There is a tingling drive that emerges within a corner of all of our consciousnesses every so often that prompts the phrase: “What is the point?” This question has been attacked from all sides ever since consciousness and wonder arose in the human mind. Answers to this have come from various religious ideologies, spiritual beliefs, personal ideas, and even just the answer of nothing. I, however, consider the point to have a definite answer that all conscious beings can understand and appreciate because we all experience this curiosity for the reasoning of things, especially when it relates to existential matters of life and death. Based on the human drive for knowledge and meaning, there is a need to express such findings and emotions that come from the epiphanies and frustrations of those endeavors, and so the study and creative expression of art is the reason for existing.
I will now lay out an argument for why I believe studying and practicing art is the meaning of life:
P1: Life has unavoidable suffering in it.
P2: To live, one must suffer.
P3: One must overcome suffering to keep living.
SC1: A goal of life is to overcome suffering.
P4: The human mind strives toward suffering in order to overcome it.
P5: Once one suffering has been overcome, the mind strives toward overcoming another suffering (usually one that is greater/more challenging).
P6: Once survival suffering has been overcome, the mind will strive toward overcoming existential suffering.
P7: Existential suffering is overcome by the study and creation of art.
C: The meaning of life is art.
Firstly, to see if this is a valid argument, I must see if the premises connect well toward the conclusion. P1 starts off the argument with a statement relating life to suffering. P2 reiterates this statement by relating living to suffering. P3 reiterates P1’s statement by relating the continual act of overcoming suffering to the continual act of living. SC1 merges the last three premises’ statements into an overall concise sub-conclusion that leaves a bookmark jumping-off point to continue further. P4 then brings in the human mind and its connection to overcoming suffering. P5 exemplifies the progression of what P4 represents. P6 brings in an example of the intention of P5. P7 provides an answer to the example of P6. The conclusion then contextualizes P7 while also building upon SC1. Therefore, with all the premises connecting well to the conclusion, this is a valid argument, meaning it is impossible for the scenario of the premises being true and the conclusion being false to occur. However, for it to be a sound argument, I must go through the premises again to see if they are all true.
Starting with P1, I know that every person who has ever existed has suffered; from the first cries of birth, to breaking a bone, to not getting into a graduate school the first time, to loneliness and depression, to excruciating death, this is a truism. With P2, this sentiment continues because since life has suffering in it, that means that to continue living, one will continue to contact suffering in its many forms. P3 further continues the work of the previous two premises by saying that since suffering will be with one throughout life and will keep pushing against the individual, then one will have to overcome the sufferings contacted or else they will eventually overcome the individual and lead to death (it must be stated, however, that the sufferings are not independent or waiting for any previous ones to be overcome before introducing themselves into one’s life; someone can be depressed and not overcome that suffering for years while other sufferings are overcome in the meantime; but if many sufferings accumulate without being overcome, death will eventually occur). SC1 then brings the previous three premises together and says that overcoming suffering is a goal of life. This sub-conclusion is true because, as explained previously, if one does not overcome suffering throughout life, it will overcome them, so to live, one must overcome suffering, and if one chooses to live, that means they will be actively trying to achieve the overcoming of suffering, making that a goal (and since this goal has to do with living/existing, one may even call it the goal of life).
P4 is true because of how the human mind works; it wants the satisfaction of relieving the suffering as well as the enjoyment of overcoming the challenge the suffering provides; a sense of pride and achievement results from proving that one is strong enough to beat the challenge as well as confirming that one’s abilities are sufficient. It feels good to nail the job interview, even though the practice beforehand is difficult; it feels satisfying to solve that daily puzzle, even if it takes time out of the day; it feels rejuvenating to know that one year has passed after committing to alcohol sobriety, even if the withdrawals were excruciating and the jealousy of going to parties with friends while they could drink was tormenting. Overcoming suffering feels good and the brain loves feeling good, especially when it knows it worked for it, then it can justify feeling good.
P5 is true because the human mind does not like being content which is due to the condition of greed. A child is only content with a new toy for a certain amount of time; getting them an exact replica is not the solution they are looking for; they want something that can stimulate even more fun. An alcohol drinker at one point was content with five drinks a night to get drunk, now they need eight to feel drunk. The human brain works in such a way that it can only be satisfied with achieving its goal for a certain amount of time. After that, a new greater goal is desired and pushed toward: “I understood Plato’s Meno, now let me attempt The Republic,” “I mastered the ukulele, now I feel ready to try the guitar,” “I finally got under twenty minutes for my 5k time… hmm… can I get sub-nineteen?” The individual could certainly keep running the 5k at the sub-twenty-minute time, or even, stop running it completely, as they have achieved their goal, but instead they want more; the mind is ecstatic about beating the previous goal and is now even more motivated and confident for the next one, even though it will take immense effort and time to complete, perhaps even more than the previous goal. This makes sense from an evolutionary perspective as it makes us more innovative and leads to better ways to survive and push the limits of what it means to survive. This also shows why a life without suffering is impossible (further proving the earlier premises), because the human mind cannot be content for long; it will create its own suffering over time: summer break comes along and the bored student wishes they had some work to do when just last semester they wanted it to be summer break so that there was no work to do.
