECTIVE & CHANGED IT?
--RELIGIONS IN GENERAL--
..Religious Perspective..
OUTLINE
I.INTRO
II.MY BRIEF RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVE
III.HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF ISLAMIC VIEWS (quote koran)
IV.ISLAMIC WOMAN GUEST SPEAKER (quote)
V.FRIEND INTERVIEW PERSPECTIVE
VI.HOW IDEAS CONFIRM OR CONTRADICT WITH EACHOTHER
VII.COMPARE WITH OTHER RELIGIONS
VIII.CONCLUDE
--HOW IT CCOMPARES TO MY OWN PERSPECTIVE & CHANGED IT?
--RELIGIONS IN GENERAL--
RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVE [draft]
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF LIFE?
..Religious Perspective..
Religion, the easiest way for one to come to terms with why they are living on this planet. The main reason people depend on a set of beliefs to live their life by, is because it gives them reasoning for what life is all about and how they should live it for that individual believer. Every single religion no matter what, relates with eachother for the face that all of them in some way or form has its purpose to supply the believer with an answer. An answer to something that could not have much of any logical answer to man, which is why one believes in a "higher power". All in all, religion itself, generallly speaking is a set of beliefs, and ethics that guide a person to live their life a certain way. Religion gives an explanation for what would be the unexplainable, and is extremely "popular" to majority of humankind in diverse ways.
Religion is played as the cornerstone for life. In Catholicism, a popular religion in which i have decided to focus on, gives its believers an answer to the way they should live their life, and provides them with the belief of what will even happen after life ends. Catholicism falls under the Christian views, and in its own branches off to the similar ideas of many other religions such as Judaism and Islamic views etc. Catholocism provides their spiritual belief for afterlife, and gives a guikdeline for purpose, structure, and gives comfort that pertain to the particular belief in God.
RABBI-PHILLIP ROTHMAN:
PRIEST-FATHER LAWRENCE
NOTES::ADD INTO THE ESSAY
-Jesus Christ is what life is all about:sacrifice, being with him, love, unity. Closest part of God to us. Lived here through the son of God.
-Crucifix:reminds of suffering and it is not only with one Jesus.
-MOL:to do something about the sorrow, suffering & pain that exists in the world. being there for eachother. about emptying oneself of any selfishness so that one is generous.
-the answer to suffering is to ease it.
-no answers for life, other than ressurection and afterlife, which is what Jesus has been through.
-no purpose and meaning leaves one's life scattered.
-with giving you will recieve. SACRIFICE. give thanks. be thankful
-MOL:being the best christian one can be. acknowlegding one IS a sinner. the need of others to help to learn and grow. be open. allow God to work through people. Growing and change, day by day. the fact that he can communicate to us adds to the MOL.
-listen/read the word of God & allow it to challenge him to be better and reach out
-have a center of meaning. experiences of life changes it slightly, not completely
-GOD is LOVE
-having a responsibility to the other. comittment to love (for God)
-do things even when you don't feel like it.
-integrate what we recieve from judaism...(foundation for which christianity/catholocism is built)..it is built on it, yet more steps further because there are MORE living. Christ-like lives:follower of Jesus Christ...Christ is the center. (that is the uniqueness of catholocism)
..Religious Perspective..
Religion, the easiest way for one to come to terms with why they are living on this planet. The main reason people depend on a set of beliefs to live their life by, is because it gives them reasoning for what life is all about and how they should live it for that individual believer. Every single religion no matter what, relates with eachother for the face that all of them in some way or form has its purpose to supply the believer with an answer. An answer to something that could not have much of any logical answer to man, which is why one believes in a "higher power". All in all, religion itself, generallly speaking is a set of beliefs, and ethics that guide a person to live their life a certain way. Religion gives an explanation for what would be the unexplainable, and is extremely "popular" to majority of humankind in diverse ways.
Religion is played as the cornerstone for life. In Catholicism, a popular religion in which i have decided to focus on, gives its believers an answer to the way they should live their life, and provides them with the belief of what will even happen after life ends. Catholicism falls under the Christian views, and in its own branches off to the similar ideas of many other religions such as Judaism and Islamic views etc. Catholocism provides their spiritual belief for afterlife, and gives a guikdeline for purpose, structure, and gives comfort that pertain to the particular belief in God.
RABBI-PHILLIP ROTHMAN:
PRIEST-FATHER LAWRENCE
NOTES::ADD INTO THE ESSAY
-Jesus Christ is what life is all about:sacrifice, being with him, love, unity. Closest part of God to us. Lived here through the son of God.
-Crucifix:reminds of suffering and it is not only with one Jesus.
-MOL:to do something about the sorrow, suffering & pain that exists in the world. being there for eachother. about emptying oneself of any selfishness so that one is generous.
-the answer to suffering is to ease it.
-no answers for life, other than ressurection and afterlife, which is what Jesus has been through.
-no purpose and meaning leaves one's life scattered.
-with giving you will recieve. SACRIFICE. give thanks. be thankful
-MOL:being the best christian one can be. acknowlegding one IS a sinner. the need of others to help to learn and grow. be open. allow God to work through people. Growing and change, day by day. the fact that he can communicate to us adds to the MOL.
-listen/read the word of God & allow it to challenge him to be better and reach out
-have a center of meaning. experiences of life changes it slightly, not completely
-GOD is LOVE
-having a responsibility to the other. comittment to love (for God)
-do things even when you don't feel like it.
-integrate what we recieve from judaism...(foundation for which christianity/catholocism is built)..it is built on it, yet more steps further because there are MORE living. Christ-like lives:follower of Jesus Christ...Christ is the center. (that is the uniqueness of catholocism)
WTHDTQEM [final]
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF LIFE?..WTHDTQEM?..
