meaning of life

Parvin Etesami, one of Iran's most celebrated poets, deeply explored the essence of existence, searching for the meaning of life through themes such as love, knowledge, justice, and self-perfection. This study, employing a descriptive-analytical approach and utilizing library sources, delves into Etesami's nuanced perspectives on life’s meaning. On one hand, she sees meaning as inherent, woven into human nature and the universal order. On the other, she highlights the significance of free will and personal choice in shaping one’s own life path. By bridging these seemingly opposing viewpoints, Etesami presents a holistic and humanistic interpretation of life’s meaning—one that embraces both spiritual and divine dimensions while recognizing the individual’s role in shaping their own destiny. This study's uniqueness lies in its careful examination of how Etesami reconciles these perspectives in her poetry. Ultimately, her work suggests that life’s meaning is found in striving for self-improvement and transcendence while also cherishing the beauty of everyday existence

The world moving away from spiritual values and removing the concept of God from life leads modern man to emptiness and meaninglessness; Therefore, the role of "faith" as one of the components that give meaning to life is a topic that we intend to address in this article with a document-library method. Therefore, we have examined and compared the issue of faith and its role in giving meaning to life from the perspective of two Christian and Muslim God-believing thinkers - Kierkegaard and Ibn Arabi. In order to introduce a meaningful life, Kierkegaard explains the three stages of human life and introduces a meaningful life as synonymous with a life of faith. For faith, he lists characteristics such as love, passion, danger, anti-reason and paradox. Even though like Kierkegaard, Ibn Arabi assigns a colorful role to "faith" in giving meaning to life and deals with the issue of meaning indirectly in the form of happiness and misery; Ibn Arabi's mystical attitude, which shows his deep benefits from the teachings of Islam, is more moderate than Kierkegaard's anti-rationalism.

One of the most important issues of philosophy is the question of the meaning of life. It seems that the purpose of meaning in the opinion of Kierkegaard and Mulla Sadra is the purpose of life. It should be noted that the purpose of life is for someone who has knowledge and will, and the example of this is only human. Mulla Sadra and Kierkegaard explained the meaning of life by clinging to and appealing to religious beliefs, or in a better word, religious feeling, with God at the head of them. Kierkegaard considers the meaning and purpose of life to be a leap towards faith in God, and without this He considers the spirit of human life to have no support and no meaning. He does not interfere with rational reasoning in the discussion of the meaning of human life, because this spirit (intellectual) is a kind of passivity that removes the characteristic of religious activity from man. take but it must be acknowledged that what has been neglected in his view is the natural structure of man. In the wisdom of the Supreme, inspired by religious teachings, there is a kind of connection between man, God and existence, and the existence of God is considered the ultimate goal and the main factor of this connection, and in Sadra's thought, the correct understanding of this meaningful relationship and efforts in this direction are the key to meaning. Life is human. According to Sadrul Matalhin, the meaning of life depends on the existence of a valuable goal, a goal that is beyond the material and even spiritual issues of man, and that is a transcendental matter. He considers man to consist of soul and body, and what brings man to this valuable goal is man's will and intellect. This article attempts to express the thoughts of these two thinkers about the meaning of life, while also establishing the source of God as the only foundation and source of meaning in Mulla Sadra's thought, and criticizes Soren Kierkegaard's view.

The meaning of life is considered as one of the issues that have faced serious challenges in thecontemporary world due to the change and evolution of human life today. This challenge doesnot only occur in the known life, but sometimes it also shows itself in the life based on moralityand religion, which can indicate the peak of the crisis. Signs and works can be found in thesearch for a solution to this challenge in the philosophical literature of Søren AabyeKierkegaard and the literature of Javadi Ameli. Using an explanatory-inferential analysis, thisarticle seeks the views of Soren Kier Kegard and Javadi Ameli about faith and its impact onthe meaning of human life; Because according to both philosophers, life based on faith is theonly appropriate answer and solution to deal with emptiness and meaninglessness; but thereare basic differences and similarities between Javadi Amoli's faith and Kier Kegard's faith,which will be discussed in the following text.

