Generally, when people give reasons for why our lives do not matter, many turn to our smallness in the universe or to the fact that we do not live forever. However, Nagel suggests that even if we took up a larger portion of the universe, or if we lived forever, our lives would still be meaningless; our meaninglessness would just take up a larger percentage of space, or exist for a longer amount of time. Nagel states that these reasons are attempts to express the absurdity of life which arises from the paradoxical conscious awareness of our gratuitous stance in the world in combination with our need to take our lives seriously. Nagel defines the seemingly external viewpoint which humans are capable and bound to take, sub specie aeternitatis,
…show more content…
I disagree with both philosopher’s view of meaning. I do not think that meaning is objective. I think that meaning is a human construct, which is completely subjective, and not existent in the world outside of our minds. This idea is supported by Nagel when he states that a mouse is not absurd “because he lacks the capacities for self-consciousness and self-transcendence that would enable him to see that he is only a mouse” (295). This applies to every organism and every object outside of the human mind. Because meaning is not just a human experience, it is subjective (as Wolf states, golfing might be meaningful to some but not to others), the realization of meaning in one’s life can be actively manipulated based on the vantage point that one chooses to have. I do not believe that only a self and a sub specie aeternitatis viewpoint exist. There are an infinite amount of viewpoints which we can choose to take, all of which imply different amounts of meaning depending on the conditions within that viewpoint. For example, for the viewpoint consisting of only an immediate family, a son or daughter can be viewed to be the most meaningful thing. However, on a cosmic lever, that son or daughter is worthless. Just as we can choose whether to have our lives filled with ironic or despair, we can choose whether we or the people around us are meaningful to us. Although one might say that in terms of the universe, we are meaningless, one can also say that in terms of us, the universe itself is meaningless, acting as only a catalyst to sustain what is meaningful to us. By doing so, we can choose whether our lives are absurd. We have the choice of giving or taking meaning from our lives, and for the betterment of humanity, for the greatest amount of happiness, and for the least absurdity, we should generally choose to have lives that are meaningful to us, no matter what that means on an individualistic
I disagree with both philosopher’s view of meaning. I do not think that meaning is objective. I think that meaning is a human construct, which is completely subjective, and not existent in the world outside of our minds. This idea is supported by Nagel when he states that a mouse is not absurd “because he lacks the capacities for self-consciousness and self-transcendence that would enable him to see that he is only a mouse” (295). This applies to every organism and every object outside of the human mind. Because meaning is not just a human experience, it is subjective (as Wolf states, golfing might be meaningful to some but not to others), the realization of meaning in one’s life can be actively manipulated based on the vantage point that one chooses to have. I do not believe that only a self and a sub specie aeternitatis viewpoint exist. There are an infinite amount of viewpoints which we can choose to take, all of which imply different amounts of meaning depending on the conditions within that viewpoint. For example, for the viewpoint consisting of only an immediate family, a son or daughter can be viewed to be the most meaningful thing. However, on a cosmic lever, that son or daughter is worthless. Just as we can choose whether to have our lives filled with ironic or despair, we can choose whether we or the people around us are meaningful to us. Although one might say that in terms of the universe, we are meaningless, one can also say that in terms of us, the universe itself is meaningless, acting as only a catalyst to sustain what is meaningful to us. By doing so, we can choose whether our lives are absurd. We have the choice of giving or taking meaning from our lives, and for the betterment of humanity, for the greatest amount of happiness, and for the least absurdity, we should generally choose to have lives that are meaningful to us, no matter what that means on an individualistic