Is meaning man-made?

[Matthew777]

Well, I have intentions, so it seems as though I have meaning in my life.

Just check this out:
http://home.earthlink.net/~startz/frankl.htm

 

[Waiting for the Verdict]

Well, I have intentions, so it seems as though I have meaning in my life. So no problem, then. I can certainly see why it would be a problem to have no intentions - it would be difficult to see how someone lacking intentions could act at all.

Or is something else meant by 'meaning'? Why do people - not you, obviously - suggest that people who do not believe in a deity cannot have meaning in their lives if all they are talking about are intentions?

Again, it wasn't I that made that suggestion. It was Sarte, Camus, etc... I'm not saying you can't make meaning for your life, but that that meaning will have no inherent reality. Their is no platonic ideal of meaning in a truly atheist system. For that matter, I sometimes doubt that there is any meaning in Christian systems...or if there is, the meaning is so evil that we are better off without meaning. I'm saying that if I become an atheist, which I very well might, the idea of meaning in life will have no value to me, just as it didn't for many nihlists and existentialists.

 

[David Gould]

Very interesting. But it does not really answer my question. It mentions meaning as if everyone already knows what is meant by then. It talks about seeking reasons to be happy, rather than seeking happiness, which is fair enough. It also talks about purpose as if that was interchangeable with meaning. I guess you might think I am being difficult here, but maybe you should simply tell me what, in your opinion, the word 'meaning' means in the context of 'a meaning of life'.

 

[Matthew777]

Very interesting. But it does not really answer my question.

...well then perhaps you will actually have to read the book.

 

[David Gould]

Again, it wasn't I that made that suggestion. It was Sarte, Camus, etc... I'm not saying you can't make meaning for your life, but that that meaning will have no inherent reality. Their is no platonic ideal of meaning in a truly atheist system. For that matter, I sometimes doubt that there is any meaning in Christian systems...or if there is, the meaning is so evil that we are better off without meaning. I'm saying that if I become an atheist, which I very well might, the idea of meaning in life will have no value to me, just as it didn't for many nihlists and existentialists.

What do you mean when you use the word 'meaning'? I do not understand. At the moment, meaning has no value to me because I have no idea what people who use the term mean by it. What is it that I should want to have it?

 

[David Gould]

...well then perhaps you will actually have to read the book.

Maybe. But at the moment I am talking to you. You obviously know what you mean when you use the word 'meaning'. Why are you reluctant to share that with me?

 

[Matthew777]

Maybe. But at the moment I am talking to you. You obviously know what you mean when you use the word 'meaning'. Why are you reluctant to share that with me?

Because you have to look in order to understand meaning. If I explained it to you, that would be much too easy.
Just start with the book, it's less than 200 pages.

 

[David Gould]

Because you have to look in order to understand meaning. If I explained it to you, that would be much too easy.
Just start with the book, it's less than 200 pages.

Presumably the book is written in words. As such, it will be explaining meaning to me in words. What is the difference between these words and the words that you can supply right now that makes the words in the book difficult and yours much too easy?

 

[Matthew777]

Presumably the book is written in words. As such, it will be explaining meaning to me in words. What is the difference between these words and the words that you can supply right now that makes the words in the book difficult and yours much too easy?

First of all, I find your claim to not even having the slightest understanding of meaning to be silly. On the other hand, that should not be surprising for an atheist.
Frank's book is easy to read, down to earth, and definitely not preachy. I'm sure you'd enjoy the read.

 

[nadroj1985]

The fun thing about meaning (if it is defined as purpose, anyway) is that things can only have meaning in relation to something else. And, by that very admission, one must also admit that existence as a whole does not have meaning, because there is nothing outside existence as a whole. If you cannot give yourself meaning subjectively (and really, we all can and do, whether we admit it or no) you can find no consolation in an "objective" meaning, at least as far as I can see.

 

[David Gould]

First of all, I find your claim to not even having the slightest understanding of meaning to be silly. On the other hand, that should not be surprising for an atheist.

Assume, then, that I am pedant and do not wish for any misunderstandings. I want to know what you mean when you talk about meaning. You gave me a dictionary definition. Do you agree that meaning - in the sense of a meaning of life - is the same as intention, for example?

Why are you refusing to tell me what you mean by meaning? Surely you know what you mean when you say the word? Or perhaps you actually don't know. Either way, it is confusing that you do not want to say.

