<blockquote>
  <p>it seems to me that a meaningful existence requires
  the absence of cognitive dissonances, but I wonder what science would
  have to say about this, and if there is any empirical basis for
  claiming this.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The difficulty, as you've pointed out, is that there isn't agreement on the definition of "meaning" in this context.  Meaning can be interpreted by different people (and cultures) variously as: "accomplishment", "social good", "altruism", "realizing potential", "inner peace", "knowledge", and on and on.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>the argument that meaning-seeking behavior is a purely evolutionary
  phenomenon that serves only to maximize one's potential for
  reproduction doesn't appear sufficient.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Read about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism#Evolutionary_explanations" rel="nofollow">evolutionary explanations for altruistic behaviour</a> for example to see how this can be addressed: "Every single instance of altruistic behavior need not always increase inclusive fitness; ... it would be beneficial to err on the side of caution and usually be altruistic even if in most cases there were no benefits."</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>how far would we need to curb the definition so that humans would no
  longer qualify as the only meaning-seeking organisms?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>"Social good" and "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism_%28biology%29" rel="nofollow">altruism</a>" are examples of meaning-seeking behaviours commonly found in many animal species.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Could modern experimental methods such as EEG, fMRI, gene expression
  profiling and epigenome sequencing be used to answer some of these
  questions at least to a degree?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Sure, why not.  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism#Neurobiology" rel="nofollow">For example</a>: "Altruism, the experiment suggested, was not a superior moral faculty that suppresses basic selfish urges but rather was basic to the brain, hard-wired and pleasurable."</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>I'd be happy to know at least if there are some research groups or
  labs that try to tackle such questions.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The area of psychology most likely to address such an abstract concept as meaning-seeking is probably <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanistic_psychology" rel="nofollow">Humanistic Psychology</a>: "Human beings are intentional, aim at goals, are aware that they cause future events, and seek meaning, value, and creativity."</p>

<p>You can read about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_psychology#The_meaningful_life" rel="nofollow">research done in this field</a> - there isn't very much of it though - and also about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-actualization" rel="nofollow">self-actualization</a> (another common interpretation of meaning-seeking in psychology).</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-25T21:23:06.973Z
Thank you for your answer. However, I don't think altruism is a particularly good example of meaning seeking in the context of this question; group-based evolutionary arguments don't seem to suffice either. Meaning seeking can be highly (purely?) individual thing (suicides out of honor, risking social exclusion to stand for your values etc.). All this considered, a more suitable explanation seems to be that we can indeed override our evolutionary/biological drives with custom interpretations of the world. The question then is how do these custom interpretaions reflect on a biomolecular level.
w128
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-26T01:47:02.523Z
But honour-suicides and standing up for values are excellent examples of altruism are they not?  Self-sacrifice for the greater good...?  Why do people like Trayan Marechkov and Mahatma Gandhi commit suicide in honour or stand up for their values if not for the benefit of their family and friends, the oppressed, the minority, the people they care about?  Anyways, altruism is just a well-researched example that happens to be found in the animal kingdom.  As you said, there are many other types of meaning-seeking behaviours in humans.
Arnon Weinberg
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-26T10:06:13.463Z
But doesn't "greater good" in this sense appear too transcendental to be explained by purely evolutionary goals of an individual? How could e.g. concerns for some notion of a better future society be explained purely evolutionary (consider an individual without family, friends, children, or loved ones)? Sure, evolution has shaped and enabled such behavior, but that doesn't really answer much - e.g. evolution has also enabled me to use my arms and eyes to prepare food, but that says little about the nature of hunger. :) And it's this biology-behavior relation that I'd like to know more about.
w128
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-26T19:13:04.640Z
Sure.  Not that cognitive science knows much about the biological nature of hunger, and certainly know even less about meaning-seeking, but check out the links I provided in the answer to see the current state of affairs.  If you have further questions, then consider posting a new topic.
Arnon Weinberg
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-24T05:26:12.603Z
2015-02-27T19:04:21.120Z
2015-02-27T19:04:21.120Z
Arnon Weinberg
<p>According to <a href="https://psy8.net/pages/about" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Applied system-vector psychoanalysis</a> meaning-seeking behaviour is a side effect of the evolutionary formation of the purported &quot;audial vector&quot;.</p>
<p>&quot;Audial vector&quot; is a characteristic of increased audial sensitivity of primeval tribe members who carried out the function of night guards of the tribe. Given that function, they had ample time to spend in solitude and meditate over all sorts of matters, including abstract questions such as the meaning of life.)</p>
<p>(Important disclaimer to make is that this Neo-Freudian/evolutionary psychology concept, albeit intriguing, does not present any empirical evidence of its claims.)</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-17T08:16:49.450Z
2022-07-17T08:16:49.450Z
drabsv
<p>In short, I'm interested in cognitive, neuroscientific, biological and/or computational perspectives on what we vaguely refer to as meaning seeking. Of course, this is a large topic, but any information would be highly appreciated.</p>

