Human Being

Categories of Human Existence

The Meaning of Life: Life, Death, and Immortality in the Context of Human Purpose in the World

The experience of humanity's presence in the world is reflected in a series of concepts that can be termed the categories of human existence. These concepts are largely not inventions of philosophy, but rather have evolved spontaneously within the culture of all peoples as forms of understanding various phases, stages, and states of human existence and activity. Despite the diverse meanings of these categories, they share a common thread: through them, humanity recognizes its relationship with the world and the experiences that accompany this relationship. Let us consider some of them.

Often, the uniqueness of humanity is perceived in its capacity to reflect on the meaning of its existence and the inevitability of death. Indeed, unlike other living beings, humans do not merely exist; they are aware of their existence and recognize that others also acknowledge the reality of their existence, all of whom understand that their lives will eventually come to an end. This awareness enables the exchange of thoughts concerning our earthly coexistence and the ability to adjust our attitudes towards our own lives and those of others.

The category of “the meaning of life” embodies the substantial richness of life, an understanding of one’s purpose in the world (primarily in the social realm), goal-oriented direction, value-based orientation, and the very reason for living one’s life. The emergence of the existential question regarding the meaning of life in the history of human spirituality signifies a growing sense of freedom, if we define freedom as the capacity for choice. The significance of the question concerning “the meaning of life” increases against the backdrop of recognizing its finitude; for if existence in the world is finite and temporally limited, then are our expenditures of life worth living? In other words, do the values of life outweigh the sorrowful finality of death?

At all times, and certainly not for all individuals, such questions receive constant attention. In ancient times and within traditional societies, the lives of the vast majority unfolded within the established forms of existence, and likely few of those individuals often pondered the meaning of life. Only as individual freedom increases, as the individual becomes detached from the primary interweaving with the community, does humanity’s attention to the issues of life's meaning become more pronounced, revealing the inner world of those individuals who are preoccupied with reflections on life, death, and their purpose. Such concerns particularly intensify during societal crises, when suffering takes on a mass character, or during crises that affect individuals in their personal lives. All of this is reflected in art, folklore, philosophy, and religion, as well as in the thematic weight of everyday communication.

Religion and philosophy have always sought to ascribe universal significance to such themes, to prepare responses that have a more or less conclusive character, even providing prescriptive forms: as they say, for every time and circumstance. All world religions generally diminish the significance of earthly life, viewing it as a battleground for the conflict between good and evil, the sinful and the righteous, where the latter are oppressed and wronged. The true life for the righteous is found in the carefree contemplation of God in paradisiacal conditions, as a reward for their devoted faith and previous suffering. Touching upon religious views, we often turn to examples from the Bible. Yet, as the Quran, the holy book of Islam, describes paradise: “A likeness of the garden which is promised to those who fear God: therein are rivers of water that do not spoil, and rivers of milk whose taste never changes, and rivers of wine delicious to those who drink, and rivers of purified honey. And therein for them are all kinds of fruits and forgiveness from their Lord...” (47: 16, 17); life in paradise is characterized as “beauty and joy” (76: 11). Similar sentiments can be found within Christianity. The meaning of earthly life is preparation to take one’s place beside God. There, all the dead will be resurrected, followed by eternal life.

In contrast to the well-known world religions, philosophy, throughout its long history, has provided a rich palette of answers, including optimistic and pessimistic, constructive and destructive perspectives that either diminish or elevate humanity. We cannot even begin to exhaust the list of prominent thinkers who have pondered the issues surrounding the meaning of life. Almost all of them have left behind well-reasoned thoughts on these matters. There is much to choose from. However, it is essential to caution against the temptation of seeking the meaning of one’s life in the recipes of others. Each individual must personally experience the search for their own meaning. This pertains to a strategic choice of life path, or at least the development of a general stance toward life. Almost daily, we face choices: whether there is meaning in doing this or that, or whether it makes sense to go somewhere or to meet someone we do not favor. Such choices do not touch upon fundamental values, such as whether it is worth living at all. People turn to such alternatives during crisis periods in their biographies (so-called normative life crises).

