3 Answers

  1. “To be or not to be” is a question not only about the meaning of life, but also about the meaning of death. Because if a person was born, then this may have made some sense. But why would he want to die if he still didn't understand what it was all about? So it would be good to find an answer to both parts. If, of course, there is any sense in it after all.�

    I sometimes think of a Chinese toy I saw as a child – a small bird continuously dips its beak into a bowl as long as there is water in it. The “drinking bird” is based on simple physical phenomena: inside the toy is a vessel with a volatile liquid, which either evaporates or condenses, changes the center of gravity of the bird, forcing it to turn endlessly on a skillfully selected axis.�

    Now, if the bird could understand the physics of this process, would it be smart enough to understand the meaning of what is happening as well? Would she have found the answer to her eternal question – “To drink or not to drink”?

  2. To be or not to be is the formulation of the question of the meaning of life. Initially, there is no meaning to life. A person is born because nature has made the process of reproduction quite simple and working-individuals of the same species and the opposite sex can easily reproduce, the process is worked out, debugged by millions of years of evolution, and if there are no diseases in this area, then unprotected sexual contact will certainly lead to reproduction (except for a few days in the female cycle). This is why there are so many children conceived while drunk, or in dysfunctional families who do not care or do not know about contraception. The birth of these children clearly did not have any deep meaning and design.

    The meaning of life, to be or not to be a person can only decide for himself, having made some decision based on his knowledge of the world, people, culture-everything that is in his head.

    I think you can make a simple choice of the meaning of life-to live for yourself or for people? If for people, then this is the path of an altruist, philanthropist, scientist, researcher, etc. – to make the world around you better, fairer, safer, and more truthful. If you live for yourself, then all the forces of a person will be directed to ensuring their safety, comfort, and pleasure. Neither choice guarantees that you will reach your goal before the end of your life and will probably die trying. The first one will at least be remembered for his attempts, intentions and what he managed to do. The second one will not be remembered (well, definitely not as a positive one), but his life will probably be more pleasant and comfortable, because he only cared about himself. The third choice, in my opinion, is a meaningless existence out of fear of self-violence and the inability to carry out one of the first two (for example, a long-term homeless person).

  3. Users of this project are able to try to give answers to eternal questions, and even put them – as, for example, this question indicates our ability to answer eternal questions.

    This is because the users of this project are human, and people tend to ask questions, including those that they don't have an answer for. These latter questions are often called philosophical questions, and they distinguish between knowledge and ignorance on the one hand, and can serve as a way to define human nature on the other.

    A person is a being who asks himself difficult questions. Some of them he eventually resolves – this is how modern physics answered the question about the nature of gravity, which seemed eternal to Newton's contemporaries.

    Other questions-such as the question of the “meaning of life” – may be fundamentally unsolvable. In any case, it is very good that we continue to ask them, and do not change ourselves.

Leave a Reply