Conatus: THIRD EDITION by Tom Wallace - HTML preview

C O N A T U S

meaning might be something that we figure out, based on our experiences of quality. Under this scenario, our own embodied selves respond to quality, whilst our minds ponder value. And, likely as not, quality will get the upper hand, even when we’re fooling ourselves into thinking otherwise! So, to take the most familiar example, if the meaning of life is pleasure, then this is based on the positive experiences people have of life — on positive qualities.

How about the difference between meaning and purpose? There may be meaning without a purpose, but there can be no purpose without a meaning. Like value and quality, these two terms also seem to get conflated. One view of meaning suggests that a wider universal meaning is contained in individual meanings. We might ‘contain our own meaning’, so to speak, and not be in need of some wider context to explain what is going on. Could it be said then that meaning does not have to be understood — it is sufficient that it is simply known to be there? Then we might say, I cannot step outside my own meaning — either everything in my life has it or nothing. Meaning can be self-creating and self-sustaining. Meaning, it could be said, occurs in the living of life, not in contemplating life’s meaning in some theoretical way. Meaning is self-generating. (See F. David Peat’s Synchronicity.)

This thought, in turn, could be expanded by saying that, in fact, not only does the self create her own meanings, she may, in a way, be an expression of universal meaning. This takes us back to Schopenhauer, and the universal Will being expressed through individuals. But, if

152