if there is no life after death does anything matter at all?

[dragonstar57]

weather your a billionaire or a homeless guy on the streets on NY.

a religious leader or a movie star in a hundred years you will be dead and all of your accomplishments will not matter to you any longer. and in a thousand years in all probability no one will remember you.

and in a 5 billion years all traces of your legacy will be destroyed with the earth when the sun becomes a red giant. so does anything even these words as I type them matter at all in any capacity??

and as an extension if nothing matters does right and wrong exist?

[Mr Skeptic]

Well, there's several billion of us that think stuff matters. Should it matter? Dunno, but it does. In any case, we're better off acting as if things matter.

[AzurePhoenix]

Totally subjective. My life matters all the more to me because I'm aware that this is all I've got to work with and had better make the best of it. Wouldn't matter so much if I thought I had eternity to fritter away the time, everyone'd inevitably take it for granted (as most do nowadays with our scant ~80 years.)

 

It'd be nice to be remembered down the road, as a matter of my own ego, but it's not really important, and everyone will be just as forgotten eventually, from you or me to Jesus and Caesar. But that doesn't matter to me because I won't be around by then for it to matter to me, but I am around now and thus my current existence, and the foreseeable continuation of my existence matter to me for the time being.

 

Can't say the same for you or anyone else.

 

As for right and wrong, there is no ultimate basis for right and wrong, good and evil, etc. They're abstract constructs that we create and uphold. The universe has no meaning or purpose beyond what conscious entities can attribute to it, and so right and wrong exists only in the context of the subjective values of beings capable of producing them. In our case, those values are usually rooted in the behaviors we evolved as a social species, further shaped, refined, augmented, supplemented and twisted by culture, society, memetics etc.

[Marat]

Things can be extremely important in a relative sense -- that is, relative to me and the other people around me at this time and in this place -- without having to be important in an absolute sense for all eternity and for the entire universe. The $100 bill in my wallet is still important and useful to me even though on some other galaxy or in Ancient Rome it would not be recognized as legal tender with the capacity to purchase anything. There is a general tendency to assume that things need an absolute foundation to be validated at all, when in fact all we ever have in our finite existence are relative foundations, which are always adequate for the relative purposes, meanings, and existences we have.

[lemur]

Things can be extremely important in a relative sense -- that is, relative to me and the other people around me at this time and in this place -- without having to be important in an absolute sense for all eternity and for the entire universe. The $100 bill in my wallet is still important and useful to me even though on some other galaxy or in Ancient Rome it would not be recognized as legal tender with the capacity to purchase anything. There is a general tendency to assume that things need an absolute foundation to be validated at all, when in fact all we ever have in our finite existence are relative foundations, which are always adequate for the relative purposes, meanings, and existences we have.

 

It is interesting to think about how skilled people are in scale-modulation in controling their perspective of how dire or insignificant events, actions and their potential consequences are or could be. On the far end of the scale-continuum is the millions of years that will render everything ever done by humans (possibly) meaningless. On the other end of the scale-continuum is the perspective that every photon emitted by an atom has a measurable effect on something else. In between those two poles, you can figure out various levels of embracing or dismissing the awareness of causes and consequences.

 

The question is what leads a person to note causes/consequences at one scale at one moment and attempt to influence the situation - but at another moment relativize what's going on by claiming that at some point in the future it won't ultimately matter anyway? If you think you're going to die anyway eventually, for example, why not stop avoiding risky behavior immediately that would expose you to HIV or something else that could shorten your lifespan? If you think nothing you do is going to matter in 1000 years, why not lie, cheat, and steal as much as you think you can get away with and never do anything to make anyone else's life better?

[dragonstar57]

so its like a bunch of people on a sinking ship with no life rafts and no radio some panic and still die and some have a party ant get drunk despite their inevitable demise and still die. while they all died some of them had a good time before doing so?

[Sisyphus]

Why would it matter if there was life after death?

[dragonstar57]

it was just an example. i just meant if there is an end and in that end your exactly where you started wouldn't that end nullify the journey? like walking in a circle?

Edited September 25, 2010 by cipher510

[Sisyphus]

it was just an example. i just meant if there is an end and in that end your exactly where you started wouldn't that end nullify the journey? like walking in a circle?

 

Why would that nullify the journey? The journey is what exists. Why does it matter where you "end up?" (And if where you "end up" is what matters, then wouldn't it never ending also mean that nothing matters?) Why is the last thing more important than everything that comes before it?

