Meaning of Life
Many influential philosophers throughout history have offered a response to the issue of what, if anything, makes life worthwhile, albeit they rarely state it in these terms. The systematic endeavor to determine what individuals have in mind when they think about the issue or what they mean when talking about life’s meaning is one component of the philosophy of life’s purpose (Martin, 1993). For many theorists, phrases like relevance and significance are interchangeable with “meaningful.” Insufficiently revealing is also a problem; however, some people distinguish between meaningfulness and importance. Yet, the dichotomy between the problem of the meaning of life and the nature of existence is also enjoyable.
Raymond Martin’s views
Invisible and peculiar practical-philosophical confrontation is revealed in “A Fast Car and a Good Woman” by Raymond Martin. Martin observes life’s problems—poverty, illness, suffering, misery, and so on—and questions the concept of purpose. Humans should avoid these difficulties if they can; if they cannot, they must accept them. Part of the challenge is figuring out which situations humans can and cannot avoid. Death is a unique issue that raises questions about life’s meaning, but Martin is not sure how it relates to the topic of whether lives are worth living.
On the other hand, Martin considers the initial analysis problematic, asking people to examine a point in life when their subjective best time was. He asks if they are concerned about the purpose of life at the time of their apex experience (Martin, 1993). We had solved the riddle of life at that point, and there were no purpose problems. This suggests that pleasure is essential because happy individuals do not see inquiries as difficulties. If there is a life difficulty, it is finding a way to be content. Thus, the dichotomy of life and its meaning collides with the existential philosophical position of subjectivism.
Tolstoy’s views
Tolstoy is the archetypal example of a man whose existential anxiety bursts forth from his pages, leaving the reader wondering what it all means in the end. The problem of needs was primarily Tolstoy’s dilemma because he had everything, but he realized that it did not persist and was not gratifying. When people acquire what they want, they constantly want more or something else or a different version of what they already have. Tolstoy was overtaken with minutes of bewilderment and then a sense of lifelessness as if he did not know how to live or what to do, and he lost himself and became sad. However, it happened, and he went on with his life as usual. Then those perplexing minutes were replayed repeatedly, constantly in the same format.
Richard Taylor and Nagel’s views
Richard Taylor, like Nagel, situates philosophical problems regarding the meaning of existence in the conflict between objective meaninglessness of “endless pointlessness” in his words—and subjective meaning. In his opinion, our lives are objectively pointless but not intrinsically worthless (Martin, 1993). In other words, the tasks individuals set for themselves, the things to which they knelt day after day, realizing one by one their flimsy plans, were precisely the things in which their wills were profoundly involved, precisely the things in which their interests resided. There was no need to ask questions, and they were no longer required; the day, like the existence, was adequate in itself. Without a doubt, the best way to look at everything in life, Nagel and Tylor, is silence.
In Taylor’s opinion, subjective significance is found in activities in which our wills are involved. According to Taylor, a human being responds to the need to live as soon as he takes his first breath. He does not care if it’ll be worthwhile or if anything significant will come of it any more than the worms and birds do. The purpose in life is to be alive since it is in his nature. The ability to start a new mission, a new castle or a new bubble is what matters. It only matters because it needs to be done, and he is motivated to do it.
Gautama Buddha’s views
Life always produces dissatisfaction because of the multiple human desires. That is the core of Gautama Buddha’s contribution to solving life’s problems. It might or might not be the best option. Martin said that one should return to the times in one’s life when one’s subjective best was at hand because such times provided total satisfaction (Martin, 1993). Perfect contentment is a type of victory over death since a person might be so profoundly in love, so pleased that they believe they could die at any time. When people reach that level of fulfillment, they have won the war for happiness, and death is no longer a threat. Our philosophical and moral victory, however, is only transitory. Death is a constant antagonist, and desire is its ally because we cannot be pleased just once. The itch of desire returns, the struggle resumes, and the battle continues until death stops it forever.
Work Cited
Martin, R. (1993). A fast car and a good woman [E-book].