Can Life Have Meaning Without Afterlife?
As far as I can tell there is no strong evidence that anything happens after we die, and yet I can't imagine life having meaning or purpose unless there is. You can't examine life well while you're still living it anymore than examining a forest while stuck in a tent. No matter how proud we might be of our intelligence, and our inability to find anything seemingly more intelligent it seems we are just over complicated poop machines. Just one matter to another. All things microscopic beings can do. We can try to define a purpose based on our occupation, or some might argue that being happy is the only meaning to life, but that only sounds like a way to prevent sadness and suicide. We harm this planet and each other and we can't contribute nearly enough to justify the harm. Can we properly examine life while still alive? If there is no afterlife can we assume life had no meaning? Any thoughts on this topic?
Comments (49)
That goes for language, and for life.
There are people who can- and you should listen.
Quoting TiredThinker
Based on your premise of there being no evidence of another life, this would be the only time we can. As you did just now.
Quoting TiredThinker
That would only give it all the more meaning as a matter of fact. I mean. What else is there? Something valuable or rare is only valuable or rare because it exists but in such few numbers. Right?
If there’s no life after the afterlife can we assume the afterlife has no meaning? If there’s no life after the afterafterlife can we assume the afterafterlife has no meaning? If there’s no life after... I think that I’ve made a point.
There was a great comic on this topic a week ago:
The Elflord and the Mayfly
Only during life can we supply it with meaning. If there was an afterlife there would be no meaning to life, and no sense in living it.
We shouldn't go that far now. Here. Watch this.
Life isn't perfect or constantly tolerable. And that's precisely why it is. Think about it some.
Erm.. how about 'welcome to the forum'? Lol.
See this is classic core belief being challenged. Aside from making not only himself but by association literally anyone and everyone part of whatever ideology (probably atheist) seem like an ass... it's just unattractive and uninviting. Depressing really. Just. Yeah, no. Clearly not the way to be happy and find inner peace. Ironic how sometimes those who seek to destroy faith end up being its greatest ally. All part of the plan I guess. :grin:
Heh, I was making a sarcastic joke about how threads like this one about the afterlife have been increasingly moved by Mods to the Lounge, a section of the forum that does not appear on the main page, essentially relegating such threads that the mods find unseemly to the graveyard. A convenient way to get rid of them without outright deleting them. I for one think about the conundrum of an afterlife quite often, and find it to be a very philosophical and worthwhile topic of discussion.
Mistakes were made.
Same time, I understand how blind faith in something (allegedly, hopefully the right thing) can be non-conducive to philosophical discussion and fruitful debate. After all, that's what the forum entails.
No reason faith should be a hindrance to logic. Perhaps that's the message of those who do as you say they do? Who knows.
I think we probably agree, but I'm not following you.
United we stand...
:up: I go back and forth on this a lot. One thing I've come up with is that "meaning", as understood even within the confines of this idea of life having meaning only in the present, is a concept that stems from some sort of metaphysical "meta-meaning" situation. We thought life had meaning in relation to an afterlife, but now we've amended that, and, using the same language, we say that life only has meaning in the now. And then it gets twisted up with some concepts borrowed from Hinduism or Buddhism.
...Confused we fall?
I think you've hit on the important part right here. To be more specific, if you are unhappy to begin with, life will seem to lose its meaning. The opposite is also true: when you are happy, you tend to see the meaning in your life. Consider that happiness might be the cause, and meaning is the effect. If you can find other ways to increase your happiness, the fact that life is finite should bother you less. Just my thoughts on the subject, I'm no expert.
:up: :100: :clap:
[quote=TiredThinker]Can life have meaning without afterlife?[/quote]
It looks like the answer to your question is implicit in your question. I understand that the view implied in the question is universal and not peculiar to you. What is this view I talk about? It's the one where we think only eternal life can have meaning. If so, the meaning of life must be to live [for as long as possible (given existing realities) but preferably, till the end of time itself].
The followup question is, "what is live/living?" The intriguing fact in re living is that it invariably involves attempts to, well, cheat death. People want to be part of something that outlasts their finite lifespan - they make discoveries, invent things, build monumental structures, develop new ideas, etc. All these activities which allegedly give lives meaning are simply alternative methods of living forever. In other words, again, the meaning of life, as suggested by all this, is to live (for as long as possible or, better still, forever).
