Right. So meaning is something that exists prior to seeking it as it is something that is looked for and found in nature, and not created by the mind. — Harry Hindu

Not if meaning is subjective and interpretive. How can inherent meaning be subjective? If you are saying that the reason is that some interpretations of meaning are wrong or fall short of what you are labelling 'inherent and found in nature,' are these incorrect meanings not still created in real human minds. These human minds are physical parts of the natural world. A nazi will assign certain interpretive meaning to the label Jewish. Such personal assignment of meaning can be very destructive and very unjust. This happens also in your serial killer example and may be due to a malfunctioning brain.
Were such warped meanings not still CREATED in the real brains/minds of the people who constructed such.

Its not different really but it is down to their interpretation of the 'effect' you have had of THE world or THEIR world. Which can be very different from your own personal assessment of your effects. — universeness

Right. So we're not disagreeing that your actions have effects on the world (meaning), or that one can have an interpretation of those effects as being conductive to achieving their goals or inhibiting them. So meaning and it's interpretation as good or bad are two different things. Those effects exist prior to any interpretation. Unless you are saying that the interpretation of the effects is meaning which would mean that unless we share the same goals, we don't share the same meanings. If this is the case then when someone asks what the meaning of life is then you have to get at their goals in life to even know if your answer would be useful to them. Goals are simply ideas in the present that trigger effects like behaviors in an effort to realize the goal. Having a purpose, or goal, for something does not necessarily mean that you will achieve that purpose or goal. Even acting in such a way to achieve the goal or purpose doesn't necessarily mean you will achieve it either. Failure to achieve goals and purposes is something that should be considered.

The OP was suggesting that life was meaningless. I think even the simple acrimony that discussion about the meaning of life can cause is itself strong evidence that living a life is anything but meaningless and that legacy is very important to many, if not most people. — universeness

A legacy is essentially the effects you leave behind.

Does this also indicate that you think some meaning is useful to ones life? — universeness

Sure. Meaning and usefulness are mutually exclusive. Meaning is the relationship between causes and effects. Those relations are either useful or not depending on one's own goals. One's goals do not determine if some causal relation is meaningful. They determine which relationships are useful in achieving or inhibiting one's goals.

For instance, your words on this screen carry all sorts of meaning as the effects of numerous causes. Your words are caused by your ideas and your intent to communicate them. They are also caused by the language you learned and you level of understanding of English. By reading your words I can get at your ideas as well as your understanding of the language you are using - depending on my goals. Just because I may be more interested in your understanding of the English language does not mean that you words also do not carry meaning in that they refer to your ideas. Meaning is there in the causal relation between your idea and your words on this screen, but aren't useful to my goal in understanding your level of education with the English language.

Not if meaning is subjective and interpretive. How can inherent meaning be subjective? If you are saying that the reason is that some interpretations of meaning are wrong or fall short of what you are labelling 'inherent and found in nature,' are these incorrect meanings not still created in real human minds. These human minds are physical parts of the natural world. A nazi will assign certain interpretive meaning to the label Jewish. Such personal assignment of meaning can be very destructive and very unjust. This happens also in your serial killer example and may be due to a malfunctioning brain.
Were such warped meanings not still CREATED in the real brains/minds of the people who constructed such. — universeness

If meaning were subjective and interpretive then how can we ever hope to communicate using scribbles on a screen? Wouldn't we have to have a common understanding of the meaning of the scribbles for us to communicate?

Take the tree rings in a tree stump. What do the tree rings mean? What does it even mean to ask that question? A botanist would say that the tree rings mean the age of the tree. Was the meaning projected by the botanists mind or something discovered by observation? If it was projected by the botanist's mind then I could project something different and then where would we be? Who would be right or wrong and would it even matter? In other words, if meaning is projected by the mind then I simply need to project from my mind and asking others would be pointless. If it is something that is observed then what would that be if not observing how tree rings (the effect) were created by how the tree grows throughout the year (the cause)? If this is the case then meaning is inherent in the causal relationship between how the tree grows and tree rings appearing in the tree stump. I would simply need to observe the causal relation and agree with the botanist, but there would be no reason for me to agree, or even ask the botanist's opinion, if meaning is projected by each mind.