As a variant of a more general, so to speak, profound approach to discovering the meaning of life, one can consider the definition of human essence. It is known that the essential nature of any other living being is nearly wholly realized in its individual life. Moreover, this essence is complete. Any domesticated or wild animal, provided that no external calamity jeopardizes its health and life, will inevitably reproduce in its individual existence all that is common to its species. Interestingly, the essential nature of humanity is open, unfinished, meaning that it is continuously in a state of becoming, unfolding throughout the history of humankind. Human individuality, during its existence, does not exhaust the life of the species. Therefore, an individual who seeks to determine the meaning of their life might set as their goal the endeavor to fully realize within it the collective achievements of humanity: in science, art, social life, communication, and political processes. The meaning lies in the pursuit of the finest accomplishments of humanity and their multiplication through one’s own achievements, in the aspiration to acquire personal experience across the full cycle of existence in the world (growing physically and morally healthy, acquiring broad knowledge and a cherished profession, experiencing love and marriage, raising children and enjoying grandchildren, attaining wisdom, and forgiving others their shortcomings, etc.).

The presented variant is unlikely to suit any average person, an ordinary individual from the street, as not everyone possesses all the natural gifts and appropriate social conditions for this, nor does fate guide everyone down such a distant and sharply defined path. Therefore, one wise and courageous individual, who had his own experience of horrific suffering in Nazi concentration camps, namely the Austrian psychologist and psychiatrist Viktor Emil Frankl (1905—1997), analyzed the problem of life’s meaning and indicated a more democratic path to filling life with meaning, though it is not an easy one. First, Frankl refuses to speak of any exhaustive, all-encompassing meaning, for such a meaning would be something transcendent to humanity. An infinite meaning lies beyond the limits of human cognition and action. Secondly, meaning cannot be given externally; it must be discovered personally by each individual. Providing meaning to another individual from an external source would amount to mere moralizing. Thirdly, meaning exists for each person, and each has their own individual meaning.

Frankl convinces us that our lives possess meaning, which endures under all circumstances and conditions. Even such a tragic triad as suffering, guilt, and death can be transformed into something positive. Furthermore, the author employs a values-based approach to delineate the paths through which individuals can rediscover the meaning of life. There are three groups of values: the values of creativity, experience, and relationships. The first group manifests itself through productive creative endeavors, where each person can find meaning in their actions, in the creation of something.

Fulfill your professional duties with integrity, refine your creative skills, and your life will be infused with meaning. We would also categorize the performance of daily responsibilities—sustaining your life and providing for your loved ones—within this group of values. Approach all small tasks that affirm your human dignity with seriousness: keep your home and body clean, and always present yourself neatly. Maintaining oneself according to the standards of domestic culture is a significant, albeit often unnoticed, effort, for which no accolades are given. Walk down a village street, observe the yards or gardens, look at the entrances of city buildings, and you will instantly be filled with shame for some and respect for others. There is no need for grand dreams of a heroically meaningful existence if you cannot take the necessary care of yourself, allowing yourself to become cluttered with refuse and failing to diligently perform your professional duties. A worthless politician, even if he is constantly on the television screen, stands lower in human merit than a skilled and responsible baker. Cultivate the habit of creating order around you from a young age; any minor lapse in this regard inevitably leads to chaos, narrowing the sphere of culture worthy of a human being.

I would like to reinforce this thought with a resonant poem by contemporary Ukrainian poetess Lina Kostenko, in which the heroine addresses her careless relatives:

“O my kin, my dear kin!
Why has the weed spread through the garden?
My hardworking lineage from generation to generation!
The yard is neglected, O righteous God!
Nine days the soul still resists,
But now it will soon grow accustomed.
That little carrot, that little flower,
You won’t weed them out of this world…”

The second group of values comprises experiential values, which reveal themselves in our sensitivity to phenomena in the external world: to experience something (enchantment by beauty, the grandeur of a moment) or to love someone. In our lives, there are moments of elevated awareness, recollections of which convince us of the validity of our existence, even if such moments do not visit us frequently and can never become a mundane reality. When one has been in love or cared for another with affection, they will never forget the trust and silent gratitude for the bestowed peace and grace, for shared joy and sorrow.

The third group of values that Frankl identifies are relational values. This pertains to one's attitude toward factors that limit human life (e.g., various sufferings, hardships, pain, death): “How one accepts the burdens of life, how one bears their cross, and the courage displayed in suffering—the dignity shown when sentenced and condemned—are all measures of how much one has developed as a human being. Once the list of categories of values includes relational values, it becomes evident that human existence is, by its very nature, never devoid of meaning. A person’s life is imbued with meaning until the very end—until the last breath. And as long as consciousness does not abandon the person, they must continuously realize values and bear responsibility. They are responsible for realizing values until the last moment of their existence.”

