ASSIGNMENT

PHI104: Introduction to Ethics

Section: 13

Topic: “The Meanings of Lives”

Submitted To: Manzoor Elahee (MmEe) Sir

Submitted by: Sazzadul Islam Sajin

Student ID: 2112447642

Introduction:

What is the meaning of life?

Well, this is a huge philosophical question, once it was the heart of inquiry from ancient
traditions to modern thinkers, the question has inspired and puzzled human beings for centuries.
Yet, contemporary scholars like Susan Wolf suggest an artful but crucial shift: instead of "the
meaning of life," we might better ask about the meanings of lives. This plural form understands
the diversity of human experience and the personal, cultural, and ethical frameworks that inform
how individuals interpret purpose, fulfillment, and value in their existence.

The question pops out to be whether there is any unique cosmic purpose, but how lives should be
lived, and what gives them meaning. Of course, from this standpoint, we will enter upon a more
practical and ethical discussion—how can individuals live meaningful lives when the whole of
one's being may not have an objective purpose or value? But here is where philosophers
disagree: If there is no ultimate meaning of human existence, then is there any meaningfulness in
life?

In this research, I will engage with a debate with this ethical issue, drawing upon Susan Wolf’s
analytical framework from “The Meanings of Lives” and I will also provide some ethical
insights from our textbook “B.N. Ghosh’s Business Ethics and Corporate Governance”. Via this
research, we will explore whether lives can be meaningfully lived in the absence of divine
purpose, what is actually the meaning of life, what ethical principles ground our search for
meaning, and how engagement, value, and ethics intersect to make lives significant.

Debating the Meanings (Subjective Fulfillment vs. Objective Value):

Susan Wolf invites us to reconsider how we frame discovering life's meaning. As Susan argues,
asking "what is the meaning of life?" is often obscure and potentially incomprehensible if
applied abstractly. Life is not just a word to define or a signal to decode. Rather, when people
speak of life's importance, they often express a want for intention, a goal and a sense that their
journey concerns a broader context.

Wolf shifts the discussion from philosophical grandstanding to practical existential concern:
what makes an individual’s life meaningful?

Her suggestion is simple yet profound: "A purposeful life is one that actively and at least
somewhat successfully engages in an undertaking (or undertakings) of positive value." This
becomes the foundation of our debate.

The debate arises over what constitutes "positive value." Is it subjective—defined by what a
person finds fulfilling—or is it objective—defined by societal, moral, or universal standards?
The meaning and value of life differs for all yet a sense of purpose provides humanity with
motivation to better understand ourselves and make our short time matter.

Subjective Views of Fulfillment:

A person can find their own satisfaction in life through various means. A person may feel
satisfied by simply listening to music or taking care of their children, or exploring the outdoors
as much as possible. If an individual experiences purpose and joy through these activities, is that
not enough to make their life meaningful?

However, Susan Wolf argues subjective enjoyment alone lacks substance. Susan cites those who
waste days watching television, are indeed spending their self quality time but they in return are
accomplishing nothing. Or those fulfilling their wishes only but are disconnected from greater
good. These examples of lives lack meaning, not for lack of pleasure but for failing to engage
with worthier things in life.

Objective Value:

This leads to the crucial point: for a life to be meaningful, engagement must be with something
that has value beyond the self.

B.N. Ghosh supports this with his discourse on ethical reasoning. He notes, is more than
subjective morality. It is grounded in reasoned principles that help distinguish right from wrong,
good from evil, and meaningful from meaningless. He elaborates ethical systems such as
deontological ethics (duty-based), utilitarianism (consequence-based), and care ethics, all of
which imply an objective standard for judging actions.

Ghosh echoes Aristotle’s argument that happiness leads to the ultimate end of life, achieved not
by self-satisfaction but through virtuous activity. As applied to Wolf's belief of meaningfulness,
we find some match with this interpretation: both agree that the worth comes from engaging in
good activities that are valuable in themselves and in line with a virtuous or hence ethical
purpose.

Therefore, it follows that ethical reasoning can provide a framework for considering the quality
of one's engagements-in other words, creating meaning outside basic choices.

