This is a very simple set of questions really - I just want to see the wide variety of opinions that I expect would be shown.
What is the purpose behind our lives? Why not end it all the moment you first get depressed? Are we, the human race, going anywhere and if so where? What natural instinct encourages us to survive rather than give in?
i reckon, we’re here for a bit. thats all we really know, and even that can be put a stop to. so hey, why not try and enjoy things.
its like when you’ve just been strapped into a rollercoaster and you realise it was the stupidest thing you’ve ever done and you’re likely to vom afterwards. but they’re not going to stop the whole ride just for you, so you might as well try and enjoy it.
i don’t know what the natural instinct which encourages us to survive is. but it might be seeing others enjoying themselves? and therefore thinking it can’t all be bad. which is why you’re more likely to be miserable if you’re around miserable people.
or i suppose it could just be the whole genes continuing thing?
OR … everyone knows that things get bad and things get good … so if you’re miserable, you’ll get over it.
OR it could just be our associations with death. as society loses faith in religion (sorry religious folk, but its happening) we’re beginning to think theres nothing afterwards. and we all know however you die, death isn’t going to be very nice. so you might as well postpone it.
ahem … getting me coat.
For a religious believer I assume the easy answer is, to get to heaven, attain nirvana, enlightenment, moksha, insert afterlife name here.
At the moment (i’m subject to change) I do not believe that there is an objective purpose to life that we are all trying to attain. I do not believe in an afterlife but I do believe that man creates his own purpose in life and that it is equally valid and important. What is man without a purpose? I guess that fits in with the existentialist point of view that we are the creators of our own consequences.
A lot of people get depressed at the thought of life having no ‘meaning’. I think that from an early age we have the idea of “the meaning of life” instilled into us and so when we get older and naturally come to the realisation that there might not be a meaning to life, it frightens us and confuses us. Some people get depressed, some people look to an afterlife and some people get over it. I understand this is a huge simplification.
For me, I’m one of the people who is trying to get over the fact that life has no external meaning and that the meaning in an individual’s life is created from within. I am responsible for myself and my actions and therefore I choose my purpose in life.
For this reason I do not see the human race as “going anywhere”. We are the product of evolution (people wanting to debate that should start another thread 
) and in the same way that it would seem silly to ask “is the beaver race going anywhere?” i do not think it applies to humans either. We are a large group of individuals, not a whole made up of a smaller parts.
The natural “instinct” as you call it is I think genetic and environmental. The genes inside you want to reproduce and survive and have done so for the last 64 billion years or whatever it is. Therefore, by now they are programmed to create bodies (humans) which will “want” to survive for a certain period of time. On top of this, all societies (i might be wrong) bring their offspring up to live. You don’t have a baby in order to encourage it to give up when the going gets tough. Yes, sadly there are anomalies.
phew I think that’s all I can say at the moment 
‘‘the meaning in an individual’s life is created from within’’ (ben)
i do agree with this, but i don’t think everyone needs to find their ‘‘purpose in life’’. life is the purpose. if you’re the only one who cares about your life (i agree with that too) then just enjoy it. don’t waste your time trying to find out its purpose in the race. if you stumble into being the next einstein, then fab. you’re also making a mark on other people’s lives.
but there’re easier ways to do that. i’d personally find it more rewarding to be remembered by 5 people (more or less) as an incredible parent/friend/role model because i was enjoying myself than by millions because i was very intelligent.
i don’t think the ‘‘meaning of life’’ is anything more than enjoying yourself and getting what you want out of it. it sounds selfish, but its not really. most people’s idea of enjoying themselves includes making others happy too. and i think its easy for people not to realise that until they’re too old to put it into practice.
“i don’t think everyone needs to find their ‘purpose in life’.” (clarice)
You’ve missed my point. I do not believe there is an external purpose in life for people to find and therefore i agree with your statement. I believe that people make their own purpose by the actions that they make or in your words, “life is the purpose.” The act of living and following the desires that one has becomes the purpose in life.
hope that clears things up 
The whole “purpose of life” thing reminded me of a scene in Dead Poet’s Society with Robin Williams. He is teaching in a classroom about why we (man) write poetry and he says this:
“We don’t read and write poetry because it’s cute. We read and write poetry because we are members of the human race. And the human race is filled with passion. And medicine, law, business, engineering, these are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But poetry, beauty, romance, love, these are what we stay alive for. To quote from Whitman, “O me! O life!.. of the questions of these recurring; of the endless trains of the faithless–of cities filled with the foolish; what good amid these, O me, O life? Answer. That you are here - that life exists, and identity; that the powerful play goes on and you may contribute a verse.” That the powerful play goes on and you may contribute a verse. What will your verse be?”