What do the tree rings mean? — Harry Hindu

You are confusing reference with meaning.

I'm not confusing anything. I'm saying that meaning is the relationship between cause and effect and reference is a type of causal relation.

I'm saying that meaning is the relationship between cause and effect and reference is a type of causal relation. — Harry Hindu

Still waiting for your proof.

The OP was suggesting that life was meaningless. I think even the simple acrimony that discussion about the meaning of life can cause is itself strong evidence that living a life is anything but meaningless and that legacy is very important to many, if not most people.
— universeness
A legacy is essentially the effects you leave behind. — Harry Hindu

To expand on this: One's legacy (the effect) is a result of one's actions (the causes) in life. As such you create your own meaning by your actions - hence life is not meaningless unless you take no action.

Still waiting for your proof. — Jackson

I have shown that the proof is in the way people use the word, "meaning" in that they are referring to a causal relationship. I think that universeness's mentioning of "legacy" and how one's actions affect the world and other people support this.

I have asked you what you believe others are referring to when they use the word, "meaning" and I'm still waiting on that.

I have asked you what you believe others are referring to when they use the word, "meaning" and I'm still waiting on that. — Harry Hindu

I answered. You should have told me you did not understand it and I would have gladly explained.

Right. So we're not disagreeing that your actions have effects on the world (meaning), or that one can have an interpretation of those effects as being conductive to achieving their goals or inhibiting them. So meaning and it's interpretation as good or bad are two different things. — Harry Hindu

Perhaps there is a subtle joining here of 'effect' and interpretation of that effect becoming a personalised meaning. I would prefer your last sentence above to read 'So effect and its interpretation as good or bad are two different things.' I am not sure the word 'meaning' rests as comfortably in your sentence as the word 'effect,' I don't see the word effect and meaning as synonymous

Those effects exist prior to any interpretation. Unless you are saying that the interpretation of the effects is meaning which would mean that unless we share the same goals, we don't share the same meanings. If this is the case then when someone asks what the meaning of life is then you have to get at their goals in life to even know if your answer would be useful to them. — Harry Hindu

I concur with your first sentence here but yes meaning, because it can be very subjective and interpretive is garnished from effect. If an item falls towards me from a window and just misses me then once I know whos window it came from, I can interpret the meaning to be a deliberate act or accidental.
I need further investigation to know for sure but 'deliberate' or 'accidental' are both valid creations in my mind at the moment of the 'event.'
Should I care if my answer to "what is your meaning of life " is useful or not to another?

Failure to achieve goals and purposes is something that should be considered. — Harry Hindu

Good advice I think and I certainly apply it but I will still try, despite the risks if I perceive that goal to be very meaningful to me or to a group I identify with.

Meaning is there in the causal relation between your idea and your words on this screen, but aren't useful to my goal in understanding your level of education with the English language. — Harry Hindu

But surely the communication of my ideas, expressed in a common language between us are indicators toward my 'education with the English language.' I don't imagine it matters whether or not it comes from a self-taught source or an academically certificated source, as long as I am able to demonstrate my command of it to your satisfaction and if I can't then I would assume our communication would become less attractive to both of us.

If meaning were subjective and interpretive then how can we ever hope to communicate using scribbles on a screen? Wouldn't we have to have a common understanding of the meaning of the scribbles for us to communicate? — Harry Hindu

Well 'scribbles on a screen' is a phrase intended to dilute the importance of the communication attempt or the communication method or perhaps both. We are social creatures, asking questions seems to be fundamental to our psyche and our 'seek meaning' imperative.

