
Thoughts on Man's Purpose in Life (1977) - killjoywashere
https://govleaders.org/rickover-purpose.htm
======
playing_colours
Thank you for sharing this great piece of wisdom! Recently, I read Self-
Reliance by Emerson, and its modern “translation”
[https://www.youmeworks.com/self_reliance_translated.html](https://www.youmeworks.com/self_reliance_translated.html)
and try to base my way of living on that foundation.

As our existence seems ultimately meaningless, and there is no universal
compass to drive us through life, it is difficult for people and personally
for me to keep deeply motivated about my work and other activities. On the
surface, I may be driven by money, work achievements, desire to have a happy
family, having fun, but often I find myself facing the deep dark emptiness of
lacking a deeply ingrained purpose I would be happy to follow wholeheartedly.

I read an interesting thought from Jordan Peterson that a great purpose is to
reduce suffering in the world. It sounds deep and great, but I think it will
be hard for many people to connect their day to day activities to this noble
meaning.

I sometimes envy of people from previous centuries, when Christianity was
strong, and many found their purpose in serving God. God is dead in the
Western civilisation now, and it is very hard to fill the void.

~~~
RubenSandwich
"God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort
ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of
all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will
wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What
festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the
greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods
simply to appear worthy of it?"

\- Nietzsche, The Gay Science, Section 125

I too look at the social coercion afforded to religion and envy. The idea of
moving almost anywhere and having a weekly community event with like minded
people is unparalleled.

~~~
raxxorrax
But Nietzsche probably broke down because of the expectations he imposed on
himself. At least that is what I take from how his writing changed over time
and the end of his biography.

I like coke and fatty burgers btw... I meant the drink...

~~~
RubenSandwich
From my understanding it's hard to know too much about his latter years
because while his health was deteriorating his sister took over his estate and
started publishing his fragments in an order that supported her antisemitic
worldview[0].

[0]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisabeth_Förster-
Nietzsche#Ni...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisabeth_Förster-
Nietzsche#Nietzsche_Archive)

------
padobson
_To which he could have added, it takes talent to know that what counts is
condemning mediocrity not in others but in ourselves._

This is the money line for me. People who find purpose, who improve themselves
to pursue that purpose, are always looking at their failures and asking how
they can make themselves better so they can succeed on the next try.

Those who blame others don't get better, they stay where they're at.

This isn't to say that you can't be held back by circumstance or the mistakes
of others, just that you yourself won't improve if you focus on the things you
can't control.

Finding a trait in yourself that could have allowed you to succeed had it been
better developed can be difficult and requires creativity, but there's a lot
of purpose to be found in that difficult and creative work.

------
pmoriarty
Viktor Frankl[1] was a psychologist who wrote the remarkable book _Man 's
Search for Meaning_[2], where he recounted his experience as a prisoner in
Auschwitz and noticed that those who survived in such circumstances had a
strong sense of meaning.

He explored the question of meaning more fully in his later work, and came to
believe that the meaning of your life was a question that life asks of you,
and that you answer this question by the choices that you make.

[1] -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Frankl](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Frankl)

[2] - [https://www.amazon.com/Mans-Search-Meaning-Viktor-Frankl-
ebo...](https://www.amazon.com/Mans-Search-Meaning-Viktor-Frankl-
ebook/dp/B009U9S6FI/)

------
HONEST_ANNIE
" Nothing in the world is the way it oughta be. It’s harsh…and cruel…but
that’s why there’s us…champions. It doesn’t matter where we come from, what
we’ve done, or suffered. Or even if we make a difference. We live as though
the world were as it should be, to show it what it can be. You’re not a part
of that yet. I hope you will be. "

\-- Angel, Season 4, Episode 1, “Deep Down“

~~~
Delmania
“If nothing we do matters, all that matters is what we do.”

------
vincent-toups
I know its cynical of me, but whenever I see people talking like this, all I
can think is how craven and cowardly they are.

The desire for some overarching sense of meaning is motivated by, in my
experience, simple fear. Fear and a lack of faith in one's character (which is
another kind of fear: what might I do if I didn't have a framework taking
control away from me?)

There isn't any final meaning we can pin down, and even if there were such a
thing, we pretty clearly are incapable of figuring it out.

There is lots of stuff we'll never understand, both personally and as a
species. True wisdom is, in my opinion, transcending the discomfort associated
with not knowing.

------
empath75
Man’s purpose is life’s purpose is the universe’s purpose which is to increase
entropy by extracting free energy from our environment and using it to perform
work, and thus generate additional waste heat that radiates into space.

~~~
AnIdiotOnTheNet
That presupposes that this isn't merely a side effect of the existence of the
universe, the reason for the existence of which we would be incredibly foolish
to believe we can actually ever know, if indeed there is one.

------
dredmorbius
"From the physicist's point of view, Man seems to have no function except that
of dissipating or degrading energy."

\-- Henry Brooks Adams, _The Degradation of the Democratic Dogma_.

[https://archive.org/details/degradationofdem00adam/page/216](https://archive.org/details/degradationofdem00adam/page/216)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Adams](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Adams)

Similar thoughts from Aldo Leopold, Howard Odum, Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen,
and many others.

