“Life Is Meaningless”
…or is it?
As I was doing research for my article on emptiness, I came across a number of people and sources that stated essentially that “life is meaningless”. At first, I thought this was generally was the same point as I was making in the emptiness article, but after reading further, realized that not only was it a very different point, but rather was simply incorrect in some ways and framed in an overly negative manner in others.
The Viewpoint
There have been a large number of highly intelligent and high-profile people that have made the point that “life is meaningless” over time. Gandhi himself once said “Everything we do is futile, but we must do it anyway.” There is a popular and lengthy “philosophical horror” book on the concept. There are pages and pages of google results for the question. But what exactly do people mean when they say that life is meaningless? Woody Allen frequently has discussed the concept of life being meaningless, and has broken his views down in detail. He says:
“I firmly believe, and I don’t say this as a criticism, that life is meaningless… The truth of the matter is, when you think of it, every 100 years, there’s a big flush, and everybody in the world is gone. And there’s a new group of people. And that gets flushed, and there’s a new group of people. And this goes on and on interminably — and I don’t want to upset you — toward no particular end, no rhyme or reason. And the universe, as you know from the best of physicists, is coming apart, and eventually there will be nothing, absolutely nothing… What I would recommend — this is the solution that I’ve come up with — is distraction.”
Now we have a very interesting point here, one that we will spend the rest of this piece dismantling, because when you read it here it seems very convincing, but when it comes right down to it, it’s bullshit.
First, we must acknowledge the truth of what has been said. Yes, it’s true we will all die at some point. And yes its also true that earth and all the things we have been able to influence will cease to exist at some point. The question is, does that mean that nothing has meaning?
Absolutely not. To make this distinction is at best a grammatical error and at worst a highly pessimistic distortion lens on life. What is being said here is that nothing has permanence. And there is a huge difference between the words “meaning” and “permanence”.
We can firmly establish that it’s the truth that nothing is permanent. I also don’t think anyone would be surprised by this. If you tell someone that nothing is permanent, I doubt anyone would regard this as a deeply insightful statement or want to argue with you about it. It’s common knowledge. But at the same time, this statement is also not something that makes people uncomfortable like saying nothing has meaning.
Meaning and/or Permanence?
So the question is, is it possible for something to have meaning without being permanent? This is a hard question to answer, because these are two concepts that are based entirely in different domains. Let’s break down each of these words in more detail. The concept of permanence is physical, calculated, universal. It is formally defined as:
The state or quality of lasting or remaining unchanged indefinitely.
You can discuss something’s permanence in a very concrete and objective manner. An object’s existence and permanence is a concept rooted in physics. On the other hand, meaning is extremely subjective, and human-based. The formal definition of meaning in the way we are using it is:
To be of some specified importance to (someone), especially as a source of benefit or object of affection.
There’s a huge difference right away here — the definition of meaningfulness is itself based on human perception. It’s not a physical property inherent to an object. It’s simply a way that something is regarded by a person. Therefore, you can say that things do not have an inherent meaning, they can only have meaning when we confer meaning upon them.
The Disassembly
We can easily establish that just because something is not permanent (and indeed, nothing is), does not mean that it has no meaning. After all, there are many things that have meaning to people, according to the definition of the word, and as we have already established, nothing is permanent, so we already are Δ.
That being said, us humans love to “leave our mark” and to “own things” and to try to create little bubbles of permanency in an entirely impermanent world. In fact, many times as a result of this we closely associate meaning and permanency. After all, what is the meaning of making an art piece if it’s destroyed before anyone sees it?
But this is a mistake. Meaning is an invention of the human mind, and projecting it at a universal scale is as inappropriate as asking “when was the beginning of the universe” (beginnings are only a human understanding of how time works). Universe-level concepts and human understanding of the operation of things are rarely, if ever, compatible. In order to correctly utilize the word “meaning”, it must be applied at a human level, as it is a human concept by definition.
So let’s get into a specific example. I might say that I gave someone a dollar on the street and that had meaning, and this would be true. You could say “well that person will die and the universe will be destroyed eventually so it actually had no meaning”, but that would be incorrect. You could correct it by simply changing “meaning” to “effects that exist permanently.” However, it would then be a stupid statement — “You gave someone a dollar and that was meaningful to you? Ok fine, but the effects of your action will not exist permanently!” just doesn’t have the same ring to it. This is because to have meaning, something does not need to last forever.
The Meaning of Meaning
So why is it that as soon as you replace “meaning” with “permanence”, it takes the sting out of arguments? It’s because meaning is vastly important to us, and permanence isn’t as much. When something is meaningless, it is truly and by definition of low to no value to us, so saying that something is meaningless is really bad. And conversely, when something is meaningful, it is of great importance. On the other hand, saying something is permanent or not doesn’t have as much of an impact, since everyone knows that nothing is truly permanent.
But while you can now fully refute anyone claiming that life is meaningless, there is still something important to be learned from the argument, and it’s a lesson of non-attachment (much like many Buddhist teachings, actually). There really is nothing that is permanent, so we must be sure not to confuse meaning and permanence, and not become attached to things such that you need them to always be around. Instead, you are better off enjoying them for the meaning they provide to you without setting up any expectations of how permanent they may be or how long they will last.
With all that being said, I’d like to end this piece with a short story I found during my research:
An astronomer once said to the Pope, “Look at all the billions of galaxies out there, each containing trillions of stars and planets, stretching over light years of distance. Looking through a telescope, you realize that a human is a mere speck in this universe.” The Pope reportedly responded “Yes, but you must remember: That mere speck is the one observing and comprehending what is being seen.”
Sometimes, the solution is all about changing perspective.
Photo is from Uganda, where everything is so absolutely different than anything I ever imagined. And there are a lot of people there doing good work that helps people who need it. And that has meaning.
If you liked this piece, please “recommend” it by clicking the little green heart below. Thank you!
