Presentations conclude (Do keep it to 10 minutes, presenters, and let's postpone discussion until all the reports are done.)... Rec: Setiya 6-7 -- Absurdity, Hope
- WJ, On a Certain Blindness in Human Beings (1899) - in BNA, on reserve - H2 Gino Palilla
- SSHM ch6 Wonder and Hope #H01 Hayden Dye, #H2 Haley Gauda, #H3 Floris
- Setiya 6-7 Absurdity, Hope #H1 Coven Gallers, #H2 Aidan Taylor, #H3 Daniel Chera
- QE XIII Now what? #H1 Ella Helms, #H2 Will Stout
- WJ, What Pragmatism Means (1903) - in BNA, on reserve - #H2 Sage Robinson, Gary Wedgewood, #H3 Traden Davis
- The question of absurdity is about what? 148
- Why isn't "42" a good answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything? 151-2
- What did Samuel Scheffler say about "the afterlife"? What's "the Alvy Singer problem"? 161-3
- What does Rebecca Solnit say about the relation between hope and action? 175
- What did Seamus Heaney say about the relation between hope and history? 182
And one last question:
Roman Phillips H#03
ReplyDelete1. The question of absurdity is not about explanation but about meaning. Yet it comes from the same perspective: one in which we meditate on the universe and the place of humanity within it, the course of human history little more than the blink of a cosmic eye.
2. According to Douglas Adams's Hitchhiker books, the answer to the ultimate questions of life, the universe and everything is "42", but Setiya points out that if we are cogs in a cosmic machine, when we figure out our function, the number still does not tell us what life means. Setiya argues that the pont remains that the function alone is not enough to give life meaning. The meaning of life has nothing to do with function.
4. Solnit says that action is impossible without hope: you cannot strive for what you care about, when success is not assured, without hoping to succeed or at least make progress.
Or you could say that 42 neither explains nor provides personal meaning, at least in the absence of a great deal of context and clarity as to what, exactly, the question even is.
DeleteH01
ReplyDeleteLH #1:
It is one of "meaning" (Setiya 148). I think it is interesting that he separates meaning from explanation. I think that explanation as to why and explanation as to how definitely serve the idea of meaning differently. A "why" can be meaningful, but a "how" does not seem to have any intrinsic meaning in itself.
LH #2:
42 is not a sufficient answer because, just because we are tools used to achieve some goal does not necessarily give our lives meaning. I think that this is true, and it makes the definition of meaning even more difficult to pin down. However, I think that your life will have some sort of function, even if it is not consistent, so it is more a matter of choosing what you want to devote yourself to.
LH #3:
He writes about the afterlife in the sense that we draw meaning from the belief that there will be more generations of humans, and theorizes that we would lose a very important sense of purpose if the world were to grow infertile (Setiya 161). The Alvy Singer problem is basically that if meaning in life depends on the next generation's meaning, then at some point we come to the last generation, which has no meaning, and thus the generation before that has no meaning, and so on (Setiya 163). While it would obviously be harrowing in a way that we probably could never understand, I would agree with Setiya that there can be more to life than the next generation. After all, we ourselves are someone's next generation.
Setiya, Kieran. LIFE IS HARD: HOW PHILOSOPHY CAN HELP US FIND
OUR WAY. Riverhead Books, 4 Oct. 2024.
ST-1: The question of absurdity explores whether life has any inherent meaning, given the stark contrast between the importance we place on our existence and the vast, indifferent universe. This tension arises from our need for purpose, which often feels at odds with the apparent insignificance of humanity in the grand cosmic scale.
ReplyDeleteST-2: In The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, "42" is humorously offered as the ultimate answer to life, the universe, and everything, but it lacks meaning without understanding the question. Setiya emphasizes that searching for abstract, universal answers misses the real value of life, which lies in engaging with its particular, subjective, and practical challenges.
ST-3: Samuel Scheffler redefines the "afterlife" as the survival of humanity and future generations, which gives our lives meaning and context. Rather than focusing on personal immortality, he highlights the importance of collective continuity. The Alvy Singer problem, inspired by Annie Hall, describes existential despair over mortality and the universe's impermanence. Setiya suggests addressing this by appreciating life's intrinsic value in the present rather than worrying about its ultimate longevity.
ST-4: Rebecca Solnit connects hope to action, arguing that hope is an active engagement with the belief in the possibility of change. It motivates people to take transformative steps, even when outcomes are uncertain. Hope, therefore, is not merely a mindset but also a driving force for meaningful action.
#H1 - Zoe Kuhn
ReplyDelete#1 - The question of absurdity is about meaning.
#2 - “42” is not a good answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything because the meaning of life has nothing to do with function. The number does not tell us the meaning of life when we find out or function
#4 - Regarding the relation between hope and action, Rebecca Solnit says that action is impossible without hope.