P6 dives into what I was just talking about in relation to human survival. Before modern times, a great majority of the human race had to live in such a way that they had to actively work toward getting food, building shelter, and making clothing. Today, there is a large percentage of people who can get those needs at a moment’s notice without too much effort as the human race has been able to accumulate an abundance of resources (the distribution of said resources is not used effectively, but that is another topic). An average office worker goes to work, gets their paycheck, can spend time with their family and friends, work toward a promotion, etc. They have suffering in their life, but not survival suffering per se. Moving up the chain, take someone like Elon Musk who is leading one of the programs for humans to go to Mars. Think about this: Do we really need to go to Mars? I would argue no, there are more pressing issues that the human race could deal with using that time, effort, and money, but for someone like Musk who has a lot of money, or aerospace engineers who love space, they want to press the limits of what has already been achieved before. This endeavor is drastically beyond meeting the needs of human survival. This mindset of wanting to overcome greater and greater sufferings applies to the more general person as well; not all individuals want to go to space or build more sophisticated computers or develop new biomedical techniques, but I believe that every individual wonders about the existential, their own individual purpose that gives them meaning, something beyond traditional survival. Once the mind has conquered the need to sustain life, it ventures to the challenge of why life.
Before regarding P7, I think it is beneficial to define what I mean by “existential suffering” and “art.” Firstly, I believe that “existential suffering” is an anxiety about the reason that one exists, is alive, and is conscious. This mindset is one that can be particularly overwhelming as it can challenge previous notions of ideologies, what it actually means to think, and can lead one down a rabbit hole of “whys” and “whats” and “hows” until an existential crisis. I believe this paradoxical quote sums up the definition: “There is an anxiety of making sure it is known to myself that I exist and an anxiety of being completely baffled at the feasibility of my own existence.” Existential suffering is at the top of the hierarchy of types of suffering because it directly pertains to life itself (though this does not mean that it is necessarily the worst or hardest suffering to go through). “Art” is the apex of creativity to which one can express themselves in pure subjective form. As one experiences art either through study or creation, they gain a sort of catharsis through the obtainment of knowledge that either brings epiphanic realizations or an expression of feelings that were previously held back from present consciousness. Art is giving into the vulnerability of one’s existence and putting it out through words, actions, emotions, etc. This release is able to help overcome the existential suffering through the satisfaction of creation that confirms that one exists to oneself by having something that represents their own subjective self. Only each individual artist can make what they have created, so the creation elicits the fact that the individual is, within oneself, unique and conscious. Art also confirms that one exists to others as well by potentially providing them with their own sense of sublime awe that results in their own self-reflection that could lead to their own possible artistic expression. Art is “the self” encapsulated in some expressed form. The arts of visual expression are paintings, drawings, sculptures, architecture, nature, and clothing. The arts of auditory expression are music and language. The arts of imaginary expression are books, plays, movies, and poems. The arts of thought expression are philosophy, politics, religion, and culture. The arts of flavorful expression are food and drink. The arts of physical expression are exercise, dance, and sex. The above explanations show that art can indeed overcome existential suffering, proving P7.
With all of the premises being true and all connecting well to the conclusion, I can say that this is a sound argument and that the meaning of life is art. This answer succeeds in explaining the drive to understand. Humans are innately curious creatures, causing us to innovate and explore and experiment until we push the boundaries, then we push further. One of the problems “beyond the boundary of understanding” is the idea of “what is the meaning of life?” As one focuses on this idea, they may, for instance, think to themselves about it or talk to friends and family. However, this has all been done before, and to no avail in terms of a logical progression toward some happy ending that everyone can agree on. This is where religious ideologies, spiritual beliefs, and more come into play as answers that people can pick and choose from in order to find an answer to the meaning of life that fits them best. This “choosing” of one’s belief is subjective as there is no “right” answer, and the idea of subjectivity is exactly what is behind “art” as I have defined it. Searching for “the meaning of life” is a highly emotional journey and one that not everyone finds. It can bring intense elation upon comforting theories or immense anger when nothing seems to satisfy. This is where art comes in. Art allows one to express these emotions in a subjective way. One can write about it to “let the feelings flow”; one can read a novel to feel understood when fearing oblivion; one can paint to represent their excitement of living in a visual form. The complete expression of subjectivity within art allows epiphanies and catharsis to explode. Recall listening to an album and feeling the closeness to the artist and their lyrics; “why can it bring tears of happiness?” because it is meaningful. Recall eating at that restaurant on vacation; “why can I still remember the exact feeling of the taste of the food, the smoothness of the wine? Why is the environment around me gone and replaced by the restaurant?” because it is meaningful. And what is special about it is the subjective nature of the art; to others, those things are not meaningful because they are yourexperiences. The most intense feelings of nostalgia, sublimity, passion, love, depression, anxiety all arise from a deep experience with one of the art forms listed. Experiencing one of the art forms is what gives that sudden clarity of “Wait… I exist… people around me also just exist. This moment means something… and yet no one else notices right now.” And that aloneness in the experience is important. It signifies your life. The fact that you can look at a painting and laugh while someone else looks at it and cries shows that you exist as you. The art, either in one observing it or creating it, exemplifies your existence, therefore the meaning of existence designates itself within art.