Current lifestyles in human societies are influenced by various apparent causes and factors. According to these causes, many discourses have formed to achieve an ideal lifestyle. However, understanding the nature of these causes and their relation with the ‘meaning of life’ can serve as a guide for individuals to attain the most desirable lifestyle. The main philosophical principle that serves as the foundation for lifestyle analysis is the ideal concept of having an ‘ideal lifestyle’, and it seems that achieving this ideal lifestyle is among the human ideals that can be realized by properly understanding and explaining the ‘meaning of life’ and internalizing and institutionalizing it within man. This study aims to achieve this goal through rational-analytical methodology. After defining and identifying the origins of these two concepts, which stem from human faculties such as theoretical intellect and practical intellect, it can be said that the meaning of life and lifestyle are mutually related and reciprocal. The ‘meaning of life’ forms lifestyle (creation), and ‘lifestyle’ contributes to the stability and enhancement of the ‘meaning of life’ (motivation). The ‘meaning of life’ establishes meaningful patterns, which in turn lead to behavioral patterns. Lifestyle is composed of a set of behavioral patterns in different spheres of life, and each behavioral pattern can manifest in various ways. Religion also plays an important role in forming the ‘meaning of life’ and influencing ‘lifestyle’. Furthermore, ‘lifestyle’, influenced by customs, climatic conditions, and geographical factors, can impact the form and appearance of religious rituals and practices. Explaining the various aspects of the relation between these two concepts and proving their complete correlation are the findings of this study.

In this article, the relationship between lifestyle and the meaning of life in Mozad’s stoic school is investigated. An old school that considers the meaning of philosophy as a way of life and advocates stylization, and its teachings have been taken into consideration today. The way of life is one of the concerns of human beings, and to identify its strengths and weaknesses, in order to present an ideal style, the meaning of relevant and effective life should be sought in it. The mining of life is formed based on ontology, anthropology and values are formed. After deriving it in the Stoic school, her behavioral teachings are examined in the four areas of interaction with oneself, with others and with existence. Existence of defects such as how to interpret the essence of existence and man in the intellectual foundations of the Stoics has caused the emergence of a multifaceted and ambiguous meaning of life, and as a result, the lifestyle resulting from this school has conflicts and challenges such as how to communicate with the Creator and the practical obligations resulting from it. Human communication and how to interact with other species and how to accept modernity and resilience are facing the requirements technological life.

The meaning of life is one of the most important concepts in the history of philosophy, which has preoccupied many philosophers. In modern era, the traditional concept of meaning has lost its credibility due to the explosion in every field of knowledge and technology, and subsequently, the migration of the Gods. Martin Heidegger, as the most important philosopher of the Twentieth Century, focused his attention on the meaning of life in modern thought in the absence of metaphysical Gods. In the first period of his intellectual gestation, he sought to dream up a meaning for life by rejecting any kind of idealistic approach based on the concept of his fundamental ontology.  Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze the hermeneutic phenomenology of Dasein in order to get  a  better understanding of the meaning of authentic existence, which is the main mission of  early Heidegger's philosophy. Heidegger's thought and his fundamental ontology focused on the human beings as Dasein. Heidegger believed that the truth of existence could be understood by  Dasein because the existence could be observed in the human beings. Accordingly, to obtain the meaning of life, Heidegger unravels the mystery of the fundamental structures of Dasein which are related to each other, including being-in-the-world, fear and the consciousness of death using his hermeneutic conception of language. He concluded that Dasein could obtain an authentic life as a meaningful life using the consciousness of death of and freedom from the Daesin's domination through free choices. However, Heidegger believed that the will is not  the only solution, and also  we should always open up the new perspective in this regard  that existence itself provides for us.

