The meaning of life is probably something obvious, like ‘Be nice’ or ‘Don’t eat yellow snow.’ But we’ll never know, because philosophers love making everything complicated.
1 Like
François Rabelais, a French author of the XVI th century gives 2 answers 
The first is an oracle from the divine bottle : “Drink” Ant it is interpreted as such : “Drink your fill at the fountains of knowledge. To know, in order to love, is the secret of life. Avoid the hypocrites, the ignorant, the cruel: free yourselves from vain terrors; study man and the universe; learn to know the laws of the physical and moral world, so that you may obey them and them alone; drink, drink knowledge; drink truth; drink love.”
At another place: one of the character says
“Therefore here we hold not that laughing, but that drinking is the distinguishing character of man. I don’t say drinking, taking that word singly and absolutely in the strictest sense; no, beasts then might put in for a share; I mean drinking cool delicious wine. For you must know, my beloved, that by wine we become divine; neither can there be a surer argument or a less deceitful divination. Your academics assert the same when they make the etymology of wine, which the Greeks call, to be from vis, strength, virtue, and power; for ’tis in its power to fill the soul with all truth, learning, and philosophy”
In the olden days, people had to read books to learn things. Now, thanks to the internet, we just read headlines and shout at each other.
Philomena
1 Like
We can make an argument that the internet offers a wealth of interesting learning.
Problem is, there are too many distractions. There is too much information !
1 Like
Problem is that the quality of this information is often low, that the bad ones is put forward, and that most people, at best put bad and good information on the same level.
If common sense was really common, more people would have it.
2 Likes
The brain is the most powerful organ in the body, which is worrying because mine once forgot how doors work.
I’m thinking far worse is that, it seems, most don’t seem to care one way or the other.
Here’s an interesting take:
(no symbolic about it 
)
Very.
It brought in psychology, biology, and evolution, based on science. It’s been a long time since I read Brave New World, I forgot the ending. Weird that he wrote it as a parody.
The question at the end, about what would you trade for happiness is a good one. I admit I go for those “levers” too much.
If progressives could create their perfect society, it would be the society in Brave New World.
The same could also be said of most atheists.
No idea what you’re talking about.
Any proof ?
The true matter for atheists is that they don’t agree politically.
Their only political aim is that religion does not dictate the laws. I don’t see the relationship between that and " Brave new world".