To me, your tree example speaks to how meaning becomes knowledge and finally widely and sometimes even universally accepted knowledge such as 'all humans are mortal.'
I am ok with all the interpretations of an event. Was that a comet or a 'star of Bethlehem etc.
When we are sure what interpretations/meanings are correct to most people than we accept them as truth. That's the only time knowledge should be committed to a science book.
A theist/theosophist can write any fable/personal interpretation of events in a religious text that he/she/personal gender wants but stop calling it the truth. I am personally convinced that counting tree rings does indicate the age of the tree.
When we can find majority agreement we can say that effect is meaningful enough to rename the proposal as knowledge. Meaning is therefore a carrier force. Like a gluon. Bonds quanta together into something more useful to all of us. Events.....meaningful interpretations.....knowledge. Life is good....and...meaningful.

To expand on this: One's legacy (the effect) is a result of one's actions (the causes) in life. As such you create your own meaning by your actions - hence life is not meaningless unless you take no action. — Harry Hindu

I agree but it's also a continuum of how your legacy is interpreted by each new mind that encounters its forms of memorialisation and their view of the memorialised interpretations of others, about you.
Socrates has no personal memorialisations so we only assign personal meaning to his legacy through the interpretations others have made about him yet he remains an important figure in human history and to each new generation of humans.

I do not think meaning is a function of cause and effect or any fact. Meaning is not derived from any fact. Meaning has to do with value. Not necessarily subjective.

I've always taken the view that living life is the point. Making meaning. Why do we need a foundational guarantee for purpose? — Tom Storm

For when the intutitive optimism like yours wears thin.

* * *

It's just we've solved the issue. It's not our problem you don't like, or understand, the solution. — Harry Hindu

But you can't, don't, won't teach others your solution. You simply blame them. (So typical for religious/spiritual people and optimists.)

I'm happier now than I have ever been. I'm busy, I'm reading a lot of history. I listen to great music on the radio and internet. There's the small house and weedy lawn to look after.

Death, like an over-flowing stream
Sweeps us away; our life is but a dream,
an empty tale, a morning flower
cut down and withered in an hour. — Bitter Crank

A view suitable for people who have pretty much ended their worldly efforts and are now just waiting for death, pleasantly.
But it's not possible to live with such an outlook when one still has a long way to go, because then such an outlook is counterproductive.

1. What causes a turn from distraction to facing the meaninglessness of human existence? — Tate

Chronic pain, among other things.
Social ostracism, disenfranchizement.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Consent IS facing. With as full attention as possible, it is allowing into awareness without dispute. If right/wrong enters, the moment is lost. — ArielAssante

I see what you mean

Externally, if your house is on fire, get out as quickly as possible, then call the fire department. — ArielAssante

Right.

Absolutely -- waiting-for-death is not a suitable approach for people who are not old yet -- whatever one thinks of as "old" for themselves. My approach isn't "resignation from the game" altogether, because I, of course, don't know how long I may live yet. I still "engage".

But you can't, don't, won't teach others your solution. You simply blame them. (So typical for religious/spiritual people and optimists.) — baker

There's nothing to teach. You give meaning to your life by simply living. Of the millions, if not billions, of possible genetic combinations between your parents, you were the lucky one to have come into existence.

I'm not religious or spiritual. I can be an optimist as much as I can be a pessimist. I am a determinist. Your existence is determined given the conditions of this universe. Make the most of it.

1. What causes a turn from distraction to facing the meaninglessness of human existence?
— Tate

Chronic pain, among other things.
Social ostracism, disenfranchizement. — baker

This explains a lot. From a chronic pessimist's POV everyone else is a "typical religious/spiritual people and optimists". It seems to me that a balance of optimism and pessimism is necessary for a better understanding of life's meaning.

Absolutely -- waiting-for-death is not a suitable approach for people who are not old yet -- whatever one thinks of as "old" for themselves. My approach isn't "resignation from the game" altogether, because I, of course, don't know how long I may live yet. I still "engage". — Bitter Crank

A young person could die tomorrow. No one at any age knows how long they have. The point is to live each day like it's your last no matter how old you are.