[jackson33]

Maybe that's why 75% of humanity sincerely believes their journey will in fact be rewarded in some way after death (something after death). While I can't openly agree anyone's journey should be less rewarded than any other or that right and wrong as judged by any society or for that matter any religious philosophy, should be the final determinant, most rational individuals (6.8B) are allowed enough time to judge for themselves, their net value for having lived.

[dragonstar57]

Maybe that's why 75% of humanity sincerely believes their journey will in fact be rewarded in some way after death (something after death). While I can't openly agree anyone's journey should be less rewarded than any other or that right and wrong as judged by any society or for that matter any religious philosophy, should be the final determinant, most rational individuals (6.8B) are allowed enough time to judge for themselves, their net value for having lived.

but IS there any net value of having lived?

[ewmon]

if there is no life after death does anything matter at all?

It's all eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die, just like Jay in the movie Dogma. When there's no consequences -- no afterlife -- after someone takes a "dirt nap", then there's no ultimate punishment ... hey, it's all over when we die. We'd be no better than animals. Look at these 233 pleasure-seeking (and supposedly upstanding) citizens who made the big list recently. This is society gone wrong in a big way --- not 233+ coincidences.

[Sisyphus]

It's all eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die, just like Jay in the movie Dogma. When there's no consequences -- no afterlife -- after someone takes a "dirt nap", then there's no ultimate punishment ... hey, it's all over when we die. We'd be no better than animals.

 

If you need the threat of "ultimate punishment" not to do wrong, then you are no better than an animal, I agree.

 

Look at these 233 pleasure-seeking (and supposedly upstanding) citizens who made the big list recently. This is society gone wrong in a big way --- not 233+ coincidences.

 

I don't understand what argument you're making. Has there been a dramatic increase in teachers having sex with students? Correlated with what? When did "society go wrong," and why is this of all things a measure of it? Remember you're on a science forum.

[ewmon]

Has there been a dramatic increase in teachers having sex with students? Correlated with what?

Yes, specifically female teachers have sex with their students. Correlated with history.

 

When did "society go wrong,"

Circa 2000.

 

why is this of all things a measure of it?

Women and teachers are some of the most trusted members of our society when it comes to the welfare of our children ... well ... they used to be.

[Sisyphus]

Yes, specifically female teachers have sex with their students. Correlated with history.

 

 

Circa 2000.

 

 

Women and teachers are some of the most trusted members of our society when it comes to the welfare of our children ... well ... they used to be.

 

I still don't get it. What does correlated with history mean? In 2000, the number of specifically female teachers having sex with students dramatically increased (citation needed?)? And you blame this on what?

[jackson33]

but IS there any net value of having lived? [/Quote]

 

cipher; Lets look at the alternative or never having lived at all. Has nothing in your life meant anything to YOU or as important, to someone else. Value is subjective or comes from the persons mind. When looking back over my long years, most all my memories are in fact positive, while there are no notable major achievements to articulate, my thoughts are related to people I've known (a lucky person and my parents) or the people I've known, most long gone. Since I have trouble with religion as taught and practiced, I don't expect to see any of them again, but have those memories (very valuable). Then in our infancy as a reasoning species, what we have been taught or call an afterlife and may actually exist on death may not be one in the same thing.

 

I still don't get it. What does correlated with history mean? In 2000, the number of specifically female teachers having sex with students dramatically increased (citation needed?)? And you blame this on what? [/Quote]

 

Sisy;Possibly it's just the 24/7/365 news cycle, the humans sexual stimulation that come from daily activity internet/media/more people or simply that more abuses are being reported, but there does seem to be more people of authority being reported for exerting one abuse on another, than before.

 

But ewmon with regards to the thread, what about the millions of humans that were conceived and would have otherwise lived some life if not long fruitful lives, if not aborted in some manner, have they been deprived of any value...

[dragonstar57]

It's all eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die, just like Jay in the movie Dogma. When there's no consequences -- no afterlife -- after someone takes a "dirt nap", then there's no ultimate punishment ... hey, it's all over when we die. We'd be no better than animals. Look at these 233 pleasure-seeking (and supposedly upstanding) citizens who made the big list recently. This is society gone wrong in a big way --- not 233+ coincidences.

how is this society gone wrong?

ie.http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/51769-can-we-assume-children-are-all-all-stupid/

[padren]

Yes, specifically female teachers have sex with their students. Correlated with history.

 

Women and teachers are some of the most trusted members of our society when it comes to the welfare of our children ... well ... they used to be.

