For centuries, philosophers such as Aristotle and St Augustine have tried to both understand and explain the meaning of life. During his trial, even Socrates alluded to this question at his trial saying that “the unexamined life is not worth living.” Whether the solution is striving for eudaimonia through living a good and virtuous life or striving to find happiness in God, the question of life’s meaning is arguably both the biggest and most fundamental question of philosophy. From the ancient philosophical influences to people nowadays questioning their existence and purpose, such a question seems unavoidable. Moreover, unlike other branches of philosophy where opposing views and stances have been argued repeatedly, the question of life’s meaning is one that is constantly evolving, bringing in wide ranges of viewpoints.
Take, for example, Douglas Adams’ 1979 novel A Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, a contemporary attempt to tackle the question, where a supercomputer named Deep Thought was built to answer the question of life. After 7.5 million years of computation, an answer of 42 was produced. When asked about the origin of this answer, Adams replied saying that he chose the number 42 completely at random as he wanted an answer that made no sense. Here, there is a curious response to the question– what if there is no predefined meaning to it whatsoever? Such is the view of existentialists, who believe that we as humans are answer-seeking creatures in an answerless world, where we are searching for the meaning of life even though there is none.
This is a bold claim and one that completely contradicts the traditional stance of essentialism. Going back as far as ancient Greece, figures such as Plato took it as a given that everything in the universe has an essence, a set of unchanging properties that make a thing what it is. For example, when looking at the element gold, we can see that its essence is having the atomic number of 79. This is because when considering a piece of gold, factors such as its shape and size don’t make the object gold, but rather the fact that it has 79 protons. Gold is what it is because of its particular essence and would be a completely different substance if it had, for example, 78 or 80 protons. Essentialists believe that everything has an essence and our essence exists before we are even born. This can be simplified down to the idea that essence precedes existence, where we have a purpose prior to existing.
During the 20th century, however, French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre returned to the idea of existence and essence but instead considered if our existence comes before that of our essence. This inspired him to flip the idea of essentialism around and come up with the phrase ‘existence precedes essence.’ Instead of believing that God chose everyone’s purpose, Sartre instead proposed that it was up to us to choose and determine what gave our life purpose and meaning. However, existentialism does not only apply to atheists, with the father of existentialism Søren Kierkegaard very much believing in God. While seemingly contradictory, as a creator supposes some purpose prior to existing, theistic existentialists reject the idea that God created us with any particular purpose in mind. Instead, they posit that we were created out of God’s love.
As a result of being born into a universe which seemed to him without meaning, Sartre declared that ‘man is condemned to be free.’ Without any answers in the world, figures and institutions of authority are just people, and do not necessarily need to be obeyed. Due to this, it was proposed that the best way to live was to do so authentically, where it is realised that any meaning one’s life has is solely there because that person gives meaning to it.
From here, it seems a small step to nihilism and take the bleak view that nothing matters at all. If there is no meaning to life, is it even worth living? However, existentialists would reject this idea, as life can have a subjective meaning, dependent on the meaning you assign to it. To deny the freedom you have and to not live authentically by refusing to choose meaning for your life based on your values is to live in bad faith, something existentialists actively warn against.
The rejection of living in bad faith and the act of living authentically is best described in Albert Camus’ novel The Myth of Sisyphus. The Greek legend was said to have cheated death not just once but twice. As a punishment for this, Sisyphus was made to roll a boulder up a steep hill; however, just before it reached the top, the boulder would roll back to the bottom, making the task pointless. In his novel, Camus wrote, ‘the struggle itself towards the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.’ Camus argued that, just like Sisyphus’ task, life is without a higher meaning. Despite this, just as Sisyphus gave his life meaning by embracing the struggle in his impossible task, we should try and find meaning in our life to give ourselves a sense of purpose. Potentially even more interesting is the idea that Sisyphus would be happy. Contrasting the bleak, nihilistic view one would expect of a man punished with an impossible and pointless task, the suggestion of joy even in such miserable circumstances serves as a reminder that even in an objectively meaningless world, satisfaction can be derived from living authentically and giving personal meaning to things.
So, what is the meaning of life and how should we live? Unless you believe we are made with a divine purpose or essence that we need to fulfil, the answer could not be simpler. By living and acting as our true selves, upholding the values that we choose to accept, we are free to live life in whatever way we desire. Humans have complete freedom and so, we should act in a way that follows our own personal belief system, with the meaning of life being to choose what gives life meaning.