Swenson takes a decidedly theistic stance on the meaning life in which the beginning of his argument is based on the idea of happiness. Swenson argues that life’s true purpose is based on achieving happiness through serving the moral consciousness. It is the moral consciousness through an action and devotion in which reveals the existence of God thus giving meaning and dignity to life. Furthermore, Swenson begin an idea that humans are provided by nature with the desire for happiness (Swenson 2008, p. 18). To further the idea that happiness must be sought, he states the thought that life is not life unless it is considered happy with the comparison, happiness is not happiness unless it can be justified (Swenson 2008, p. 19). This shows that Swenson’s stance the meaning in human life must come from meaningful happiness (Kanon, 2016). Swenson explains the four problems with the idea that happiness may come from the material or the external world.
…show more content…
Swenson explains that if a person relies on external goods, than one belongs to the world, rather than owning it (Kanon, 2016). Happiness is also found through the material world is considered short, changing, and unpredictable (Kanon, 2016). Therefore, the uncertainty of this creation will eventually lead to unhappiness. Furthermore, Swenson states that material things are considered valuable because we say they are, however, something that is found to be good is considered a false happiness, thus it must be replaced by something else (Kanon, 2016). Moreover, he states that it seems to be an act of treason to humanity if material goods are found to be the source of happiness (Swenson 2008, p. 22). Swenson finds that the material things are not accessible for all people; therefore he believes that one must find happiness and the meaning in something not of the external human world (Kanon, 2016). Swenson continues the idea that the meaning is to seen through moral consciousness alone and that it is the moral consciousness that one can begin to sense the presence of God (Swenson 2008, p. 23). This shows that Swenson believes in a God-centered to meaning of life(Kanon, 2016). Swenson later concludes that our freedom as humans is to decide whether or not to fulfill the voice is a source of happiness and humanity (Kanon, 2016). Swenson finds that many people desire happiness, and those who are considered to be not happy fail to realize their humanity (Swenson 2008, p. 18). However happiness is not a pleasant moment of the present, but it something considered to be deeper. Complete happiness must be filled with meaning, worth, and reasoning (Swenson 2008, p. 19). On the other hand, Aristotle believes that happiness is consisted with good things in which most people desire for. For example, their creative work, having good friends, food, freedom, wealth, and etc., are things that people desire. However, Swenson believes that this can lead to many problems, which is stated above (Kanon, 2016). Therefore, the reason to reject Aristotle view is due to the reason that many people are going to fast and are way ahead for these goods. Swenson argues that he cannot enjoy being happy that other people do not have (Kanon, 2016). This leads life meaning must be all around and that it should be something that everyone is able to access. Swenson eventually concludes with the belief of God in which is considered to be not so universal, plea for happiness makes it much more easier to intake (Kanon, 2016). For example, some may say that a meaningful life is based on creation or altruism, however, those are not the fundamental sources of happiness (Kanon, 2016). Swenson argues against is that the aforesaid ones are not based in money exchange or even luck, however, there are purposeful actions and can be achievable (Kanon, 2016). Swenson also states the pure happiness must come from something that can be obtainable by all people, therefore the source this happiness can be equally obtainable by all people (Kanon, 2016). However, material goods and items are not always accessible for many people in their lifetime. Moreover, Swenson believes that all humans are meant to be happy in their life or possibly to be so (Kanon, 2016). Swenson’s argument is considered to be convincing, his argument against meaning that is found in the external world are considered to be powerful as well (Kanon, 2016).
Swenson explains that if a person relies on external goods, than one belongs to the world, rather than owning it (Kanon, 2016). Happiness is also found through the material world is considered short, changing, and unpredictable (Kanon, 2016). Therefore, the uncertainty of this creation will eventually lead to unhappiness. Furthermore, Swenson states that material things are considered valuable because we say they are, however, something that is found to be good is considered a false happiness, thus it must be replaced by something else (Kanon, 2016). Moreover, he states that it seems to be an act of treason to humanity if material goods are found to be the source of happiness (Swenson 2008, p. 22). Swenson finds that the material things are not accessible for all people; therefore he believes that one must find happiness and the meaning in something not of the external human world (Kanon, 2016). Swenson continues the idea that the meaning is to seen through moral consciousness alone and that it is the moral consciousness that one can begin to sense the presence of God (Swenson 2008, p. 23). This shows that Swenson believes in a God-centered to meaning of life(Kanon, 2016). Swenson later concludes that our freedom as humans is to decide whether or not to fulfill the voice is a source of happiness and humanity (Kanon, 2016). Swenson finds that many people desire happiness, and those who are considered to be not happy fail to realize their humanity (Swenson 2008, p. 18). However happiness is not a pleasant moment of the present, but it something considered to be deeper. Complete happiness must be filled with meaning, worth, and reasoning (Swenson 2008, p. 19). On the other hand, Aristotle believes that happiness is consisted with good things in which most people desire for. For example, their creative work, having good friends, food, freedom, wealth, and etc., are things that people desire. However, Swenson believes that this can lead to many problems, which is stated above (Kanon, 2016). Therefore, the reason to reject Aristotle view is due to the reason that many people are going to fast and are way ahead for these goods. Swenson argues that he cannot enjoy being happy that other people do not have (Kanon, 2016). This leads life meaning must be all around and that it should be something that everyone is able to access. Swenson eventually concludes with the belief of God in which is considered to be not so universal, plea for happiness makes it much more easier to intake (Kanon, 2016). For example, some may say that a meaningful life is based on creation or altruism, however, those are not the fundamental sources of happiness (Kanon, 2016). Swenson argues against is that the aforesaid ones are not based in money exchange or even luck, however, there are purposeful actions and can be achievable (Kanon, 2016). Swenson also states the pure happiness must come from something that can be obtainable by all people, therefore the source this happiness can be equally obtainable by all people (Kanon, 2016). However, material goods and items are not always accessible for many people in their lifetime. Moreover, Swenson believes that all humans are meant to be happy in their life or possibly to be so (Kanon, 2016). Swenson’s argument is considered to be convincing, his argument against meaning that is found in the external world are considered to be powerful as well (Kanon, 2016).