 

I suspect this may in part be due to the "Jerry Springer Effect" in that it's much easier to see highlighted cases that pop up and create a false sense of "this has become commonplace" while forgetting the sample group is over 300 million people, and our ability to be uncover of current cases is increasing at a rate that far outpaces the number of that those current cases are increasing by.

 

Secondarily, while there may be ups and downs (tracking behavior on some index similar to the stock market) we actually are doing better globally and have been on a steady increase over the last 10,000 years. We pretty much just began to enjoy the luxury of having alternative civil remedies to common life problems that don't involve massive bloodshed.

 

Consider:

• Humans are predatory animals with (in evolutionary time) a long history of using brutality and violence to solve common problems
  
• In an exceptionally short time we have recently started exploring non-predatory alternative solutions to those common problems
  
• We have recently come to appreciate those non-predatory solutions so much, that it is actually painful to see where we don't apply them or haven't yet figured out how to apply them.
  
• Our ability to observe the world has increased exponentially very recently, exposing ourselves to both the great and horrible things make up the current state of humanity
  

 

In short: If you were in the first human collective to discover soap and thus hygiene you would very quickly learn how much we all stink.

 

That doesn't however make the discovery of soap and hygiene a bad thing.

 

 

 

Re OP:

 

We exist in the untenable position: If we die, we are erased. If we don't, our brains will eventually have to forget some stuff to make room for more stuff - who you end up being while you live forever would eventually obliterate your former self just as completely as death. Our brains are designed to solve problems and achieve goals, so we naturally want life to have a "goal" even though we have no objective way of determining the value of any given goal. On top of that - we only have about 80 yrs tops to really figure it out.... immortality would solve the "only 80 yrs" part, but does nothing to solve the question.

 

All it would mean is you have an eternity to try and figure out just where the heck you are and where you are going.... but there's no reason to believe it can be solved in a gillion years any more easily than in 80.

 

My recommendation would be to:

 

1) Appreciate what's around you - this whole existence thing is pretty awesome crazy

2) Ask yourself if you are holding onto unrealistic expectations - people may have told you the world works a certain way, but the world never has made any promises. Find the subtleties between what you thought you had and what you can see you have.

3) Continue to try to fix what you find to be wrong, without ever expecting to get anything right - we see degrees of refinement that can greatly improve the quality of life, but there is no such thing as a perfect answer, and the stress to find one and the discomfort of not having one will drive you to be a better, more self-reflective individual... but that feeling is just the pressure that drives that force of self refinement, not something you should get down on yourself for or an indicator of failure.

Edited September 25, 2010 by padren

[dragonstar57]

I suspect this may in part be due to the "Jerry Springer Effect" in that it's much easier to see highlighted cases that pop up and create a false sense of "this has become commonplace" while forgetting the sample group is over 300 million people, and our ability to be uncover of current cases is increasing at a rate that far outpaces the number of that those current cases are increasing by.

 

Secondarily, while there may be ups and downs (tracking behavior on some index similar to the stock market) we actually are doing better globally and have been on a steady increase over the last 10,000 years. We pretty much just began to enjoy the luxury of having alternative civil remedies to common life problems that don't involve massive bloodshed.

 

Consider:

• Humans are predatory animals with (in evolutionary time) a long history of using brutality and violence to solve common problems
  
• In an exceptionally short time we have recently started exploring non-predatory alternative solutions to those common problems
  
• We have recently come to appreciate those non-predatory solutions so much, that it is actually painful to see where we don't apply them or haven't yet figured out how to apply them.
  
• Our ability to observe the world has increased exponentially very recently, exposing ourselves to both the great and horrible things make up the current state of humanity
  

 

In short: If you were in the first human collective to discover soap and thus hygiene you would very quickly learn how much we all stink.

 

That doesn't however make the discovery of soap and hygiene a bad thing.

 

 

 

Re OP:

 

We exist in the untenable position: If we die, we are erased. If we don't, our brains will eventually have to forget some stuff to make room for more stuff - who you end up being while you live forever would eventually obliterate your former self just as completely as death. Our brains are designed to solve problems and achieve goals, so we naturally want life to have a "goal" even though we have no objective way of determining the value of any given goal. On top of that - we only have about 80 yrs tops to really figure it out.... immortality would solve the "only 80 yrs" part, but does nothing to solve the question.

 

All it would mean is you have an eternity to try and figure out just where the heck you are and where you are going.... but there's no reason to believe it can be solved in a gillion years any more easily than in 80.