Perhaps there is a subtle joining here of 'effect' and interpretation of that effect becoming a personalised meaning. I would prefer your last sentence above to read 'So effect and its interpretation as good or bad are two different things.' I am not sure the word 'meaning' rests as comfortably in your sentence as the word 'effect,' I don't see the word effect and meaning as synonymous — universeness

I never said that meaning and the effect were synonymous. I said that the relationship between some effect and its causes is synonymous with meaning. As such, your interpretation is the effect of the interaction of the observed effect (like words on this screen or tree rings in a tree stump) with your memory and goals. So effects are also the causes of subsequent effects (infinitely?). As such, the relationship between your interpretation and the observed effect is meaning.

I concur with your first sentence here but yes meaning, because it can be very subjective and interpretive is garnished from effect. If an item falls towards me from a window and just misses me then once I know whos window it came from, I can interpret the meaning to be a deliberate act or accidental.
I need further investigation to know for sure but 'deliberate' or 'accidental' are both valid creations in my mind at the moment of the 'event.' — universeness

Exactly. You interpret the meaning. Interpretation and meaning are different things. Again, the interpretation is just the effect. The meaning is the relationship between your interpretation and some other causal relation. Your interpretation is the act of discovering that relationship between the item falling and its cause.

Well 'scribbles on a screen' is a phrase intended to dilute the importance of the communication attempt or the communication method or perhaps both. We are social creatures, asking questions seems to be fundamental to our psyche and our 'seek meaning' imperative. — universeness

Not at all. I'm merely pointing out that scribbles on a screen are what is interpreted, and the act of interpreting is discovering the cause of the scribbles on the screen - specifically the idea in the head of the author that produced the scribbles.

To me, your tree example speaks to how meaning becomes knowledge and finally widely and sometimes even universally accepted knowledge such as 'all humans are mortal.' — universeness

No, not how meaning becomes knowledge. It's how interpretations become knowledge - another causal relation, or meaning.

When we are sure what interpretations/meanings are correct to most people than we accept them as truth. — universeness

We don't necessarily need to prove to others our own interpretations for our interpretations to work for us. We test other's interpretations to see if they work for us. It's not in the number of people that believe it. It's if it has been tested by each individual to see if it works for them, not the fact that someone simply claimed what their interpretation is and is accepted by everyone without everyone testing it for themselves. Common knowledge exists as a result of others trying on others' interpretations, not simply taking others at their word.

I agree but it's also a continuum of how your legacy is interpreted by each new mind that encounters its forms of memorialisation and their view of the memorialised interpretations of others, about you.
Socrates has no personal memorialisations so we only assign personal meaning to his legacy through the interpretations others have made about him yet he remains an important figure in human history and to each new generation of humans — universeness

Do you need others to interpret your legacy for your life to have meaning? Are you saying that your life's meaning is dependent upon others' interpretation of your actions? Or can you give your life meaning by interpreting your own actions and their subsequent effects on the world (which includes other people)?

I never said that meaning and the effect were synonymous. — Harry Hindu

Yes you did.

The point is to live each day like it's your last no matter how old you are. — Harry Hindu

Why?

A legacy is essentially the effects you leave behind. — Harry Hindu

What does that have to do with the topic of this thread?

Meaning, purpose and use refer forward. For the religious, life refers forward to an afterlife or an eternal life. But for the irreligious, there is nothing for life to refer or create to that is beyond it that can give it a purpose, use, function, or meaning.

One can only therefore consider it as having decorative value. So try not to put ugly posts here chaps, it lowers the tone, spoils the pattern. We are born and die like flowers, so try to look pretty and smell nice if you can, while you can. Don't expect meaning, but go for beauty.

One can only therefore consider it as having decorative value. So try not to put ugly posts here chaps, it lowers the tone, spoils the pattern. We are born and die like flowers, so try to look pretty and smell nice if you can, while you can. Don't expect meaning, but go for beauty. — unenlightened

Just like a Disney movie for children.

Just like a Disney movie for children. — Jackson

Yes! Disney films are beautiful so why do you sneer? Do you think it grown up and clever to be miserable and unpleasant? It isn't.

Do you think it grown up and clever to be miserable and unpleasant? It isn't. — unenlightened

I did not say that. But lying about suffering is always a bad idea.

Disney films are beautiful so why do you sneer? — unenlightened

Wow, if you're a child.