One of the fundamental concerns of humanity since its inception has been the question of the meaning of life. Meaningfulness has two connotations: purposefulness and value. Certainly, the meaning of the meaning of life depends on the type of worldview and perspective of each philosopher. The present research seeks to examine the answer to the question of whether pleasure is related to meaningfulness or not. Does pleasure require pleasure to achieve the meaning of life? This research compares and contrasts the theories of Aristotle and Mulla Sadra on the relationship between pleasure and the meaning of life. In this article, the descriptive-analytical method is used to analyze the concepts. The most important philosophical bases that distinguish and differ between these two philosophers are the question of equivocation of existence. Aristotle does not believe in the equivocation of existence. From Aristotle's point of view, pleasure and happiness are a constant for all human beings and he does not believe in different levels of pleasure. He considers happiness to be limited to this world and exclusive to the rational part of man. He considers the way to reach meaning to be limited to the realm of virtue. However, Mulla Sadra, based on the principle of equivocation of existence, believes that pleasure has different levels, with intellectual pleasure being superior to sensory pleasure and being higher in terms of rank and existential dignity than the world of sense and matter. Mulla Sadra considers happiness to be related to the physical and spiritual dimensions, so Mulla Sadra believes in comprehensive happiness. He considers the way to reach meaning to be wisdom, imagination, and inner forces. He considers the way to reach happiness to be a human voluntary action. He considers the true example of happiness to be in the afterlife.

The relationship between art and ethics is one of the most important and fundamental topics in the discussion of giving meaning to life, which is as old as the history of philosophy. In the meantime, existentialist philosophers have dealt with this issue more carefully. The purpose of this research is to examine the views of two existentialist philosophers, namely Nietzsche and Sartre, in relation to the moral function of theater art and its role in human excellence, in order to finally answer the most important biological problem of mankind, i.e. finding meaning for life.

In the end, a conclusion was reached that both philosophers have defined the moral act in relation to the act of creation and creativity. By referring to the ancient tragedy and subsequent theater, they present a method of practical ethics, which ultimately leads to creating a sense of commitment and agreement in life.

Enhancing human capacity to adapt and remain resilient in the face of natural and man-made disasters has long been a central concern. This article explores the relationship between practical monotheism and social resilience, drawing on the thoughts of Ayatollah Misbah Yazdi. Employing a library-based research approach with descriptive and analytical methods, the article examines how practical manifestations of monotheism can strengthen societal resilience. According to Ayatollah Misbah’s works, three key areas are identified in this respect: (1) constructive interaction within society, (2) promotion of moral virtues and human values, and (3) emphasis on the meaning and purpose of life. Constructive interaction, grounded in monotheism, fosters social resilience by promoting societal unity, respect for individual and collective rights, and the dignity of the underprivileged. Theological contributions associated with monotheism further contribute to resilience. By fostering hope in God’s grace and encouraging societal members to embrace truth, patience, and mercy, these contributions build resilience. Finally, focusing on the meaning and purpose of life within a monotheistic framework, which includes recognizing God’s judgment, destiny, and wisdom in shaping the world, provides a foundation for resilience by acknowledging the limitations of worldly knowledge and the certainty of the afterlife.

Heterophenomenology is a term that Daniel Dennett coined against Husserl's phenomenology, and its purpose is to study the problem of consciousness from a third-person perspective, as it is common in natural sciences. Dennett criticizes Husserl's phenomenology due to its reliance on introspection and first-person perspective, as well as the impossibility of creating consensus. The result of this is skepticism, solipsism, and relativism. According to Dennett, the only appropriate and agreeable method for studying consciousness is to focus from a third-person point of view on the processes that go on in the brain and are not available through introspection and from a first-person point of view. Accordingly, Dennett proposes the model of multiple drafts in opposition to the Cartesian Theater to investigate consciousness, according to which all types of perception, thinking, and mental activity in the brain are accompanied by multi-directional processes of interpretation, description, and development within sensory data. In this article, the claim is defended that the criterion of essentialism to distinguish introspection from the phenomenological method, considering Dennett's opposition to any essentialist approach to studying consciousness, is not effective. In addition, the priority of the third-person approach leaves no room for a phenomenological science based on the third-person perspective.