Ethical Reasoning via Relativism, Absolutism, and the Plurality of Meaning:

A critical and an ethical tension arises in our debate over the ethical relativism vs. absolutism.
Can we say that some lives are objectively more meaningful than others? Or is meaning relative
to each individual's life context?

Ethical Relativism: The meaning of something and the morality of it are culturally or personally
made. What is meaningful in one culture may not be meaningful at all in another culture. So, no
one standard rule can define the value of life universally.

This view is partly in line with Susan Wolf's allowance for differing instincts about positive
value. One person may find meaning in teaching, another in artistic expression, another in
political activism. Each is different but potentially meaningful, provided the engagement is
sincere and the activity is positively valued.

But as Ghosh warns, relativism can lead to moral rejection if unchecked by critical thinking
skills. With no universal standard of ethics, any number of things a person does will seem
justifiable, even those that harm others.

Ethical Absolutism: Ethical Absolutism is the meaning Based on Objective Value. The
Absolutists, such as Aristotle and Kant, maintain that some value, such as justice, compassion,
and truth are universally applicable. B.N. Ghosh on the other hand contrasts moral and meta-
moral norms to demonstrate this. He contends that in order to appeal to classic ideas, ethics must
go above tradition and convention.

According to this reasoning, pursuing morally virtuous goals is equally as important to a person's
sense of fulfillment in life as achieving personal fulfillment. Even if a dictator who finds
fulfillment in conquering others or a fraudster who gets satisfaction from lying may feel
involved, their lives have no moral significance.

Thus, according to Wolf and Ghosh's ethical theory, an ethically meaningful life must satisfy
both subjective fulfillment and objective value.

Practical Implications of a Life of Meaning:

From the practical perspective, the most important meaning is when faced with real-life
situations in a world of capitalist enterprise and the fast pace of change, where identity often gets
confused with productivity. As Wolf notes, fulfilment is often confused with happiness or
pleasure, but the two are distinct concepts.

For example, take a business manager who goes through a lot every day to earn half a million
Taka a year. By Wolf's standards, he would lead a meaningless life because this kind of daily
grind does not connect the businessman's work to broader values, such as, for example,
breathtaking beauty that benefits everyone or teaching young people that grows into beauty
around us all. This means, as Ghosh insists, that a life led solely by materialism tends to end up
ethically bankrupt.

On the other hand, a teacher, nurse, or artist who earns little and does socially useful work lives a
truly meaningful life. The imbalance lies not in wealth or popularity but in ethical direction and
genuine involvement.

Implementation: Eventually, education should aim not only at skills but also at helping students
discover values worth pursuing and businesses should adopt corporate social responsibility not as
PR but as a meaningful mission plus Governments should prioritize policies that allow citizens to
pursue purpose and lives that are both fulfilling and valuable.
Conclusion:

In conclusion, there may be no definitive answer to the question of what life's purpose is.
However, as Susan Wolf and B.N. Ghosh show, life has a variety of genuine and achievable
purposes.

Having money, being famous, or even being happy does not ensure a worthwhile life. It is
acknowledged that by actively taking part in endeavours or connections that have social and
ethical works makes a life worthwhile

Therefore, the meaning is neither entirely objective nor fully subjective. It appears at the meeting
point of what is good and what we care for."Meaning arises when subjective attraction meets
objective attractiveness," as Wolf states.

In the end, deciding how to live is what gives life significance rather than questioning "why we
exist."
References:

● Aristotle. (2009). Nicomachean ethics (W. D. Ross, Trans.). Oxford University Press.
(Original work published ca. 350 B.C.E.)
● Ghosh, B. N. (2011). Business ethics and corporate governance. Tata McGraw-Hill
Education.
● Kant, I. (1996). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals (M. J. Gregor, Trans.).
Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1785)
● Nagel, T. (1971). The absurd. The Journal of Philosophy, 68(20), 716–727.
[Link]
● Smith, A. (2002). The theory of moral sentiments. Cambridge University Press. (Original
work published 1759)
● Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2023). The meaning of life.
[Link]
● Wolf, S. (2007). The meanings of lives. In Princeton readings in political thought:
Essential texts since Plato (pp. 594–606). Princeton University Press.
● BBC. (n.d.). What makes life meaningful? BBC Ethics Guide.
[Link]