I think this speech encapsulates the way I feel better than I could ever express. A truly remarkable film with some wonderful speeches like this one.
considering this is one of my favourite topics, i have a remarkably small amount to say about it. but here i go.
no-one is ever going to be open-minded enough to consider their life as just a fragment of humanity and existence. why? because you’re living it. i personally believe that we are just here add our drop to the gene pool, and we “fall in love”/procreate etc because that’s how life works.
but that doesn’t mean you have to consider your life completely worthless. you might be just an amalgamation of genetic survival but so what? you might as well have a laugh. if you fall in love, why fret about the fact that scientifically speaking, you’ve only fallen in love to procreate? why not just enjoy it?
of course there are some things that challenge the whole idea of us simply being on earth to pass on our genes. if so, why do people adopt kids? if it’s not going to pass on their genes in any way, why bother loving some red-faced little thing that craps itself all the time? (sorry … i don’t like kids). there’s also the argument of why we have a conscience - if it’s all about survival, heck, why not kill your neighbour (to go with the biblical lingo) and steal all his food?
i have my own personal answers to these questions but i can’t be arsed to go into them. they are, however, one method of suggesting that there is “a deeper meaning to life” or whatever.
apologies if i’m rambling. i’m feverish 
A lot of people use the phrase: “How can life be nothing more than the procreation of genes?” Well firstly I’ll say that the complex biological behaviour that has resulted in all the life on this planet is not just a “nothing”. I would rather look at it as a “how amazing that we are a product of such an intricate system.” After we have acknowledged our own mortality in the correct framework we can begin to enjoy ourselves. The realisation that we are survival machines for genes should not be a depressing one which leads to lack of motivation but rather a wonderous one which spurs us to follow a fruitful life.
Ok, the adopting kids and killing your neighbour thing both have answers. They are not conclusive and I am only giving one version of an answer here with which I am most familiar with.
In The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins (which can be found in the Links section ), there is a chapter called “Memes: the new replicators”. In this chapter he postulates the idea that society has its own set of replicators. Take for example, table manners. Table manners, says Dawkins, is a Meme which gets passed down from generation to generation. Other memes include religion, political persuasion, cultural rituals etc. The parent will more often than not, indoctrinate (for want of a better word) their offspring with these memes in order to keep them in the “meme pool” in the same way that genes do in the gene pool. With memes, this is a concious act on behalf of the parent involved. So, with adoption, a parent may wish to adopt a child in order to pass on memes. It seems a rather cynical view but that is one answer.
Personally, I see adoption as human conciousness combatting the selfish gene in the same way as contraception or abstinence. This is not in conflict with the selfish gene theory which says we are only here to procreate our genes. This is the truth but we are able to go against it.
Next we have the “killing your neighbour”. Once again Dawkins answers this in the Selfish Gene by saying that it is not beneficial to kill your neigbour and steal his food because it is not an evolutionary stable strategy. When a society containing organisms that kill each other is simulated on a computer, the killing individuals benefit at first but they gradually dwindle themselves into destruction. The society’s that work best are ones which do not kill each other to steal food as can be seen in today’s society. We are a result of trial and error and not of there “being something more to life”.
I would implore you to read the Selfish Gene because I do not do it justice and it does answer all these sorts of questions. Hmm…I have gone slightly off-topic…sorry about that!
ben, The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins , what is that link?
The purpose of life is to enjoy quality of life! >>>
The day we die two numbers will appear on our bellies: One number indicates the miserable hours we suffered and the other number shows the number of wonderful hours we enjoyed in our lives. If the your number of wonderful hours on your belly will be higher than mine I’ll be jealous, because you enjoyed a better quality of life…than me! That sums it pretty much up what the meaning/purpose of life is -or does it not? jjj
jjj,
what is your reasoning behind believing that the point of life is to enjoy quality of life? More importantly, what exactly do you mean with the terms “enjoy” and “quality” and provide examples if you can.
Why do these numbers appear on our bellies? Why not our foreheads, chest, legs, or better yet…a number on each butt cheek?
Furthermore, do these numbers represent the miserable hours that we caused ourselves or that others caused us to have? Or both? If both, then what do we say to a person who is miserable because their child was kidnapped? Or him who is tortured? Or he who has to struggle through life because life is tough on him? What about those who are racially/sexually/culturally discriminated against their whole lives? Do we just say…“well you should be smiling and enjoying through all of that”?
