Filosofia Unisinos Unisinos Journal of Philosophy 20(2):146-154, may/aug 2019 Unisinos – doi: 10.4013/fsu.2019.202.04 On the meaning of “the meaning of life” Sobre o significado do “sentido da vida” Tufan Kıymaz1 ABSTRACT When it comes to a question as notoriously unclear as “What is the meaning of life?”, clarifying the question and its conceptual setting is a necessary step before attempting to answer the question. The analysis of the concept of “the meaning of life” is a twofold task; “the meaning” and “life” both need to be examined. In this paper, I primarily focus on “the meaning.” I argue that, although there is much disagreement and confusion in the literature about the meaning of “the meaning” as it is applied to life, there is one most plausible interpretation of this notion. In the end, even though I do not answer the question of the meaning of life, I propose an account of what a correct answer to the question is supposed to look like, based on my original function analysis of “the meaning”. Keywords: the meaning of life, meaningfulness, meaning in life. RESUMO No tocante a uma questão notoriamente pouco clara como “Qual é o sentido da vida?”, esclarecer a questão e seu marco conceitual é um passo necessário antes de tentar respon- dê-la. A análise do conceito “o sentido da vida” implica uma tarefa dupla: tanto “o sentido” quanto “vida” precisam ser examinados. Neste artigo, enfoco primordialmente o termo “o sentido”. Sustento que, embora haja muita divergência e confusão na literatura sobre o significado de “o sentido” quando este termo é aplicado à vida, há uma interpretação mais plausível dessa noção. No fim, embora não respondendo a questão do sentido da vida, apresento uma proposta de como poderia ser uma resposta correta a essa questão, com base em minha análise da função original de “o sentido”. Palavras-chave: o sentido da vida, significatividade, sentido na vida. 1 Bilkent University, Department of Philosophy. H249, Bilkent, Ankara 06800, Turkey. Email: tufankiy- This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC [email protected]. BY 4.0), which permits reproduction, adaptation, and distribution provided the original author and source are credited. On the meaning of “the meaning of life” To many who are not professional philosophers, “What worthwhile?” “Does (or can) human life have any meaning?” is the meaning of life?” is the paradigm philosophical ques- (Edwards, 2000, p. 133); “What is it all for?” “Why am I here?” tion; however, partly because of its apparent unclarity, this “What is the point of it all?” (Britton, 1969, p. 3); “Does life question does not receive as much attention from academia have a purpose or point?” “Does life have some value?” “Does as is supposed in popular culture. Clarifying this question and my life signify something?” (Thomson, 2003, p. 12); “Why its conceptual setting is a necessary step before attempting to live?” “Why is life worth living?” (Thagard, 2010, p. 1, 3); and answer it. The analysis of the concept of “the meaning of life” many other variations. is a twofold task; “the meaning” and “life” both need to be ex- From the above interpretations, we can identify some amined. In this paper, I primarily focus on “the meaning.” I concepts that are regarded to be closely related, even identical, argue that, although there is much disagreement and confu- to the meaning of life, such as the purpose of life, what makes sion in the literature about the meaning of “the meaning” as life valuable/worthwhile, and the reason/explanation of life. it is applied to life, there is one most plausible interpretation We also see that some interpretations of QML are about the of this notion. existence of human life in general, some are about the life of In the first section, I briefly explore some of the inter- the person who asks the question, and some are about exis- pretations of the question “What is the meaning of life?” tence in its entirety. Most importantly, some questions in the 2 (hereafter QML) and the answers given in the philosophical list are descriptive/explanatory and some are normative . literature. In the second section, I discuss interpretive strate- Let us now briefly survey the answers given to QML gies for handling the apparent ambiguity of QML. In the third in the literature, which will help us better understand about and the fourth sections, I examine two concepts, namely the what different philosophers take the question to be. Accord- psychological meaning in life and the meaningfulness of life, ing to Metz (2001, 2002, 2007, 2013a, 2013b) and Seachris and point out the ways in which they are distinct from (2011), supernaturalism, subjective naturalism, and objective the naturalism are the standard categories