~~~
dqpb
That's wrong though. Our function is to reproduce. That is literally the
reason life is a thing - and it is opposite of entropy.

~~~
Sinergy2
Reproduction is definitely a net increase in raw entropy. That's what is meant
by "dissipating energy", I imagine.

~~~
dqpb
Not information entropy

~~~
raxxorrax
It sucks that the intuitive interpretation regarding both applications is
completely inverted.

------
trabant00
These are easy to like answers. They sound right. The truth is ugly and not
really useful at all in making any decision: there is no purpose. Let me
explain my theory as brief and clear as I can.

Humans are not designed to work as individuals but as a whole population. If
you judge at the species level it makes the most sense to try and push in
every direction available and let natural selection take its course.

Is it better hard working than lazy? You get hungry if you don't go out to
hunt but it is better to set up traps than to fight animals hands on, or
better yet delegate the work to others. We wouldn't have progress in comfort,
security, etc without laziness. Laziness is not bad!

This applies to all qualities in human nature. A balance is better than any
extreme of course, but that balance cannot be deduced intellectually,
emotionally, morally, legally, etc. You can only try, "the road to hell is
paved with good intentions", etc. The right balance changes in time and space,
it varies from individual to individual.

On top of that there are lessons to be learned from individuals who do take
things to extreme.

For me it is clear we are doomed to be drones sacrificed in every direction
possible to explore by algorithms deeply embedded in our hardware. Any sense
of purpose, any rationalization of why our direction is better - an illusion.
An useful illusion ofc. If you don't manage to fool yourself jumping off the
bridge is the only option.

------
em-bee
_man(kind) has been created to carry forward an ever advancing civilization_

this is what i believe, and this is why i am a Free Software advocate, as that
is my way of making a (meager) contribution. i believe that humanity is
destined to advance as a society and technologically. the technical progress
we achieved in the last 150 years is just the beginning. our global society
too will progress to the point that we solve all the problems we experience
today.

------
gerbilly
My advice is to start from where you are right now.

Are you stressed out? Then try and calm yourself a bit.

What good could you do right now for someone else of for the world? Now go do
it.

How did it turn out? Reflect, and make note of what you'd do differently next
time.

Repeat.

Fancy philosophical musings can be a huge waste of time if they don't help you
perform the steps above. It doesn't matter if we have free will or not, or if
we live in a simulation, or if all of life is a dream or any of that bullshit.

------
matell
it seems to me the five principles - responsibility, perseverance, excellence,
creativity, courage - are actually surface terms describing deeper motivation,
which is our constant drive to improve our "mental model".

in our brain, we have a "mental model" of the world. it is imperfect, yet
allows us to make predictions. Our goal is to improve this model (aka
simulator, prediction engine) over the time. We seek for indicators which tell
us if our mental model is improving or not. One of the indicators is money one
our bank account, our praise of some master.

I'd be grateful if anyone of you can point me to some literature which
describes the approach I outlined above. I use the expression "improve my
mental model", but I guess philosophy is using some other (more established)
term.

\---

I am not trying to deal with the question why we actually strive to improve
our "mental model" :) though I like the idea that it leads to "less
suffering".

------
yters
Why are people so against belief in God and even becoming Christian, if, as
people see to believe, Christianity provides great benefit? There seem to be
plenty of good reasons to believe in God, at least, and Christianity's track
record has many positives along with the negatives. Plus, the historical
evidence for the New Testament's reliability is pretty good, if my
understanding is correct. I'm not sure what is the hold back:

\- big need: existential despair

\- big solution: Christianity

\- no obstacle: Christianity is intellectually viable in our modern world

UPDATE reply to replies since I'm rate limited on new comments:

I'm saying Christianity fits "Believe only that for which there is evidence,
and only for the time that there is evidence"

1\. Good scientific evidence God exists

2\. Good historical and archeological evidence the Bible is accurate

3\. Historical evidence of the tremendous benefits of Christianity (see Rodney
Stark), which flow logically from the principles of its founder Jesus, and
seemingly more successful than can be explained by human inspiration

I'd say at the very least Christianity holds up much better than the modern
mythos of materialism and purposeless evolution. Perhaps don't accept
Christianity, then, but certainly don't accept the modern secular narrative
which is even worse evidentially speaking. It makes little sense to accept a
bad explanation as default because you don't have a good explanation.

In general, I do not see a internally consistent reason based on any modern
criteria (enlightenment, postmodernism, positivism, etc.) for the widespread
dismissal of theism and Christianity, and the clinging to atheism and extreme
secularism.

~~~
playing_colours
I cannot make myself believe in God, particularly, in God who notices and
interferes, and dedicate myself to him; and I think it is the problem for many
of us.

Philosophically, Western society moved beyond good and evil, desecrated
Christianity, questioned the words of God, and Nietzsche nailed it.

