Suppose you’re having a conversation about the meaning of life with six of your

Suppose you’re having a conversation about the meaning of life with six of your close friends. One of them, Heidy, says, “I think my life is meaningless. Your life is meaningless. There is no meaning to anyone’s life.” Surprisingly, all of your friends nod their heads and agree with her!
You ask them to clarify what they mean by this.
Heidy says, “Well, since life is meaningless, there must not be a God.”
Payum says, “Also, since life is meaningless, we should now all be pessimists.”
Indica says, “And since life is meaningless, there’s no reason to be well-behaved morally.”
Melody says, “Plus, since life is meaningless, we all might as well just give up: there’s no reason to try to do anything or accomplish anything.”
Bram says, “Yeah, and since life is meaningless, egoism makes sense: we should spend the rest of our lives selfishly making ourselves as happy as possible.”
Onat says, “Actually, Bram, I’m not sure. I think that, since life is meaningless, there’s no way to ever experience happiness or ever be truly happy.”
Respond to at least two of your friends. Based on your understanding of nihilism, absurdism, and existentialism from this Unit, do you think the claim that life is meaningless implies what your friends are saying? Why or why not? Between your two responses, choose at least one friend’s statement that you disagree with, and (in an intellectually productive way) explain why you think that nihilism does not imply what your friend claims it does. Be sure to fully explain and defend your interpretation of the claim that life is meaningless
Respond to these 3 posts please (2-3 sentences)
I do not believe that the claim that life is meaningless implies what Onat is saying. Camus’ absurdist viewpoint did see life as nonsense that people take seriously, however just because the world is nonsense does not mean we can never be happy. Rather than giving into despair, we can accept and laugh at the absurdity of life, which leads to happiness. We also should not give into false hope, as this is not “true” happiness. Although Camus proposes despair and false hope as options, he gives reason not to follow these options. Even so, the choice of happiness exists. Therefore, even if one does not choose to live in such a way, laughing at the absurd still exists as a possibility of a happy experience. If one laughs at the absurd throughout their life, perhaps they can truly be happy. They also can live life with passion, freedom and revolt and embrace the meaningless of life such as human passion and the absurdity of freedom, as described by Van Aken (2).
Heidy is correct in the way that nihilists and absurdists think. They reason based on the premises that life has meaning if and only if God exists, and that God does not exist, therefore life has no meaning. According to such logic, since life is meaningless, then God cannot exist.
First off, wow this is a pretty miserable group. Second, even if life is meaningless overall, to Indica, I’d say we at least know our actions have consequences for others. We know we can hurt or help others. So unless you’re in pain yourself (and with a mindset like hers she very well could be) why would you want to hurt others? You surely wouldn’t want someone to hurt you after all. And to Onat, I’d say despite the fact that people seem to always seek temporary happiness, there are definitely ways to achieve long term happiness a.k.a. fulfillment such as achieving a goal you worked super hard for and enjoying the fruits of your labor or building something that will outlive you like a family or business. “Life is meaningless” implies that anything you do does not truly matter, last, or make a strong enough difference. If you look deeper into it, yes that would imply what the six friends concluded. I disagree with both Indica and Onat, but nihilism does imply what they concluded, at least for Indica. For Onat nihilism may not admit his conclusion, but only a nihilist/miserable person would feel and conclude that anyway.
The claimed life is meaningless implies what Melody is saying she asserts that life is meaningless, and people should not strive to accomplish anything. It is evident that Melody views life from the perspective of nihilism. This philosophical perspective contends there is no objective meaning to life, and it is pointless to try to construct our own (Tartaglia & Llanera, 2021). As well, the claim life is meaningless does not imply what Bram is saying. According to Bram, while there is no meaning to life, it is possible to create our own. The ability to develop one’s meaning implies that life is not entirely meaningless.
I disagree with the statement made by Bram because his statement asserts that even though life does not have a meaning, a person can create their own. In my opinion, Bram’s view does not align with nihilism. As well, there is no need for a person to have values since they will not contribute anything to their lives. Apart from that, this theory contends there is no truth, and it is pointless to uphold values. Nevertheless, Bram holds the possibility of a person creating their meaning. Such a view is not consistent with the definition of negativism given above. Bram’s view is more aligned with absurdism which asserts that even if life is meaningless, people should embrace its absurdity and take advantage of what it can offer. Bram’s statement supports this since it contends that people should strive to live their lives selfishly, making themselves as happy as possible.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Previous post This is a Journal – no resources needed. Book is given in the downloads use for
Next post Reading and writing are complicated exercises, and require a tremendous amount o