What is life all about? What is the true purpose of living? How can we live meaningfully? Is that even possible? What is the meaning of life? These are all questions that are just screaming out for complete controversy. Every single human being lives different lives every single day and will all have different answers for that question. Yet does one ever stop to think about the question itself? Does this question alone even make sense? How can one have an answer to a question that they do not understand? Maybe that’s our problem! We have come to understand that we must identify the question before we can identify the answer to it. Many people interpret the meaning of this question very differently from each other, which is why it has become so difficult for determining an answer, and a main reason for why there is so much controversy towards answering it in the first place. Every single human being lives different lives every single day and will all have different answers for that question. Yet does one ever stop to think about the question itself? Does this question alone even make sense? How can one have an answer to a question that they do not understand? There needs to be a certain understanding of the question before we can identify the answer to it.
Many philosophers have written on the idea of life, and have questioned the question, depicted it apart, bringing about each possible point of view of the question, so that when it comes to manufacturing an actual answer, it would make much more sense for more people to relate. Through grasping the varied interpretations of the question of life, one would hope to absorb each of the several aspects of it. Each view of the question will leave a stronger comprehension towards coming to terms with creating an actual answer that will suit us as a whole, rather than individually. Philosopher Irving Singer has brought us closer to our own definition of the question in his unique article, “What is the Meaning of Life?” Singer’s distinct way of recognizing the question was to split the actual question into two concrete ways of viewing it. He recognized that a reason for such controversy and contradiction on answering the question, is that there are two completely different levels of looking at it with two completely different intensities. Either in a more general and universal aspect, compared to specifically to one’s personal and private life. Throughout the article, Singer builds the wall between the two distinct fractions of the question. Singer states, “We long to know the secrets of the universe and what it means, in itself, apart from human interests. At the same time, however, we seek a meaningful way to live our lives, whether or not we can find a separate meaning in the cosmos…” where he then announces that answering the question would be much simpler if we’d just emphasized such difference and took each under some consideration.
Irving Singer makes it clear that people seem to be striving to find the meaning of life for them almost everyday of their life unintentionally, yet when it comes a time where they may be bombarded with actually being asked, “what is the meaning of life?”, almost immediately they are baffled because of the many different ways you can think of the question. Is it finding the meaning of life in its entirety, or for one as an individual?
Irving also questions whether or not one can even find or suddenly discover the meaning to life, or if it is something one creates and generates as they go along and make their journey through life. Irving distinguishes what makes the question so difficult for someone to answer, and shows that by the struggle to just simply answer the question, it in fact is not simply done at all. It actually just brings about other challenging, mind blowing questions alongside with the initial one, What is the meaning of life?
Philosopher John Wisdom also provides the reader with an alternate way of looking at the question. Wisdom introduces the idea that some people believe that the question may just all in all be completely senseless and irrational. He goes deep into clarifying why people believe so, and demonstrates the difference between interpreting the question by what life actually is, compared to what life gives, leads to, or is caused by. Wisdom broadens our minds with a number of examples to compare the logical and rational question, “What is the meaning of life?” with other questions that essentially are nonsensical, such as, “What supports all things?” and “What is bigger than the largest thing in the world?” Many people categorize all three of those questions to be very much illogical and ridiculous, however, it is made clear that the question of life is not at all absurd even if it sometimes seems so.
Much like John Wisdom, Joseph Ellin also acknowledges the fact that some people think of the question as meaningless and absurd and there is no answer to that question. However Ellin explores the idea that there are people in this world who are blinded to believe something so, for the simple fact that when you view the question, What is the meaning of life?, there is no legitimate reason that could prove that this question is senseless with the exception of the thought that there is no answer. However, is there really no answer, or is it that no one knows the answer? Just because a solution is difficult to solve, and may seem impossible, it does not mean that the solution does not exist. When one literally depicts apart the question, each and every word that makes up the question beholds a distinctive meaning much like all the other questions produced in the universe.
While Ellin finds ways of discovering why the question in fact makes complete sense, he seems to struggle to do so because while he tries to make a definite meaning out of the question by referring to the representations of each word used in the question, when looking at it as a whole, life in fact does not represent anything, it just simply is. Ellin compares the meaning of the question with the example of the word, “dog”. When one hears the word dog, there is an immediate visual representation (of a dog) for the word, which gives the word its meaning. Also when dealing with “dog”, one can make connections from that one word to another, which gives it its definition from that as well. To describe the definition of a word, is to express it with other words, making connections with other things, branching off from one meaning to another, which ends up being the way to define the meaning of anything. However, how can one define life to its meaning? What relationship does the meaning of life have with other words or things that could possibly fabricate a definition, the same way “dog” associates with other words and things that produces a definition? Being that one cannot create a range of valid and all around convincing answers to the question, that naturally leaves one to consider the question to be senseless and invalid.
When people search for the meaning of life they automatically compare their own lives to the question, and relates the answer with their personal experience. Yet is that really a good enough definition of life to the rest of the world? Ellin compares the natural instincts of people when answering “What is the meaning of life” to a normal activity like playing sports. When playing any game or any sport, there is a point to it, which gives it its purpose to play it in the first place. On a sports team there are a number of players who all have similar intentions to fulfill the objective of the game. However, what if there was a foreigner watching the game, and had no idea what was going on. What if he were watching the game from the bleachers trying to understand the rationale of the it yet couldn’t. Because that person does not understand the purpose and object of the game, does that mean there is no purpose and object of the game? No. It just simply means that that person does not quite understand it…yet. Compare the game that was being played on the field, to life, and us humans as that one foreigner. Just because we don’t reasonably know the reason and purpose we live, does not mean it has no meaning.