Is this the correct way of looking at the meaning of life?
Well, any opposing view to the above will have to contend with the fact that meaning (of life) is, well, meaningless, if there is nothing that can have meaning (no life). I suppose this is the exact reason why people seek meaning in eternal existence - no life, no meaning is the argument here. At death people are annihilated and nothing remains that can have meaning, any meaning, at all. This, I guess, is the rationale behind the belief that only eternal life is meaningful.
Consider now the scenario in which a person is immortal and just that and nothing more? Does the mere fact of being immortal give meaning to this person's life? The conundrum here is, if you accept my argument for why we see meaning [only] in eternal life, this person's immortality serves only to ensure the eternal existence of that which can possess meaning but the meaning this immortal being can possess is not immortality itself but must be something else above and beyond it. In other words, meaning is still an additional item that must be attached to eternal life.
All that can be said then is that eternal life (afterlife) is necessary but not sufficient for life to have meaning.
:chin:
This.
How can you justify this judgement? On what principles do you think that the changes we make to the planet, in our ever so short life spans, are harms rather than benefits?
Here's one way of looking at it. To leave the planet unchanged after one's life is to neither harm nor benefit the planet. So to benefit the planet is not to leave the planet unchanged. The bigger the change that a person makes, the more potential there is for there to be great harm, or great benefit. On what principles would you distinguish a beneficial change from a harmful change?
Does anything differentiate what is real from the imagined? How could it... after all, meaning is imaginary. Perhaps you simply meant you consider other's meanings of meaning to be meaningless?
I don't see how a finite or everlasting existence differs in this respect. A static afterlife would be dead and meaningless, as I see it.
I do recall an episode of Voyager in which one of the Qs (an immortal being) wanted to end his existence. Apparently he had done everything and seen everything. I feel everything is in the scope of our mind. Our strongest memories tend to be the earliest ones. But over time they are harder to locate, but as far as I can tell are still there. The awe of life isn't from seeing everything. It's from appreciation of things much larger than us. Limits to our intellect are important. It's a ratio. And each experience of previously experienced things will always be unique.
even with an after life or immortality, life would be meaningless, as it would make any action truly futile, especially in a deterministic world like ours, and you would truly just be a slave of existence and immortality.
Quoting TiredThinker
being happy is very subjective, often comes at the price of others' happiness, and doesn't last as much as suffering.
Quoting TiredThinker
yes we can, via rationalism, and viewing ourselves in the third person instead of our own eyes, then having our peers try the same and see if we have the same findings
ultimately in my opinion, life cannot truly ever have a meaning.
Have you first defined meaning?
Lets go with this. You're defining "Meaning" as "Impact in some later life". So when you get to that later life...is there any meaning anymore?
You've been pushed with meaning as a religious means. You have been told to sacrifice for others; to not have a reward today, because you will have a reward much later. You have been taught to devalue your current life. To look at yourself as a poopsack that will only be worthy when your soul rises again. That you are a thing of harm and destruction that must be tamed and held back with struggle for a greater reward and existence later.
You were taught wrong.
You are a combination of atoms and molecules that have existed for trillions of years. You are a chemical reaction that not only works to keep itself going, but has gained something that has not happened (to our knowledge): sentience. You are matter, that realizes it is matter. You are part of the universe, that realizes it is part of the universe. You are able to see yourself. That's utterly flipping amazing, and incredibly rare.
You get to observe what you are around you and decide, "Should it be this way? Can it be better?" You get to find meaning in the now. In the breath that you take. In the thoughts that you will have for a precious few 80 years ( if you're lucky).
The rest of existence doesn't have this. The rest of existence is unaware of itself, blissfully smashing about and just doing what it started so long ago.
Do you think this is amazing? Or should it just go away? Should existence return to not knowing itself? Should we preserve existence that knows itself? What meaning will you attach to life? Can you, in recognizing yourself in the universe, figure out how to best express yourself in its logical laws?
