Silly puns aside, like there is none or that that's only for you to decide... despite their repetition, are pretty sound advice for anyone starting out on the road of individualization. I also believe that if we all recognized the Golden rule as some goal to strive towards, we would be much better off as a species and collectively speaking.

Wikipedia ~ "Hedonism is a school of thought that argues that the pursuit of pleasure and intrinsic goods are the primary or most important goals of human life."

I don't necessarily agree on pursuit of pleasure a worthy objective meaning for life; however, I think pursuit of instrinsic good make sense as a humanistic meaning for life.

I don't necessarily agree on pursuit of pleasure a worthy objective meaning for life; however, I think pursuit of intrinsic good make sense as a humanistic meaning for life — matt

I suppose that an experience of pleasure could be inherently meaningful partly because when we are in a state of pleasure we are less likely to seek further meaning.

On the other side I don't derive meaning from suffering.

I think if there is no meaning to existence then that could be deeply problematic. I think societies survive by enforcing meanings and reaching some kind of temporary consensus.

People speak and act as if there was some agreed upon meaning consensus. But I am quite nihilistic and find things inauthentic. Can we force our own meaning on society and can we have our own meaning without imposing it on the other?

An objective meaning could be something that justifies societies and actions and deflates nihilism.

It's not that there is no meaning. Even an antinatalist or nihilist proclaims meaning found where there is none. The problem is that (at least in the West) meaning had been subjugated into a concept of utility or economic satisfaction like preference or tastes. Thus, rendering any discussions about said preferences or tastes as moot, and unwelcome.

On the other side I don't derive meaning from suffering. — Andrew4Handel

That is probably a good attitude.

The deepest sense of pleasure is found in the gratification of the deepest desire. Google defines desire "a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen". Wish attainment. Gratification of our deepest wishes (goals) Power from the ability to create a certain reality for ourselves. This is the highest purpose. Moral self willing. What Wallows said the golden rule.

The pursuit of pleasure in the sensual sense (physical)

I feel that either life has an objective meaning or it has no meaning.

It can be a quagmire to define meaning but here I am referring to life having an overriding goal or purpose or structure.

For example the laws of physics or cell structures do not depend on the individual and continue to exist after the death of the individual. In this sense you can't impose meaning onto something that already has an intrinsic structure.

However evolutionary theory has undermined the idea of a purpose in nature. It makes life seem subservient to mindless reproduction and survival.

Acquiring insight is the main purpose of life. And if you need a reputable source for that, you only need to look at my profile.

One objection to objective meaning I have heard is that it stops us from making our own meaning or is deterministic. This is an Objection to a gods meaning being our meaning.

But I am not sure that we can make our own meaning in a strong sense because what makes us able to bestow meaning in this way and what makes our meaning valid. You could cite groups such as the Nazis as indulging in meaning making or any other dangerous, controversial or wacky group.

Modern art is probably relevant here where people consider certain works to be valueless and only given the title art based on a new flexibility to the concept of art. I don't think all things labelled art are art or are equivalent.

Often we don't make a meaning but derive it from preexisting things or other people.

I wonder what parents think the meaning of life is when they create a child. Surely you would want your child to have a meaningful life in a meaningful world.
In some cases parents have a religious meaning but the problem with that is what happens if the child rejects that. You cannot guarantee your child will find your meanings valid.

The objective is what one can perceive. So, it will always be messed up with other things.
So I see and hear people. They are like me, wanting to understand the the awful things they hear and see.
And that is it. The place where "we" meet.

Or not.

If it existed you would never know when you found it because you’re a subjective creature. You’d have to be God to know and even then you wouldn’t be 100% sure as it is always possible that you just THINK you’re God when you’re not actually all knowing. The fact that people can misninterpret or have different interpretations of ANYTHING is proof no objective statement can exist. The only “objective” statement I found is “I am conscious”. Of course all of this also falls into the “subjective trap” where I could’ve misinterpreted something. It’s quite a contradiction

I thinking an objective meaning would be applicable to everyone. The objective meaning would fail if it didn't apply to everyone.

For example every human needs a heart to live.

I think everyone's life should have value and meaning.

objective defined as "everyone agrees with it" is very different from objective as "will never be different regardless of anyone's opinion". You can measure when you have the former but you can't tell when you have the latter. I was using the latter definition.

What would it be?

Would it be about achieving goals? Making progress morally and spiritually? Doing the will of a deity. Fulfilling an inbuilt teleology?
Hedonism? — Andrew4Handel

It cannot be, because there isn't any objective meaning. No argument can support any meaning of life without being biased to our own existence. We measure the meaning of life, based upon our own existence as humans, which makes the argument flawed. If we cannot present an objective meaning of life towards another lifeform, such as another form of intelligent life in the universe with another set of parameters for the meaning of life, then we cannot have an objective meaning. We can present an objective meaning of life, so long as it incorporates every possible life form in the universe, which makes it impossible for us to present it, as we are bound to the existence of being humans. Whenever you try to deduce the argument for an objective meaning of life, you will run into the answer that there isn't any objective meaning of life. If you create a subjective meaning of life, that is a set of maxims of your own, but never objective. Objective means it has been and will always be something, but since life wasn't created with any meaning in mind, but instead evolved out of dead matter evolving into organic matter through chemical processes, there is no objective meaning.