Life is like sitting down and watch a movie, yet you were late, and only caught middle of movie. You are oblivious to what happened in the movie before you sat down to watch it, therefore, during that time you do not know what is going to happen in the end, and you have not found any real profundity to the reason everything is happening at that time, yet there is still a “big picture”, and Joseph Ellin emphasizes that.
In trying to answer such a question, many say it does not make any sense, for the simple fact that one cannot actually come up with any type of legitimate answer for it, especially without going through a series of staggering and self-contradicting thoughts. When it comes to the real groundless questions, much like, “what supports all things?“ they are in fact all meaningless. Those questions are what show us that within every question, there is just another question, and that there is questioning behind everything. However, not to mistaken those real senseless questions with “what is the meaning of life”. In struggling to answer that question, it is not that it has no meaning behind it, it is just that one cannot completely comprehend enough to create a totally satisfying and conclusive answer. Being that no one has yet been able to say, “the meaning of life is…”, many immediately reject it as ever having a meaning and sense to it in the first place, although it has complete potential. What is it about this question that seems so ridiculous? Is it just that words cannot describe? If so, what can?
What is life all about? What is the true purpose of living? How can we live meaningfully? Is that even possible? What is the meaning of life? These are all questions that are just screaming out for complete controversy. Every single human being lives different lives every single day and will all have different answers for that question. Yet does one ever stop to think about the question itself? Does this question alone even make sense? How can one have an answer to a question that they do not understand? Maybe that’s our problem! We have come to understand that we must identify the question before we can identify the answer to it. Many people interpret the meaning of this question very differently from each other, which is why it has become so difficult for determining an answer, and a main reason for why there is so much controversy towards answering it in the first place. Every single human being lives different lives every single day and will all have different answers for that question. Yet does one ever stop to think about the question itself? Does this question alone even make sense? How can one have an answer to a question that they do not understand? There needs to be a certain understanding of the question before we can identify the answer to it.
Many philosophers have written on the idea of life, and have questioned the question, depicted it apart, bringing about each possible point of view of the question, so that when it comes to manufacturing an actual answer, it would make much more sense for more people to relate. Through grasping the varied interpretations of the question of life, one would hope to absorb each of the several aspects of it. Each view of the question will leave a stronger comprehension towards coming to terms with creating an actual answer that will suit us as a whole, rather than individually. Philosopher Irving Singer has brought us closer to our own definition of the question in his unique article, “What is the Meaning of Life?” Singer’s distinct way of recognizing the question was to split the actual question into two concrete ways of viewing it. He recognized that a reason for such controversy and contradiction on answering the question, is that there are two completely different levels of looking at it with two completely different intensities. Either in a more general and universal aspect, compared to specifically to one’s personal and private life. Throughout the article, Singer builds the wall between the two distinct fractions of the question. Singer states, “We long to know the secrets of the universe and what it means, in itself, apart from human interests. At the same time, however, we seek a meaningful way to live our lives, whether or not we can find a separate meaning in the cosmos…” where he then announces that answering the question would be much simpler if we’d just emphasized such difference and took each under some consideration.
Irving Singer makes it clear that people seem to be striving to find the meaning of life for them almost everyday of their life unintentionally, yet when it comes a time where they may be bombarded with actually being asked, “what is the meaning of life?”, almost immediately they are baffled because of the many different ways you can think of the question. Is it finding the meaning of life in its entirety, or for one as an individual?
Irving also questions whether or not one can even find or suddenly discover the meaning to life, or if it is something one creates and generates as they go along and make their journey through life. Irving distinguishes what makes the question so difficult for someone to answer, and shows that by the struggle to just simply answer the question, it in fact is not simply done at all. It actually just brings about other challenging, mind blowing questions alongside with the initial one, What is the meaning of life?
Philosopher John Wisdom also provides the reader with an alternate way of looking at the question. Wisdom introduces the idea that some people believe that the question may just all in all be completely senseless and irrational. He goes deep into clarifying why people believe so, and demonstrates the difference between interpreting the question by what life actually is, compared to what life gives, leads to, or is caused by. Wisdom broadens our minds with a number of examples to compare the logical and rational question, “What is the meaning of life?” with other questions that essentially are nonsensical, such as, “What supports all things?” and “What is bigger than the largest thing in the world?” Many people categorize all three of those questions to be very much illogical and ridiculous, however, it is made clear that the question of life is not at all absurd even if it sometimes seems so.
Much like John Wisdom, Joseph Ellin also acknowledges the fact that some people think of the question as meaningless and absurd and there is no answer to that question. However Ellin explores the idea that there are people in this world who are blinded to believe something so, for the simple fact that when you view the question, What is the meaning of life?, there is no legitimate reason that could prove that this question is senseless with the exception of the thought that there is no answer. However, is there really no answer, or is it that no one knows the answer? Just because a solution is difficult to solve, and may seem impossible, it does not mean that the solution does not exist. When one literally depicts apart the question, each and every word that makes up the question beholds a distinctive meaning much like all the other questions produced in the universe.
While Ellin finds ways of discovering why the question in fact makes complete sense, he seems to struggle to do so because while he tries to make a definite meaning out of the question by referring to the representations of each word used in the question, when looking at it as a whole, life in fact does not represent anything, it just simply is. Ellin compares the meaning of the question with the example of the word, “dog”. When one hears the word dog, there is an immediate visual representation (of a dog) for the word, which gives the word its meaning. Also when dealing with “dog”, one can make connections from that one word to another, which gives it its definition from that as well. To describe the definition of a word, is to express it with other words, making connections with other things, branching off from one meaning to another, which ends up being the way to define the meaning of anything. However, how can one define life to its meaning? What relationship does the meaning of life have with other words or things that could possibly fabricate a definition, the same way “dog” associates with other words and things that produces a definition? Being that one cannot create a range of valid and all around convincing answers to the question, that naturally leaves one to consider the question to be senseless and invalid.
