Common Perspectives On The Meaning Of Life

How might these questions about human nature, purpose, and flourishing, be answered by those holding a Pantheistic or Atheistic (choose one) worldview?

Susan Wolf addresses these questions an aim to bring out the distinctive characteristics of the reasons and motives that give our lives meaning. Wolf claims that "meaningful lives are laws of active engagement and projects of worth" (Wolf, 206). Suggesting that when a person is actively engaged in anything they feel alive and life is more worth living. Nevertheless, Wolf explains that neither religion or science is sufficient for leading a meaningful life, claiming that a life of passion could corrupt the pursuit of happiness if you decide to dedicate your life to how you feel. Suggesting that working toward some goal that is substantial than yourself, can be hard work if you don 't have any passion or connection to it. According to Wolf, the subjective element is necessary for a meaningful life and arises from active engagement in some activity that one loves. In addition, the passive attachment to objectively valuable things are not sufficient for meaning. The feeling of fulfillment originates when “one is doing what one loves, or when one is engaging in activities by which one is gripped or excited” (Wolf, 207).

This document explores the meaning of human life, its purpose, what it serves for and also

Differences in culture, history, geography, and collective temperament all make for diverse starting points. . . . But beyond these differences, the same goal beckons” (Prothero 1). This is a great approach because it puts the differences in religions in perspective while still showing they all show a common goal. The second scholarly approach is the ‘4 Step Process’ which is also by Stephen Prothero. First, there must be a problem. Second, there must be a solution to this problem, which also serves as a religious goal. Third, there must be a technique for moving from this problem to this solution. Fourth, there must be an exemplar who chart this path from problem to solution. This is a great approach because it helps to point out the differences across and inside religious traditions. The third scholarly approach is the ‘Question of Ultimate Meaning’. William Portiers approach deals with the deep or great questions about the human condition that we can only answer ourselves. “Why are we here? What becomes of us in the end? What is our final purpose? What is a human being and how ought we to behave toward one another?” (Portier 17). This is a great approach because it makes you personally come up with answers to those questions and to answer those questions, you must look at many different religious traditions. The fourth scholarly approach also written by William Portier deals with ‘The Dialectical

Many philosophers have spent countless hours contemplating human existence and human purpose, but overall they are all analyzing one question- what is the best way to live? In almost every culture around the world, life is cherished and people have come up with religions and philosophies that suggest answers to the question concerning the best way to live. Some philosophies, such as Ayn Rand’s objectivism and Aristotle’s views on happiness, are centered around pursuing one’s own happiness and leading a fulfilling life. However, actually successfully living in the best way by pursuing one’s own happiness is quite challenging due to the complex restraints of human nature and human flaws. In order

The sixth question simply asks if there is purpose to life. I answered that I believed that everyone on this planet is put here for a certain purpose that God wants us to fulfill. It could be simple as learning important lessons or maybe to lead people to greater goals and higher enlightenment. This is tied into the Christian worldview because God sent Jesus down to Earth to die for our sins so we should be able to complete our purpose God has put in front of us.

Society tends to live day to day without much question of their own existence. Humans are born into the world and without second thought begin to live their lives, but there comes a time when individuals begin to question the reason for their being. In Richard Taylor’s, “The Meaning of Life”, Taylor explores the thought that our existence, when viewed externally without our prejudices, is fundamentally pointless. A thorough analysis of Taylor’s ideas will be given to understand the reasoning behind his thoughts, his argument will then be defended from counter arguments that state that the meaning behind any entity’s life could have any alternative meaning.

Spirituality is an interdependence of an individual to the religion and religious beliefs, such as, visiting to temple, church and other religious buildings and participating on spiritual activities (praying, meditation, worshiping and donation). In my opinion, spirituality is the way of existing in the society and the world because every human being learn to adjust in the society from their religious beliefs and value systems which are unique among various people. Spirituality helps to find the meaning of different circumstances of the individual’s life, which provides better solution of any problem in their life. Similarly, spirituality explains the human boundaries which promotes the safety and belongingness among various people. Also it is the way of understanding the world and their role in the world.

Most people want to live a meaningful life. They feel that is important to live a life that is sufficient and worthwhile. The meaning of life has been debated among many people and philosophers throughout history. There have been several theories used to try to explain the true purpose of life in some subjective or objective perspective. Louis Pojman argued that religion gives every individual life meaning to it and those who choose not to believe have no morality or purpose in life. On the other hand, suppose someone would object Pojman theory and believed that life with or without God is not required for finding meaning in life. In the following paper, I will explain Pojman theories about religion giving meaning to life and what that life may consist of. Second, I wish to explain how an atheist would reject his premise and provide a response to how a person of faith would respond to and atheists argument.

Analyse the key beliefs of a religious and secular world view in relation to ultimate questions – Taylor Murfitt.

In “The Meaning of Lives,” Wolf asserts that the question “What is the Meaning of Life?” is inherently unintelligible because it is uncertain what the question is asking. In other words it is too general because it has no specified context. Wolf then acknowledges, however, that there is value in examining the meaningfulness of a life. This is because she observes people wanting meaning as an unchangeable fact. While there is no grand reason for meaning, she suggests that we can create value through what we do in our life. In her work, Wolf constructs a framework on how to obtain meaning in one’s life. I will examine her view, then critically discuss the positive attributes and the shortcomings. Wolf does a sufficient job to outline a possible way to achieve meaning. However, I will argue that a definition for the meaningful life that does not include morality and happiness is not sufficient. Lastly, I will express the subjective and objective tension that weakens her stance.

Ever since the existence of a civilization, the fundamental question of how and why; to identify and explain the human’s nature and how man is ought to live, has been the key element in philosophical world. Many philosophers provided and made public of how they viewed this world as, and the human in it, and experimented themselves with their approaches, however, no philosophers could possibly bring forth the same views as other philosophers nor yield an answer which do not leave a sense of doubt in our mind. None of the theories were incorrect, but none of them were right in the sense that even two

The Existential questions which are important to ask are, Why do we suffer? What happens after we die? and does god exist? Many religions will have answers for these questions, however the comparison between the Catholic viewpoint and the Secular Humanist viewpoint will be argued in this report.

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

Through out history, as man progressed from a primitive animal to a "human being" capable of thought and reason, mankind has had to throw questions about the meaning of our own existence to ourselves. Out of those trail of thoughts appeared religion, art, and philosophy, the fundamental process of questioning about existence. Who we are, how we came to be, where we are going, what the most ideal state is....... All these questions had to be asked and if not given a definite answer, then at least given some idea as to how to begin to search for, as humans probed deeper and deeper into the riddle that we were all born into.