Intelligent life has an incredible meaning. You don't have to wait to die to have it. Tell yourself today you are going to make something of it. You may stumble, you may make mistakes and even fail. But everything you do is a small portion of existence that has that precious sentience. Don't waste it.
There is a problem with the principle of plenitude, which states that given an infinite amount of time, every possibility will be actualized. If there are infinite possibilities, it's impossible to actualize them all. So the principle of plenitude hits its nemesis when we assume infinite possibilities.
In other words, we cannot assume both infinite time and infinite possibilities because infinite time necessitates that all possibilities have been actualized (principle of plenitude), while infinite possibilities implies that it is impossible to actualize all possibilities.
What's the meaning of the universe? What's the meaning of atomic particles? People often want to know the meaning of their lives, but I think that's a very egocentric to focus on ourselves. Why not ask the same questions about the universe or other things?
If that is your passion, that is fine. Work on become a neuroscientist or AI developer. There are people who are trying to mimic the brain with the ultimate goal of transferring consciousness over to something more durable and longer lasting than a human brain. You may not obtain it, but your work may allow others to obtain it in the future.
But taking the gift you have and lamenting it is not something else is something I think many people go through. Some don't find meaning because they were born in a poor area of the world where they subsisted on meager eating until dying at a young age. Some don't find meaning because they suffer a crippling disease, and wish their life was one that did not have it.
There is no meaning in something that cannot be. Its not meaning that you're looking for. Its a desire for a wish to come true. You have to look at what you have, at what is, as real and naked in front of you as it is, and find value in making it something you feel proud of.
And the mind can survive death in its ideas and impact on the world. You are able to type your woes online. That is the lasting impact of a mind beyond its fleshy vessel. The works of famous philosophers created scientific and political changes that you benefit from today.
Meaning does not rely on a fantasy. Meaning relies on reality. You can let your mind be more than its woeful self (I say in jest). Get out there and let your mind make an impact on the world that will last beyond your death. Just...make it a positive one if you would? It helps everyone else obtain the same goal as well. =)
I am not assuming anything about the duration of time or the finite or infinite nature of the universe.
Interesting. I have had the thought that the "meaning in the now" is second-rate in comparison to some ultimate transcendent purpose, kind of like salvaging whatever we can.
On the other hand, I have also thought that meaning derived from the future is "horizontal", while meaning derived from the present is "vertical". The present has depth, the future has breadth. The present is real, the only real, but is fleeting. The future is never real, but always eternal. Whatever we don't have now, we can project into the future. The present slips through our fingers, and the future is a mirage. Neither one is exactly what we want or need; any search for meaning necessarily falls short. This is the burden of time-consciousness.
I'm a little drunk right now so idk if that made sense.
You referred to an "immortal being", which implies living forever, and therefore everlasting time.
I suggest life can have meaning without an afterlife.
Meaning is something deeply personal (not based on some objective truth) and exists solely in the present (you cannot feel in a time you do not exist). This would imply to me that life only has meaning in the moment that you're in. Once you die, your ability to experience meaning will die with you but that doesn't speak to the meaning you experienced when you experienced it.
I believe this would hold true even if there was eternal life or an afterlife of some kind. In that scenario, could you really experience meaning in any moment other than the one you were present in?
Why does it matter how the universe, particles, and mud came from if it is unable to recognize its own existence. The mind is the only thing I want to know is special.
I referred to a fictional immortal being in reference to those concerned with boredom of an immortal existence. I don't believe bored would be a forgone conclusion
What good is a sense of meaning that is deleted upon death? It was just a super sophisticated motivation to keep going. Evolution pushing us to serve our biological purpose. The mind has many tricks to keep us going. But that doesn't mean we exist for a particular meaning beyond the ecosystem. Everything else must just be ego to think we are special without proof.
Meaning is “deleted” in life too. For instance, suppose you enjoyed a certain show as a child. In your present life you may even struggle to remember you felt that way. Using your phrasing, it’s been deleted. Meaning only exists in the moment you’re in. This isn’t a unique feature of death.
Nothing in nature claims to be apart from everything except the human Self. It says "I am separated from the whole, I live here in my myself-bubble. I'm not even one with this body I'm inhabiting".
