The Meaning of Life

Apparently “what is the meaning of life?” is one of the biggest philosophical questions, yet it is not something I have wrestled with since I was single digits in years of age. I am quite content with my understanding of this particular question and have not found need to update my views. Often the things we are best at or most right about are those things we see as so obvious we neglect to share these insights due to an assumption that they are unanimous held beliefs. It is for this reason I write this essay, but I suspect I will offer no more answers than any other attempt. This is because solutions to the internal world of thought, reason and emotion are not directly transferable. We can share and describe things using cumbersome and awkward tools but we cannot give or show in the internal world as we can in the external world of space, time and objects. This means that although I have have found the meaning of life, it is the meaning of my life and thus not universally applicable to others. It may help others to find the meaning of their lives but this is the best it can hope to do.

Our own personal answers to questions such as the meaning of life are part of something analogous to a complex internal logic gate network. Each answer we have to one of these questions provides a certain way to respond and feel about the things that happen to us. This system could be called our outlook on life. Each person builds their system with different foundations and to different design specifications based on their life's circumstances. The systems act in many ways to aid us but can be our undoing should a foundation of the system fall apart due to change in circumstance or new reasoning and lead the individual to breakdown or insanity. The benefits these personal systems offer when they a working are; as a guide to direct us in new situations and as a defence mechanism to deter negative effects on the mind that may result from unfavourable situations. They offer consistency of character and a grounded contentedness when the system is robust. Some peoples systems however are not linked together and fall apart when multiples areas are needed simultaneously, other peoples are rigid and shear apart as needs and understandings change.

These systems are something we build up from our life experiences and understandings so that we may affect the emotions we feel as a result of events. The autonomous body desired the use of reason to increase it's effectiveness, the body however did not desire to lose sight of it's autonomous aim of procreating. To combat this problem the body evolved emotion to affect the reasoning part of the brain to ensure it is used towards the desired ends of the body. Emotions are essentially an interface between the physical body and the consciousness, they are the language of the body that enable it to communicate to and influence the conscious. Emotions and reason are both powerful influences, and that battle rages in most of us with unpredictable results. An individuals outlook on life is the consciousness’s response to the emotional control of the autonomous body. With careful design, reason is able to temper negative emotion. More importantly however, reason may be used to harmonise positive emotion with bodily function, desire and action. One can ultimately reach the stage where their rational responses and emotional ones coincide without the conscious having to give ground to the emotional “front”. This is a state in which an individual has achieved their maximum freedom in regards to their selfish genes.

The meaning of life is a large part of each persons system, it is also somewhat central and as such interlinked with most other areas. This means that my answers to these specific questions only work for my particular system. In order for them to work in the same way for you then you would need to adopt my entire outlook on everything, of which the problems are so clear I wish to waste no time on them before moving on. The fact that I have found my own meaning for life is even less useful than only being applicable to people with my outlook as it is also only useful for people with my outlook that are in my situation. Should my situation change in the appropriate manner my system will cease to function and I will need to adapt it, rebuild it of suffer the consequences. The question of what is the meaning of life may be one of humanity's greatest questions, but each of the many answers to it are all of limited usefulness.

Meaning is a very human thing, we, like animals, are equipped with a drive that is outside of any system we construct, but this drive is an urge not a meaning. We must ascribe our own meanings to these drives and understand them so that our conscious is at peace with our body. Animals do not have this requirement for they do not have the same need of meanings. I must make the distinction at this stage between a psychological basis for giving meaning to life and a divine purpose for being. Some would say that there is a very specific reason that we exist and that we each have parts to play. This may be true and I can offer no proof either way. If it were the case I expect it would be related solely to our reason or our pure will, as many have named it, and not of our physical bodies. This is because life seems as much to me a physical process as the tides, while the machinery of our bodies is a remarkable thing it is the nature of consciousness that is the real mystery. We have logical explanations for the biological process of life that use the same laws of logic as our understandings of Newtonian mechanics or solving sudoku puzzles. These we do not have for consciousness and as such I can entertain ideas of a religious nature. My lack of proof either way however means this essay will be entirely psychological and not theological. While religion is included as part of my system it is the psychological benefits of an individuals beliefs that I am concerned with here and not the validity of those beliefs.

