In a series of articles, I have explored the question of “meaning of life”— and how different it is from simply chasing material goods. Let me approach the theme from another angle.
We have become extremely rational about what we believe is possible. We have constructed an internal image of what can and cannot be done in this world — what can be changed, what cannot be transformed, what lies within our individual and collective capacity and what lies beyond it.
Ask most people if they want peace in the Middle East and they will say yes. Ask them if they believe peace is possible — many will say no.
Here lies a deep contradiction. We no longer believe in our own aspirations.
This gap between what we long for and what we believe is possible creates a quiet internal fracture. We normalize violence. We rationalize inequality. We accept chaos as inevitable. We call it “being realistic.”
We are told that poverty is natural, that war is unavoidable, that injustice is complex and therefore permanent. But poverty is not created by the poor, and becoming rich is not the solution to poverty. Trying to address structural problems on an individual basis only masks the deeper issue.
Human development has never been based merely on perceived capacity. It has been driven by aspiration. Every great transformation began as something that seemed impossible.
The meaning of a life depends largely on the aspirations one holds for the future. And happiness is deeply connected to the distance between those aspirations and their realization.
Today’s crises are not only climate change, war, and poverty. There is a widening gap between our aspirations and the belief in our capacity to fulfill them.
Our internal energy has been hijacked by external forces — economic systems, political narratives, technological distractions —convincing us that it is safer to lower our aspirations than to fight for them.
To be human is to keep the fire of aspiration alive.