Recently, I read the biography of Rockefeller by Chernow. It was stunning how
his strong faith drove and motivated him. He thought he was blessed by God to
build his business, he must fulfill this mission, and it justified some
questionable actions he did.

~~~
yters
I'm not talking about some particular conception of God, but there seem to be
decent philosophical and scientific reasons to believe that there is a
creative agency responsible for our universe. Furthermore, this agency seems
to have taken particular care for our wellbeing.

We've got to separate the question of existence from the question of nature.
That God exists seems very evident from all we know. What God's nature is is
more of a question mark, and we should not let this question mark about nature
obviate what we know about existence.

And belief in God is not a panacea, people do horrible things in the name of
God, and perhaps even more horrible things in the absence. However, people
have done very great things, perhaps the greatest things, in the name of God.
So there is that, too.

Also, in regards to your specific purpose you mention in the other thread of
eliminating physical suffering, it seems Christianity in particular has done
the most throughout history of eliminating physical suffering. Thus, insofar
as your goal is to eliminate suffering, Christianity seems to be the most
effective platform to do so.

UPDATE to reply to this post, b/c I'm rate limited:

It's one of those struggles you mention :)

At least this one is about resolving ultimate meaning instead of ignoring it.

------
nick0garvey
The author is known as "Father of the Nuclear Navy", it seems he wrote this
towards the end of his career.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyman_G._Rickover](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyman_G._Rickover)

------
mapcars
Life is not a subject of thoughts and purpose, our imaginary thoughts and
imaginary purposes contained in it.

------
DantesKite
So I've been thinking a lot about this question of what I should do with my
life.

It seems like an obvious question to ponder, but I never seriously considered
it until I quit my job. I know this because after quitting my job, I had the
freedom to pursue a lot of my desires (at least for a little while) and found
that everything I pursued did not satisfy me. Not even a little bit.

I thought about it for some time and realized most of my desires were the
desires of other people. I had become infected with them and over the years
never really stopped to reflect what I wanted.

What are the odds I really wanted to become a physicist like so many others?
Or a social worker? Or a wealthy man? These were all lies I told myself
because I didn't know what to do.

Everything I pursued was because I saw someone else do it.

But when I stopped to reflect what I wanted to do, I found nothing. No voice,
no inner calling. I was blank.

I spent weeks and weeks trying to figure an answer and stumbled upon Robert
Greene's "Mastery" which would've been better titled "Man's Search For
Meaning".

I had hints of how I should conduct myself, of what I should do to find some
sense of purpose, but nobody ever set down the framework quite like Robert
Greene did.

Don't be fooled by the title.

Your life's mission is to find your life mission. And then, once found, pursue
ever specialized lines of work and skill to capture that primal inclination
deep within you.

You can imagine in a sense every brain on the planet is born uniquely suited
for capturing or expressing some pattern. You'll feel it as a kind of need.
It'll direct your life towards particular interests. But early on you lack the
skill to express it properly, in a way that deeply engages you.

With discipline and practice, you can bolster that inclination—you can learn
to deeply engage it. And as you do so, you'll cultivate a sense of
meaning—you'll be one the edge of what you're capable of doing.

That's where a human likes to reside. On the edge of what they know.

But it takes discipline. It takes time.

Humans are mimetic creatures. We forget about ourselves so easily. You have to
be aggressively persistent about the things you love.

And as you learn each skill that captures some inclination, you constantly
expand. You learn more and more skills. You never stagnate, because therein
lies the path of suffering.

And as you continue to add new skills, you not only increase your odds of
success, you begin to cultivate a series of skills no other human has in equal
measure. Because they're based off what you like—nobody else on the planet can
compete with you there. You stand outside all hierarchies.

But the journey is long, tedious, and sometimes painful. It takes discipline
to do the work that'll resonate with your deepest interests. Even Einstein got
bored sometimes.

But if you don't do this, if you don't take the time to figure out what you
enjoy doing, if you stagnate, you will stain your life with a bitter
melancholy. And you'll lament over what could've been and you'll spend the
rest of your days in an idle torment.

You must avoid this at all costs.

Move towards your highest calling. Move towards the pain.

You'll find peace waiting on the other side.

------
mms1973
This is the biggest question in Existence. I don't think I have the right
answer in 300K years of Homo Sapiens history.

But I would say:

1\. reproduce, have kids 2\. keep what your ancestors gave you and make it
better

Be a doer and a thinker. The Admiral was also right.

~~~
AnIdiotOnTheNet
If these are the purpose of existence, then we have already failed.

1) According to most cosmological models the universe will eventually end.

2) Even if it didn't, the problem with infinity is that anything that can
possibly happen will happen, including the extinction of everything ever
descended from ourselves.

One is forced to consider that the journey must be more meaningful than the
destination.

~~~
kd5bjo
> the problem with infinity is that anything that can possibly happen will
> happen.

Not necessarily. There are different cardinalities (sizes) of infinity. Your
statement can only be true if the cardinality of time is at least as high as
the cardinality of all possible events; I don’t know enough math (or physics)
to pin either of these down, but it’s not obviously true.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph_number](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph_number)

~~~
AnIdiotOnTheNet
That's an interesting point that, sadly, I also lack the requisite
understanding to properly consider.

