Abstract
In this paper, I explore the traditional religious account of what can make
a life meaningful, namely, the view that one's life acquires significance insofar as
one fulfils a purpose God has assigned. Call this view ‘purpose theory’. In the
literature, there are objections purporting to show that purpose theory entails the
logical absurdities that God is not moral, omnipotent, or eternal. I show that there
are versions of purpose theory which are not vulnerable to these reductio
arguments. However, I then contend that there is a problem facing purpose theory
which no version can avoid. I argue that the best reason for holding a God-centred
theory of life's meaning logically precludes the possibility of purpose theory being
the correct version of it. More specifically, I argue that if a relationship with God is
necessary for one's life to acquire meaning, this must be because God would have
properties such as atemporality and simplicity, perfections which are incompatible
with purposiveness. I conclude that religious thinkers have good reason to develop
other theories of the way God could confer meaning on our lives.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Philosophy,Religious studies
Cited by
25 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Why the divine purpose theory fails: a conversation with Thaddeus Metz;International Journal of Philosophy and Theology;2021-10-20
2. Hopeism;Studia Theologica - Nordic Journal of Theology;2021-07-20
3. The Place of Religion in Combating Corruption in Nigeria;Journal of Church and State;2020-07-31
4. Life, Meaning of;International Encyclopedia of Ethics;2020-06-15
5. On the meaning of “the meaning of life”;Filosofia Unisinos;2019-09-13