According to Schopenhauer, awareness of death is based on Knowing the desire and abandoning the desire and self-willed death or canceling the desire for immortality. He denies any individuality in immortality. Therefore, his theory does not satisfy the desire for survival in man. According to him, awareness of death is achieved through intuition. Nietzsche looks from death to life. It is death that gives man the power to live. The ideal life of each person is determined by his characteristics. He wants man to live creatively and not passively. Nietzsche is a follower of individual natural ethics, but in explaining his belief, he ignores aspects of natural ethics that are based on things other than the struggle for survival. He also ignores the role of environmental factors and education in creating superhumans. What he introduces as a solution for the meaning of life requires having pure wisdom, while the common people lack it, therefore it does not work for everyone. Awareness of death is produced by all the natural forces. For him, the knowledge of death is of the type of understanding.

The exploration of the meaning of life remains a central concern for contemporary humans. While Heidegger did not explicitly address this matter, his opinions can be discerned from his writings. He posited that modern humanity grapples with a form of nihilism, and the remedy lies in a return to authentic existence. In the later part of his life, Heidegger emphasized the importance of preventing dominance over nature and promoting respect for it as the criterion for the meaning of life. One significant limitation of Heidegger's perspective is the neglect of the role of goals and purpose in imparting meaning to life. In contrast, religious views provide a framework depicting a perfect, transcendent, and eternal goal for human life. This divine goal can guide individuals toward the pinnacle of meaning in life.

The meaning of life is one of the most important concerns of modern Man and one of the fate-making problems among contemporary philosophers, psychotherapists, and moral philosophers. The present study investigates the meaning of life in the view of Mullā Ṣadrā, as a Muslim philosopher, and Irvin Yalom, as a contemporary Western existentialist psychotherapist. The focal question of this paper is what the cosmological and anthropological foundations of the meaning of life in the views of Mullā Ṣadrā and Yalom are. The findings of this study indicate that God appears with beautiful and glorious manifestations as the end of being, which grants meaning to being, and Man is present with their ontological gradedness, immateriality, and plurality. By contrast, in Yalom’s philosophy, the centrality of God is denied; the world is void of meaning, and it is Man who must grant meaning to life. Therefore, it can be said that one deals with the unveiling of meaning in Mullā Ṣadrā’s philosophy and the creation of meaning in Yalom’s philosophy. Regarding the problem of the meaning of life, Mullā Ṣadrā’s approach is teleological and divine, while Yalom’s approach is non-teleological and atheistic.

Thaddeus Metz has tried to show that the meaning in life, like morality and happiness, is one of the normative categories of life and emphasizes the distinction between the meaning in life and happiness. According to Metz's definition, happiness consists of "positive experiences" and pleasure is basically connected with happiness. Why is happiness different from meaningfulness and what are their differences? These are the main questions that this article addresses. By searching in Metz's works, we can provide some witnesses and reasons why Metz makes a distinction between happiness and meaningfulness. According to Metz's view, happiness is related to the animal realm of the individual, while meaningfulness is related to the human realm, so that although pleasure can increase happiness, but it will not necessarily lead to meaningfulness increase. He makes six distinctions between happiness and meaningfulness: 1. The source of meaning is "relational", but the source of happiness is "intrinsic"; 2. The bearer of meaning is "action", but the bearer of happiness is "sensation"; 3. The greater impact of happiness from “luck” than meaningfulness; 4. The desire to "continue" the state of happiness, wanting "esteem" to be meaningful; 5. The possibility of happiness, only "during the lifetime" in contrast to the possibility of meaningfulness "posthumously"; 6. bias towards the future v lack of bias. Although Metz has mentioned six important distinctions between happiness and meaning, his statement is not comprehensive and other distinctions can be added to Metz's list.