We may claim that we are all one but we don't (and we can't) experience oneness.
I don't think there's anything metaphysically wrong with the universe, rather the problem is the "I", the thinker and it's thoughts.
When there's no thinking there can be no problems. Nothing says "I am here now but one day I'll be gone". In between two thoughts there's no problem.
Can the Self be a product of human culture? Much like a few hundred years ago when basically everybody believed in God. Since you grew up surrounded by people constantly referring to this "God", he became "real".
The present day child has first no notion of a self, of a me, that is taught by repeatedly pointing and saying things like "yes you did that John!", "this is your teddy bear" and so on, repeatedly referring to the child's Self. Still it takes years until the child have self-produced thoughts (a Self).
So maybe the gurus are right, the self is an illusion?
(wow, this got off the track, sorry.)
Memories seem to get updated and altered, but the brain is imperfect and perhaps a mind outside of the brain records everything perfectly as perhaps the universe itself may
I agree that without the impression of "I" there would be no problem. But since there is, there must be a reason for it.
An afterlife would require that your experience machine (thoughts, feelings, perception) would somehow exist separate from the nervous system, which to me seems impossible.
Quoting Wheatley
Some molecules began to make copies of themselves. The race for survival and reproduction began on this particular planet, and it's still going on. What's the purpose of a worm in the ground?
Life obviously has no meaning whatsoever. Life will flourish wherever there's fertile soil, but it's indifferent to the opinions, suffering and pleasures of its creations, whether it's worms or primates.
"Properly" or not, we can't examine anything once we're no longer alive.
Whether or not there is afterlife, we can assume anything about life's meaning or lack of meaning, but that won't change the fact that living is 'evaluating, selecting, prioritizing, interpreting ...' in order to survive and even thrive for as long as we live; and only in hindsight does one's irrevocable - irreparable - losses in the course of 'evaluating', etc, have meaning to the degree they shape one's life and remind one of lessons learned for survival and perhaps even provide (recurring) challenges - traumas - to be overcome. Whether or not there's a "here after", now here has every one alive by the throat struggling to delay the inevitable, fatal misadventure permitting, for as long as one is able, while gasping for meaning - the means to go on, to breathe (re-spiritus) ...
... imagining Sisyphus happy. :mask:
The rest of us are able to identify their mental health issues, Exhibit A--DSM-V. Of course, there are cases of mass hysteria or mass hallucination, but I'm not convinced that's really a thing. People can say whatever they want, and they do, and it gets ridiculous, and it's saturated with anxiety, attention-seeking and great quests for limelight and immediate gratification.
I think a good example of imagination is schizophrenia. I'm never going to hear a voice, or bump into a stranger, if it only exists in someone's imagination, and I've actually never seen someone with schizophrenia touching the imaginary person they're talking to, but that's just an observation based on personal experience.
What meaning or purpose does the existence of an afterlife provide?
Quoting TiredThinker
So are other animals. What makes humans special complicated poop machines in that we have an afterlife and other life doesn't?
Quoting TiredThinker
Isn't a belief in an afterlife a way of preventing sadness in suicide? It seems that you are distressed that the evidence indicates that there isn't an afterlife.
"What's the point of a soul
When all I'm being is
A faulty copy of myself"
-VETO
When I was a youth, it worried me that my life didn't seem to have any meaning. By that, I think I meant something like 'purpose'.
After a year or so of soul searching, I came to accept that it in fact didn't have any meaning. But, far from making me more depressed, I realized that that was actually a good thing. If my life had a purpose, then I would feel under some sort of obligation to fulfill that purpose. If it had no purpose, then I was free to do whatever I wanted with my life.
Some might think that that would then lead me to be a totally depraved, immoral, self-centered seeker of immediate pleasure with no regard for anyone else. But it didn't, because I realized that ignoring the needs of others in the long run would make life worse for me. I wanted to have friends. What I chose to do with my life was to get as much pleasure and as little pain as possible from it. And this in fact led to the same sort of life that people with morals lead.
This would be true whether there is an additional realm for eternal contemplative bliss or not. I think the real question is: If there was such a realm of eternal life, how would the meaning of life be different?