'Philosophy: Meaning of Life and Worthwhile Life Essay\r'

'In this paper I ordain be discussing Tolstoy and Sartre entrances on the significance of bearing by comparing and contrasting Tolstoy’s objectivism and transc culminationentalism and Sartre’s subjectivism and existentialism. I will later conclude why it is that Sartre’s view resonates more at bottom myself. Tolstoy’s view on transcendentalism states that the just way for you to brook a worthy a bearness is if you follow God’s jut out, for following God’s jut is the only way to maintain the â€Å" ii ingredients”: immortality and an extraneous significance for individual lives, which Tolstoy turn overs atomic number 18 essential for obtaining a worthwhile liveliness.\r\n consort to Tolstoy, God’s plan gives occasions get and the value they squander and that they are goodly in virtue of playing a federal agency in the plan. However, Sartre contradicts Tolstoy’s view of transcendentalism with his position on existentialism, the nail opposite of transcendentalism. Existentialism claims that human beings were non designed with a purpose in mind; the only way for humanity to eitherow purpose in their life is if they assign one to themselves. Sartre goes on to consecrate that each individual is in adulterate of inventing his or her suffer self, thither is no plan nor a larger picture.\r\nSartre besides argues that there is no such thing as human nature, and since God does not exist, human beings must be in charge of themselves when deciding what is sort out and prostitute and how they should live their life. From existentialism, Sartre concluded by dint of subjectivism that there is no correct way to live life. It is up to the individual to invent their own life and the standards they will use to task it. We are free in the moxie that we must create our own ad hominem determine. Sartre goes on to state that we are innate(p) nobody and that it is our actions that s tart to create the subject matter in our lives.\r\nSartre remembers that there is no external meaning outside of life. There is no god. There is no path for us to follow. Again, this is the opposing opinion of Tolstoy, which he argues through objectivism. Objectivism is the view that for a life to be considered â€Å"worthwhile” there must be a given set of features put forward in our life. Although, we play no role in deciding what exactly it is that constitutes as a worthwhile life and that we lose no control over the matter. Essentially, there is a correct way to live life, and it is possible that you can be accompaniment your life wrong.\r\nWith myself being an atheist, Sartre’s views on the meaning of life resonates more within myself. Perhaps I am as well as newborn and too naive to believe that God does not exist, but in the eighteen years I have lived, I can honestly say that I have no tenableness to believe in God or any other higher power. This became in truth clear for me at a young age when I lost a very close friend in car accident. I could never transform that if God has a plan for everyone and everything that he would create so a good deal torment and suffering.\r\nHow is it possible that such horrible things take place to such good people? why would God purposely give parents the institutionalize of burying their own child, at such a young age with such a bright and promising in store(predicate)? And then for people to justify suffering and suffering by simply stating that â€Å"everything happens for a reason” or â€Å" God take his angel back” as if it makes it all okay. The pain and suffering goes far beyond my own life and experiences. wherefore was it Gods plan to have third world countries without food or water or to have six million Jews killed during the Holocaust?\r\nI could never come to understand the ratiocination behind that. So why legislate your whole life in worship of God trying to please a higher power that has created so much evil in the world. Instead, I believe that you should live life freely, the way you privation to live. You shouldn’t live in guardianship of God and that in the end there should be no ultimate stopping point of heaven or fear of hell. Why should it be that faith makes an individual life substantive? When what really should be meaningful is the individual life itself. Why does there have to be an ultimate meaning to life?\r\nIs it simply not overflowing to gain happiness and meaning from common life itself? For instance, the smiles parents get from their children or enjoying a walk outside on a sunny day. Why must there be further reason. Decide what is right and wrong based on your values and live your life accordingly. At the end of your life, before you die, be able to bearing back on your life and cognise that you lived with no regrets because you did what made you gifted and you lived your life how you wanted to a nd not how anybody else told you to. afterwards all, it is your life.\r\n'