The Meaning of Life

Pretentious title, or what? Terry Eagleton knows that, and heads off criticism of his grand designs by taking a humorous approach to the question of "What is the meaning of life?".

Of course you could say that it's a non-question, because there's no reason why it should have any meaning - unless you happen to believe in some religion or other. Eagleton, despite being a Marxist, certainly a materialist-critic of a kind, is also a Roman Catholic - though as Michael Caine might say, not many people know that. He seems reluctant to accept that Life might have no meaning at all, though he does agree that it's a question to which we do not have, or to which there might not be an answer.



But his exploration of the philosophy of being is thoroughly entertaining, and as he makes his way through Nietzsche, Heidegger, Marx, and Wittgenstein, it makes you feel like immediately reading (or re-reading) these writers again.

He takes on major belief systems with great brio. It's interesting that without overtly saying he has an answer, he singles out Religion, Art, and Sexuality as touchstones of the 'sense and value of existence'. Not property, work, power, money, status you notice. This is the man who seems to have re-found God, and has certainly started a second family at an age when most people are retiring (which he will be doing soon, if Manchester University gets its way).

He deals with all the possible ways the question 'What is the meaning of life?' might be answered. These include - What if we already know, but aren't aware of it? What would we do if we did know? and What if there is no answer?

He moves on to give an enthusiastic appreciation of Samuel Beckett as the Apostle of the Abyss, then slides into a consideration of what we can do whilst we are waiting for the End to come.

Pursue happiness, surely? But even that is not without problems, which he explores with reference to Aristotle and (again) Schopenhauer. The two main problems here are what constitutes happiness. Is it freedom from pain, or torturing old ladies? And isn't it by its very nature transitory?

In the end he comes down to a solution which I'd have thought he would label 'old-fashioned liberal humanist'.

The meaning of life is not a solution to a problem, but a matter of living in a certain way. It is not metaphysical, but ethical. It is not something separate from life, but what makes it worth living - which is to say a certain quality, depth, abundance, and intensity of life. In this sense the meaning of life is life itself, seen in a certain way.

And what is this way? It's called 'love'. And he ends with the analogy of life as a jazz band - players improvising freely, and all contributing to a greater whole. What he doesn't note - and it would actually strengthen his case - is that they are not actually playing 'freely', but are basing their contributions on the harmonic sequence of the song which they all know, respect, and are prepared to observe.

But in one sense it's not a book which sets out to produce answers. He's more interested in raising questions - and awkward ones at that. And the absence of answers shouldn't deter people from taking the arguments on board. Eagleton leaves enough doors open for any number of approaches to contest this issue.