That depends entirely on the manner in which any particular folks have come to encompass, to embrace and then through their behaviors, to embody their own understanding of the word.
And then [for some] in their attempts to intertwine, integrate and/or challenge the understanding of others. In particular, out in the world of actual social, political and economic interactions.
My own argument revolves around the extent to which [in a world sans God] mere mortals are able to propose a purpose that transcends the manner in which I have come to understand the meaning of dasein, conflicting goods and political economy.
But here we need to decide on an actual context. One we are all likely to be familiar with. One in which we share our own understanding of what having a “purpose” might mean. And, then, if our meanings come into conflict, assessing the extent to which this either can be resolved [in a political “consensus”] or linked to a frame of mind that is said to be [and then demonstrated to be] reflective of an optimal understanding.