So from my last 2 posts it is inherent that my life has to include the idea that it has to include more then me in my quest and it has nothing to do with religion. So we go to the next great thing, money. The aim in life was to just earn lots of money and then help people and stuff.
- First I would have to earn money, this approach is taken by most westerners and have integrated it to many aspects of life. This is a life long process, so it could easily be the aim of life. At this point I realised that one persons life is irrelevant as when you die there is nothing passed on (apart from inheritance, which is sometimes given to charities) this will be dealt with in the next post.
- Once you have the money another problem crops up. It is how much money do you need? Now the biggest answer that people pull out of the hat, is just enough to live on but that is a loose definition, since most people use that to just include food, water and shelter. This approach doesn’t take into account the sociology and psychology of people. People need to be entertained and live on a comfortable state of luxury.
- The real problem is how much luxury is needed? It is possible to say that the most richest people in the world don’t need that much money and I quite agree but they still keep earning more and more and buying more and more stuff. It was as though they were not content with what they have and need more. This runaway richness is something that would need to be avoided in an effort to maintain efficiency and for the need to distribute the wealth.
- It was at this point many ideas of the aim in life came out but this was influenced by a modification of Marxist theory.