 

My recommendation would be to:

 

1) Appreciate what's around you - this whole existence thing is pretty awesome crazy

2) Ask yourself if you are holding onto unrealistic expectations - people may have told you the world works a certain way, but the world never has made any promises. Find the subtleties between what you thought you had and what you can see you have.

3) Continue to try to fix what you find to be wrong, without ever expecting to get anything right - we see degrees of refinement that can greatly improve the quality of life, but there is no such thing as a perfect answer, and the stress to find one and the discomfort of not having one will drive you to be a better, more self-reflective individual... but that feeling is just the pressure that drives that force of self refinement, not something you should get down on yourself for or an indicator of failure.

but why bother if it will be like it never happened?

[ewmon]

I still don't get it. What does correlated with history mean? In 2000, the number of specifically female teachers having sex with students dramatically increased (citation needed?)? And you blame this on what?

Correlated with history means that, before circa 2000, hardly a case of female teachers having sex with their students can be found. I can't cite the absence of cases.

 

Perhaps Pamela Smart in 1990 was the seminal case of female-teacher-and-student sex (and more). Regarding the overall increase in serious female-perpetrated crimes, there's the case of Wanda Holloway (1991), a Texas mother who attempted to murder the mother of her daughter's cheerleader rival so her daughter would make the squad. There's the Tonya Harding case (1994) who hired thugs to literally knock rival figure skating champion Nancy Kerrigan out of the competition. And then, in 2000, there's the Katherine Knight case (who, I'll grant, is insane) who murdered, skinned, butchered, cooked, and ate her husband and tried to serve his cooked remains to his children. Ms Knight gets the blue ribbon for that one. Lizzie Borden (1892) was the former big, bad "bogeywoman" in American folklore, but she can no longer hold a candle to these criminals.

 

Also in 1990, the tragic childhood of Richard Berendzen, then-president of American University in Baltimore, came to light after he was caught making indecent phone calls. As the case unfolded, it was found that his mother had forced him to have sex with her during his young boyhood in the 1940s. He detailed this horrific abuse in his book, Come Here, so entitled because that's how she would call him when she wanted to have sex with him.

 

Blame. Is the emergence of 233 cases of female-teacher-and-student sex in the last 5 or 10 years a bizarre coincidence, or the result of a permissive attitude in our society, or copycat crimes, etc? Even if they are copycat crimes, they were made all the more possible by society's permissive attitude.

 

Citations. I cited an article detailing 233 cases of female-teacher-and-student sex in the last 5 or 10 years. I could have written to the relaxed standard of other posters in this thread, and yet, I gave a citation. If this thread requires citations, here are two instances that lack citations:

 

Well, there's several billion of us that think ...

Maybe that's why 75% of humanity sincerely believes ...

This material is getting off topic, which was never my intention, so I will leave it.

[padren]

but why bother if it will be like it never happened?

 

Because it "is" while it is. Secondarily, consider what you mean by "bother" since really what else are you going to do? Anything you "bother" to do will be doing something, the only way to cut that down really is to kill yourself - but death will come inevitably anyway, so why rush? Why not see what you can and what you can do, while you can?

 

Is a life spent not bothering to do anything, really any more enjoyable than one bothering trying to do everything you can?

 

I find bothering to be quite fun!

 

 

If you find that bothering is not fun, I recommend contemplating the issue more (which is what you are doing by starting this thread) because it really can be. Personally, I find the idea that we emerged from the mud simply due to how mud tends to influenced by the sun on a rock of this composition and ended up being able to look around and say "wow" is freakishly awesome. I am continually impressed by the scope and depth of the Universe and while this experience is transient, the fact that even such a transient experience can exist at all is so mind-blowingly incredible that I am quite happy to accept the transient aspect.

 

 

Also - consider the fact that time is an illusion - there is no present in time, only in our perceptions at any point in time. Say to yourself right now "I know this is the present" and then remember that memory 5 minutes later. It doesn't feel the same because all you have 5 minutes later is a memory, but at that moment in time you knew that was the present and it still exists there in the space/time of the Universe. That intensity and certainty that it was in fact, the present in your consciousness still exists at that moment in time - even if it doesn't exist in your current consciousness at your current moment in time.

 

All moments past, present, and future exist in time somewhere in this Universe, including the day you die - you just don't have any information about it, but it does exist. So, there is a moment that you die, and it exists in space/time now, but you are still here now - it hasn't erased your past.

