THE MEANING OF LIFE
INTRODUCTION
Your purpose in life is simply to help on the purpose of
the universe.
- George
Bernard Shaw
Great,
thanks George – but what the heck is “the purpose of the universe”? Indeed, does
the universe have a purpose at all, or is it the purposeless, meaningless
accident many would have us believe?
Life
raises many big questions: is there a God; does life have any special meaning;
why is there something rather than nothing; how to be truly happy with a life
that must end? Is it possible to answer the big questions posed by life in one
“Theory of Everything”? Indeed, can there be absolute “T” Truth in a relative
universe or must all truths be necessarily relative and personal? It is my intention in the following
three essays to explore these questions – to explore life for meaning beyond
the personal, purpose beyond the animal, and truths beyond the relative.
A grand aim, and many of the brightest of us would say that I am
wasting my time. The majority of scientists and philosophers currently hold the
position that the discoveries of science in the centuries since Galileo indicate
that the universe occurred accidentally in the first place, proceeding mechanistically
in the second, and purposelessly in the third. Everything in the universe is the
result of an initial accident – the Big Bang – even the “miracle” of life is
just a chemical consequence which is evolving naturally with no grand design, to
no particular end. Humans are just another animal, having evolved through the natural
selection of random mutations to be the creatures we see before us. While
humans do exhibit some odd behaviours, these, if observed
closely enough through the neo-Darwinian lens, can be completely and
satisfactorily interpreted in terms of natural, blind animal survival instincts
and genetic imperatives. Some scientists have come to proudly describe
themselves as evolutionary-biologists, or evolutionary-psychologists – in other
words, as ideologues. Philosophy, once described as a footnote to Plato, has
now become a handmaiden to science. Darwinism has thereby become a new religion
– the House of Disbelief. Its creed – any talk of special meaning, ultimate
purpose or existence beyond this, is wishful nonsense – humans are just “lucky
meat puppets”.
This “H” House of
Disbelief has waged a great debate of increasing intensity with the House of
God over the centuries since Galileo established the cosmology in the Bible was
wrong. But the debate is circular and has seldom raised itself above the banal.
The House of God declares: “The Hebrew god is the one true God because the
Bible says so”, and the House of Disbelief ripostes with: “We can disprove that
god therefore there is no God”. Nietzsche declared Disbelief the victor years
ago, claiming that: “God is dead – and we have killed him”. Philosophy has
danced on “His” grave ever since – but what if we are dancing on the wrong
grave. Further, what if both our major “H” Houses have it wrong – and we are
dancing on an empty one?
Is the
incredible, straw god of the Hebrew nomads the only possible Divine? Is “his”
death at the hands of our sciences the Death of God – or just the death of a
religion? Could there be a God other than the primitive god of pre-scientific,
semi-nomadic, desert tribes – a rational “D” Divine? Because theism is weak,
does this mean that atheism is strong? Atheism only exists because of theism. Are
the majority of humanity atheists (believing there is no God) or are we
actually anti-theists (disbelieving religion)? And could there be special
meaning and ultimate purpose in life other than the incredible religious idea
of life as a test for eternal reward or punishment – a rational meaning and
purpose?
The House of
God’s model of meaning and purpose is bankrupt, but there is much in life that
is not well explained by the House of Disbelief’s theory of everything also – much
that does not resemble the mechanistic proceeding from the accidental. For
example, the biggest mystery for science is why anything exists in the first
place – why is there something for our sciences to examine rather than nothing?
And the creativity of the universe – why is the universe so highly creative when
all should naturally be chaos, any accidental order quickly reduced by entropy;
how did life come about – inorganic chemistry become organic? When we consider some
of the products of life, especially humanity, things get – in the words of
The first two
essays in this series will examine our “H” Houses – of God and of Disbelief. In
the third essay I will venture outside these Houses to examine the above mysteries
that hint of special meaning and ultimate purpose – maybe even of a rational
“D” Divine?. I will examine our highly creative
universe and humanity’s strange role in its creativity. I will examine also the
apparent human condition – of being a spiritual being in an animal body – and
whether human life, after natural, animal imperatives are met, has an
ultimately spiritual purpose? I will search, in other words, for “T” Truths.
This is
intended to be a rational exploration. I have nothing to sell, belong to no
Church, and like to believe that I subscribe to no ideology.
If I have
nothing to sell, why am I doing this? I think that humanity has reached a dangerous
point in its evolution, where our spiritual evolution is lagging our
technological evolution – we have atom bombs in the hands of stone-age
religions, and material ideologies which deny our spirituality altogether.
Some feel that
humanity is unworthy to survive, that it is greedy, nasty, brutal – even evil.
Some feel it is full of original sin – that “there is no health in us”. I disagree, there is much in humanity which is magnificent.
Every day there are great human acts of unselfish bravery which go unreported. Someone
once said that “The world knows nothing of its greatest heroes” – and it’s
true. There are many who quietly struggle against repressive religious and secular/political
ideologies, people who suffer cruel deaths and torture because they believe that
life can be better – and they are winning – you don’t have to go back many
years to see how far we have come from public executions, from slavery and
child labour, from frequent cruelty to animals. There may be other life-forms
in this universe (or even other universes) some of which may be relatively “better”,
but I am a member of this particular life-form and the overwhelming majority of
humans make me proud to be so. I also enjoy the great creativity of the human
species: its art, music, literature, buildings, machines, sciences – and look
forward to what it might yet achieve. But, if we are to have a future we must seek
to understand any possible meaning and purpose of life better – we must better understand
what will truly make us lastingly happy. If we can determine how to be lastingly
happy we may at last understand who we truly are – and what the fuck we may be
doing here?
This is an
attempt to approach the absolute with a mind born of the relative. To walk as far as I can down Buddha’s “Road to Truth” (although I
am neither a Buddhist nor an anything elseist).
I hope I do not wander down Shakespeare’s “primrose path to the eternal
bonfire”? I’m sure that many religious people will say I have, but I can’t
believe in their ancient, awful, parochial, male “g” gods of fear and anger. The
essays are listed below. They will be continually updated as my exploration
advances. I like to think I am on a quest for Truth rather than trying to win
an argument, so send me an email through the link if you have any good ideas.
The essay
titles are: An Examination
of the House of Disbelief;
An Examination of the House of God;
What are my
qualifications? I am a philosopher – as is everyone who gets out of bed in the
morning.
Graeme Meakin.