Frankl's reflections belong to life-affirming concepts, teaching us the courage to confront the truth, directed toward fostering respect for humanity and its dignity. The history of philosophy encompasses both optimistic and pessimistic musings on the meaning of life. However, we deliberately orient young individuals toward the arguments of optimists, for the vitality of youth instinctively protests against the decline of spirit. I wish only to bolster this spirit with references to the authoritative thoughts of world-class thinkers, as young people should know their wise allies on the journey ahead.

One of the 20th century’s philosophical classics, Erich Fromm (1900-1980), also devoted considerable attention to existential questions, examining them through a dichotomous lens. One of the primary existential dichotomies, in his view, is the dichotomy of life and death. The awareness of one’s mortality profoundly influences a person’s life. People have devised many ideological contortions to evade the unconditional acceptance of this dichotomy, such as attributing immortality to the soul. Mortality leads to a second dichotomy: although each human being has numerous developmental opportunities, the limited time of our earthly existence will never allow full participation in the development of humanity.

A person can respond in various ways to these two dichotomies: by closing their eyes to them, succumbing to circumstances, or tragically enduring the feeling of hopelessness. Alternatively, they may look truth in the eye without panic or fear, understanding that “there is no other meaning in life besides that which a person imparts to it, unlocking their potential, living fruitfully, and achieving happiness through the full realization of their endowment—an endowment of intellect, love, and fruitful work.”

In connection with Fromm's concept of happiness, I would like to note the following. In public consciousness, there exists a widespread notion that the meaning of life should be linked to the pursuit of happiness, joy, pleasure, and that boredom is a constant companion and a criterion for the absence of meaning. However, abstract happiness, uncertain joy, or pleasure cannot constitute a genuine, actionable meaning that fills life, as they are rather secondary, derivative from some undertaking, an emotional experience of elation arising from a specific action completed. The hazy dream of unceasing joy and happiness in life is founded on the desire to escape present deprivations and sufferings, to embrace a reliable refuge. This is understandable and forgivable, as long as we remember that any acquired oasis of happiness and pleasure today can also devalue and lead to a state of boredom.

We are pulled from a state of ennui by the fullness of time spent on activities, where there is no gap between what we have done, what we are doing, what we must do soon, and in the foreseeable future. A cultured person never experiences boredom, whether alone or in a crowd; their life does not seem excessively long or too short. Here we can recall the wise thoughts on these matters of the Roman Stoic philosopher Lucius Annaeus Seneca: “We should not be concerned with living long, but with living well… Is it worth experiencing joy for eighty years in idleness? Such a person has not truly lived; they linger among the living, not having died in due time, but having died a prolonged death. For one engaged in matters, I swear, a day is never too long. Let us extend our lives! For the meaning and main hallmark of life is activity.”

Frankl compels us to recognize that our lives are imbued with meaning, which persists under all circumstances and conditions. Even the tragic triad of suffering, guilt, and death can be transmuted into something affirmatively constructive. Moreover, the author adopts a values-based framework to illuminate the paths through which individuals may rediscover life's significance. These paths can be categorized into three groups of values: the values of creativity, experience, and relationships.

The first group reveals itself through productive creative endeavors, where one can discover meaning in their actions, manifesting through the act of creation itself. Embrace your professional responsibilities with integrity, hone your creative abilities, and your life will be suffused with purpose. This category also encompasses the diligent execution of daily duties—sustaining one's life and providing for loved ones. Approach all minor tasks that affirm your human dignity with gravitas: maintain cleanliness in your home and body, and always present yourself with care. Upholding the standards of domestic culture represents a vital yet often overlooked effort, deserving of recognition. Stroll down a village lane, observe the yards or gardens, and gaze upon the entrances of city edifices; you will be swiftly filled with either shame for the neglected or respect for the well-kept. There is no necessity for grand ambitions of a heroically meaningful existence if you cannot attend to the essential care of yourself, allowing clutter to overtake your life while neglecting your professional obligations. A worthless politician, even if perpetually visible on the television screen, possesses less human merit than a skilled and conscientious baker. Cultivate the habit of creating order around you from an early age; any minor lapse in this regard inevitably ushers in chaos, constraining the sphere of culture worthy of a human being.