 

So you do have a limited number of moments and those moments will only impact the future up to a point, past which they will be effectively "lost" going forward, but they'll always exist in the points of space/time that make up your existence and influence. That can never be undone, and there is no more "objective" value to whether those moments are in the past, present or future.

 

We may be finite, but in our own way we really are eternal, and what exists not only can't not-exist at the point in space/time that it did exist. We are just biased towards things that do/will exist in the present/future because those are the only things that matter to how we deal with the world from our current present. Objectively, we are all just features of space/time that exist as part of the Universe through a span of space/time, so don't worry that there is a "future" from another perspective in which you won't exist. Since time is part of the description of the Universe, you will always exist as part of that description regardless of how small relative to the full scope of space and time within the Universe.

 

 

Why not explore that, and make it the best possible chunk of space/time you can?

 

Got any more pressing matters to take care of?

[dragonstar57]

Correlated with history means that, before circa 2000, hardly a case of female teachers having sex with their students can be found. I can't cite the absence of cases.

 

Perhaps Pamela Smart in 1990 was the seminal case of female-teacher-and-student sex (and more). Regarding the overall increase in serious female-perpetrated crimes, there's the case of Wanda Holloway (1991), a Texas mother who attempted to murder the mother of her daughter's cheerleader rival so her daughter would make the squad. There's the Tonya Harding case (1994) who hired thugs to literally knock rival figure skating champion Nancy Kerrigan out of the competition. And then, in 2000, there's the Katherine Knight case (who, I'll grant, is insane) who murdered, skinned, butchered, cooked, and ate her husband and tried to serve his cooked remains to his children. Ms Knight gets the blue ribbon for that one. Lizzie Borden (1892) was the former big, bad "bogeywoman" in American folklore, but she can no longer hold a candle to these criminals.

 

Also in 1990, the tragic childhood of Richard Berendzen, then-president of American University in Baltimore, came to light after he was caught making indecent phone calls. As the case unfolded, it was found that his mother had forced him to have sex with her during his young boyhood in the 1940s. He detailed this horrific abuse in his book, Come Here, so entitled because that's how she would call him when she wanted to have sex with him.

 

Blame. Is the emergence of 233 cases of female-teacher-and-student sex in the last 5 or 10 years a bizarre coincidence, or the result of a permissive attitude in our society, or copycat crimes, etc? Even if they are copycat crimes, they were made all the more possible by society's permissive attitude.

 

Citations. I cited an article detailing 233 cases of female-teacher-and-student sex in the last 5 or 10 years. I could have written to the relaxed standard of other posters in this thread, and yet, I gave a citation. If this thread requires citations, here are two instances that lack citations:

 

 

 

This material is getting off topic, which was never my intention, so I will leave it.

what do female teachers having sex with male students who arguably will be no more capable/incapable to make that decision when they are 18 have to do with weather life has meaning?

and is this an argument for meaning or ageist it?

 

Because it "is" while it is. Secondarily, consider what you mean by "bother" since really what else are you going to do? Anything you "bother" to do will be doing something, the only way to cut that down really is to kill yourself - but death will come inevitably anyway, so why rush? Why not see what you can and what you can do, while you can?

 

Is a life spent not bothering to do anything, really any more enjoyable than one bothering trying to do everything you can?

 

I find bothering to be quite fun!

 

 

If you find that bothering is not fun, I recommend contemplating the issue more (which is what you are doing by starting this thread) because it really can be. Personally, I find the idea that we emerged from the mud simply due to how mud tends to influenced by the sun on a rock of this composition and ended up being able to look around and say "wow" is freakishly awesome. I am continually impressed by the scope and depth of the Universe and while this experience is transient, the fact that even such a transient experience can exist at all is so mind-blowingly incredible that I am quite happy to accept the transient aspect.

 

 

Also - consider the fact that time is an illusion - there is no present in time, only in our perceptions at any point in time. Say to yourself right now "I know this is the present" and then remember that memory 5 minutes later. It doesn't feel the same because all you have 5 minutes later is a memory, but at that moment in time you knew that was the present and it still exists there in the space/time of the Universe. That intensity and certainty that it was in fact, the present in your consciousness still exists at that moment in time - even if it doesn't exist in your current consciousness at your current moment in time.

 

All moments past, present, and future exist in time somewhere in this Universe, including the day you die - you just don't have any information about it, but it does exist. So, there is a moment that you die, and it exists in space/time now, but you are still here now - it hasn't erased your past.