Frank's book is easy to read, down to earth, and definitely not preachy. I'm sure you'd enjoy the read.

I am sure I would enjoy the read.

 

[Matthew777]

The fun thing about meaning (if it is defined as purpose, anyway) is that things can only have meaning in relation to something else.

Meaning is found in finding a purpose higher than oneself, which may or may not be a personal God.

TAnd, by that very admission, one must also admit that existence as a whole does not have meaning, because there is nothing outside existence as a whole.

There is always the uncaused first cause of all existence.

If you cannot give yourself meaning subjectively (and really, we all can and do, whether we admit it or no) you can find no consolation in an "objective" meaning, at least as far as I can see.

You know what, you should read more existentialism. Please start with Kierkegaard.

 

[Matthew777]

Why are you refusing to tell me what you mean by meaning?

The meaning of life is its all-embracing purpose, the reason for existence to be found in existence.

 

[nadroj1985]

First of all, I find your claim to not even having the slightest understanding of meaning to be silly.

Then I think you really don't understand what's going on here. The thing that a lot of people don't realize is that, when someone attacks a concept (such as "meaning", objective morality, or God) they are attempting to make it meaningless.

When I say I don't believe in God, for instance, what I mean by that statement is that I cannot form a meaningful concept of God in my mind. It's not that I know exactly what theists are talking about when they say "God," and I've just rejected that concept -- it's that I have investigated theists' claims and found that I cannot figure out what they mean when they say "God." So, I lack a belief in any God, because I don't have a good idea as to what one is.

It is the same, I think, with David and your conception of meaning.

 

[Matthew777]

When I say I don't believe in God, for instance, what I mean by that statement is that I cannot form a meaningful concept of God in my mind.

...which is a weakness of the mind and soul that you need dire help for.

 

[nadroj1985]

Meaning is found in finding a purpose higher than oneself, which may or may not be a personal God.

OK, good, that was the assumption I was operating under.

There is always the uncaused first cause of all existence.

Well, not from my point of view But, even if there was, does God exist? If so, he is part of "existence as a whole." Look at it this way: what is God's purpose?

You know what, you should read more existentialism. Please start with Kierkegaard.

I'm actually reading a little Kierkegaard right now. Confusing as hell, but infinitely interesting.

 

[David Gould]

The meaning of life is its all-embracing purpose, the reason for existence to be found in existence.

Okay. So it is an all-embracing purpose.


1. Does this mean that every person has the same purpose?
2. Is this purpose imposed on us from the outside or can we choose whatever purpose we want to?


What do you mean by 'the reason for existence'? Is this 'the reason we exist' or 'the reason we should choose to continue to exist' or something else?


I should mention here that the reason we exist is, from an atheist perspective, just because - certain events happened and those events led to our existence. With regard to my second option, what about that reason can imply a should? Shoulds, from the perspective of someone who does not believe in an absolute morality, are non-concepts. Thus, the things I raised are things I have problems with.

 

[Matthew777]

Well, not from my point of view But, even if there was, does God exist? If so, he is part of "existence as a whole." Look at it this way: what is God's purpose?

Creation and Big Bang Cosmology
Dr. William Lane Craig
http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/creation.html

 

[Matthew777]

Okay. So it is an all-embracing purpose.

Yes, either for the entirety of the universe or the universe within the individual.

What do you mean by 'the reason for existence'? Is this 'the reason we exist' or 'the reason we should choose to continue to exist' or something else?

One could say that it is both.

I should mention here that the reason we exist is, from an atheist perspective, just because - certain events happened and those events led to our existence.

And the mathematical improbability that the universe as we know it arose by chacne, combined with the uncaused first cause necessitated by the Big Bang, shows the atheist perspective to be foolish.

 

[David Gould]

Yes, either for the entirety of the universe or the universe within the individual.

I am unclear what this means. So either the entire universe has a purpose or individuals have purposes?

One could say that it is both.

I am assuming that you do say that. You have already read my objections to that.

And the mathematical improbability that the universe as we know it arose by chacne, combined with the uncaused first cause necessitated by the Big Bang, shows the atheist perspective to be foolish.

I was not talking about the universe - I was talking about why I exist. I exist because certain events happened; if they had not happened, I would not exist. The reason I exist is because those certain events happened.