I can understand, however, that one may think of ways that invalidate the truthfulness of some premises or alternative meanings of life that are not art. I would like to quickly address a common belief that any particular religion is the meaning of life. This is inheritably true under my argument as religion is an art form. It is a subjective expression of the belief in some sacred or higher power, usually a God or gods. I understand too though that some readers may believe that one religion, in particular, is the only “real” religion which would invalidate the truthfulness of other religions making religion objective instead of subjective. To that, I present this logical argument:
P1: An individual believes that religion X is objectively the only real religion.
P2: I believe that the belief in religion X is a subjective view on the art form of religion, to which many others exist.
SC1: There is a discrepancy between whether religion X is objective or subjective in belief.
P3: A thought is subjective when it is influenced by a personal viewpoint.
P4 A thought is objective when it is not influenced by a personal viewpoint.
P5: The belief in religion X is from a personal viewpoint.
C: The belief in religion X is subjective.
P1 is a statement from one individual and P2 is a statement from another (SC1 shows that there is conflict in the viewpoints). P3 and P4 are definitions for subjectivity and objectivity, respectively. P5 connects P1 and P3. The conclusion brings the conflict to a resolution using the definitions. P1 and P2 are true statements in this imaginary scenario that could realistically occur. P3 and P4 are true as they are definitions. P5 is true as the statement of the belief in religion X comes from a personal viewpoint. Therefore, since all the premises connect well to the conclusion (valid argument), and all the premises are true, I can say that this is a sound argument. This means that there can be no objective religious belief, allowing one to connect to whichever religion makes the most sense to them, or none at all. One could say that religion X is the true religion to believe in if it is veridical: it can be felt by multiple people and multiple senses. Multiple people could see and feel religion X’s God making it veridical, but also multiple people can experience the exact opposite, making it real for some and not real for others; this is therefore subjective.
Subjectivity is powerful. Some may say that its power makes it absurd at the end of the day. Can I not just say that the snow outside is blue instead of white and that be real for me while others laugh? I definitely can do such a thing under a subjectivist’s view, but it does not draw toward any meaning. The subjective only has true power when it comes to meaningful topics, as that allows two or more sides to have a passion behind their differing beliefs, resulting in debate or argument. I can argue for my blue snow view, but I would eventually get dismissed; there is no substance behind it. If I argue for Lolita being a novel of unorthodox, crazed, passionate love while another person says it is merely the ramblings of a pedophile, then we are getting somewhere. Each of our views has a passion behind it that evokes a certain meaning within us that wants to spring out. Each of our sides is our own side because of the different experiences that have built us to our current personalities; that difference and drive to explain oneself based on our life views show that we each exist. Each person has the desire to learn about and appreciate art because it connects to them in an intimate way that then bubbles within them to eventual sublimity. Looking at a realistic painting makes one’s perspective bounce out of their mind: “How can someone simply see the image of a couple and paint stroke by stroke in such a pattern that over time results from mere shiny mixtures to… reality on the canvas?” That feeling of awe in the art puts life into the perspective of “I actually exist” instead of “Oh, I have to remember to get bread from the store… pick up the kids from school… I still need to call Charlotte… Look at that dog… Oops, almost ran a red light… Why did I not go to sleep earlier?” which is just the typical mind rambling through the day. Art makes one think about their existence as their existence. It stops the mind and tells it a lesson, a connection, or gives it the drive to produce something similar, all on a path toward meaning.
I like to think that the arts prove that we have beaten the evolutionary struggle that every other species exhibits: we have time for leisure, which leads to more time to think about existence (as opposed to thinking about trying to live the rest of the week), which leads to unorthodox methods of using the mind (unorthodox in terms of what it was originally made for: survival until reproduction of the next generation), and that unorthodoxy spawns art which comes from a part of the mind tapped into and developed that is not related to survival. The reason that artistic expression is around is because we would be utterly bored if it was not: the goal of survival is completed, what then is next? – meaning. Art makes one look in the mirror at themselves or teaches them a lesson or evokes a powerful emotion or invigorates them to create art of their own or invites a response to share. But what are we trying to share in art? – a feeling of connection of shared meaning through subjective creation.
very good