When people search for the meaning of life they automatically compare their own lives to the question, and relates the answer with their personal experience. Yet is that really a good enough definition of life to the rest of the world? Ellin compares the natural instincts of people when answering “What is the meaning of life” to a normal activity like playing sports. When playing any game or any sport, there is a point to it, which gives it its purpose to play it in the first place. On a sports team there are a number of players who all have similar intentions to fulfill the objective of the game. However, what if there was a foreigner watching the game, and had no idea what was going on. What if he were watching the game from the bleachers trying to understand the rationale of the it yet couldn’t. Because that person does not understand the purpose and object of the game, does that mean there is no purpose and object of the game? No. It just simply means that that person does not quite understand it…yet. Compare the game that was being played on the field, to life, and us humans as that one foreigner. Just because we don’t reasonably know the reason and purpose we live, does not mean it has no meaning.
Life is like sitting down and watch a movie, yet you were late, and only caught middle of movie. You are oblivious to what happened in the movie before you sat down to watch it, therefore, during that time you do not know what is going to happen in the end, and you have not found any real profundity to the reason everything is happening at that time, yet there is still a “big picture”, and Joseph Ellin emphasizes that.
In trying to answer such a question, many say it does not make any sense, for the simple fact that one cannot actually come up with any type of legitimate answer for it, especially without going through a series of staggering and self-contradicting thoughts. When it comes to the real groundless questions, much like, “what supports all things?“ they are in fact all meaningless. Those questions are what show us that within every question, there is just another question, and that there is questioning behind everything. However, not to mistaken those real senseless questions with “what is the meaning of life”. In struggling to answer that question, it is not that it has no meaning behind it, it is just that one cannot completely comprehend enough to create a totally satisfying and conclusive answer. Being that no one has yet been able to say, “the meaning of life is…”, many immediately reject it as ever having a meaning and sense to it in the first place, although it has complete potential. What is it about this question that seems so ridiculous? Is it just that words cannot describe? If so, what can?
WTHDTQEM [draft 2]
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF LIFE?
..WTHDTQEM..
What is the meaning of life? This is a question that is just screaming out for complete controversy. Every single human being lives different lives every single day and will all have different answers for that question. Yet does one ever stop to think about the question itself? Does this question alone even make sense? How can one have an answer to a question that they do not understand? Maybe that’s our problem! We have come to understand that we must identify the question before we can identify the answer to it. Many people interpret the meaning of the question very differently from each other, and for that reason, as a class, we now understand why it has become so difficult for determining an answer to our question. We have taken three articles from three philosophers and depicted each apart to get deep into the message they are all trying to convey. From this, we have come to some comprehension of the varied interpretations of the question , “What is the meaning of life?” With this, we hope to absorb each of the several aspects of the question that Philosopher Irving Singer, John Wisdom, and Joseph Ellin have introduced us to. This will possibly leave us closer to our own definition of the question of life, then perhaps life itself.
John Singer’s composition was the first of the three we read. Singer’s unique way of coming to terms with the question “What is the meaning of life” was to split the actual question into two concrete ways of viewing it. He recognized that a reason for such controversy and contradiction on answering the question, is that there are two completely different levels of looking at it. Either in a more general aspect or specifically to one’s personal life. One may identify the meaning of life with their private life, while others may see it on a more universal aspect. Throughout the article, Singer builds the wall between the two distinct fractions of the question. Singer states, “We long to know the secrets of the universe and what it means, in itself, apart from human interests. At the same time, however, we seek a meaningful way to live our lives, whether or not we can find a separate meaning in the cosmos…” where he then announces that answering the question would be much simpler if we’d just emphasized such difference and took each under some consideration.
Irving Singer makes it clear that people seem to be striving to find the meaning of life for them. However, is it finding the meaning of life in its entirety, or for one as an individual? He also questions whether or not one can even find or suddenly discover the meaning to life, or if it’s something one creates and generates as they go along and make their journey through life. Irving distinguishes what makes the question so difficult for someone to answer, and shows that by the struggle to just simply answer the question, it is in fact not simply done at all. It actually just brings about other challenging and mind blowing questions alongside with the initial one, What is the meaning of life?
Philosopher John Wisdom wrote on the meaning of life as well, and provides the reader with the idea that some people believe the question may all in all just be completely senseless. He goes deep into clarifying why people believe so, and demonstrates the difference between interpreting the question by what life actually is, compared to what life gives, leads to, or is caused by. Wisdom broadens our minds with a number of examples to compare the rational question, “What is the meaning of life?” with other nonsensical questions such as, “What supports all things?” and “What is bigger than the largest thing in the world?” Many people categorize all three of those questions to be very much illogical and ridiculous, however, it is made clear that the question of life is not at all absurd even if it sometimes seems so.
In trying to answer such a question, many say it does not make any sense, for the simple fact that one cannot actually come up with any type of legitimate answer for it, especially without going through a series of staggering and self-contradictory thoughts. When it comes to the real groundless questions, much like, “what supports all things?“ they are in fact all meaningless. Those questions are what show us that within every question, there is just another question, and that there is questioning behind everything. However, not to mistaken those with “what is the meaning of life”. In struggling to answer that question, it is not that it has no meaning behind it, it is just that one cannot completely comprehend enough to create a totally satisfying and conclusive answer. Being that no one has yet been able to say, “the meaning of life is…”, many immediately reject it as ever having a meaning and sense to it in the first place, although it has complete potential, but the problems is, words just cannot describe.
About all types of stuff..
learning through changes.
Not put here to worship someone
The question is pointless…if you know the point in living…what’s the point in living.