We exist and all notions of the mystery of our existence that fuels our sense of there being an objective meaning to our existence is false and based on lacking knowledge about how life evolved. The "hunt" for objective meaning is futile and out of desperation when faced with the meaningless nature of our existence. I would abandon all attempts at finding objective meaning and instead find a meaning that we invent for ourselves. If we are meaningless, we are free to create meaning, to create a reason for existing. If we can't create meaning, then we might as well kill ourselves. Trying to find an objective meaning of life is a distraction from either giving up life or creating meaning. But it's tempting to try and find an objective meaning. People tend to want an authority to govern them, it's a well-known function in psychology about how people behave. So most people want to find an external solid truth that can govern them and the idea of having no meaning, having nothing that guides us, frightens most people to death. But it's futile, there isn't any objective meaning, we simply are and that's it. The meaning needs to be created and if that's scary, it doesn't mean hiding from it makes it less true.

The question is, if there was an objective meaning of life, what would it be? Please entertain the question instead of rejecting it outright.

The question is, if there was an objective meaning of life, what would it be? Please entertain the question instead of rejecting it outright. — matt

How can I entertain a question that is essentially impossible to answer? I can answer with what I might think is a subjective meaning of life, a meaning that I personally think is worthwhile in life, but answering what is an objective meaning of life is a pointless question when there isn't any objective meaning.

To entertain the question, you must first accept that there is an objective meaning of life, but something we don't know. But as soon as you try and make a rational argument for doing so, the question falls apart into absurdity.

So how can we answer a question that is pointless? It becomes trivial nonsense without philosophical weight. The true question that can be discussed would be... can there be any objective meaning? And so far we've had thousands of years of philosophers failing to find there to be any.

I've tried the following:

1. Being the only species, on this planet, capable of rational inquiry, comprehension and feeling, we should carry this accidental (evolution) or deliberate (god) trait to its natural conclusion - gather knowledge, wisdomn, feel the beauty of the universe. Like I read somewhere, ''the universe is trying to understand itself''.. We're the brains and heart of the universe, one could say. Why not function accordingly?

Is this purpose?

Of course some will disagree that the universe is ''beautiful''. Life-smothering vacuum, asteroids, supernova radiation, parasites, etc. but that doesn't detract from the fact that we are the brains and heart of the universe.

We're capable, probably in a limited way at present, of comprehending its laws and structure, and love its mind-boggling vastness and potential or fear its world-destroying power through asteroids, volcanoes, supernovae, etc.

So, try to understand the universe and invest emotionally in it.

One doesn't have to be a scientist to do this. Reality is at many levels. We know it because we've studied them. There's an x-ology, meaning study of x, for all that a human experiences. Given this is so, one can always find a subject that one is drawn to. Study it, contribute, enjoy it.

Some may disagree with me. In the short run there's mortality and in the long run there's the heat death of the universe. Why do anything at all, let alone try to understand the universe? Better to have fun and die.

My meaning in life can be erased in an instant (asteroids) or slowly when the universe reaches thermal equilibrium and there's no life giving or sustaining energy.

Yet, there's a real chance that our knowledge is incomplete or even wrong. May be we can, if we develop the tech, hop from star to star and extend life till a point where we can create our own stars and planets. Too much science-fiction? Could be but I think it's more probable than, say, that we've completely understood this universe of ours.

2. To have meaning is to have purpose. A purpose implies usage. To be used for something is something people don't like. This is relevant for people who want divine purpose. If God creates us for a purpose then we're not free and we're being used justl like a hammer or a nail.

It could be that we derive satisfaction by being part of something ''greater'' than ourselves. Yet, if this is true then we're no more than slaves who must do their master's bidding. Is this a purpose/meaning one would like?

It's odd that the pyramids, they are beautiful, should be so highly regarded and credited to the pharaohs. What of the slaves or laborers that actually did the hard work? To have divine purpose would be to be like them, used, abused and forgotten and their hard labor attributed to their master.

It could be that if the purpose were benevolent the sweat would be worth it. Yet, to have no choice in the matter still reeks of slavery. One could say that the goodness in the work would automatically make us volunteer. Yet that is a condescending attitude - to think for someone else is to ignore his personhood.

3. We lack an objective purpose. In the context of 2 above this should be a happy occasion. We're not slaves to a god at least. This opens the door to self-created meaning in life. We can choose our own paths in life's journey and write our own chapter in the book of humanity.

In this sense, the lack of objective meaning is a blessing and should be welcomed instead of cried over.