 

So you do have a limited number of moments and those moments will only impact the future up to a point, past which they will be effectively "lost" going forward, but they'll always exist in the points of space/time that make up your existence and influence. That can never be undone, and there is no more "objective" value to whether those moments are in the past, present or future.

 

We may be finite, but in our own way we really are eternal, and what exists not only can't not-exist at the point in space/time that it did exist. We are just biased towards things that do/will exist in the present/future because those are the only things that matter to how we deal with the world from our current present. Objectively, we are all just features of space/time that exist as part of the Universe through a span of space/time, so don't worry that there is a "future" from another perspective in which you won't exist. Since time is part of the description of the Universe, you will always exist as part of that description regardless of how small relative to the full scope of space and time within the Universe.

 

 

Why not explore that, and make it the best possible chunk of space/time you can?

 

Got any more pressing matters to take care of?

so because all things that have ever exist or will ever exist exist right now even after I die I will still be alive but just in a different time? i should have just paid attention in Sunday school and went along with the crowd after all it would be far less depressing to think that that life is a test and that a all powerful being cares about me. weather its hopelessly self-diluted or not.

Edited September 26, 2010 by cipher510

[ewmon]

what do female teachers having sex with male students who arguably will be no more capable/incapable to make that decision when they are 18 have to do with weather life has meaning? and is this an argument for meaning or ageist it?

The OP's question is:

 

if there is no life after death does anything matter at all?

Once a person's life ends, the general idea of an afterlife is that the person has no control over the consequences of an afterlife (even if it involves reincarnation), which are rather absolute (some "supreme being" makes a judgment and pronounces sentence). When people no longer believe in an afterlife (ie, the ultimate consequences over which they have no control), then living in the present tends to become self-serving and relative.

 

To answer the OP's question, "Does anything matter at all?", my answer was that it has even come to female teachers, to whom we could undoubtedly entrust our children, can no longer be trusted as much as they used to be. These people are an excellent example of what happens when one does not believe in an afterlife. This is, after all, what we're talking about.

 

To some people, life will continue to have some sort of meaning; to others, the meaning of life will become very self-serving and relative. See it, want it, take it. I merely gave shocking real-life examples.

[dragonstar57]

The OP's question is:

 

 

Once a person's life ends, the general idea of an afterlife is that the person has no control over the consequences of an afterlife (even if it involves reincarnation), which are rather absolute (some "supreme being" makes a judgment and pronounces sentence). When people no longer believe in an afterlife (ie, the ultimate consequences over which they have no control), then living in the present tends to become self-serving and relative.

 

To answer the OP's question, "Does anything matter at all?", my answer was that it has even come to female teachers, to whom we could undoubtedly entrust our children, can no longer be trusted as much as they used to be. These people are an excellent example of what happens when one does not believe in an afterlife. This is, after all, what we're talking about.

 

To some people, life will continue to have some sort of meaning; to others, the meaning of life will become very self-serving and relative. See it, want it, take it. I merely gave shocking real-life examples.

1.i don't see what is so shocking i don't even see how it is illegal

2.if "OP" means original poster that would be me

3.just because belief in a concept harms society does not make it untrue

[Mr Skeptic]

It's all eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die, just like Jay in the movie Dogma.

 

Or, as in the Bible, which I think said it before the movie Dogma. Actually, the whole book of Ecclesiastes might be relevant to this thread, as it is largely dedicated to King Solomon's attempt to find meaning to life (King Solomon was labeled by the Bible as the wisest man there ever was or will be, for whatever that's worth). Here's how it starts off:

¹ The words of the Teacher, ^[a] son of David, king in Jerusalem: ² "Meaningless! Meaningless!"

says the Teacher.

"Utterly meaningless!

Everything is meaningless."

 

³ What does man gain from all his labor

at which he toils under the sun?

 

⁴ Generations come and generations go,

but the earth remains forever.

 

⁵ The sun rises and the sun sets,

and hurries back to where it rises.

 

⁶ The wind blows to the south

and turns to the north;

round and round it goes,

ever returning on its course.

 

⁷ All streams flow into the sea,

yet the sea is never full.

To the place the streams come from,

there they return again.

 

⁸ All things are wearisome,

more than one can say.

The eye never has enough of seeing,

nor the ear its fill of hearing.

 

⁹ What has been will be again,

what has been done will be done again;

there is nothing new under the sun.

 

¹⁰ Is there anything of which one can say,

"Look! This is something new"?

It was here already, long ago;

it was here before our time.

 

¹¹There is no remembrance of men of old,

and even those who are yet to come

will not be remembered

by those who follow.

...