..WTHDTQEM..
What is the meaning of life? This is a question that is just screaming out for complete controversy. Every single human being lives different lives every single day and will all have different answers for that question. Yet does one ever stop to think about the question itself? Does this question alone even make sense? How can one have an answer to a question that they do not understand? Maybe that’s our problem! We have come to understand that we must identify the question before we can identify the answer to it. Many people interpret the meaning of the question very differently from each other, and for that reason, as a class, we now understand why it has become so difficult for determining an answer to our question. We have taken three articles from three philosophers and depicted each apart to get deep into the message they are all trying to convey. From this, we have come to some comprehension of the varied interpretations of the question , “What is the meaning of life?” With this, we hope to absorb each of the several aspects of the question that Philosopher Irving Singer, John Wisdom, and Joseph Ellin have introduced us to. This will possibly leave us closer to our own definition of the question of life, then perhaps life itself.
John Singer’s composition was the first of the three we read. Singer’s unique way of coming to terms with the question “What is the meaning of life” was to split the actual question into two concrete ways of viewing it. He recognized that a reason for such controversy and contradiction on answering the question, is that there are two completely different levels of looking at it. Either in a more general aspect or specifically to one’s personal life. One may identify the meaning of life with their private life, while others may see it on a more universal aspect. Throughout the article, Singer builds the wall between the two distinct fractions of the question. Singer states, “We long to know the secrets of the universe and what it means, in itself, apart from human interests. At the same time, however, we seek a meaningful way to live our lives, whether or not we can find a separate meaning in the cosmos…” where he then announces that answering the question would be much simpler if we’d just emphasized such difference and took each under some consideration.
Irving Singer makes it clear that people seem to be striving to find the meaning of life for them. However, is it finding the meaning of life in its entirety, or for one as an individual? He also questions whether or not one can even find or suddenly discover the meaning to life, or if it’s something one creates and generates as they go along and make their journey through life. Irving distinguishes what makes the question so difficult for someone to answer, and shows that by the struggle to just simply answer the question, it is in fact not simply done at all. It actually just brings about other challenging and mind blowing questions alongside with the initial one, What is the meaning of life?
Philosopher John Wisdom wrote on the meaning of life as well, and provides the reader with the idea that some people believe the question may all in all just be completely senseless. He goes deep into clarifying why people believe so, and demonstrates the difference between interpreting the question by what life actually is, compared to what life gives, leads to, or is caused by. Wisdom broadens our minds with a number of examples to compare the rational question, “What is the meaning of life?” with other nonsensical questions such as, “What supports all things?” and “What is bigger than the largest thing in the world?” Many people categorize all three of those questions to be very much illogical and ridiculous, however, it is made clear that the question of life is not at all absurd even if it sometimes seems so.
In trying to answer such a question, many say it does not make any sense, for the simple fact that one cannot actually come up with any type of legitimate answer for it, especially without going through a series of staggering and self-contradictory thoughts. When it comes to the real groundless questions, much like, “what supports all things?“ they are in fact all meaningless. Those questions are what show us that within every question, there is just another question, and that there is questioning behind everything. However, not to mistaken those with “what is the meaning of life”. In struggling to answer that question, it is not that it has no meaning behind it, it is just that one cannot completely comprehend enough to create a totally satisfying and conclusive answer. Being that no one has yet been able to say, “the meaning of life is…”, many immediately reject it as ever having a meaning and sense to it in the first place, although it has complete potential, but the problems is, words just cannot describe.
About all types of stuff..
learning through changes.
Not put here to worship someone
The question is pointless…if you know the point in living…what’s the point in living.
WTHDTQEM [draft]
What the hell does this question even mean?
What is the meaning of life? This is a question that is just screaming out for complete controversy. Every single human being lives different lives every single day and will all have different answers for that question. Yet does one ever stop to think about the question itself? Does this question alone even make sense? How can one have an answer to a question that they do not understand? Maybe that’s our problem! We have come to understand that we must identify the question before we can identify the answer to it. Many people interpret the meaning of the question very differently from each other, and for that reason, as a class, we now understand why it has become so difficult for determining an answer to our question. We have taken three articles from three philosophers and depicted each apart to get deep into the message they are all trying to convey. From this, we have come to some comprehension of the varied interpretations of the question , “What is the meaning of life?” With this, we hope to absorb each of the several aspects of the question that Philosopher Irving Singer, John Wisdom, and Joseph Ellin have introduced us to. This will possibly leave us closer to our own definition of the question of life, then perhaps life itself.
John Singer’s composition was the first of the three we read. Singer’s unique way of coming to terms with the question “What is the meaning of life” was to split the actual question into two concrete ways of viewing it. He recognized that a reason for such controversy and contradiction on answering the question, is that there are two completely different levels of looking at it. Either in a more general aspect or specifically to one’s personal life. One may identify the meaning of life with their private life, while others may see it on a more universal aspect. Throughout the article, Singer builds the wall between the two distinct fractions of the question. Singer states, “We long to know the secrets of the universe and what it means, in itself, apart from human interests. At the same time, however, we seek a meaningful way to live our lives, whether or not we can find a separate meaning in the cosmos…” where he then announces that answering the question would be much simpler if we’d just emphasized such difference and took each under some consideration.
Irving Singer makes it clear that people seem to be striving to find the meaning of life for them. However, is it finding the meaning of life in its entirety, or for one as an individual? He also questions whether or not one can even find or suddenly discover the meaning to life, or if it’s something one creates and generates as they go along and make their journey through life. Irving distinguishes what makes the question so difficult for someone to answer, and shows that by the struggle to just simply answer the question, it is in fact not simply done at all. It actually just brings about other challenging and mind blowing questions alongside with the initial one, What is the meaning of life?