Moreover, it appears that the premise behind your argument is that life is all about whether you will be jealous of another or not based upon the hours of misery and happiness they have, don’t you think life is about more than whether you will be jealous or not? Also, just because you might enjoy your quality of life more than I, it doesn’t logically follow that you had a BETTER quality of life. Or do you see the two words as synonymous? Again, it depends on your definition of ‘better’ compared to ‘enjoyment’. Hence, I will ask, what do you understand ‘better’ to mean in this context?
What’s your take?
Hi…Gadfly,
Well, well…now I’m in trouble explaining my philosophical joke. I’ll try.
I consider highest possible, lasting contentment or quality of life to be my ultimate goal in life. How to achieve it? > Through logically correct actions!
This assumes that we are born healthy, enjoyed a wonderful childhood and requires all steps of personal, philosophical development. - Once we got thus, far we then are set (to “rip the rewards”; i.e.) to enjoy fulfillment of our inherited (mental, emotional, physical) needs (forget wants & wishes!), unique abilities and talents. That truly is enjoyment of quality of life…I’d say or do you disagree? You are free to know “better”!
The appearance of “numbers on the belly” has only metaphoric significance… With that joke I just tried to point out “the meaning/purpose of life” in a novel way. The danger of course is that someone misinterprets the joke by ignoring the in 1) mentioned factors…
Contentment and/or quality of life is in fact a very complicated and fickle entity. If only one of the above mentioned factors fail to eventuate or other negative factors interfere, the whole thing is off! At times even a little headache may spoil it, momentarily.
Thus, you are rightly saying that often our destiny is governed by exterior influences, such as genetic defects, mistreatment, violence or criminal actions. That’s horrible I agree. Sadly, our society still suffers from these uncivilized, social problems due to lack of EPE (early, philosophical education). Philosophical immaturity, ignorance or confusion is the world’s greatest social problem! “Suffering philosophical misery” is the opposite of “enjoying quality of life”!
(Now you know what I’m raving about…)
I like your gentle way of “accusing me to be logically incorrect”. I wish my friend “Matthew” is going to read this (he never misses a posting, you know) to take a good example from you! - Sir, you are a gentleman! (or gentle-lady?) Now, all what’s left is: to hope I was able to interpret my joke logically correct… I tried my best! Regards from jjj in Chile
If it is only a joke, then I will not waste my time on analysing it, instead I will try to enjoy the humour of it. I don’t mean anything bad by this, but how was it a joke? I ask because I am trying to find the humourous value in it. But if you would like me to take your statements seriously, and don’t mind having them analysed and dissected, let me know and I will continue my analysis pertaining to your last post.
Respectfully,
~Magius
To > Gadfly,
Philosophical pondering is quite serious and demanding stuff. Thus, any colorful alternatives are welcome. My yoke should be caricaturized! Maybe than you would see the humor in it? Words alone don’t transmit imagination and that’s a problem.
Did you not like my response (of serious explanation), which followed? I did my best and I expected an equally constructive response from you.
Well, I’m curious what your response will be…
Mind you, this forum allows for multiple registration. So, I’m not surprised that I’ll be responding to the “wrong addresses”… It’s fun, too! It usually takes a while to recognize imposters. I’m pretty good at reading “(flawed) reasoning styles” of the same and respond accordingly, but always in a kind way… 
jjj
PS. I partake in this forum in order to enhance my quality of life. Thus, I courtly curb anything, which takes away from that… Simple as that!
Remember: My words may come accross as “negative”, but trust me my intentions are purely positive. My acquired German-English" may not be the English you are used to. I beg for peace & tolerance! 
What might have happend to him? Who knows?
Maybe he is watching in the wings… the Fight of the Gladiators!
Maybe he isn’t to sure yet, on whether to support or to reject?
Too much at stake? Wise man!
What ever it might be, he seems to be a top diplomat!
I reckon, he’s going soon to teach us all a lesson or two, just wait and see! jjj
jjj stated:
This isn’t about ME or YOU knowing better, atleast not for me. It’s about coming to an understanding together. If it is logic that guides our actions, and those actions guide our enjoyment of our quality of life, than we need go no further than to study logic. Yet you illogically conclude this to mean that one is born healthy. So are we to say that anyone born, unhealthy, cannot one day become healthy? Or even if they never truly become healthy but are plagued by health problems (as most philosophers were) are we to say that they cannot enjoy the quality of life? IMPORTANT NOTE: you have still failed to answer my previously posted question of “What is quality of life?” - you have said that it was lasting contentment. But then logically speaking, adhering to the definition of the word, we would be satisfied at all times. But humankind is defined by never being satisfied. You don’t eat because you are satisfied, but because you feel a pang in your stomach, a discomfort, that tells you to eat. Such is the case with sleep, heat, cold, companionship, love, etc etc. Hence your notion appears erroneous. Isn’t there also a sense in which, you spoke of in another post, those Australians who have all their needs met (who are closer to contentment than Africans) are those with feeble minds, etc etc - what do you make of this contradiction?
