Re: meaning of life (was Re: virus: RE: Why have children?)

David McFadzean (
Thu, 07 Nov 1996 17:52:04 -0700

At 02:21 PM 07/11/96 +0000, Martin Traynor wrote:
>How convenient ;). I would take meaning to be importance or
Maybe our definitions are not so different. Consider:

"This X means a lot to me" == "This X is important to me" ==
"This X affects me deeply"

"This is a significant change" == "This change has many effects"

> This would imply that a life can have meaning without
>reference to anything external to itself.

It could using my definition as well. A life can have meaning
by having an effect on itself (which is in fact unavoidable).

>By your definition of meaning, yes. By mine, no.

I didn't say meaningless, I said relatively meaningless. Wouldn't
you agree that the life would be more meaningful if it touched
many other lives? Even assuming your definition of meaning is
different than mine?

David McFadzean       
Memetic Engineer      
Church of Virus