This article aims to reassess the concepts of power, resistance, and subjectivity by examining the ideas of Hannah Arendt and Michel Foucault. At first glance, it seems that these two thinkers, rooted in different philosophical and theoretical foundations, are in opposition to each other, making a dialogue between their perspectives seemingly impossible. However, this article proposes an alternative approach by highlighting the common grounds and commonalities in their deconstruction of power. Moreover, it argues that their political views can be seen as aligned and complementary, leading to a deepening and development of each other's ideas and the creation of new political approaches. Thus, the central questions addressed in this article are: what forms of agency emerge for the contemporary subject as result of the deconstruction of power in thought of Arendt and Foucault? How does power act as a source of resistance while opening up new possibilities for the subject? The main finding of this study is that, in contrast to traditional and modern interpretations, power in the works of these thinkers is seen as a positive, creative, and productive concept. Based on this understanding, resistance and alternative forms of empowerment for the subject emerge. It should be noted, however, that Arendt’s and Foucault’s interpretation of resistance agency and power may differ due to the primacy of political and social issues in their respective theories.

.The main problem of the article is to examine the relationship between the three concepts of time, life and moral life, and the goal is to answer the question, what is the philosophical relationship between these three concepts? In this article, it has been tried to prove with the descriptive and analytical method that the relationship between time and the meaning of life can be analyzed and explained only in the third angle, which is moral life. Because the truth of man is nothing but existence and all perfectional attributes are a way of existence, but the essence of existence, the stronger and more noble the existence, the higher the perfectional attributes will be. Also, moral life has an ontological approach. And man is a fluid and changing being. It is that one order of existence goes towards a more complete order with its essential movement to reach the goal of elimination, that is, to reach happiness or destruction in the presence of God. Acquiring moral virtues over time and in accordance with the essential movement of the human soul over time is a part of moral life, and moral life is the same period of life; sometimes short and sometimes long; It is used to achieve the goal and acquire moral virtues to beautify it and achieve the goal; Consequently, it takes time to gain purpose or meaning in life.

In Muhammad Husayn Tabatabai’s view, primordial nature or ‘fiṭrah’ appears to be the cornerstone for philosophical analyses related to the human being. In this paper, using a descriptive-analytical method, Tabatabai’s theory of fiṭrah has been explained, and some of its implications in terms of the meaning of life have been inferred. Then, its impact on the conceptual analysis of ‘meaning’ in the different theories of the meaning of life, especially ones that are based on ‘purpose’ and ‘value,’ is investigated. The result of this study shows that Tabatabai defines fiṭrah as the unique creation of each creature. Additionally, value and purpose are conceptual components of each other, that is, a human being who gives meaning to his/her life by a purpose, finds that purpose necessarily valuable, and on the other hand, by any valuable thing he/she is going to find meaning, inevitably considers it somehow as his/her purpose. Moreover, purpose and value cannot be conceptually analyzed without the theory of fiṭrah. This means, according to Tabatabai, every purpose and every valuable matter, regardless of their instances, are necessarily defined in accordance with human fiṭrah. This point indicates the importance and necessity of the ontological discussions about human fiṭrah, its requirements and its place in existence, for adopting a theory in the meaning of life.

In "Value and Virtue in a World Without God," Weillenberg considers naturalism as an atheistic account of the universe. He first introduces the meaninglessness of life in the absence of God with four narrations and then challenges it with the help of three perspectives. He then goes on to find ways to ontologically base morality on religion and tries to show that these ways are dead ends. In this book he does not clarify his alternative view, but in the book "Strong Ethics", it is revealed that he is a naturalist. In response to the question why should one live morally? It wants to show that there is a possibility of moral motivation apart from God, although God can also be a good supporter of morality. In introducing virtues into his proposed ecosystem, he is no longer content with merely presenting a positive view, and seeks to show that some virtues are born in the absence of God, or at least have a deeper meaning. The most important criticism of him is the identification of theism with being a Christian.