jjj stated:
What if one doesn’t enjoy a wonderful childhood? Does that necessitate that they will never obtain a good quality of life? Furthermore, what do you see as philosophical development? Secondly, to say that true enjoyment of quality of life is to enjoy ones inherited needs, unique abilities, and talents - is to forget two things: 1) One may spend their lives doing what they are naturally inclined to do, but still hate it and their life. For example, I may be naturally inclined at architecture, but I may also be a German during the Second World War who disagrees with what Hitler is doing, yet I may be employed (coerced by threat of death) by Hitler to build (design) all his Concentration Camps, bunkers, barracks, etc - which may make me sick to my stomach. 2) If I grant you the above quote, it still makes for a horrible world. If we all entertain ourselves with our natural inclinations, we will invariably impose our actions onto others. There is something more that is needed than mere enjoyment of quality of life in order for us to have a equal opportunity for enjoyment of quality of life for all. Having said that, there is something that needs to over-arch upon an individuals rights, natural inclinations, and so on. If we are all to be expected to enjoy a quality of life. As is the case, this very over-arching system will impose itself on each of our enjoyments of quality of life. Hence, a contradiction.
jjj stated:
Do this again and you get a berating. Just because I didn’t get the joke, doesn’t mean I ignored the mentioned factors in 1). In fact, I don’t IGNORE even a single word you write. Hence, do not go around making ‘beating around the bush’ statements that don’t actually come out and say “Gadfly, you ignored the factors in my first post” but mean the same thing. It is sly, weak, cowardly, and precocious (prematurely developed). Lastly, your metaphor failed to get across the correlation between it and the meaning/purpose of life; so it is you who failed and not I. The onus is on you to articulate yourself correctly (according to the rules of grammar and logic) and clearly (so that your words correctly represent the meaning you are trying to get across). I am still, left with no understanding of what you meant the metaphor to mean, in the sense that anything that I see it trying to say fails to conform to logic and reason. I mention this because you yourself admitted that it is logic that leads us to enjoyment of quality of life.
jjj stated:
If that is the case, you will have to explain to me how anyone can ever enjoy the quality of life. Since there are atleast a dozen negative factors at play at all times. The only way to have them not interfere is to ignore them, if this is what you want to say, what conclusion are we to draw? I see only that the point of life is to enjoy quality of life which is to say that we must ignore any and all negative factors. Where will that leave us jjj?
jjj stated:
OKay, first you called it contentment, now you are calling it bliss. So which is it? You once again fail to explain what your words mean or what their implication into life is. So once again: “How do you define and substantiate this ‘ultimate’ and secondly, HOW do YOU suppose we have good odds at achieving it for many years?” ----->You would save me and yourself alot of time if you explained these things to start, without others having to ask, there are some questions that are really easy to see coming, it’s nice when someone takes the time to explain them. It shows that you truly want us to understand instead of feeling good about yourself for talking at us instead of to us.
jjj stated:
The fact that you are proud has been evident to more than just myself. Moreover, how is it you accomplished this enjoyment of quality of life? - again another question that you should have noticed we would inquire into.
jjj stated:
Did you ever think that maybe others can imagine different, and possibly greater things than you can? Furthermore, how have you convinced yourself that you cannot imagine anything greater?
jjj stated:
What specific kind of philosophy is it that you rave on about that is key to us enjoying quality of life? What are its most important tenets, principles, and teachings? I agree that ignorance AND confusion is one of the world’s greatest social problems, but how do you see yourself as not victim to both of these?
What’s your take?
I love your conclusion: “It’s about coming to an understanding together.” It’s a wonderful thought, isn’t it? Do you know why I wrote: “You are free to know better?” >>> because I almost 100% knew that you are going to dismiss it as who knows what. Sometimes I ask my self: Why do I through my pearls of wisdom…(you know the rest)? >>> I do it to keep in touch with the trend of our young people.
