The following is a "philosophical fable" from PHILOSOPHICAL EXPLANATIONS, an excellent book by Robert Nozick. Although the author had the intention of merely presenting an alternative explanation regarding the concept of "God", he has, with this fable (which I will paraphrase rather than quote directly), concisely articulated a further trashing of the current and historical notions of theology, spirituality and human purpose. Basically, many of my own opinions of the "meaning of life"(?), formed well before this book was written, are encapsulated here.

Let's assume for a moment, there actually is a divine being or higher power ("god") sitting around one day feeling it's existence lacks purpose and realizing there is little it can do about this. It can keep the feeling and continue a meaningless existence...or end it. Or, it can discover the purpose its existence already serves, the meaning it has, thereby eliminating the feeling. Or it can try to dispose of the feeling by giving a meaning and purpose to its existence.

The first dual option carries minimal appeal; the second, despite its most diligent efforts, proved impossible, leaving the third alternative, also with limited possibilities. One can make ones existence meaningful by fitting it into some larger purpose, making oneself part of something else that is independently and incontestably important and meaningful. However, a sign of really having been stricken is that no preexisting purpose will serve in this fashion- each purpose that in other moods appears sufficiently fulfilling then seems merely arbitrary. Alternatively, our hypothetical "god" can seek meaning in activity that itself is important, in something self-sufficiently intrinsically valuable. Preeminent among such activities, if there are any such, are creative activities. So, as a possible route out of its despair, the "god" being decided to create something that itself would be marvelous.

The task required all of its knowledge, skill, intuitive powers and craftsmanship (and, maybe, more than a little whimsy). It seemed to the "god" being that its whole existence until then had been merely a preparation for this creative activity, so completely did it draw upon and focus all of its experience, abilities and knowledge. It was excited by the task and fulfilled, and when it was completed, the "god" being rested, untroubled by purposelessness.

But this contentment was, unfortunately, only temporary. For when the "god" being began to think about it, although this creation had taxed its ingenuity and energy to make the heavens, the earth, and the creatures upon it, what did it all amount to? The whole of it, when looked at starkly and coldly, was itself just an object, of no intrinsic importance, containing creatures in a condition as purposeless as the one it was trying to escape. Given the possibility that the "god" being's talents and powers were those of a being whose existence might well be meaningless, how could their exercise endow its existence with purpose and meaning if such exercise issued only in a worthless object?

At this point in its thoughts, the "god" being came upon a solution to this problem. If it were to create a plan, a grand design into which its creation fit, in which its creatures, by serving the pattern and purpose it had ordained for them, would find their purpose and goal, then this very activity of endowing their existence with meaning and purpose would be its purpose and would give its existence meaning and point. Also, giving their existence meaning would, retroactively, make meaningful its previous activity of creation, this creation having issued in something that turned out to be of value and worth.

The arrangement has served.

Only, occasionally, out of the corner of its mind, does the "god" being wonder whether it's arbitrarily having picked a plan for them can really have succeeded in giving meaning to the lives of the role-fillers among them. (It was necessary, of course, that it pick some plan or another for them, but no special purpose was served by its picking the particular plan it did. How could this have been. For its sole purpose then was to give meaning to its existence, and this one purpose was insufficient to determine any particular plan into which to fit its creatures.) However, lacking any conception of a less defective route to meaningfulness, it refuses to examine whether such a symbiotic arrangement truly is possible, whether different beings can provide meaning and point to each other's existence in a fashion so seemingly circular. Such questions press the "god" being toward the alternative it trembles to contemplate, yet to which it finds its thoughts recurring. The option of ending it all, by now familiar, is less alien and terrifying than before. It walks through the valley of the shadow of death.

Makes you wonder what the worship of your basic, generic "god" will get you in the end, huh?