I wish to fortify this thought with a resonant poem by contemporary Ukrainian poetess Lina Kostenko, wherein the heroine addresses her negligent kin:

“O my kin, my dear kin!
Why has the weed spread through the garden?
My hardworking lineage from generation to generation!
The yard is neglected, O righteous God!
Nine days the soul still resists,
But now it will soon grow accustomed.
That little carrot, that little flower,
You won’t weed them out of this world…”

The second group encompasses experiential values, which manifest in our sensitivity to phenomena in the external world: to experience something (the enchantment of beauty, the grandeur of a moment) or to love another. Within our lives, there exist moments of heightened awareness, memories of which affirm the validity of our existence, even if such moments are rare and can never settle into the mundane. When one has loved or cared for another with affection, they will eternally recall the trust and silent gratitude for the peace and grace bestowed, for the shared joys and sorrows.

The third group of values identified by Frankl consists of relational values. This pertains to one’s attitude toward the factors that constrain human existence (such as various sufferings, hardships, pain, and death): “How one accepts the burdens of life, how one bears their cross, and the courage displayed in suffering—the dignity exhibited when condemned—are measures of how much one has developed as a human being. Once relational values are included in the spectrum of value categories, it becomes evident that human existence is inherently suffused with meaning. A person’s life remains imbued with significance until the very end—until the last breath. And as long as consciousness persists, individuals must continuously realize values and shoulder responsibility. They are accountable for actualizing values until the final moment of their existence.”

Frankl's reflections belong to life-affirming concepts, imparting the courage to confront truth while fostering respect for humanity and its dignity. The history of philosophy comprises both optimistic and pessimistic contemplations on the meaning of life. However, we intentionally guide young individuals toward the arguments of optimists, for the vitality of youth instinctively rebels against spiritual decline. I aim solely to bolster this spirit with references to the authoritative thoughts of world-class thinkers, as young people should be aware of their wise allies on the journey ahead.

Among the philosophical classics of the 20th century, Erich Fromm (1900-1980) devoted considerable attention to existential inquiries, examining them through a dichotomous lens. One of the primary existential dichotomies, in his perspective, is that of life and death. The awareness of one’s mortality profoundly influences the course of life. Many ideological contortions have been devised to evade the unyielding acceptance of this dichotomy, such as attributing immortality to the soul. Mortality begets a second dichotomy: although every human possesses numerous developmental opportunities, the limited span of our earthly existence prohibits full participation in humanity's growth.

Individuals may respond to these two dichotomies in myriad ways: by shutting their eyes to them, capitulating to circumstances, or tragically enduring a sense of hopelessness. Alternatively, they may confront the truth without panic or fear, recognizing that “there is no other meaning in life besides that which a person imparts to it, unlocking their potential, living fruitfully, and attaining happiness through the full realization of their endowment—an endowment of intellect, love, and productive work.”

In relation to Fromm's notion of happiness, I would like to underscore the following point. A prevalent notion within public consciousness links the meaning of life to the pursuit of happiness, joy, and pleasure, while regarding boredom as a constant companion and a criterion for the absence of meaning. However, abstract happiness, uncertain joy, or pleasure cannot constitute a genuine, actionable meaning that fills life; they are secondary, derivative experiences arising from specific actions accomplished. The nebulous dream of unceasing joy and happiness in life is grounded in the desire to escape present deprivations and sufferings, seeking refuge in a reliable sanctuary. This yearning is understandable and forgivable, provided we remember that any oasis of happiness and pleasure acquired today may also diminish and lead to a state of ennui.

We are extricated from ennui by the richness of time spent on activities, where no gap exists between what we have done, what we are doing, what we must soon do, and what lies ahead in the foreseeable future. A cultured individual never experiences boredom, whether alone or in a crowd; their life does not seem excessively long or too short. Here, we can invoke the wise reflections of the Roman Stoic philosopher Lucius Annaeus Seneca: “We should not be concerned with living long, but with living well… Is it worth experiencing joy for eighty years in idleness? Such a person has not truly lived; they linger among the living, not having died in due time, but having died a prolonged death. For one engaged in matters, I swear, a day is never too long. Let us extend our lives! For the meaning and main hallmark of life is activity.”

Our era has imparted to the theme of death nuances with which past ages were largely unfamiliar. For instance, the discourse surrounding the human right to die has become increasingly prevalent. This is often discussed within the framework of euthanasia, typically associated with a peaceful and painless death achieved through medical intervention for those suffering from incurable illnesses, aimed at alleviating their suffering. It is not merely the practice, which is relatively rare, but rather the very possibility of euthanasia's widespread application that has ignited a vibrant debate regarding its philosophical, moral, and legal dimensions.

