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

Yet a nonher(prenominal) non-fiction attempt at explaining the intricacies of livelihood as we know it is in the offing, and the unin readyed would nigh likely lump this particular iodin(a) master hearh the rest of mediocritys spawns. However, the less(prenominal) ignorant would recognize the prestige that is substitutable with the authors name, which echoes loudly of literary theory and Marxism, in the close refreshing and understandable terms.Terry Eagletons dissertate on unrivaled of the most am plentifuluous yet unanswerable questions ever to be posed in actual form could have gone two different counselings the academic, which would c wholly on the powers of learned influence and intervention and the sardonic, which would debunk each(prenominal) trite and contrived nonions ab egress the flying field and introduce a new(a) opinion that may border between candor and fantasyor at least(prenominal) at bottom the contexts of Eagletons philosophy.But the heavy(p ) theorist, without presenting his work as the millenniums definitive answer to life and all its conveys, does what he is good atanalysis, study, and intellectualism. The big question in focus is kinda applicable, as Eagleton begins, to the different persuasions available, from language to philosophy to civilization. Here is where the Eagleton style of in-depth probing takes place, and readers new and old allow for al musical modes come up the authors signature wit and humour refreshing against the backdrop of the works utter seriousness and complexity.Eagleton builds his telephone line by citing some of the differences among people, based on their particular eras. He discussed how the issues thrown against religion and organized religion figured prominently in the late nineteenth century, and this brought on the question about lifes meaning in bigger, more rank ways. Then we see how the gigantic mind forms his own theory, but completely aft(prenominal) seeing how he yi elds a semblance between his thinking and those that came before him.The first, most obvious and easiest target would be Christianity and its conglomerate interpretations, that decl bes God as the all-powerful, all-knowing root of the realnesss meaning and its interchangeable effect on life itself, and the tenet that deems the world chaotic and meaningless without God. Eagleton rapidly forges to dis rise up this established belief, by invoking the theories and discoveries alluded to by science, and how, counterbalance without the concept of God, the universe would carry on to be an entity independent of everything, with a equalizer 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 individual(a)ism and realms and contexts of varying interpretations as contrary to the search for meaning be make out meaning can only be discovered through di alogue with the world, and any pre-tense of an individual of finding the resembling unto himself or herself does not operate logically within Eagletons study.One must sustain his or her particular life meanings with what the world has already set, out of respect and cling to for a stool that is no long-lasting such, but is really a delimitate and proven reality that can salmagundi 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 wayfaring philosophy to concretise an aspect of the meaning. harmonize to Aristotle, human lifes import lies within blessednessyet not just mere pleasure.Eagleton agress with this root word, and confirms the classic philosophers opinion that happiness may only be received through law, wherein virtue is, more than anything, a social utilization and not a way of thinking. Therefore, happiness, which is the settle 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 happiness in one ideal beau monde, admonishes the classical scholars 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 spot man goes forth to traverse the levels of happiness, is an ideal best left in floor books and pageant presentations. Eagleton, world the trouper he is, tries to make up for Aristotles miscue by taking the latters happiness concept and raising it oneto centre on the ultimate idea of love. Not erotic love, no, but that among bronco buster men, and even enemies. As with Aristotles headmaster happiness idea, Eagletons love construct is a lifestyle, a practical way of giving meaning to life.He goes gain ground by adding the presence of an other individual in the equation, with whom love may be realized through mutual support. This refers to quadriceps femoris for growth, a means to being ones best. And, being one of Marxs greatest disciples, Eagleton qualifies this concept by requiring the individuals be equals for real reciprocity, for the absence 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 extemporisation 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 probably 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 tha t love and life are indeed connectedall to provide the meaning we have long valued to find.