Philosopher John Wisdom wrote on the meaning of life as well, and provides the reader with the idea that some people believe the question may all in all just be completely senseless. He goes deep into clarifying why people believe so, and demonstrates the difference between interpreting the question by what life actually is, compared to what life gives, leads to, or is caused by. Wisdom broadens our minds with a number of examples to compare the rational question, “What is the meaning of life?” with other nonsensical questions such as, “What supports all things?” and “What is bigger than the largest thing in the world?” Many people categorize all three of those questions to be very much illogical and ridiculous, however, it is made clear that the question of life is not at all absurd even if it sometimes seems so.
In trying to answer such a question, many say it does not make any sense, for the simple fact that one cannot actually come up with any type of legitimate answer for it, especially without going through a series of staggering and self-contradictory thoughts. When it comes to the real groundless questions, much like, “what supports all things?“ they are in fact all meaningless. Those questions are what show us that within every question, there is just another question, and that there is questioning behind everything. However, not to mistaken those with “what is the meaning of life”. In struggling to answer that question, it is not that it has no meaning behind it, it is just that one cannot completely comprehend enough to create a totally satisfying and conclusive answer. Being that no one has yet been able to say, “the meaning of life is…”, many immediately reject it as ever having a meaning and sense to it in the first place, although it has complete potential, but the problems is, words just cannot describe.
What is the meaning of life? This is a question that is just screaming out for complete controversy. Every single human being lives different lives every single day and will all have different answers for that question. Yet does one ever stop to think about the question itself? Does this question alone even make sense? How can one have an answer to a question that they do not understand? Maybe that’s our problem! We have come to understand that we must identify the question before we can identify the answer to it. Many people interpret the meaning of the question very differently from each other, and for that reason, as a class, we now understand why it has become so difficult for determining an answer to our question. We have taken three articles from three philosophers and depicted each apart to get deep into the message they are all trying to convey. From this, we have come to some comprehension of the varied interpretations of the question , “What is the meaning of life?” With this, we hope to absorb each of the several aspects of the question that Philosopher Irving Singer, John Wisdom, and Joseph Ellin have introduced us to. This will possibly leave us closer to our own definition of the question of life, then perhaps life itself.
John Singer’s composition was the first of the three we read. Singer’s unique way of coming to terms with the question “What is the meaning of life” was to split the actual question into two concrete ways of viewing it. He recognized that a reason for such controversy and contradiction on answering the question, is that there are two completely different levels of looking at it. Either in a more general aspect or specifically to one’s personal life. One may identify the meaning of life with their private life, while others may see it on a more universal aspect. Throughout the article, Singer builds the wall between the two distinct fractions of the question. Singer states, “We long to know the secrets of the universe and what it means, in itself, apart from human interests. At the same time, however, we seek a meaningful way to live our lives, whether or not we can find a separate meaning in the cosmos…” where he then announces that answering the question would be much simpler if we’d just emphasized such difference and took each under some consideration.
Irving Singer makes it clear that people seem to be striving to find the meaning of life for them. However, is it finding the meaning of life in its entirety, or for one as an individual? He also questions whether or not one can even find or suddenly discover the meaning to life, or if it’s something one creates and generates as they go along and make their journey through life. Irving distinguishes what makes the question so difficult for someone to answer, and shows that by the struggle to just simply answer the question, it is in fact not simply done at all. It actually just brings about other challenging and mind blowing questions alongside with the initial one, What is the meaning of life?
Philosopher John Wisdom wrote on the meaning of life as well, and provides the reader with the idea that some people believe the question may all in all just be completely senseless. He goes deep into clarifying why people believe so, and demonstrates the difference between interpreting the question by what life actually is, compared to what life gives, leads to, or is caused by. Wisdom broadens our minds with a number of examples to compare the rational question, “What is the meaning of life?” with other nonsensical questions such as, “What supports all things?” and “What is bigger than the largest thing in the world?” Many people categorize all three of those questions to be very much illogical and ridiculous, however, it is made clear that the question of life is not at all absurd even if it sometimes seems so.
In trying to answer such a question, many say it does not make any sense, for the simple fact that one cannot actually come up with any type of legitimate answer for it, especially without going through a series of staggering and self-contradictory thoughts. When it comes to the real groundless questions, much like, “what supports all things?“ they are in fact all meaningless. Those questions are what show us that within every question, there is just another question, and that there is questioning behind everything. However, not to mistaken those with “what is the meaning of life”. In struggling to answer that question, it is not that it has no meaning behind it, it is just that one cannot completely comprehend enough to create a totally satisfying and conclusive answer. Being that no one has yet been able to say, “the meaning of life is…”, many immediately reject it as ever having a meaning and sense to it in the first place, although it has complete potential, but the problems is, words just cannot describe.
OTHER PEOPLE'S PERSPECTIVE [final]
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF LIFE?
..Other People's Perspective..
While on the search to identify my own personal meaning of life, I must be able to open my mind, and take other people’s opinions of life into consideration. The meaning of life that I plan to soon come to terms with, shall be one that other’s can relate to as well. I plan to feed off of many people’s ideas and depict each thought thoroughly to create my own. I have made an effort to consult three family members of mine as well as a few friends, and with that my school mates throughout my school were all given surveys we, as a class have created.
I sat down with my mother, Alicia, and asked her what her meaning of life was. She seemed startled by the question at first, being that it’s not typically something one would probably ask a person. After taking a few moments to gather her thoughts, she finally brought herself to say that life is about love. Interesting enough, my mother came to the conclusion that life was all about building relationships with people and creating certain connections with them. “Life is about finding people who are compatible with you. Someone with whom you can enjoy their company, and relate with one another” she stated, and continued to say that life is basically about not being alone. My mother, is a single, divorced woman, and considering such, I pondered upon the thought that it seemed that to my mother, life was all about finding a true love and bond between a person (or people). I found that quite appealing.