The best reason to have a reason-for-life is not that there necessarily is a reason, but that life is much more pleasant and manageable if you do have one. Many other good things may come of having a robust reason for life other than happiness but it is a worthy kicker none the less. Obviously what each person thinks constitutes a good life will depend a lot on what their view is on the meaning of life and so stating the benefits of having a meaning for life becomes rather circular. As such I shall go on to describe my personal outlook on the meaning of life and then relate this problem specifically to that.

I believe there to be three categories that cover all of the various manifestations of people's aims in life. The first is our animal or biological drive to have children. Our body, the vessel in which an individual's conscious resides, is a construct to reproduce in an attempt to immortalize the genes. The body offers rewards to those consciousness's that are obedient, no surprise that the greatest rewards are reserved for obeying the primary function of procreation (I do not speak from experience here, only observation, and would welcome any differing opinion on this subject). People with strong family units and ties are those who are most invested in the first category of meanings for life. By caring for and helping those they consider family they are able to lead a content a fulfilled life in many ways. People who would like nothing more than to have a family they could love and care for, but cannot attain, one will struggle to find fulfilment and contentedness in life. While a simple and elegant solution it is far from a guaranteed one. I describe it as simple and elegant as there are not a great many ways to go about having a family. Additionally we are, for the most part, equipped with the ability to start proceedings. No work or effort is required to reach a stage, for most people, to be able to conceive.

The second of my categories is that of personal achievement. People who set themselves goals and targets from financial ones to within industry, from sporting conquests to bettering one's self in general life. (Anyone who has read my essays in chronological order will be realising the links between this one and the one on people types, this essay however should probably come first in terms of content.) Those people who focus most on this category tend to have multiple goals they continually achieve rather than a single life aim. They live more in the present, always working towards the goals in sight and making new ones to replace the ones that are accomplished. While it is, more often than not, a myriad of aims it is possible to reduce these into groups that can have a broader more ambiguous name such as self-bettering or the others listed above. Personal achievement satisfies ones ego, often enabling one to feel good about their body and their mind. They have evidence, by accomplishing goals, to support a positive emotion towards ones complete self. The goals they set themselves give purpose to their life and will be decided based on the individuals “out look on life system”.

The third and final category is that of the higher cause. This may be a religious, a political, a social, or a cultural higher cause. By dedicating a portion of ones life to something that they believe to be in some way altruistic, they suffer less guilt for their existence and the happiness they have. As such they are enabled to feel more comfortable in themselves and enjoy more life and happiness through having made this form of sacrifice. Again, which particular cause they donate their efforts to will depend on how they are able to use their outlook on life system to prioritise and justify the various options. It does not really matter weather you do the good work of god or build schools in communities to poor to make them or pursue a political career in order that you might help your fellow man provided you think it is the right thing to do, either it is the most important thing to you or the thing you are able to offer most to. The reason it does not matter which cause is focused on is due to the desired results being internal and not external. The benefits of each of the various causes will have widely differing effects in external reality but to each person helping a cause they believe in they will be attaining a very similar feeling of having a right to exist because it is in some way good.

The latter two categories are both ways of using reason in combination with naturally evolved emotions to create an internal harmony. Those with personal aims do something that makes them feel good and then justify that good feeling by using reason to compare their level of achievement, either with a past self or their peers. Those who put their efforts into the higher cause have reasoned that the higher cause is a worthy and just thing to do, they then use the positive emotions they get from helping the cause to justify their initial reasoning. With the first category it tends to be a desire to have family that leads to reasoning about a decision to do so. Harmony in this sense is achieved by accepting the bodies desires rather than reasoning ways to a happy compromise between body and mind. All three are simply different ways to align reason and emotion or body and mind. The higher causes people tend to be where mind has negotiated the most advantageous compromise with the body however in the family people the body has obtained the best deal. The people of personal aims are somewhere between the two. This is not to suggest that any particular investment in one of these categories over any other is better or worse. If it keeps you happy and hurts no one it would seem to be entirely good.

