The question, “what does life mean?" used to be considered as a paradigm of philosophical investigation. As a researcher, life is meaningless without paradigm and perspective. These are indispensable in peoples' lives as we encounter research in our daily lives. According to James Tartaglia (Veal, 2017), when properly defined, the topic of life's purpose is "the keystone of philosophy," serving to "lock its traditional preoccupations in place" and "allow them to bear weight in an intellectual culture dominated by science." He also contends that we should consider this idea as he rejects the premise of the question and draw the conclusion that "life is meaningless." More precisely, James Tartaglia is one philosopher who is not at all happy about it; in fact, he appears to be absolutely furious about it, as readers who have read this journal's recent symposium on Thaddeus Metz's book Meaning in Life: An Analytic Study would be aware. What enrages Tartaglia the most, it seems, is that the "traditional" topic of life's meaning has been completely disregarded by what he refers to as the "new paradigm" in analytic philosophy, which is purportedly devoted to exploring this question. He further states that the conventional question of life's purpose is not only the only genuine, legitimately philosophical inquiry of life's meaning, but it is also the most important one.
COVID-19

The question, “what does life mean?" used to be considered as a paradigm of philosophical investigation. As a researcher, life is meaningless without paradigm and perspective. These are indispensable in peoples' lives as we encounter research in our daily lives. According to James Tartaglia (Veal, 2017), when properly defined, the topic of life's purpose is "the keystone of philosophy," serving to "lock its traditional preoccupations in place" and "allow them to bear weight in an intellectual culture dominated by science." He also contends that we should consider this idea as he rejects the premise of the question and draw the conclusion that "life is meaningless." More precisely, James Tartaglia is one philosopher who is not at all happy about it; in fact, he appears to be absolutely furious about it, as readers who have read this journal's recent symposium on Thaddeus Metz's book Meaning in Life: An Analytic Study would be aware. What enrages Tartaglia the most, it seems, is that the "traditional" topic of life's meaning has been completely disregarded by what he refers to as the "new paradigm" in analytic philosophy, which is purportedly devoted to exploring this question. He further states that the conventional question of life's purpose is not only the only genuine, legitimately philosophical inquiry of life's meaning, but it is also the most important one.