4. Why do we seek meaning though? What about life as we know it is inadequate.

Our forefathers were too busy just surving the vagaries of nature to think about stuff like this. Then things changed. Civilization allowed us to think on life and people became discontented. We began to see how similar we are to animals. They too eat, mate, procreate and build nests. Were we simply animals? Were we just the star attraction yet nothing more than an animal in a zoo? We, sought, a higher purpose. That which would put us above mere animals.

This trend, if we could call it one, continued along the same line. There came among men, supermen, who wanted to be more than just a man (now that we were not just animals).

We can see where this is going. There seems no end to it. There will always be something ''greater'' we want to be a part of. I guess, if one must continue extending this line of thinking, we won't ever be satisfied unless we become gods ourselves.

And even when we do become gods we may still ask, in our vanity for which we're well known, ''Is this all?''.

Just saying...

I must be brief; I have to usher at a funeral in 28 minutes, and I'm still in my bath robe.

The universe doesn't provide us ready-made, objective meaning. It can't. On the other hand, we can, we will, we shall, we must provide meaning. And we do.

Got to go. The corpse is waiting.

Got to go. The corpse is waiting. — Bitter Crank

Not to be blunt or insensitive, but that's a very meta framing of your "nothing has objective meaning"-comment. :sweat:

What would it be?

Would it be about achieving goals? Making progress morally and spiritually? Doing the will of a deity. Fulfilling an inbuilt teleology?
Hedonism? — Andrew4Handel

If there was a balloon on Mars, what colour would it be? Red? Blue? Yellow? Green?

The best color is white because it contains all other colors.

The best color is white because it contains all other colors. — matt

That's another good example of where things can go wrong in philosophy.

Please explain

Please explain. — matt

Okay. Those sort of statements are ambiguous enough to potentially lead to error, and it doesn't have to be about colour: it could be about virtually anything.

One way of interpreting your statement is that you're saying that, for you, white is the best colour, because, for you, the best colour is whatever colour contains the greatest number of other colours, and white contains the greatest number of other colours. If this is what you meant, then there's no problem. Otherwise, there's a problem, because I don't think that you can justify that there's a best colour in any way other than in this subjective and relativistic sort of way.

The universe doesn't provide us ready-made, objective meaning. It can't. On the other hand, we can, we will, we shall, we must provide meaning. And we do. — Bitter Crank

If the universe does not contain meaning where are you getting the meaning from? Something from nothing? I think whatever we find meaningful is inevitably provided by the Universe.

However if we don't find meaning in this it cannot be blamed on us.

I was saying objective meaning would be the equivalent to finding the everyone needs a heart to live. Maybe someone could see we all need love and we all flourish with love.

I don't agree with that necessarily but there could be something fundamental that humans objectively need to have a fulfilled existence.

I think evolution is a claim of objective meaning where evolutionary theorist seek to explain life from a fixed or lawful paradigm.
If the only reason we exist is through evolution then evolution offers an explanation of our desires (reductively) and these are around mindless survival and reproduction.

I don't know why organisms seek to survive but organisms tend to have survival traits so at the basic level you could say we are here to survive.

On the other hand you could say we have discovered that we are simple blind reproduction machines and have now exposed the secret behind our desires and we should stop aiding mindless replication of our genes.
I feel that after discovering the idea of evolution it should cause us to reevaluate things and to me if you you favour the most ruthless reductive notion of evolution I think we should end this process.

On the other hand I think the whole scientific paradigm is probably not favorable to exploring meaning.

(..)gather knowledge, wisdom, feel the beauty of the universe. Like I read somewhere, ''the universe is trying to understand itself''.. We're the brains and heart of the universe, one could say. Why not function accordingly? — TheMadFool

I think trying to understand and explore the universe could be meaningful if that was humanities main goal. But there is too much other stuff going on like overpopulating and polluting the planet, over consumption and war.
I think gathering knowledge does require using meanings in some sense. But who knows where our accumulated knowledge will take us?
Maybe we will explore hidden dimensions of reality or create time machines or something radical like that.
Personally I quite like the idea of a world dedicated information gathering and creativity but this one is just too dystopian at the moment.

If God creates us for a purpose then we're not free and we're being used just like a hammer or a nail — TheMadFool

I think our parents have already played God and we are here because of their motivations or actions.

My parents are very religious Christians who made me go to church up to 5 times a week as a child. So I had that meaning imposed on me until I left home.

I have no idea now what it would be like to be truly free to choose my own meaning without indoctrination.

I don't know of any specific goal or target which makes life significant or meaningful but, from what I've observed of life, human life predominantly, it seems significance and meaning is tied to consciousness of life. By this, I mean how we cognize, how we respond, how we appreciate the ideal, the practical and in relation to others (people, objects, subjects), etc. This is because everything we consider to be good or worth any value is dependent upon its attributes/features in our consciousness. Also, the basic levels we have of happiness are often dependent on alteration of state of consciousness in one way or another, e.g. through change of awareness in mental states, emotional states, physical states, etc. So, perhaps the objective meaning of life is to develop our consciousnesses.