Sometime in the distant past, I came across an article in the internet newspaper explaining everything. It was called "Multiplying sadness ". Article was written in an uncompromising form and raised so-called “eternal” questions: “What we live for”, “Why are people so cruel”, “How wars end”, etc. and simultaneously answered them. The article sad that scientists, namely – neurobiologists, sociologists, ethnographers long ago were able to spotlight all these important items and answer on them in a very substantive manner, and only we, silly old people are still tormented with them.
The first logical question: “What do we live for”, to which I could hardly believe to respond, gave me the extremely simple, but absolutely unexpected answer: “For nothing”. Well, basically, we do not need to look around for anything else of importance, because we have already been dropped on a desert to die with that answer of that kind. Being cut to the quick, I at the same time realized the limits of their understanding of the life and their practical identification with the events on world stage.
Moreover, I think that no one would have accepted such an answer even if it were published in Times twice a week. I spitted and spurned, saying: “Who do they think they are that have seen themselves as immune from liability for nonsense?”According to the authors of article, our perception that everything in the world exists for serving some moral or didactic purpose is the purest anthropomorphism; there are no factors that can explain the relationship between the cause and effect, and the judgment, opinion or conclusion, such as: “God made the sun shine for people” is extremely selfish and narrow minded. The article explained, in particular, that from the outset, we got used to benefit fully from everything that surrounds us – from the sun, from air, from life and death and that is why we never be able to view life as meaningless; in fact, most of us would be horror-stricken by the very idea of senselessness of our actions, intentions, existence – of everything.
As for me, I believe that life carries its own meaning in itself, which means affirmation of the will to live that manifests itself around us only if we devote ourselves to loving the life we live and the people we are. Therefore assuming that life is meaningless and ends as soon as we die, we devalue it and consequently nullify its manifestations. And this, in my opinion, is the most terrible what lies behind the above-mentioned article.
Creative workers, artists and other creative persons have made numerous attempts to answer the main question: “What do we live for”. For example, Fyodor Dostoyevsky experienced that the meaning of life is to give an onion to the person dying of starvation – to extend a helping hand. The parable of the onion (From the Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky) is nothing but an act of mercy – wishing to be relevant and critical to our society, the instant natural readiness to help a person or to truly forgive him for hurting you. Thus, the main goal of life according to Dostoevsky is not to betray the essence of humanism and remain human being equally in all settings and circumstances.
So, I am sure that you, in turn, have already found your own meaning of life, is possible different from mine and that is fine. I have all ground to believe the most important thing is to make no doubt that everything has its own time and purpose, even a light feather falling from the sky at our feet.