3. Extension of the organism, usually by means of replication.
The meaning of life is understood according to the beliefs that people adhere to. However, all human belief systems are accurate or inaccurate to varying degrees in their description of the world. Moreover, belief systems change over time: from generation to generation; from culture to culture; and era to era. Beliefs that are held today, even by large segments of the population, did not exist yesterday and may not exist tomorrow. Belief systems, be they religious or secular, are therefore arbitrary. If the meaning of life is wanted, a meaning that will transcend the test of time or the particulars of individual beliefs, then an effort to arrive at a truly objective determination must be made. So in order to eliminate the arbitrary, belief systems must be set aside. Otherwise, the meaning of life could not be determined.
Objectively however, life has no meaning because meaning or significance cannot be obtained without reference to some (arbitrary) belief system. Absent a subjective belief system to lend significance to life, one is left with the ‘stuff’ of life, which, however offers no testimony as to its meaning. Without beliefs to draw meaning from, life has no meaning, but is merely a thing; a set of facts that, in and of themselves, are silent as to what they mean. Life consists of a series of occurrences in an infinite now, divorced of meaning except for what may be ascribed by constructed belief systems. Without such beliefs, for many the meaning of life is nothing. While the above are some of the strategies used to explain where and how to find the meaning of life, there are other ways to answer the question “What is the meaning of life?” The answers are not necessarily associated with a specific philosophy in life, but nonetheless, are answers people regularly find themselves giving when they ponder the issue. Surely, however, life means something. And indeed it does when an individual willfully directs his/her consciousness at an aspect of life, deriving from it an individual interpretation, and then giving this interpretation creative expression. Thus the meaning in the act of giving creative expression to what may be ephemeral insights. Stated another way, the meaning of life is an individual’s acts of creation. What, exactly is created, be it artistic or scientific, may speak to the masses, or to nobody, and may differ from individual to individual. The meaning of life, however, is not the thing created, but the creative act itself; namely, that of willfully imposing an interpretation onto the stuff of life, and projecting a creative expression from it. There are so many theories in life, so many questions and still we have yet to come up with the meaning of life. Many theorists have a number of different answers to the “Meaning of Life”. Hermann Hesse said it well. The meaning of life has sparked debate for centuries, and it will never cease. Most everyone wants there to be significance to the life they have lived and despair at the thought that their life's decisions and acts are meaningless and will slip into oblivion at the end of their existence. In order to answer this age-old question about the meaning of life, let us first ask "How did I get here?" What is the meaning of life? Well known Greek philosphers such as Socrates and Plato believed that our purpose in this life was to gain knowledge in preparation for the next life. Other Philosophers such as Epicurus believed that pleasure is the main goal in life. After giving these ideas lots of thought, I have come to my own conclusion that the true meaning of life is far more complex than either of these; far too complex for any human to fully comprehend. In fact these two different philosophies are only part of the grand picture. If it were that easy for men to figure out our lives wouldn't be so messed up now. The meaning of life revolves around many different things. I
2) To search for the meaning of life; and
Recall that naturalism is the view that a physical life is central tolife’s meaning, that even if there is no spiritual realm, asubstantially meaningful life is possible. Like supernaturalism,contemporary naturalism admits of two distinguishable variants,moderate and extreme (Metz 2019). The moderate version is that, whilea genuinely meaningful life could be had in a purely physical universeas known well by science, a somewhat more meaningful life would bepossible if a spiritual realm also existed. God or a soul couldenhance meaning in life, although they would not be majorcontributors. The extreme version of naturalism is the view that itwould be better in respect of life’s meaning if there were nospiritual realm. From this perspective, God or a soul would beanti-matter, i.e., would detract from the meaning available to us,making a purely physical world (even if not this particular one)preferable.
The other answer is that the meaning of life is the will to power.
According to this version of naturalism, meaning in life varies fromperson to person, depending on each one’s variablepro-attitudes. Common instances are views that one’s life ismore meaningful, the more one gets what one happens to want strongly,achieves one’s highly ranked goals, or does what one believes tobe really important (Trisel 2002; Hooker 2008). One influentialsubjectivist has recently maintained that the relevant mental state iscaring or loving, so that life is meaningful just to the extent thatone cares about or loves something (Frankfurt 1988, 80–94,2004). Another recent proposal is that meaningfulness consists of“an active engagement and affirmation that vivifies the personwho has freely created or accepted and now promotes and nurtures theprojects of her highest concern” (Belliotti 2019, 183).
. (2021) 'The Meaning of Life by Richard Taylor'. 23 November.
The consideration of the purpose of life has been ongoing and is never-ending throughout the course of history. The question itself has caused many people to generate many different strong views and opinions based on traditional, ideological backgrounds, and religious outlooks. The deliberation about the meaning of life will never end since there is not one reassuring basic, general answer. Instead, examine the question in another way, like, “What is my purpose in life?” The purpose of life varies from one person to another because of “free will.” While some people believe that for every human, life is called to some divine duty by God, everyone has a different drive that is waiting to be discovered within themselves, and people must set
Singer (1993) defend this sort of view of meaning in life.
Subjectivism was dominant in the middle of the twentieth century, whenpositivism, noncognitivism, existentialism, and Humeanism wereinfluential (Ayer 1947; Hare 1957; Barnes 1967; Taylor 1970; Williams1976). However, in the last quarter of the twentieth century,inference to the best explanation and reflective equilibrium becameaccepted forms of normative argumentation and were frequently used todefend claims about the existence and nature of objective value (or of“external reasons,” ones obtaining independently ofone’s extant attitudes). As a result, subjectivism about meaninglost its dominance. Those who continue to hold subjectivism oftenremain suspicious of attempts to justify beliefs about objective value(e.g., Trisel 2002, 73, 79, 2004, 378–79; Frankfurt 2004,47–48, 55–57; Wong 2008, 138–39; Evers 2017, 32, 36;Svensson 2017, 54). Theorists are moved to accept subjectivismtypically because the alternatives are unpalatable; they arereasonably sure that meaning in life obtains for some people, but donot see how it could be grounded on something independent of the mind,whether it be the natural or the supernatural (or the non-natural). Incontrast to these possibilities, it appears straightforward to accountfor what is meaningful in terms of what people find meaningful or whatpeople want out of their lives. Wide-ranging meta-ethical debates inepistemology, metaphysics, and the philosophy of language arenecessary to address this rationale for subjectivism.