I don’t know that there is a meaning of life, and — if there is — I truly doubt that it’s one size fits all. I’ve got to give it to the Existentialists on this particular question.
PROMPT: Meaning of Life
Reply
Tag Archives: Meaning
PROMPT: Positive Example
I’m not sure I understand the question. I generally associate the feeling of love with positivity, but the wording suggests a contrast to the negative examples of feeling loved.
Also, not sure whether “where” is meant to refer to a part of the body, a city, a region, a country, a room of the house, etc.
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
PROMPT: Coolest Thing
I once found a $100 bill half frozen into the snow on a random stretch of sidewalk in a not-so-great neighborhood. It’s only now occurring to me that it was literally the coolest thing I’ve ever found because it was encased in ice and snow. I acknowledge it’s not so “cool” in the colloquial sense of the word.
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
“Who says my poems are poems” by Ryōkan [w/ Audio]
Who says my poems are poems?
They aren't poems at all.
Only when you understand my poems aren't poems
Can we talk poetry.
This translation by Sam Hamill in The Poetry of Zen (2004) Boston: Shambhala, p. 159
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
Spillage [Free Verse]
What spills from the brush?
What shapes are made
on the page?
What curves? What lines?
What crosses? What binds?
Who will chase after the sparks
of meaning in those wild marks?
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
Language Liquidity [Free Verse]
language is liquid;
meaning meanders.
in the long-run,
meanings are meaningless,
untethered and adrift
in an ocean of possibility.
[political words' meanings
don't drift, but tumble with
whiplash violence through
a desert of the possible.
But, predictably, the first variation
of a political word is the exact
opposite of its original meaning.]
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
Metaphor & Misnomer [Free Verse]
"in the trenches" what a circuit that phrase has taken: from the Western Front of World War I, where the trenches were cold, claustrophobic places of mud and creeping mustard gas; harbor & prison for shell-shocked souls at wit's end to become used by businesspeople & politicians to describe metaphorical fights... but there are no metaphorical fights, they should be called metaphorical games games have winners & losers, but not the living & the dead & the dying & the disabled & the permanently disturbed it feels like a frivolous bit of linguistic creep as fighters now stand on cold, wet feet in muddy trenches in Eastern Ukraine talk of salespeople or grassroots political organizers as "in the trenches" misses the point that everyone in trenches is a soldier -- be they a salesperson in the metaphorical "trenches" of calmer days.
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
BOOK REVIEW: The Meaning of Life: A Very Short Introduction by Terry Eagleton
The Meaning of Life by Terry EagletonMy rating: 5 of 5 stars
Amazon.in Page
“What is the meaning of life?” This is the question thrown at anyone accused of being a philosopher – professional or lay – though mostly in jest. In the present day, that is. In centuries past, large portions of the population took for granted that it was a question that had a knowable answer (one dictated by religion.) But as that answer became decreasingly satisfying to an increasing portion of the populace, people began to see the question as both fundamentally unanswerable and as a means to chide / test individuals who claimed wisdom or had the claim thrust upon them.
In this concise guide, Eagleton takes on the question, beginning with consideration of whether it is even a sound question. (Or, is it a question like: “What is the meaning of cabbage?” or “What color is a hypothesis?”) After considering many of the problems with the question, from the meaning of “meaning” to the presumptions about what a life has (and what it is) the book also considers some of the post-Nietzschean answers to the question and the challenges that confront them. [One that I hadn’t thought much about criticizes that many of these recent attempts are individualist (i.e. find your own meaning, one consistent with the peculiarities of your own unique life.) Is it reasonable to think that the question can only be answered at the level of granularity of the individual? Maybe, it can only be, but I did appreciate that it gave me something to think about.]
It should be pointed out that Eagleton doesn’t consider himself a philosopher. He’s primarily a critic and English literature professor. This had its advantages. First, Eagleton drew upon works of literature that explore the question, which both made for some interesting insights while also breaking up dense tangles of philosophizing. Second, much of the book deals with linguistic issues. Are the words and grammar of the question, “What is the meaning of life?” useful, and – if so – how do we understand the nature and limits of the question?
I found this book intriguing and provocative. It does have thickets of dense language, but also has its fun moments as well.
View all my reviews
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
Conflicted Botanist Limerick
There once was a Philosopher-Botanist who, on his jobs, had been an optimist. But he bred seedless fruits, and came to feel in cahoots with purpose-denying nihilist dogmatists.
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
BOOK REVIEW: Humanism: A Very Short Introduction by Stephen Law
Humanism: A Very Short Introduction by Stephen LawMy rating: 4 of 5 stars
Amazon.in Page
In this guide, Law lays out the basic principles of humanism, discusses the arguments for and against belief in a deity, and examines the humanist conceptions of morality and meaning of life (two constructs that religious people often claim can only exist in a deist world.) Humanism is an ill-understood system, in large part because it isn’t so much a set of ideas ascribed to as a way of approaching ideas in a questioning and secular way. Therefore, defining humanism isn’t as straightforward as listing a set of common beliefs because humanism can cover a wide variety of different worldviews. That makes this a particularly useful book as it clears up a number of false equivalences. Many think that humanism is the same as atheism or agnosticism, and while humanists generally follow one of those two approaches to the question of whether there is a god, humanism isn’t identical to either.
This book does a good job of organizing the debate and laying out arguments and counterarguments. I learned a lot by reading the book and by deliberating over the points of contention. There were points where I think more could have been said. For example, in the chapter on the meaning of life, after systematically dismantling the religious argument that a meaningful life is the sole domain of religion, Law doesn’t offer any guidance as to the humanist approach to pursuing a meaningful life (stating merely that most humanists agree with the religious about what is a meaningful life, even if they disagree about why it is.) I realize this is a brief guide, and the author might have wanted to avoid stepping on the toes of other guides in the series that investigate the question, but it stands as a deficiency. True, there wouldn’t be a list of what makes a meaningful life so much as an outline of how to approach it, but, still, even an overly simplified statement would have been useful.
I learned a lot from this book and would recommend it for anyone wanting to gain insight into the debates around humanism.
View all my reviews
Tiger Riding for Beginners 