A notable common factor with each of these three categories is their ability to offer some form of possible immortality. With the offspring it is immortality of the genes, with personal achievement it is the recognition from others and with the higher cause it is the effect had on others. Some have said that life is always trying to create, some claim life it trying to be free, both of which hold truth but not so clearly or abundantly as the observation that life is trying only to survive as its primary objective, in any way that it can.

The important thing to observe with the theory of the three categories is that it is far from rigid. The best comparison for this theory is that of a balanced diet. We are in best mental health when we have a selection of values in life that we adhere to which cover a selection of bases. This kind of outlook provides the most robust system where, even if some foundations are sent into disarray the others may support them while they are rebuilt. For an individual to have a family is a good thing in general for that person, it is likewise a good thing for that person to be part of something bigger and to have some personal aims and to perform some altruistic activities. Not only will the manifestations of peoples aims and the greater causes they invest in be affected by their individual outlook systems but also the requirements they have for differing levels of these three categories in their overall self justification. Some people may well be complete with only one category catered for but these people will be in the minority. Most people can eat all of the same things and survive by eating only a few things, yet diets vary greatly across the globe. This is what I would liken peoples attaining meaning in life to; you can gain meaning from a vast array of things in life yet you need only a few to survive and there is great variance in what people need and more still in what they attain.

Another area of relevance to this topic is a theory of my fathers. While it does not directly relate it can still be incorporated within the dietary analogy. He has always claimed that in life on needs an outlet for physical expression or exertion, and outlet for the creative and an outlet for the logical. To achieve this he canoes regularly, plays chess and poker and is always crafting things such as an ornate bird table or a sculpture. While I think this is not relevant to the meaning of life I think it is of huge importance in the harmonisation of the self. Once an agreeable compromise between mind and body has been reached, applying my fathers system should then enhance the advantages of unity further by strengthening and encompassing more manifestations of our selves. This is like saying; once your diet has some proteins, carbohydrates and some fibre then you should aim to ensure you are getting all the required vitamins.

A final warning against putting all of ones eggs in the same basket is the last thing on the agenda. It is easy to see how one can fulfil a desire to have a family and a desire to be altruistic with the single proverbial stone. Working for a higher cause can also be easily married with personal aims and so forth. The problem is then the strength of your outlook system when you attain a great deal of your mental nutrition from one source. Should something befall that source the damage to the individual will be great, the expression “their world collapses” springs to mind. The best approach therefore is to consider, where possible, in every choice you make; how can this benefit me, my friends and family and the greater good. The best people are those who never lose sight of any of these three things.

Having reached the end of this essay I feel I must apologise to the reader for having been somewhat mislead. This essay has offered no insights as to what the meaning of life is. Instead it has offered some explanations of the relationship between body and mind and how this may be manipulated via reasoned understanding of our existence to retain mental health and fulfilment. This is because once divine higher purposes have been disregarded due to no evidence either way you are left with a biological reason for you life which often leaves us feeling fragile, alone and insignificant. Beyond these two extremes of the mystical loving creator and the cold indifferent science there is little meaning to be found. Life just is, and because it is we may as well make it as good for ourselves and others as it can be, which is more common sense than meaning. The scientific view does not have to be pessimistic, life is still full of beauty and wonder, it just requires a little more coming to terms with. Nor does it have to be mutually exclusive from religious views, those people who are able to hold grounded views of both a scientific and a religious nature simultaneously will be the people best able to achieve contentedness and harmony.

What I am trying to say is that religion is a good thing for personal well being and may also provide the best answers to the meaning of life. As there is no proof to the latter we should come to terms with our biological existences and give meaning to the merits of improving existences. It is of great interest that most religions teach values that are in line with improving existence, it almost suggests that there is no meaning after all and the goals of improving life are all that are to be found in any search of this nature. I will discuss more fully the possible meanings that could be derived for life if one is to accept an assumption of some divine creator in a later essay. This essay however provides assistance to all kinds of people, atheist, agnostic or religious, so while being useless at providing any possible meanings for life, it is far from useless in helping life as it were. Which is, after all, our only logical aim in life as previously discussed.