We have all often asked what the meaning of life is. We have all heard the stock answers: God truth love. However, does the question not begin with a question of definition? What do we mean by life? The word is not often examined.
Could it be as simple as existence? Is life the act of breathing? There is something in this idea that unsettles us. Life is more than existence. When we see someone terminally ill, we say that person has no life. Yet they are still alive. It appears that we see life as something bigger than existence. However this can be a dangerous move to make. For if life is more than existence, who gets to decide what a real life is? If we decided that someone is not really living is it permissible to exterminate that person? Is the basis of all totalitarian regimes, the idea that only a few people are actually living? However the thought persists in us. Life is more than breathing.
So just what is this life that is more than existence? It appears that if we argue that it is more than existence,then it must be more than physical. It seems that we view life as something we cannot measure or quantify, but can recognise when we see it. You will often hear people described as full of life. So life seems to have some spiritual component to it. Yet this spiritual understanding of life seems to be based around a conception of freedom. We seem to think those that are full of life are also full of freedom.
Could this be the difference between existence and life? Existence is given to use. Some believe it is given by God,others by our parents. Either way it is given to us. We have no choice at all to exist. We either do or we don’t. In fact both ends of existence are in the main outside of our control. We do not choose when we are born or when we die, in the obvious exception of suicide.
However it appears that we do choose to live. In fact life seeks to be conditioned around participation. It requires an active spirit. Does this mean then, that the passive are not really living? The answer may be to split the passive in two. Those that see being passive as superior lifestyle choice, and those that are simply lethargic. The first group is passive through action, the second is not. The first group it could be argued still retain the spirit of life, and that the second do not.
The second component of what we mean by life is also spiritual. That being memory. We believe that a person has had a life,if they are able to remember it. We are interested in a person’s history. Once they lose memory of who they are, we start to say things such as ‘what kind of life is this? ’ This is because we regard life as a process. Something that does not just happen but the requires experience and time. We believe that one that has many choices and has both won and lost,has lived a ‘real life’. This is also why the insult, ‘get a life’ has meaning. If life depended on existence alone the insult would have no meaning. What it means is that one needs to gain experiences. That the person they are aiming the insult has done nothing.
It must thus follow that the core of what we mean by life lies in action. That when a person is no longer to act,they are no longer really living. It could be argued that breathing itself is an action, and that just surviving then also involves action. However as argued earlier, this is not the sort of action that we mean. We mean action as choice, action that has come from us. This is why we view life as something subjective. It is why we can see things like get out of my life. It can only be our life, and not a collective form of being, because we judge life to be our choices and our ideas. Thus I define life as the ability to at least want to act, and the ability to remember these actions or at least remember why we desired to act. To live is to act.
Could it be as simple as existence? Is life the act of breathing? There is something in this idea that unsettles us. Life is more than existence. When we see someone terminally ill, we say that person has no life. Yet they are still alive. It appears that we see life as something bigger than existence. However this can be a dangerous move to make. For if life is more than existence, who gets to decide what a real life is? If we decided that someone is not really living is it permissible to exterminate that person? Is the basis of all totalitarian regimes, the idea that only a few people are actually living? However the thought persists in us. Life is more than breathing.
So just what is this life that is more than existence? It appears that if we argue that it is more than existence,then it must be more than physical. It seems that we view life as something we cannot measure or quantify, but can recognise when we see it. You will often hear people described as full of life. So life seems to have some spiritual component to it. Yet this spiritual understanding of life seems to be based around a conception of freedom. We seem to think those that are full of life are also full of freedom.
Could this be the difference between existence and life? Existence is given to use. Some believe it is given by God,others by our parents. Either way it is given to us. We have no choice at all to exist. We either do or we don’t. In fact both ends of existence are in the main outside of our control. We do not choose when we are born or when we die, in the obvious exception of suicide.
However it appears that we do choose to live. In fact life seeks to be conditioned around participation. It requires an active spirit. Does this mean then, that the passive are not really living? The answer may be to split the passive in two. Those that see being passive as superior lifestyle choice, and those that are simply lethargic. The first group is passive through action, the second is not. The first group it could be argued still retain the spirit of life, and that the second do not.
The second component of what we mean by life is also spiritual. That being memory. We believe that a person has had a life,if they are able to remember it. We are interested in a person’s history. Once they lose memory of who they are, we start to say things such as ‘what kind of life is this? ’ This is because we regard life as a process. Something that does not just happen but the requires experience and time. We believe that one that has many choices and has both won and lost,has lived a ‘real life’. This is also why the insult, ‘get a life’ has meaning. If life depended on existence alone the insult would have no meaning. What it means is that one needs to gain experiences. That the person they are aiming the insult has done nothing.
It must thus follow that the core of what we mean by life lies in action. That when a person is no longer to act,they are no longer really living. It could be argued that breathing itself is an action, and that just surviving then also involves action. However as argued earlier, this is not the sort of action that we mean. We mean action as choice, action that has come from us. This is why we view life as something subjective. It is why we can see things like get out of my life. It can only be our life, and not a collective form of being, because we judge life to be our choices and our ideas. Thus I define life as the ability to at least want to act, and the ability to remember these actions or at least remember why we desired to act. To live is to act.
By Lloyd Duddridge
The Philosophy Takeaway 'The Meaning of Life' Issue 29
