**Commentary** **Theories of Meaning** There are two main schools in which we can classify opinions on this matter. » Supernaturalism - Meaning is constituted by a certain relationship to God. - If you don’t have that kind of relationship, your life is meaningless. - [Nihilism](https://rts.edu/resources/god-is-dead-nihilism/) follows from Supernaturalism if there is no supernatural. » Naturalism - Meaning is constituted by natural properties. - Natural properties are things which are part of the physical world, i.e. mind-independent. Within these schools, meaning can be considered subjective, or objective. » Subjectivism - Meaning is found on a personal, individual basis. - _Doing_, _achieving_ or _caring_ about something which _you_ deem to be important makes your life meaningful. -Pro: don’t have to worry about metaphysics of objective value, or being overly prescriptive. - Con: what if I found meaning in something such as hurting people? Or simply eating food? Would we not want to appeal to _some_ objective value? » Objectivism - Objective in two senses: 1. What makes life meaningful is the same for all people. 2. The value of a meaningful life is external – it does not arise from the self. - Morality and creativity are candidates for meaning-conferring objective properties (causing pain and drinking tea are not) However, this means that in both objectivism and subjectivism, one could cite God as their meaning of life. The answer to whether without God life can still have meaning lies in whether you believe we can find meaning in natural properties. **Does 'meaning' = '[value-adding](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23990577_Utilitarianism_and_the_Meaning_of_Life)'?** "I have been very much puzzled as to the meaning of the question "What is the meaning or purpose of life?" . . . But at last it occurred to me that perhaps the vague words of this question are often used to mean no more than "What is the use of a man's life?"... A man's life is of some use, if and only if the intrinsic value of the Universe as a whole (including past, present, and future) is greater, owing to the existence of his actions and experiences, than it would have been if, other things being equal, those actions and experiences had never existed.” - _G. E. Moore_ Further reading: [Stanford Encyclopedia, The Meaning of Life](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/life-meaning/) [T. Metz, The Concept of a Meaningful Life](https://www.jstor.org/stable/20010030) [S. Wolfe, Happiness and Meaning](https://spot.colorado.edu/~boonind/Happiness%20and%20Meaning.pdf) [J. Young, Nihilism and the Meaning of Life](https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199234097.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199234097-e-14)

Whether or not life has "meaning" is irrelevant to whether or not god(s) exists. Maybe life has no "meaning". What does that matter to the truth? It doesn't. Edit: Also, with the Christian God, life has no meaning. The purpose of life is as a test for the real life: The afterlife. The one that isn't gonna end in less than 100 years. Any effort placed into life that isn't improving your odds of getting into a good afterlife would be meaningless. As an atheist, this is the only life that I know I have.

**Life can have plenty of meaning without God; it’s rude to suggest otherwise.** • The suggestion that life can’t have meaning without religion is ridiculous and _offensive_. As an atheist, I obviously do not believe in God along with [41% of the British people]( https://yougov.co.uk/topics/philosophy/articles-reports/2020/12/29/how-religious-are-british-people) and so this makes no sense. • I don’t agree at all that to have purpose and _‘meaning’_ in your life, you must believe in God or a higher power. I mean that would literally suggest 41% of British people currently don’t have meaning in their life, purely because they don’t believe in God. • Having meaning in life does not just refer to religion - this could mean pursuing career goals, being a parent, travelling the world, owning a house, achieving a university degree, having a family etc. The list is endless. People find meaning and purpose in so many aspects of life; for some that is religion and God, but for a huge number of people, that is not the case. • Another reason I disagree with this, is because not everyone needs ‘meaning’ to reach fulfilment in life. Many people don’t feel the need to identify what it is in their life that gives them purpose - and that’s ok.

Being an atheist, this is a pretty straight forward choice... religion is dying out and people are living better lives than any civilisation in history. I don't think that is a direct effect of there being less religion but the increase in happiness is as a result of better science, and science and religion contradict each other frequently. For example: The Bible places an age of around 6000 years on the Earth, when science has proven it is at least a few billion years older than that. Another point that I believe some religious folk would agree with (maybe the more relaxed followers) is that religion is more about the teachings and values than the idea of a God or other higher beings. Even as an atheist, I have many Christian values because I have lived in England my whole life and a lot of the generally accepted moral ideas for England came from Christian teachings. So basically, if the question had been about religious values I would have been on the 'For' side, but because it specified "God" I am strongly against.