After consulting each stance my mother took when unraveling her thoughts about her own personal meaning, I have questioned whether or not I personally thought it was up to par with my own possible meaning, and if it can relate on a universal aspect as well. At some instance, I hesitated to believe that one’s own, personal life is based on building relationships with other people. I could not understand how the connection between myself and the others around me could make up my own life’s meaning. I questioned, if that means that an individual’s purpose to life is essentially dependent upon other people?
Other than my mother, I interviewed my twin sister as well. Someone who I can relate to on many different levels, who of coarse is the same age, and has dealt with the same experiences in many instances of myself. I thought it’d be interesting to see her aspect on life, for someone that is closely allied with me. Angelina’s many thoughts were briefly brought up alongside her strong opinion towards the ways of the society we live. She focused on the fact that she believed the key to life is the pursuit of happiness. I of coarse found this idea absurd for the simple reasoning that I don’t think one’s entire life should be based on trying to be happy. With my own opinion in the back of my mind, I shot out questions in which would possibly curve her ideas and make her reconsider her idea of life being about the strive for happiness. To my surprise she seemed full aware of the fact that although constant happiness is virtually unachievable, it did not stop her from believing that is the point of life. Angelina brought up the burden the society places upon people, as well as religions, and stated, “people are forced to practically live as robots”. She continued to explain how the society controls when and how someone is happy, sad, mad etc. Yet with all those typically contradicting ideas understood, her idea of happiness being the meaning of life still remained. Angelina’s view on the meaning of life is to find happiness within oneself, despite the burdens, issues, and cultures one is naturally surrounded by.
Other than the three interviews I’ve conducted, on my search to find my own meaning of life, it was only necessary that as a class, set out to find other people’s perceptions as well. Our class decided to create small survey’s and hand them out to each student within our entire school, including grades 6-12. We separated each grades’ answers, with the exception of 11th and 12th grade, and categorized the two into the senior institute. I happened to be one that not only analyzed each survey and classified each answer, but I was assigned to actually give out the surveys to a number of classes within my own 11th grade. I was able to witness first hand what it was like for my fellow students to answer these questions. Watching each class as a whole take the time to sit down and answer the given questions with what was supposed to be with genuine thought and truth, when each person received the survey, I’d noticed many similar reactions came across groups of people. The types of questions on the survey included: “What is most important in your life right now?”, “What tends to reoccur in your life, and what would you do to change it?”, and “how does the society put boundaries over your definition of the meaning of life” etc.. By appearances, I noticed that many students had just written the first thing that entered their mind. Many seemed to have found a certain comfort in relying on the archetypal “slogan” answers to replace their meaning of life. Catch phrases, and answers that just may sound like a typically good response, appeared to be very popular throughout examining answers.
Through my analysis of the data we collected for my own assigned question, “What tends to re-occur in your life, good or bad? What would you do to change it”, my partner and I had to group each answer and organize it in a way that can be statistical. Being that the question was open ended, and was not multiple choice, it was difficult to sort out all the broad spectrum of answers we received. Having to categorize such varied answers ended up put a certain constraint around my interpretations of each answer. Being that we had to arrange each answer and classify them as a group, there was a limit put on my analysis of each answer, and had in my opinion taken away from each individual. The responses ended up not being not at all specific to each person, but collective instead, which I believe eliminated some of the true meaning and depth behind each persons answers.
With dealing with the question “What is most important to you”, I found that the responses from the senior institute were most peculiar. The 11th and 12th graders, above all the other grades were the most frequent to either answer it or leave it blank. While all the other grades may have simply answered with an “I don’t know” the senior institute had the highest ratio of those who just decided to not answer it at all. From this I get the sense that it seems the older one is, the more comfortable one is with either having their specific answer or just not having one at all. From this I feel that with age, people tend to either direct themselves in the “black” or “white” zone answer, there’s not really much space for any grey areas.
Based off answers to the same question, but with the entire school, we received the most answers (52%) of those saying that finding happiness is the most important thing in their lives. Along with that, we found that the senior institute were the least to say that they cared about finding happiness as opposed to other grades. I find this exceptionally understandable, for the simple fact that with a growing age, comes a rising amount of experience with things. Seniors and juniors have in one way or another experienced more in their life than those younger, because they have lived more years. Older teen have mostly come to realize that life is going to bring struggle and hard times, and one’s happiness isn’t always going to be the key factor to focus on when other things have come their way contradicting that.
While assembling all this information up as a whole, my definition of the meaning of life has further been expanded. I’ve come to understand that many are just plainly uncomfortable answering such a question, while others bluntly have no clue, and few actually have answered with what they think is a clear and complete answer. Majority seem to much rather shrug off an answer as opposed to sitting down and forming some kind of suitable answer. However, I feel that I can take just as much out of an answer with thoughtless reactions, than I can with the attentive answers. I feel as if the nonchalance for an answer just demonstrates the fact that one is very unsure. And uncertainty and hesitation is a much better answer than none at all! The contrast of views of people of varied ages, experiences, backgrounds etc. leads me to believe that with the overlapping answers, maybe there is a meaning of life that can appropriately fit each and every one of us.
..Other People's Perspective..
While on the search to identify my own personal meaning of life, I must be able to open my mind, and take other people’s opinions of life into consideration. The meaning of life that I plan to soon come to terms with, shall be one that other’s can relate to as well. I plan to feed off of many people’s ideas and depict each thought thoroughly to create my own. I have made an effort to consult three family members of mine as well as a few friends, and with that my school mates throughout my school were all given surveys we, as a class have created.