The rest of your response is rather confusing. To put you right, I would need to write 5 pages of DIN A4. I would mind, if I had the certainty that my pearls of wisdom fall onto fertile soil… (I see black!) In your case (I mean at your present level of philosophical maturity) I suggest you pick the stuff in my postings, which is acceptable to you and chuck the rest into the dustbin. That’s going to solve our misunderstanding, for the time being at least. Trust me I have done my homework. Peace jjj
jjj stated:
It is for this reason, this kind of mind game playing that gets most new posters in trouble. We’re not kids anymore jjj, you don’t get looked up on, nor do you receive any new respect by asking questions, to which, once you get an answer you reply “See, that’s why I asked, cause I knew that’s what you were going to say”. I didn’t dismiss it, I simply told you what our discussion was about for me. If you tell me A, and I say that A doesn’t apply to me, instead B applies to me more, and you come out saying “Ha, see I knew you were going to dismiss A” doesn’t get us anywhere, nor does it make for any kind of understanding between us. If your idea of staying in touch with the trend of young people is to patronize others, you will not go far with the posters on ILP, I can tell you that much. Furthermore, young people are not into asking questions and then telling the responder that they knew they were going to respond like that. I don’t know what young people you are hanging around, but I would advize looking for some knew kids to hang out with.
jjj stated:
What exactly is it about my post that was confusing? I ask because I worded everything in simple terms, I broke your post down to quoting you by sentences, and I followed a logical format so that any average human being could follow. I’m open to hearing where I went wrong, if you will only be so kind as to quote the words that confused you and possibly explain what exactly it is about them that confused you.
jjj stated:
What exactly do you mean by putting me right? What is DIN A4? And so what if you needed to write 5 pages explaining yourself? Isn’t that what I have done for you?
jjj stated:
What do you mean by “I see black!”? Furthermore, you’re closer to proving to me that you have any wisdom whatsoever than any other poster hear, specifically because I pay so close attention to your words, yet I see no reason to believe you are wise at all. I’m not saying you aren’t wise, just saying that you haven’t presented yourself as though you were, nor have any of your words come across as thought inspiring, vivid, innovative posts.
jjj stated:
This is yet another reason why you come across as pretencious, conceited, and neive. The above quote holds the connotation that I am somehow at a lower philosophical level than you are, as well as, it holds the connotation that you know what philosophical level I am and hence can hold yourself in such high regard as to figure you could tell me how to read your posts. Your judgements (specifically of me), as well as, your elucidation of your ideas are all precocious. You may very well have revolutionary and innovative ideas, but you present them like a 16 year old egotistical shovenistic kid who thinks the world belongs to him.
jjj stated:
I wish I could say I do trust you, unfortunately you haven’t given me a single reason to. In fact, I automatically trust people when I first meet them and continue to until they give me a reason not too. You, jjj, have given me reason not to trust you. You contradict yourself, when I make that clear to you, instead of answering my questions and accusations you cover up with “Your post was confusing and I treated you the way I did because because of the philosophical level you are at”.
COME ON JJJ, let’s get it together. I’m not fond of the fact that I spent all this time explaining this to you, I don’t want to argue with you. All I am saying is, try to think of others a little before you write down your thoughts, remember that some of your purported facts won’t be accepted by us, for others yet they may wish to understand or even to accept your idea but they may fail to understand it at first, either way you should always try to back up, rationalize, or provide some logic with your ideas so that we have an easier time following, accepting, or critiquing your ideas. If you’re here only to talk at us, you won’t get very far, trust me, but if you truly care about making us understand your views and if you truly want to understand our views, opinions, and ideas then you will understand what I am talking about.
What’s your take?
Gadfly,
Your offensive approach isn’t working. In a way I try to equal your tune, but neither I enjoy it nor will I be ever good in offending people. (I received too much love during childhood…i.e. I don’t like violence and Russian-Roulettes! )
You response is full of hostility… why is that?
That explains why I too, try to speak your language of hostility…
Let’s stop it! Can you? I can! Tell me when you start, because than I will try to copy you.
Also you questions are very demanding. It’s very hard on me to go every time through the basics… only to see my affords being zeroed out with insults.
I know I came in with a big splash… I love to be wild, but did not expect to encounter sooo much hostility…
You actually zero out everything I wrote. What point has then it to defend what? - There’s nothing for me to defend!
Well, let’s see how we go… jjj
JJJ wrote-
You keep claiming that you are here to teach and to learn. Well teach JJJ! Show us the basics. Don’t let a little harsh language get in the way of your altruistic intentions. I think you may find that once you thoroughly explain yourself, you may have a better reception. As of now, you are the equivalent of someone that says, “I’m right and you’re wrong, but I’m too tired to explain why.” When you don’t explain why you’re right, that means to the people on this forum, that you can’t explain your position, because it’s incorrect. It’s in your best interest to explain yourself JJJ.