A nuanced examination of this delicate subject was conducted by the English scholar Philippa Foot. She emphasizes the critical importance of conceptually distinguishing euthanasia from potential acts of homicide, particularly when the conditions of painless death and the absence of resistance or volitional denial from the victim are met. For example, on September 1, 1939, a decree in Germany led to the gas chamber executions of 275,000 individuals deemed unproductive and a burden to society. Initially, this included the mentally impaired, those suffering from psychological disorders, and frail elderly individuals, later extending to the systematic extermination of hundreds of thousands of entirely healthy individuals. Although the manner of their deaths might be considered relatively painless and tranquil, it bears no resemblance to the contemporary understanding of euthanasia. One could also conceive of a scenario where someone is granted a painless death for the purposes of robbery or revenge. Foot argues that the legalization of euthanasia could be permissible under very limited circumstances, such as the existence of a living will from the patient or a contract with physicians to enact euthanasia when the patient has no chance of survival, is in agony, and has lost the capacity for conscious volition. Both Foot and many other researchers in this field express concerns regarding potential errors and abuses should euthanasia be legalized. However, the mere discussion of the issue has heightened public awareness of the moral and legal aspects surrounding life and death, the interplay between the right to life and the right to die, and the re-evaluation of life and death as values.

If the issue of euthanasia pertains to the right to a painless death as opposed to the agonies of life associated with physical suffering, then the abolition of the death penalty, in contrast, relates to the affirmation of the right to life amidst all conceivable criminal conflicts between individuals and society. The call for the complete elimination of the death penalty from punitive practices is gaining momentum globally, with a longstanding campaign led by eminent humanists worldwide. Their arguments are rooted both in purely religious sources and purely moral considerations, as it is indecorous for the state to mimic a killer and thereby proliferate evil. Instances of judicial errors or biases have also been cited, where individuals executed were later recognized as completely innocent. The legislation of most European states has indeed taken this path, insisting that the former Soviet republics, if they wish to coexist with the European community, adhere to its standards. On February 22, 2000, Ukraine adopted a law amending its Criminal, Criminal Procedure, and Penal Codes, introducing life imprisonment as a substitute for the death penalty. This was a difficult decision, as, on one hand, public opinion was not convinced of the justice in sparing the life of yet another serial killer, while, on the other, implementing life imprisonment demanded substantial financial resources for the maintenance and security of convicts. Nevertheless, there is confidence in the ultimate moral justification of this measure.

To conclude this discussion, let us return to the notion of "immortality" mentioned at the outset, which we sought to connect with the meaning of life. People have often associated immortality with the prerogatives of gods, spirits, and souls, yet they have not relinquished hopes of someday achieving their own corporeal-spiritual immortality. If we discard the interpretation of immortality as the social immortality of humanity through an endless line of successive generations of descendants—a prospect that provides little personal solace—we are left to contemplate only the possibility of individual biological immortality. We cannot categorically assert that humanity will never overcome death or discover means to prolong life to desirable lengths. Let us leave that to science. From a philosophical standpoint, the crucial question is: for what purpose would a person desire to live forever, what should they aspire to achieve? Might we not grow weary of eternal life, as has been portrayed in literature, where aged, ailing, and decrepit individuals, condemned to wander through eternity, most ardently wished for death?

In culture, the concept of immortality is continually correlated with the evolution of attitudes toward death. The secularization of culture, which replaces religious dogmas promising comforting eternity for the soul, does not lead to a diminishment of the tension surrounding the theme of immortality; rather, it redirects attention to science. Expectations from science revolve around advancements in prolonging life (miracle drugs, elixirs, organ transplants obtained through various means, including the development of cloning techniques and the duplication of "doppelgängers," etc.), or the postponement of life through temporary freezing, with hopes pinned on the successes of cryobiology. Moreover, there is public interest in so-called "scientific" affirmations of life after death.

It seems that various fantasies of immortality are symptomatic of a crisis in the sense of life, reflecting changes in societal attitudes toward death. We should hope that culture, as it has always done, will successfully navigate the frenzied manifestations of fear surrounding the inevitability of human life’s end and the frantic searches for means to attain immortality, while simultaneously retaining the function of assisting each individual in living a dignified earthly existence.