Is it necessary to have a'goal'in life?
For example, when you walk out of your house next morning, you have a clear idea(or goal) of where you want to go next. You don't walk just because(atleast generally). There's always a motive behind it. Something that you want to achieve. Somewhere that you want to reach by walking. A destination.
Similarly when we study in school/college, there's a clear goal of what we want to do with that knowledge (although that's becoming uncommon nowdays). You study medicine to become a doctor. You study law to become a lawyer, etc.
So, should we use the same line of reasoning for our life? Do you have a 'goal' in life? Did you reach your destination? If yes, How did you find it?
Similarly when we study in school/college, there's a clear goal of what we want to do with that knowledge (although that's becoming uncommon nowdays). You study medicine to become a doctor. You study law to become a lawyer, etc.
So, should we use the same line of reasoning for our life? Do you have a 'goal' in life? Did you reach your destination? If yes, How did you find it?
Comments (7)
But I don't think your goals need to be static. My teenager goals are not my young adult goals are not my grown-up goals...
It's important not to let them become your "white whales" that drive you insane.
It's important to have some goals you never reach. I can't find the origin of the quote right now, but a famous pianist once said "If I had another life to live, I might begin to learn something about the piano." I think that's a great sentiment. It sounds a bit sad, the futility of life and striving for greatness and all that. But I take it as inspiration--you're never done learning, there's always more to discover and marvel at, you can never exhaust the wonders of this world, or your own potential.
Life happened, as it will, and after a stretch of sickness and death, I found myself living alone again after 32 years. It took a year or two to get over that. Then I found a plan. I would go back to the beginning of my college years and do the kind of reading now that I wish I had done back then. And so I have been beefing up the content of my bachelor degree.
It's a worthwhile goal at this stage in life. Maybe it can't happen until this stage. To no great end, all of this, other than to understand the world better, understand myself better. And it's working.
I think it is interesting to consider the possibility that one's social status (as say a Mother for example) might not necessarily align with that person's existential understanding of themselves. I think this point nicely shows the difference between the actual and the existential levels of analysis. She has the social status of Mother, but her world is not significant for-the-sake-of being a Mother
This contrasts with facts though. Everyone has an objective or goal and their whole being is directed towards acheiving it.
I find that interesting because all one needs to do is look up at the stars, try to comprehend the vast scale of the universe itself, to rethink on the value of any human goal/objective.
Of course one needn't be that philosophical and return to Earth, country, community and family to see how much can be achieved at that level.
It's perspective I guess and there's no good reason to prefer one over the other.
No surprise there.
Only if action is a possibility (i.e., there are no goals in death).