A Review of Terry Eagleton’s The Meaning of Life Essay

Yet another non-fiction attempt at explaining the intricacies of action as we know it is in the offing, and the uninformed would intimately likely lump this particular one with the rest of mediocritys spawns. However, the less ignorant would recognize the prestige that is synonymous with the authors name, which echoes forte of literary theory and Marxism, in the most acceptable and understandable terms.Terry Eagletons discourse on one of the most profound insofar incontestible questions ever to be posed in actual form could have gone two disparate routes the academic, which would call on the powers of scholarly fascinate and intervention and the sardonic, which would debunk all trite and contrived notions about the subject and introduce a new concept that may border between realism and fantasyor at least within the contexts of Eagletons philosophy.But the outstanding theorist, without presenting his release as the millenniums definitive answer to life and all its meanings, does what he is good atanalysis, study, and intellectualism. The big question in focus is quite applicable, as Eagleton begins, to the different persuasions available, from language to philosophy to civilization. Here is where the Eagleton entitle of in-depth probing takes place, and readers new and old will always find the authors signature wit and humour refreshing against the backdrop of the subjects utter seriousness and complexity.Eagleton builds his argument by citing some of the differences among people, based on their particular eras. He discussed how the issues thrown against faith and organized religion figured conspicuously in the late nineteenth century, and this brought on the question about lifes meaning in bigger, more insistent ways. Then we see how the great mind forms his own theory, but only after seeing how he provides a comparison between his thinking and those that came before him.The first, most obvious and easiest come in would be Christianity and its vario us interpretations, that declares God as the all-powerful, all-knowing source of the initiations meaning and its corresponding effect on life itself, and the tenet that deems the world chaotic and meaningless without God. Eagleton quickly forges to disprove this established belief, by invoking the theories and discoveries alluded to by science, and how, even without the concept of God, the universe would continue to be an entity independent of anything, with a accord and logic that defies any claim on source and end.Eagleton did not agree with the free-flowing, opinion-respecting parameters of post-modernism, either. He found the standard allusions to individualism and realms and contexts of varying interpretations as contrary to the seem for meaning because meaning can only be discovered through dialogue with the world, and any pre-tense of an individual of finding the same unto himself or herself does not employ logically within Eagletons study.One must validate his or her par ticular life meanings with what the world has already set, out of respect and value for a construct that is no longer such, but is really a defined and proven reality that can mix both beauty and logic on the same level. Upon presenting his own personal cause towards providing an answer to the stated question, Eagleton now invokes Aristotelian philosophy to concretise an aspect of the meaning. According to Aristotle, human lifes significance lies within happinessyet not just mere pleasure.Eagleton agress with this idea, and confirms the classic philosophers opinion that happiness may only be reliable through virtue, wherein virtue is, more than anything, a social practice and not a way of thinking. Therefore, happiness, which is the purpose of life, is also its practical and realisable version. However, all is not completely nice and happy in the Eagleton-Aristotle team-upthe author, after the initial meeting of great minds regarding the ideal integration of politics, ethics and h appiness in one ideal society, admonishes the classicists expressed elements of a society necessary to attain happiness.That Aristotle defined this as one complete with women and slaves earmarked to carry out any dirty work while man goes forth to traverse the levels of happiness, is an ideal best left in history books and pageant presentations. Eagleton, being the trouper he is, tries to make up for Aristotles slip by taking the latters happiness concept and raising it oneto centre on the ultimate idea of respect. non erotic love, no, but that among fellow men, and even enemies. As with Aristotles original happiness idea, Eagletons love construct is a lifestyle, a practical way of giving meaning to life.He goes further by adding the presence of another individual in the equation, with whom love may be realized through common support. This refers to space for growth, a means to being ones best. And, being one of Marxs greatest disciples, Eagleton qualifies this concept by requir ing the individuals be equals for real reciprocity, for the absence seizure of such will render this adjudged purpose and meaning of life futile. The book ends with Eagletons inspired way of comparing life with jazz music, where improvisation is key, yet function as a whole.Thus, the author promises the answers to be found in this precise situationhappiness being individual and collective, which can only be realised through love. If any other writer tried to use the same words and the same concepts to give his or her own interpretation, everything would sound fake, and belike even absurd. But Terry Eagletons lucid writing and light touch prove that these often-lambasted elements may actually still be understood for what they are, and that love and life are indeed connectedall to provide the meaning we have long wanted to find.