I like what Eliezer Yudkowski said in The Meaning of Life FAQ. He shows in a logic chart that there must be a potential meaning or meanings to any given life if we will make it, and that each individual's interim meaning of life is to find it. I'll tell you why I like that.
The modern world makes possible a bewildering level of freedom. But many modern people don't have the imagination or drive to do much with that, and spend it watching TV. Some long for the 30-year lifespan of a medieval serf where choices are made for you. They regard options as a temporary journey to a "settled" destination. Options are not a means by which I fence off and eliminate my options, I would like to try as many as possible. I hear others say, "I must choose one love for my whole lifetime, one job to repeat endlessly, one area to live, it must all be perfect because I will never change." Isn't that like limiting one's life to one meaning? Then they lock themselves in a white picket cage. It's feudal thinking. What's their hurry? In an age of multiple lifespans in which I change so much that I'm not even the same person I used to be, why not multiple interim meanings of life?
There are similar complaints about the overwhelming torrent of information. It's an innately good thing; on the same vein as meaning, I wonder if those who complain about it seek information only long enough to come to the first conclusion, then cut off all contradictory information?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-01-19 11:26 pm (UTC)The modern world makes possible a bewildering level of freedom. But many modern people don't have the imagination or drive to do much with that, and spend it watching TV. Some long for the 30-year lifespan of a medieval serf where choices are made for you. They regard options as a temporary journey to a "settled" destination. Options are not a means by which I fence off and eliminate my options, I would like to try as many as possible. I hear others say, "I must choose one love for my whole lifetime, one job to repeat endlessly, one area to live, it must all be perfect because I will never change." Isn't that like limiting one's life to one meaning? Then they lock themselves in a white picket cage. It's feudal thinking. What's their hurry? In an age of multiple lifespans in which I change so much that I'm not even the same person I used to be, why not multiple interim meanings of life?
There are similar complaints about the overwhelming torrent of information. It's an innately good thing; on the same vein as meaning, I wonder if those who complain about it seek information only long enough to come to the first conclusion, then cut off all contradictory information?