Meanin of Life

Eric Boggs 10/29/2012 Martin Philosophy The inwardness of brio has been debated among many people throughout history. Different theories have been used to analyze and explain what our use of goods and services is in this spirit. Ive always heard from my parents that life is too short for regrets, and that there will be good and bad days. that what is it that people strive for in life? In reality there is no right answer to this simple question. Some people strive for alert life in the moment which philosopher Baggini after part book with.Others see religion as an important way to lead their lifes as Pojman could agree with. Some like Camus believe its humanly impossible to find the meaning of life. Ultimately people must find it in themselves as to their purpose in this life. Julian Baggini speaks of our purpose in this life that is more appealing than Camus or Pojman. Baggini has a teleological view on life meaning our purpose is feel forward to future goals and objectives . However Baggini doesnt mean that our purpose is to succeed presently avoiding personal happiness to achieve a better future.An example he mentions is when people say I can die happy now because a lifetime fulfillment has been achieved. What is the purpose of life after achieving a long goal, and in reality Baggini essentially says Why not. There is nothing to live for and the feeling of emptiness settles in as nothing will assemble that lifelong achievement. Baginni says the person who sacrifices too much enjoyment of life to serve the purpose of future wealth and security is thus making the mistake of overestimating the conclusion to which is future life will be better than the one he could have now.Most people strive for a rich and fashionable lifestyle, hardly at what cost is mortal willing to make for it. Baggini says what about this rich lifestyle is different than a person who doesnt have these luxuries. Just because someone has a lot of material happiness doesnt mean that person is happier. In my view I believe Baggini has the closet view on the meaning of life because living life for a nice future while taking advantages of lifes luxuries presently is a meaningful way to live.Personally Im not a deeply religious person, but I do know people who value religion and incorporate their views in their day-to-day actions. Pojman argues that religion specifically theistic religion gives meaning to life. Pojman begins by defining what it means to be free and autonomous he refers being autonomous as being self-governed or freedom to make your own choices. Pojman points out autonomy is good if it serves a purpose. Whether it is doing good or bad it still serves a purpose towards life. Pojman pointed out to bring out points an atheist women had mentioned to him in the past.One being it is more important to be free than autonomous, and the second point being Religion provides a sublime meaning or purpose to live, but it does not allow humans to be free or autonomous according to the atheist women. Pojman argues freedom cant be understood apart from the notion of purposiveness. Pojman states in order to be free one has to Act A, when you want to, in order to area some goal G. However Pojman looked into the bigger picture as to what this atheist woman was stating. Pojman essentially contradicts her statement with reasoning.Pojman says freedom and autonomy are a great deal distant from each other, but in theism it is bound together. Pojman way of defining the purpose of life wasnt as appealing to me as Baggini. Religion does gip a role in aspects of peoples lives just not enough in my opinion for it to matter. Camus had different views from Pojman and Baggini because he believed life was absurd and meaningless. self-annihilation was a prominent bringing close together that Camus commonly spoke of. Camus states that suicide was implying you were confessing that its not cost the trouble.He used an example of a man who killed hims elf five age after his daughter had passed away. The man simply was to emotionally instable to return to his normal behaviors. Camus had also mentioned absurdity which he defined a split in a man and his overall life. Camus explained that daily routine like working several hours a week and doing the same thing everyday will eventually get along with to a halt. The question is why? Why do eventually want things to change after having a stable routine life.Camus says this is weariness which possibly leads to the idea of suicide. If something abruptly changes such as death there are two options he implies. One being able to recover what is lost, or the other is suicide. He uses the example of Sisyphus which is a god that was condemned to the underworld. Sisyphus pushes a huge stone to the top of this mountain only to roll back to the bottom to do the process from start. Camus implies that this is a usual aspect in peoples lives where being stable and having a routine is sustaining un til it collapses.I feel Camus implies what is the point of living such a life if its inevitable that tragedy will likely occur. Ive had friends commit suicide and Ive have often wondered if there was anything I could have do about. In reality I looked at it from Camus point of view as it provided them a way out and essentially tell me life is not worth living. There in so plan that says how one should live, but merely a reason to find a way to live. Baggini viewed life mostly in the moment as long as happiness and future endeavors were balanced.Pojman had the idea that religion played an important role in ones life while Camus thought in the end suicide seemed to be the right choice if life became too difficult. Baggini in my opinion had the closet way in interpreting the purpose of life. Baggini explains that happiness in the present with balanced goals in the future should be a way someone should live. I certainly take ont want to wait ten years to live a rich lifestyle while fa mily and friends slip away. Life is what one makes it, but the key is finding out what purpose do people find it.