I cannot stand Tool.
I cannot stand you.
=D> =D> =D>
42 is the correct answer!
i think the life is all about living. Many of us are guily of simply existing instead of really living our lives.
I also think that life is about what we do and not do in each and every moment of the period of time in earth.
Anyway, have anyone read the book “How to live on twenty four hours a day” by arnold bennet. It talks about how we all spend our day every day.
I got the book for free at this website called Inspirational Hub .Really a good read. Go get it while it’s still there.
The website is at inspirationalhub.com
Let me start off by saying I do not know. What I do find interesting is the answers given by the respondents so far. Which answers, one could best describe as facile. Granted the 42 was rather funny 
. These are the answers from a forum dedicated to philosophers and philosophy. What is the point of all this philosophy if it brings us no closer to answering this which is surely, above all else, the ultimate philosophical question?
I realise that this may come across as critical of the forum but in fact I do mean to criticize the respondents specifically. Rather I criticize philosophy, and myself in particular, for not having anything approaching a satisfactory or ubiquitously, meaningful answer to this question.
I mean where the *@#% have five thousand years of philosophy brought us when the best answer so far is 42?
"Oh, come with old Khayyam and leave the wise to talk;
one thing is certain, that life flys;
One thing is certain, and the rest is lies;
The flower that once has blown forever dies.
Myself when young did eagerly frequent Doctor and Saint,
And heard great Argument
About it and evermore
Came out by the same door as in I went."
Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam
“What good is wisdom when it brings no profit to the wise?”
Louis Syphere, Angel Heart.
Good luck anyhow on your quest, I am sure your book will be interesting from a psychological if not a philosophical point of view.
Of course I did meet the American and he had some very definite ideas on the topic…
“Tool is exactly what it sounds like: It’s a big dick. It’s a wrench. It’s also what it sounds like: It’s a verb, it’s a digging factor. It’s an active process of searching, as in use us, we are a shovel, we are the match, we’re the blotter of acid, your tool; use us as a catalyst in your process of finding out whatever it is you need to find out, or whatever it is you’re trying to achieve.” - Maynard
An interesting view, but mine differs quite a lot. For me, at the moment (I’m sure it’ll change many, many times), this is the meaning: we are organisms. Chains of amino acids producing proteins, cells, groups of cells eventually making up organs, making up what our consciousness, perception, and ideas of this reality are. This collection of acids, cells, organs, forming a selective consciousness from which it interprets signals of the outside world. We are simply experiencing - experiencing however this collection of chemicals forms consciousness to experience (I’ll give an example). Sound waves colide with the organ in your ear known as the ear drum and an electrical signal interpreted by the collection of neurons (brain) interprets this as a function we call sound, and we experience it. Specific electrical signals are interpreted by the brain to manifest as a function called thought to the collection of cells (organism). Take a ‘mind-altering’ drug and these interpretations change, as does reality for the collection of cells (organism).
Does that mean there is no meaning to life? If you wanted to think in that manner, it would stand to reason. I just think go here and do this (Fundamental Christianity comes to mind) seems like a far too shallow an existence for my liking (no offense).
My above description hardly describes my opinion to its’ fullest, but perhaps one day I’ll be able to ponder a good collection of thought-labled sounds (words) to convey my idea.
This answer is to broad from an empistomological sense this is untrue
there is a question of our existence I say that we don’t exist we beleive we exist ownly because we are stubburn to accept truth that reality fails to exist as does the mean. we think that everything has some great outlook that we die and live on but if we die how can we live, often we must realize that the only answer to this question is far simpler than we can realize that we not only exist as a thought but that life is inso meaningless we must accept that fact and learn to live a meaningless life with meaning that is the only way
you can’t understand or fathom the meaning of life by simply reading text/words and looking at a computer screen. it is something you have to experience. period.
experience, which makes up existence.
I have to agree with this sentiment. Our primitive way of conveying experience through words is far to inert too show meaning - or even the opinion of - such a large question.
The best we could possibly hope for would be to direct each other to a way to experience reality or the lack thereof (or perhaps in between).
The meaning of life is whatever we agree that it is.
On the other hand,
A lifetime that is full of meaning is not discoverable, it must be created.
The only universal answer to this question can only come from a religious viewpoint. Religions who believe in purpose will agree that the meaning of life is the same for every human on this earth. Some believe it is unknown, and the one’s that do define one differ from religion to religion. But here’s the poing I’m getting at…
I however do not belong to any religious group so therefore I believe this: The meaning of life is subjective. We create our own meaning (and should do so without the influence or as little as possible of others). So the question is therefore meaningless. End of discussion.
If life has purpose then we are confined to a set pursuit and possibility.
On the other hand if life has no purpose all things are possible. In the first case life is simple but constrained, in the second case life is expanded but alien. I should also state that not ALL things are in fact possible but I think you get the statement.
This is what the TK wrote in the Unabomber Manifesto. Political and moral opinions aside, he was somewhat on the right track. All activities outside of basic biological living are “surrogate activities” as he labelled them. Even the pursuit of knowledge itself is a surrogate activity. This is his theory and it may be difficult to distinguish surrogate activities from basic activities when it comes to human behavior.
On the other hand we could take an existential route and claim that man simply has no nature or purpose, that, to use Heidegger’s words, “man experiences the miracle of what is”. I guess being in itself might be a purpose but by that logic it is a purposeless existence, so simply to live is not really a purpose per say.
In an uncanny sense, life doesn’t necessarily need a purpose to be meaningful. Enjoyment itself is subjective as stated above. I would not say that my time in Iraq was enjoyable at the time it occured but reflecting back up it I would say it was a great time and gave a purpose to living in a sense. Like everything else that occurs in life we often grasp at a sense of purpose but cannot in fact understand it because it is outside of language itself.
Interesting considering I have not read the unibomber manifesto.
The meaning of life is to experience joy.
The meaning of life is to express yourself.
The meaning of life is to answer the question, Who Am I?
The meaning of life is for God to experience Himself through individuation.
The meaning of life is to express love.
The meaning of life is to, through experiencing all possible things, become God.
The meaning of life is to grow. To love and learn. To commune with others.
I’m interested in reading about those response patterns.