of answers given to the meaning of life (hereafter ML) and the ways in which they are confused with ML in the literature. In the fifth section, I pro- normative versions of QML. pose and defend my analysis of “the meaning.” Supernaturalistic theories are those that derive the original function meaning of life from God, from the soul, or from both. For In the end, even though I do not answer the question of the example, according to the “purpose theory,” what gives a life meaning of life, I propose an account of what a correct answer meaning is ac ing according to God’s purpose for that life to the question is supposed to look like, for any given sense of (Metz, 2002, p. 784-7; 2013b, p. 79-117; also see Metz, 2000). the term “life.” Another supernaturalistic theory is Robert Nozick’s “infinity theory.” Nozick argues that life can only be meaningful if it I. The meaning of life: questions is linked to an infinite being, because only an infinite being can be meaningful in itself (Metz, 2002, p. 788-789; Nozick, and answers 1989, p. 167). Similarly, Charles Hartshorne argues that a life can only be meaningful if there is a God who appreciates and Among the philosophers who offer answers to QML, immortalizes (by remembering/knowing) that life (Metz, there is no consensus on what the question is really about. 2002, p. 788). Some supernaturalistic theories emphasize the Here are some questions that are offered in the literature as importance of having an immortal soul. For example, accord- interpretations of QML. ing to “ultimate consequence theory,” life can be meaningful “What, if anything, makes a life meaningful?” (Metz, only if it makes a permanent difference and that is possible 2002, p. 781); “What is it all about?” “What is (are) the pur- only if life will not end (Metz, 2002, p. 789). pose(s) of life (my life)?” “What makes life valuable?” “What Subjective naturalistic theories assert that the meaning makes life worthwhile and not irredeemably futile?” “What of a person’s life consists in her subjective attitudes towards makes life significant?” “Does a particular life achieve a good life, such as setting one’s own purposes and following them, purpose?” “What makes life worth living?” (Seachris, 2011); loving something/someone, or engaging in creative ac ivities “What is the purpose of human existence?” “What should we (Metz, 2002, p. 793, 797). It is important to note that these seek?” “What ends (if any) are really worthwhile?” (Nielsen, so-called subjective naturalist theories are only subjective in 2000, p. 239, 246); “What is the use of a man’s life?” “Under the sense that they explain meaning in terms of subjective at- what conditions is a man’s life of some use?” (G. E. Moore, titudes, but, of course, if a subjective naturalist theory is true, quoted in Moorhead, 1988, p. 128), “Is human life ever then it is objectively true. For example, if the meaning of life is 2 I use the term “normative” in the wider sense. A statement/theory is normative if it states what one should or ought to do, or what is right and what is wrong, but I will also regard any evaluative statement/theory as normative. So, a normative statement/theory is any statement/theory that declares something is better. Furthermore, a concept F is normative if and only if the statement “x is F” implies either that x is better than something else or something is better than x. For example, “good,” “right,” “wrong,” “worthwhile” are normative concepts, and so is “meaningful.” A meaningful life is better than a meaningless life ceteris paribus. I will talk more about the normativity of the term “meaningful” in section 4. Filosofi a Unisinos – Unisinos Journal of Philosophy – 20(2):146-154, may/aug 2019 147 Tufan Kıymaz engaging in creative ac ivities, the preferred creative ac ivities ing to John Cottingham, when we ask about the meaning of would change from person to person, since the desirability of life “we are asking about our relationship with the rest of the an ac ivity is a subjective matter, but, if this theory is true, universe” (qtd. in Seachris, 2009, p. 5). then that one’s life is meaningful only if one engages in cre- Seachris argues that when we ask “What is the meaning ative ac ivities is an objective fact. of life?”, what we mean by “meaning” is what a father means Objective naturalistic theories state that a non-super- by “meaning” when he goes into his children’s playroom after natural objective/mind-independent component is necessary he hears screaming and yelling, finds the children fighting and for meaningfulness. For example, Susan Wolf (2010, 2015) asks in an authoritative manner “what is the meaning of this?” argues that, unless an ac ivity is objectively valuable, it can- (2009, p.