What I'm trying to do here is to define and present an alternative for the instinctive human need for individual, personal contentment, fulfillment, happiness, purpose, value and meaning. We all know that each individual human on the planet has his or her own unique personality and conscience; from the most miserable, starving, plague infested "untouchable" in India to the poorest rice farmer in China; from the richest man on earth to the latest newborn in Africa; from the most incorrigible criminal to the loftiest of scholars. What I'm questioning here is: should each individual conscience, worldwide, be directed by any form of organized religion (again, most of which adhere to the same basic tenets and traditions, agenda and history as the various, familiar and misguided concepts of world domination) into believing that the various concepts of a generic deity, is ones own "personal God"? Can mankind never find individual value and meaning in life without the "love" of this synthetic deity? Must each and every person on the planet, regardless of their individual needs and personalities, consciences and notions of spirituality (recognized or not), gather with others of similar but not exact personalities, needs, or notions of spirituality, (most of whom, with their own concerns, their own lives to live, their own jewelry to flaunt do not care enough about the others of their "true faith" to give the majority the correct time of day) to hear over and over about how they are "loved" and guided and protected, given meaning and purpose, somehow, along with the billions of others in the world and the universe, every minute throughout their lives, by a rather impersonal (and seemingly VERY busy) "supreme" deity of one variety or another? This, of course, is in addition to all the other instances of forced conviviality and faked earnestness we must endure throughout the rest of the week.

Obviously, we, each of us on this planet and in this universe, even newborns, with their potential consciences and personalities...their potential "selves" (hopefully guided by a positive environment and upbringing, unfettered by premature religious dogma), have our unique and personal ideas in finding meaning, fulfillment, happiness and spirituality...in finding our own "god". For some, organized religion is the answer, and I truly wonder if they will not ultimately be disappointed with their choices. For others, like myself, logic and reality provide the purpose, contentment and happiness we humans all crave.

Objectively speaking, are we here because a divinity has created us to worship it, thus providing (a somewhat selfish) meaning for itself? Or, subjectively, is humanity (and, indeed, all life) presumed to exist as provision for a more secular meaning and value in appreciation of each other and of the rest of the species in the universe? Is our meaning constant or is it, as seems all faith and belief, fleeting and elusive, thought to be glimpsed, occasionally nearly grasped, yet rarely understood? What is the meaning of life? What is the source of this meaning? Are we here merely to "go forth and multiply" (as we understand the purpose of all other living things on earth)? Or are we here to earn our ticket to "everlasting life" in "heaven" "sitting at the right hand of god/christ/whomever"? Or, are we here through the whim of nature, through the existent randomness of chance, because one out of a billion sperm cells connected with one of a few hundred mature eggs, either naturally or artificially?

The traditional "god" of judeo-chrstian culture is, of course, an abstraction. And like all abstracts, this "god" is merely a collection of individual intellectual notions and worldly interpretations...consciences...which have been and still are collectivized, bastardized, stigmatized, compartmentalized and genericized through the lies, misinterpretations, historical inaccuracies, contradictions, propaganda, dogma, ritual and doctrine of organized religions, both ancient and modern. This abstraction is thereby served up whole in a misguided and futile attempt to standardize and present an idea, often for selfish gain, as opposed to attempting an impossible explanation in realistic terms of what is fundamentally an imagined, diverse morality and improbable utopian fantasy, not a physical presence.

Are those who find their purpose for existence in the transcendentalism of religion, in "god", more fulfilled, happier and more content than others of us who find our purpose in "what we can see and do for ourselves and our fellow man" in this single, fleeting life empirically apportioned to us? Of course not. Yet many of the "faithful" continuously and heedlessly badger and scorn those who have, often unobtrusively and intelligently realized the futility of religion. (I'll admit, I'm inviting a lot of scorn and badgering and possible argument by presenting this site. But, it passes the time.)

Are these transcendentalists a "chosen people" for believing in their seemingly self-consuming, generic and pedestrian spirituality? Absolutely not! Those religiously "faithful", obviously the majority among us (but for how much longer?) seem, however, more rigid, less willing to embrace or even listen to reason, and, therefore, apt to be more dogmatic and regimented in their thinking. And what will these diverse generic beliefs and philosophies get us all in the end? Perhaps the "mother of all jihads"? Armageddon?

I sincerely believe that the end result of the chaos and whimsy of life to be oblivion, an end to awareness. For ALL of us.

To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln: you can fool most of the people for a long time, but you really can't fool all of the people forever.

That's my story and, despite the best efforts, the scorn and ignorance, of those who throw "blind faith" into some allegedly all-encompassing deity, I'm sticking to it. In my admittedly pompous and somewhat fanatical way, what I'm saying here is: take that traveling snake-oil show you call organized religion, with it's "gods" and "saviors", its rites and icons, its salesmen and P.R. and "corporate headquarters", and shove it up your ass!!

Page written by: Eric D. Tallberg

October, 1998