Veritas Forum on the meaning of life

Yesterday I participated in a Veritas Forum debate at Delft University of Technology on the big question of the meaning of life. My opponent was Boris van der Ham and the Forum was entitled Finding Meaning and Purpose in Life. It was a friendly and respectful discussion with many questions from the audience. Textual versions of my opening and closing statement follow below.

Opening statement
First of all I would like to thank Veritas Forum for inviting me to participate in tonight's debate. Also I would like to thank my opponent Boris van der Ham for joining me in this evening's discussion. It's also good to be back at the university where I studied mathematics and became a mathematician before I became a philosopher.

Tonight we enquire into the meaning of life. That's a big question. There are various things that many people find meaningful, such as truth, knowledge, wisdom, personal growth, friendship and family. But I think there's one thing that all of us would agree with is definitely meaningful, namely love. For that reason alone, life is meaningful. Because without life there can be no love.

Yet, Michel Houellebecq notes that given the nature of modernity there is hardly any room left for love, but that the ideal of love is still undiminished. This ideal cannot diminish because as an ideal it is outside of time. Now, not only the ideal of love, but even love itself is outside of time. Love is not of this world. It suddenly enters into our lives from a transcendent if not divine origin. In fact, in our secularized world, only love still reminds us of the sacred ground of our very existence. In this ground we find the answer to the ultimate question.

What is the meaning of life? The meaning of life is love. Love is light. Love is life. That’s why for example In Terrence Malick's movie The Tree of Life, Mrs. O'Brien proclaims: "Unless you love, your life will flash by." And that’s why Mozart has it that love is the soul of genius and thus the source of all creativity and creation. But also, in Lars von Trier's movie Nymphomaniac, Joe states: “The secret ingredient of sex is love.” Even in logic, love is vital. For we must love logical consistency in order to reject the inconsistencies that human reason brings to light.

Ultimately, love even goes above truth. The medeval philosopher Augustine teaches that the goal of truth is love and not the other way around. Whoever puts truth above love does so because of a love for truth, so that still love takes precedence over truth. That’s why, given the choice, Dostoevsky chooses love and not truth. Because life is bigger. And also the apostle Paul chooses love over truth in 1 Corinthians 13. I quote: “If I have all powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have no love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, but have no love, I gain nothing. Love is patient and kind. Love bears all things and endures all things. Love never ends. So now faith, hope and love remain, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” So love is truly the ultimate ground of our existence. And if God is love and if we are God’s image, as the Bible proclaims, then the true purpose of our life must be love. We shall love.

Closing statement
What is the human condition? We are thrown in this world and we seek guidance. We need to understand and navigate the world. Therefore, in order to lead meaningful and fulfulling lives, in order to flourish, we need some worldview, some view of life or way of life, that guides us, that enables us to nagivate the world and that enables orientation in and interpretation of the world. So, in order to live our lives we must choose some worldview, either secular or religious.

So, a rational, a reasonable, a intellectually justified worldview is a worldview that meets its purpose, that achieves its function, that fulfills its goal, which is to properly enable world guidance, world navigation and orientation in and interpretation of the world.

This entails that rational criteria to rationally evaluate a worldview cannot only be epistemic or only directed at truth. For in the practical and existential context of people that simply need some worldview to live their lives, it is not only about the theoretical question of whether the secular or religious worldview in question is true; it is also about and in fact primarily about the practical or existential question of whether the worldview in question enables us to live our lives in a meaningful and fulfilling manner. Hence, to rationally evaluate a worldview, we also need to take non-epistemic, that is to say, practical and existential criteria into account, such as whether the worldview is practically liveable, enables personal and moral growth, enables self-realization, enhances one's quality of life, fulfills deep existential needs and longings, and is able to inspire, motivate, and inspirit.

Now, surely, christianity as a worldview meets all of these practical and existential criteria; so it would be rational to reply upon, to commit oneselves to, to accept it for life orientation, even in case, and contrary to what I believe is the case, christianity would not meet the theoretical epistemic criteria.