I sat down with my mother, Alicia, and asked her what her meaning of life was. She seemed startled by the question at first, being that it’s not typically something one would probably ask a person. After taking a few moments to gather her thoughts, she finally brought herself to say that life is about love. Interesting enough, my mother came to the conclusion that life was all about building relationships with people and creating certain connections with them. “Life is about finding people who are compatible with you. Someone with whom you can enjoy their company, and relate with one another” she stated, and continued to say that life is basically about not being alone. My mother, is a single, divorced woman, and considering such, I pondered upon the thought that it seemed that to my mother, life was all about finding a true love and bond between a person (or people). I found that quite appealing.
After consulting each stance my mother took when unraveling her thoughts about her own personal meaning, I have questioned whether or not I personally thought it was up to par with my own possible meaning, and if it can relate on a universal aspect as well. At some instance, I hesitated to believe that one’s own, personal life is based on building relationships with other people. I could not understand how the connection between myself and the others around me could make up my own life’s meaning. I questioned, if that means that an individual’s purpose to life is essentially dependent upon other people?
Other than my mother, I interviewed my twin sister as well. Someone who I can relate to on many different levels, who of coarse is the same age, and has dealt with the same experiences in many instances of myself. I thought it’d be interesting to see her aspect on life, for someone that is closely allied with me. Angelina’s many thoughts were briefly brought up alongside her strong opinion towards the ways of the society we live. She focused on the fact that she believed the key to life is the pursuit of happiness. I of coarse found this idea absurd for the simple reasoning that I don’t think one’s entire life should be based on trying to be happy. With my own opinion in the back of my mind, I shot out questions in which would possibly curve her ideas and make her reconsider her idea of life being about the strive for happiness. To my surprise she seemed full aware of the fact that although constant happiness is virtually unachievable, it did not stop her from believing that is the point of life. Angelina brought up the burden the society places upon people, as well as religions, and stated, “people are forced to practically live as robots”. She continued to explain how the society controls when and how someone is happy, sad, mad etc. Yet with all those typically contradicting ideas understood, her idea of happiness being the meaning of life still remained. Angelina’s view on the meaning of life is to find happiness within oneself, despite the burdens, issues, and cultures one is naturally surrounded by.
Other than the three interviews I’ve conducted, on my search to find my own meaning of life, it was only necessary that as a class, set out to find other people’s perceptions as well. Our class decided to create small survey’s and hand them out to each student within our entire school, including grades 6-12. We separated each grades’ answers, with the exception of 11th and 12th grade, and categorized the two into the senior institute. I happened to be one that not only analyzed each survey and classified each answer, but I was assigned to actually give out the surveys to a number of classes within my own 11th grade. I was able to witness first hand what it was like for my fellow students to answer these questions. Watching each class as a whole take the time to sit down and answer the given questions with what was supposed to be with genuine thought and truth, when each person received the survey, I’d noticed many similar reactions came across groups of people. The types of questions on the survey included: “What is most important in your life right now?”, “What tends to reoccur in your life, and what would you do to change it?”, and “how does the society put boundaries over your definition of the meaning of life” etc.. By appearances, I noticed that many students had just written the first thing that entered their mind. Many seemed to have found a certain comfort in relying on the archetypal “slogan” answers to replace their meaning of life. Catch phrases, and answers that just may sound like a typically good response, appeared to be very popular throughout examining answers.
Through my analysis of the data we collected for my own assigned question, “What tends to re-occur in your life, good or bad? What would you do to change it”, my partner and I had to group each answer and organize it in a way that can be statistical. Being that the question was open ended, and was not multiple choice, it was difficult to sort out all the broad spectrum of answers we received. Having to categorize such varied answers ended up put a certain constraint around my interpretations of each answer. Being that we had to arrange each answer and classify them as a group, there was a limit put on my analysis of each answer, and had in my opinion taken away from each individual. The responses ended up not being not at all specific to each person, but collective instead, which I believe eliminated some of the true meaning and depth behind each persons answers.
With dealing with the question “What is most important to you”, I found that the responses from the senior institute were most peculiar. The 11th and 12th graders, above all the other grades were the most frequent to either answer it or leave it blank. While all the other grades may have simply answered with an “I don’t know” the senior institute had the highest ratio of those who just decided to not answer it at all. From this I get the sense that it seems the older one is, the more comfortable one is with either having their specific answer or just not having one at all. From this I feel that with age, people tend to either direct themselves in the “black” or “white” zone answer, there’s not really much space for any grey areas.
Based off answers to the same question, but with the entire school, we received the most answers (52%) of those saying that finding happiness is the most important thing in their lives. Along with that, we found that the senior institute were the least to say that they cared about finding happiness as opposed to other grades. I find this exceptionally understandable, for the simple fact that with a growing age, comes a rising amount of experience with things. Seniors and juniors have in one way or another experienced more in their life than those younger, because they have lived more years. Older teen have mostly come to realize that life is going to bring struggle and hard times, and one’s happiness isn’t always going to be the key factor to focus on when other things have come their way contradicting that.
While assembling all this information up as a whole, my definition of the meaning of life has further been expanded. I’ve come to understand that many are just plainly uncomfortable answering such a question, while others bluntly have no clue, and few actually have answered with what they think is a clear and complete answer. Majority seem to much rather shrug off an answer as opposed to sitting down and forming some kind of suitable answer. However, I feel that I can take just as much out of an answer with thoughtless reactions, than I can with the attentive answers. I feel as if the nonchalance for an answer just demonstrates the fact that one is very unsure. And uncertainty and hesitation is a much better answer than none at all! The contrast of views of people of varied ages, experiences, backgrounds etc. leads me to believe that with the overlapping answers, maybe there is a meaning of life that can appropriately fit each and every one of us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)