Talk:Meaning of life

The depth and breadth of this article
I have reviewed the entire article and made several edits. The subject is complex and this article, rather than taking a freshman undergrad approach to the topic takes a more expansive one, which I appreciate. While I could make it more focused with less detail, I'm leaning toward thinking that would be a mistake. Thus, I'm proposing removing the two tags at the top of the article that were placed there seven months ago. Is there any discussion on this topic?
 * I agree Spicemix (talk) 15:14, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Under "Mahayana Buddhism", there are better items to site in Wikipedia
The description for Mahayana Buddhism in this article is fairly uninformed about Buddhism. I would cite the Buddhist Philosophy article for more information on the topic. Also, Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism both appeared about the same time. The idea that Theravadan beliefs are older than Mahayana beliefs is a recent view. (Recent meaning around the 18th century.) Pfstevenson32 (talk) 13:29, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Reconsideration of including "Ways of Life" philosophies
Shouldn't "meaning of life" focus strictly on direct interpretations of life purpose, without philosophies that prescribe ways to live. Stoicism for example, guides living rather than answering the existential question directly. NeutralNugget (talk) 09:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 April 2024
Thinglandowner (talk) 21:51, 10 April 2024 (UTC) The Meaning of life is to expand as far as possible like a virus so that it can't be destroyed, that is why humans exist, to help life expand across space and to live for as long as it can. Making you as a human being a insignificant part of a much larger goal.
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 22:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 May 2024
> > > Wikipedia has a rather long chapter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaning_of_life) on the subject of Meaning of life. > > One of the statements in the Wikipedia's chapter is: To evolve, or to achieve biological perfection. > > I have the following concerns about this statement:

The word 'biological' excludes many endeavors of the humanity (especially in last few hundred years) of developing tools which help humans to improve individual lives and life of the whole society and also help humans to control the environment for the benefits of individuals or benefits of groups of individuals. The word 'perfection' is too ambiguous - perfection implies we have multiple versions of the same object (or multiple same category objects) where one version is better than the other. But judgement of being better is difficult to measure: we can easy measure who/what is faster or we can more or less easy measure who/what is stronger. Bur can we measure who/what is more beautiful or useful? RawThinker (talk) 17:08, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: These concerns are better handled via a general discussion rather than via an edit request. Would suggest starting a new section re-presenting these concerns to solicit additional input. See: Consensus. — Sirdog (talk) 01:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * So I think I did what you suggested:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Meaning_of_life&oldid=1222582652
 * Should I just wait for comments?
 * Thanks. RawThinker (talk) 16:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaning_of_life
Wikipedia has a rather long chapter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaning_of_life) on the subject of Meaning of life. One of the statements in the Wikipedia's chapter is: To evolve, or to achieve biological perfection. I have           the following concerns about this statement: The word 'biological' excludes many endeavors of the humanity (especially in last few hundred years) of developing tools which help humans to improve individual lives and life of the whole society and also help humans to control the environment for the benefits of individuals or benefits of groups of individuals. The word 'perfection' is too ambiguous - perfection implies we have multiple versions of the same object (or multiple same category objects) where one version is better than the other. But judgement of being better is difficult to measure: we can easy measure who/what is faster or we can more or less easy measure who/what is stronger. Bur can we measure who/what is more beautiful or useful?

Existing statement: To evolve, or to achieve biological perfection.

Proposed statement: '''To change ourselves and/or environment to be able to achieve goals easier and faster. ''' RawThinker (talk) 19:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)