15 May 2001
I was inspired to write this essay after reading an article in the WILSON QUARTERLY written by Mark Kingwell with this same title. Mark is a brave philosopher who actually tries to answer this question. After a scholarly discourse he concludes that a meaningful life must be active and filled with purpose.
Kingwell rejects that the meaning of meaning can be found in the formulas of atomic physicists with grand theories that explain the universe, or in linguistic solution that trivialize meaning to language, or biologist or evolutionist that see the genome answering the big question, or to the assertions of fundamental religionist who relegate all meaning to their religions. Kingwell says, " (We) are immersed in meaning, awash in content, how best can we cope?" He gives five different possible answers to "What does it all Mean" but he chooses his number 5 as the correct answer!
The central question, he states in answer 5, that points to an answer is: "How ought I to live?" We see what he is driving at from these additional question: "Have I forged genuine friendships?", "Have I taken up roles and professions with integrity and joy?", "Have I left the world a better, more interesting place than I found it?", "Have I done one simple thing -- changed a tire, written a letter, cooked a dinner, performed a heart bypass as well as it could be done?" These are all moralistic and narcissistic hints for finding meaning in purposeful actions in our personal lives. As workers and shapers of the world the key to meaning lies in the performance rendered by our individual lives. This philosophic finding is not so different from the teachings of many religions.
Kingwell's article is more profound than this summary and my interpretation conveys. Readers are invited to read the whole article in the Wilson Quarterly, Spring 2001. Kingwell's paper needs to be reconciled with religion, especially the Christian religion that shapes the search for meaning for many Americans. The thoughts below include such an attempt, taking a more societal perspective with less solipsism. I am critical of religions in my discussions, but I believe that religions contribute important guides for living.
Let me first try to define what "it all" encompasses. For me it means -- what are the perils we will encounter as we make our passage in time into a new millennium -- what should we do to cope with these perils? What are the principal factors that will shape our destiny? First let me list the influences that I think will count the most:
1. New technology that determine military weaponry and economic and biological successes.
2. The decadence of Americans after decades of affluence.
3. The undeclared warfare between the religious-right and secular-left political factions.
4. Instability of economies controlled by money and stock markets.
5. Propensity of mankind to engage in war and ethnic rivalries and to follow leaders and demagogues.
6. Governments, globalization, and ideologies.
First let me talk to point 1.-- the role of science in influencing the world's future. This is probably the least controversial point as the changes caused by new technology are very evident. Some anti-science views are held by artistic pedants yearning for things like they were formerly. But many of these folks still like modern computers and nice automobiles. A telling argument for accepting and promoting technologies is in the way wars are now waged. Examples of importance of science in modern warfare are the night vision helicopters and Geophysical Positioning (GPS) Satellites that kept American casualties down in the Gulf War and in Yugoslavia. American military domination is due in no small part to our modern weaponry (that also can be made or purchased by our enemies). Similarly our economic success has been due in some degree to our advanced computer and information handling techniques. We share these new commercial technologies with European and Asian rivals. Some will claim that superior business and management methods spearhead American economic prosperity but these claims are not easy to document. The health and welfare of the world will certainly be influenced by biological investigations of the genome and of new medicines. One undeniable fact is that changes in science and technology can happen extremely rapidly. We live well and find some meaning in contributing to scientific advances.
Given then that technology is a vital bulwark in the prosperity and competitiveness of any nation or society we ask how can we foster and sustain science? Inventions and improvements in technology generally are made in government, industrial, and university laboratories by well-trained men and women. Techniques, apparatus and theories can also be imported, purchased and stolen. The United States has many very fine universities and colleges that function to teach Americans and foreigners advanced science. The newest and most functional techniques and inventions usually come from industrial and government laboratories. Research in university and government laboratories is usually supported by government funding. Citizen efforts in promoting better technology means financial and political support for technical education and for scientific research.
About point 2, the inference that the USA is in a decline is sure to be a controversial assertion. American prosperity, power and life style are the best in the world and decadence is not apparent, most Americans will say. So I will not argue the point but only list some questioning and contrary views. We have enjoyed decades of widespread affluence. Young people expect to attend colleges, have new cars and houses with services to mow the grass and plow the snow. Colleges have inflated grades so all can graduate. Divorces and live-in arrangements are supported by parents. Jobs without manual labor are usually sought.
Little heed is given the old quotation: "Ill fares the land to hastening ills a prey, where wealth accumulates and men decay". We already see the price we pay. Obese and corpulent people who instead of getting physical exercise by work, American young people golf, bicycle, ski, and engage in recreational sports. Too often the younger generation spends time with spectator sports and watching television and playing computer games. Enormous entertainment industries encourage such activities. We can ask, how would these people fare in an economic collapse where, without money, they must garner food from the earth? In a military crisis do our young people have physical stamina for trenches and are they willing to die for their country? The world is competitive -- and Latin and Asian kids are brought up to work and to obey orders. For Americans to prevent decadence means rethinking our methods for bringing up our children in homes and schools. This is a community responsibility meaning we must collectively act to recognize and correct these defects in the life of our society.
