TheMeaningOfLife.org is an essay made up of 44 points that describe the human experience from birth to death.
This is a subset of a category that can be described as, “A number of lessons,” that often include advice on living (amongst the various modes of living) and explanations that make it easier to understand and thus coexist with life’s experiences.
MeaningOfLife.tv can be treated as (the front-end to) a collection of video talks about all the obvious topics (including consciousness, morality, religion). There are also video interviews with each of the speakers (including Dennet, Fukuyama, Pinker, Wilson).
I could repeat that above generalization, by treating this website as indicative of the enormous amount of content by thinkers whom I would describe in turn by (loosely!) using words like visionary and existentially meaningful.
But: I’m not sure that I’m satisfied that the creation of this node was worthwhile. What was the purpose? Yes, I might have a better recollection of these websites and, yes, I could in practice refer to this node in the future when seeking activities. But those facts alone would not provide the justification in which I am interested. A major source for this problem is the realization that I have only properly perused the first of the website pair, and in both cases had nothing much to say.
It is not enough that I could make an effort to have what to say (e.g. look-up more websites about lessons and use that as a springboard for a discussion of what they offer, etc; or more simply peruse the sites properly). The fundamental status is one wherein I am not invested in the media – thus a change would require an arbitrary alteration (since I could just as arbitrarily invest myself in any number of other candidates, and in any case, would have to do so before undertaking a task like this).
