Hey Raph,

Thanks for reading and offering a counterargument to my piece. Maybe I shouldn’t have written this article in an overarching philosophical sense, where I argue that every human should strive to create artificial struggles to find a sense of meaning in their lives.

A lot of this piece was largely inspired from my own experience — when I aligned my life’s purpose to chase after materialistic things, I only felt an intense, transient high when I gained what I wanted and always needed to get the next thing that caught my eye. I found myself trapped in a vicious cycle of striving to earn more money to buy things that I didn’t really want. The hedonistic treadmill was not fulfilling enough for me.

When I adopted this philosophy of adopting responsibility and pushing myself beyond my current limits to improve myself as an individual both physically and mentally, many of my problems went away. I started to feel more confident, more courageous, more honest, more fulfilled, more positive. I wanted to strive and achieve better things. I saw my relationship with my coworkers, friends, and family improve in ways that I could never have imagined.

Could all of this have happened spontaneously, or was it happening because I had been willing to put in an effort to take responsibility and change myself and everyone I came into contact with? Could all of the changes in my life be correlated to the struggles and adversity I had to go through to work on my flaws and change myself for the better? (Could have been spontaneous or random, but I’m highly doubtful of this)

You can say that there is no meaning in the grand scheme of things, but is that a practical philosophy to live by? Personally, it did not serve me any good. It gave me no guidance: nowhere to start, nowhere to aim. Wouldn’t you say that you’d prefer a philosophy that strengthens and encourages a group of people rather than tell them that there is no meaning in this world, that they shouldn’t ever look to struggle in life, that they should always look to accomplish things easily? Isn’t a positive message that can at least give people a way forward better than telling people that the things they strive for in this life is all meaningless? I’m pretty skeptical of the philosophy you share with me — it doesn’t provide the necessary framework to push new generations of humans forward into the world. However, that doesn’t mean you’re wrong, nor does it mean that I’m right.

Maybe what we should argue about is how to solve the problem (helping people find meaning in their lives) rather than argue about which philosophy is objectively right or wrong.

I also did not say that doing things the hard way is more rewarding. I’m trying to tell people that the things they want most in life will be hard, which is why most people avoid them. I’m trying to tell them that they HAVE to suffer through the hard times, they HAVE to wander around in the dark when they start something new, in order to have the possibility to become exceptional. There’s just no way around it.

And I would argue that even if this artificial obstacle course we create is silly and only gives us the illusion of happiness and sense of accomplishment, isn’t it better than just smugly stating that there is no point in striving for anything since there is no meaning in the grand scheme of things? It’s understandable that not everyone in this world wants to be great and I’m certainly not suggesting that everyone has a duty or a responsibility to strive to become the best… but wouldn’t that philosophy have the potential to help people reach for the sky and produce things that could inevitably help other people?

“Greatness is subjective, relative, and very overrated.”

This philosophy only curbs the innovative and creative nature of humans. What you’re saying is correct, but it is not pragmatic for us humans if we want to move forward in life. Being critical of everything and calling things subjective does not help us in any way. It only helps us feel better about ourselves in our present form. Can you say that Leonardo Da Vinci was not great? Can you say that Plato was not great? Is it productive and helpful for us to knock them off as just “subjective” and “overrated”? That would be quite foolish of us.

Again, I really appreciate you offering a counterpoint to my piece. I will admit that my article was not as polished or as well thought out as it should have been. It is something I am working on and will continue to improve on over time. It really helps me that you are able to poke holes into my piece, so that I can sharpen and learn how to strengthen my argument. Let me know what you thought about this — I’m eager to hear what you think.

P.S. I did not intend this to be an attack in any way. I was only trying to critique your arguments and defend mine.