With regards to Point 3, the on-going conflicts between the religious right and the secular left is a little publicized warfare. The secular bastions are the universities and press and the religious forces are led by churches, especially the fundamentalist. Both the Republicans and Democratic parties woo both factions although the Republicans have been more successful in winning religious supporters. By appealing to the rich industrial leaders and to the Southern Bible-belt the Republicans are for the time being in power.
It is hard for liberals to understand that the fundamentalist interpretation means, anti-abortion (women must have babies whether they want them or not), capital punishment and death penalty, scuttle the United Nations and support to impoverished third-world nations, big tax cuts for the rich, punishment and exorcism of gays, cut the safety-net for poor Americans and turn relief for poor people over to the churches, allow guns in homes, give to oil-interests the public lands and let them destroy wild-life habitats, oppose ecological efforts to clean the air, replace public schools with parochial ones, and other programs in accord with (right-wing understandings) of scriptures. It is possible, and even more accurate, to read the Bible with diametrical opposing conclusions about these issues than those the fundamentalists proclaim.
Most colleges and universities deny or de-emphasize the value of the Bible for determining public policies. In colleges Bible study is generally limited to literary comparisons.
It is difficult for the citizen-voter to evaluate and compare the arguments of the prestigious college professors versus the preachers in the conservative churches. We have the primary cultural shaping forces of our society -- churches and universities -- giving out contrary signals for how to live.
This dichotomy of values by the principal opinion makers of Americans clouds meaning and consequentially proper living for many people. It would seem that Kingwell suggests that to make our lives meaningful we must follow the best moral road in our action. Our primary guides and mentors -- universities and churches --point us in different directions. This titanic struggle between the religious right and the liberal left makes our individual decisions about reality and proper living difficult. An essay in the Summer 2001 issue of Wilson Quarterly entitled Religion and Politics by Lee H. Hamilton presents the dimensions of this dilemma very well (www.wilsonquarterly.com). To make our lives meaningful by Kingwell's criteria is not easy in the intellectual climate of this century.
My 4th point deals with economics, a controlling force in our lives. There is little action we can take to ameliorate the consequences of mergers of big industries and the speculations of the stock markets. The injustice to workers and white-collared (see The Dark Side of the Miracle by Kenneth Foster, Spectrum, May 2001) employees caused lay-offs and the merging of businesses -- and the wild gyrations of the stock markets -- are difficult to counter by the victims of these events or by collective, democratic means. The rich and powerful CEOs and business leaders do not hear or harken to the voice of the poor, nor do they feel immediately the effects of ecological destruction. We might hope that the religious leaders would resist the ravaging of the planet and strive to alleviate the poverty of the third- world peoples. But the religious right supports the big oil interests and blesses congressional votes to continue lobbying with big money. Likewise these religious leaders decline to support the United Nation's relief of third-world famine.
How can we act in a manner that Kingwell describes as meaningful in the face of such perverse global forces? It is only in the little actions, as he suggests, we can hope to turn the tides of folly and injustice. In our jobs and social contacts we can be alert and attentive to needs of others and subordinates. The stock market requires money and this lottery is for the rich. For people of modest means it is not hard to abstain and avoid the emotional and financial roller coasters. Working for a living has more spiritual sustenance than gambling.
The first four points have describe some of the current political and economic situation in which we must try to live meaningful lives according to the guidance of Kingwell's essay. In point 5 we remember the inherent inclinations of all human beings. First because our ancient ancestors were predatory, carnivorous beings, we have natural propensities well suited to warfare and killing rivals. Innate anger and hate is apparent in all human history and today in the ethnic struggles in Yugoslavia and in Palestine. The past century had terrible world wars; wars are used still in this century as tools to solve civil and foreign problems.
Again recalling our origins as herd and hunter animals we instinctively follow leaders. Humans tend to be obedient to authority. This built-in proclivity can be used for good or evil depending on the motivation of leaders. And we all act as leaders or role models to others in our family or society. Meaningful living means choosing paths of cooperation and service, away from violence and war.
Another primitive yet dominant force inherited from prehistory is our sexual drive. Meaningful living means directing our sexual urges toward loving and responsible relationships.
We don't walk the paths of life alone. In point 6 institutions of our society that direct and restrict our actions are recognized. Already political parties, churches, and temples have been mentioned. But the primary shaping institutions are the family and primary schools. These are being stressed by the hectic work lives of parents and the deterioration of American schools. Our lives become more meaningful when we take little actions to shore up our families and schools.
Distinct from the political parties we inhabit a nation that fills our hearts with patriotic passions. This commitment to country has weakened in this century--perhaps allowing us to be more respectful to foreigners. There is a globalization movement going on today as the earth shrinks with modern transportation and communication. We must seek meaning in these processes. We worship democracy as the best machinery for government. We scorn most other idealogies except capitalism without admitting the unjust manner in which earth's resources are being shared. Meaningful living can mean learning about new things and an appreciation of foreign idealogies.
There is another dimension to directions for living, namely the spiritual. Kingwell does not mention God or pay tribute to religious faiths. Even if he were a religious person, he could not publish or advocate spiritual guidance for determining "how we ought to live" in the secular press. But a majority of Americans are Christian and lead a prayer-life in conversation with God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Prayer is common to all religions. Many people find delight in fellowship with the Holy Spirit. And because we witness or experience many tragic events and face certain death in this life, religion can give meaning to life's darker dimensions.