What is the true meaning of life? What is our purpose as human beings? The value of life varies greatly from culture to religion to an individual. Philosophers have been debating this question for centuries with many coming to different conclusions. John Stuart Mill and Arthur Schopenhauer are two philosophers who attempted to define the significance of human life. Mill was a strong advocate of utilitarianism and had quite the optimistic view on human life by seeing its goal as attaining happiness. On the other hand, Schopenhauer was a renowned pessimist who viewed the purpose of life as work, worry, toil, and trouble. Their views about the meaning of life are strikingly different and each had their own unique ideas on what means constitute
…show more content…
“Against this doctrine, however, arises another class of objectors, who say that happiness, in any form, cannot be the rational purpose of human life and action; because, in the first place, it is unattainable: and they contemptuously ask, What right hast thou to be happy?” (EEW p.234) Nevertheless, he was willing to prove them wrong and continued to defend utilitarianism. Mill replies that it is an exaggeration to claim that humans cannot experience happiness. He insists that happiness is possible in those who have experienced a few pains in their life and this could be an attainable life for almost everyone if academic and social reputations change for the better to cultivate the proper values. The root of unhappiness comes from selfishness and ignorance. This is why utilitarianism is concerned with the happiness of everyone as a whole, not with an individual’s happiness. Furthermore, Mill claims that the majority of the suffering in the world, such as poverty and disease, can be reduced if a sensible and lively community devoted their efforts to end it. “To those who have neither public nor private affections, the excitements of life are much curtailed . . those who have also cultivated a fellow-feeling with the collective interests of mankind, retain as lively an interest in life on the eve of death as in the vigor of youth and health.” (EEW …show more content…
Whether we discover the true meaning of life or not, will it really matter if that purpose does not bring joy to our lives? This is why I agree more with Mill’s theory of the greatest happiness principal (or utilitarianism) rather than Schopenhauer’s pessimistic theories on the value of existence. Schopenhauer focused more on the negatives of life (or known to him as positives) and used them as an excuse to being realistic. To further understand Schopenhauer’s view on human life I read his biography in Ethics: The Essential Writings. From what I have read, Schopenhauer lived quite a depressing life and in a way, I sympathize with his suffering. Nevertheless, it perplexes me how he refused to see true happiness as a possibility of human significance, even though the companionship of his two toy poodles. I suppose he was just traumatized from the depressing events that unfolded throughout his life. This brings us back to Mill’s point of happiness being dependable on the environment of that person’s life and character. Utilitarianism focuses on practicing actions if they are beneficial for the majority, therefore selfishness is not acceptable. In a way, Schopenhauer focused too much on the painful events of his life and refused to overcome it. “Life is a sorry affair and I intend to spend my
“Against this doctrine, however, arises another class of objectors, who say that happiness, in any form, cannot be the rational purpose of human life and action; because, in the first place, it is unattainable: and they contemptuously ask, What right hast thou to be happy?” (EEW p.234) Nevertheless, he was willing to prove them wrong and continued to defend utilitarianism. Mill replies that it is an exaggeration to claim that humans cannot experience happiness. He insists that happiness is possible in those who have experienced a few pains in their life and this could be an attainable life for almost everyone if academic and social reputations change for the better to cultivate the proper values. The root of unhappiness comes from selfishness and ignorance. This is why utilitarianism is concerned with the happiness of everyone as a whole, not with an individual’s happiness. Furthermore, Mill claims that the majority of the suffering in the world, such as poverty and disease, can be reduced if a sensible and lively community devoted their efforts to end it. “To those who have neither public nor private affections, the excitements of life are much curtailed . . those who have also cultivated a fellow-feeling with the collective interests of mankind, retain as lively an interest in life on the eve of death as in the vigor of youth and health.” (EEW …show more content…
Whether we discover the true meaning of life or not, will it really matter if that purpose does not bring joy to our lives? This is why I agree more with Mill’s theory of the greatest happiness principal (or utilitarianism) rather than Schopenhauer’s pessimistic theories on the value of existence. Schopenhauer focused more on the negatives of life (or known to him as positives) and used them as an excuse to being realistic. To further understand Schopenhauer’s view on human life I read his biography in Ethics: The Essential Writings. From what I have read, Schopenhauer lived quite a depressing life and in a way, I sympathize with his suffering. Nevertheless, it perplexes me how he refused to see true happiness as a possibility of human significance, even though the companionship of his two toy poodles. I suppose he was just traumatized from the depressing events that unfolded throughout his life. This brings us back to Mill’s point of happiness being dependable on the environment of that person’s life and character. Utilitarianism focuses on practicing actions if they are beneficial for the majority, therefore selfishness is not acceptable. In a way, Schopenhauer focused too much on the painful events of his life and refused to overcome it. “Life is a sorry affair and I intend to spend my