<h2>Background</h2>

<p>Humans tend to desire meaning in their lives. While it would be hard to agree on a precise definition of <em>meaning</em>, it often refers to positioning oneself in a way that is compatible with one's beliefs, ambitions and values, allowing the individual to make sense of the world and of himself, and to pursue whatever (often transcendental) goals he considers worthy (i.e. meaningful). In simpler words, meaning could refer to making peace with the perceived reality of the world and with oneself. At first glance, it seems to me that a meaningful existence requires <strong>the absence of cognitive dissonances</strong>, but I wonder what science would have to say about this, and if there is any empirical basis for claiming this. Or perhaps the questions is misformulated and such behavior should not be put into the domain of meaning?</p>

<h2>Possible explanations</h2>

<p>A simple evolutionary argument could be that meaning-seeking behavior originates from our impulse to belong (isolation means death), but how do we then explain hermits or dissidents or all other individuals who have effectively made themselves suffer/die in order to uphold meaning in their lives (i.e. dying for one's beliefs)? So the argument that meaning-seeking behavior is a purely evolutionary phenomenon that serves only to maximize one's potential for reproduction doesn't appear sufficient.</p>

<h2>Questions</h2>

<ol>
<li>Can meaning seeking be thought of as an <strong>optimization problem of some
biological parameters</strong> on an individual level, e.g. in terms of
energy required for various cellular processes, homeostatic gene
expression dynamics etc.? For example, depression (which can have an
existential origin) is damaging to health and has been linked to
epigenetic modifications (<a href="http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v38/n1/full/npp201273a.html" rel="nofollow">Sun et al. 2012</a>), so having a mechanism that would seek
to minimize such damage would seem to be beneficial for an organism.</li>
<li>Can we construct a more formal definition of meaning that would be
less anthropocentric? In other words, how far would we need to curb
the definition so that humans would no longer qualify as the only
meaning-seeking organisms? Or are we indeed the only species with the required neural capacity to express such behavior?</li>
<li>Could modern experimental methods such as EEG, fMRI, gene
expression profiling and epigenome sequencing be used to answer some of these questions at
least to a degree? E.g. would a comparison of individuals who claim
to live a meaningful life vs those who don't make any sense? Of
course, even if a some significant differences were observed, an
obvious next question would be what caused them, i.e. a mind-body-environment
problem ...</li>
</ol>

<p>I'd be happy to know at least if there are some research groups or labs that try to tackle such questions. </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-21T01:22:29.897Z
I can chime in that there are kinds of personalities who are more interested in meaning seeking and poorly tolerate lack of meaning in ones life. This personality type is Myers Briggs rational (NT) temperament. INTP in particular, and it persists throughout lifetime. Maybe there is a genetic component to meaning seeking, otherwise the trait would not be so well identified.
Alex Stone
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-24T09:09:18.300Z
Finally an actual scientific question. +1
Tomáš Zato
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-26T20:04:06.587Z
Nice framing of the question(s), but possibly follow-up questions only make sense once you have received additional answers to frame them even better (or they might no longer apply?). Focus is important as broad pages long answers are not a suitable format here. This seems to be [in line with Arnon's comment](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/8652/is-meaning-seeking-behavior-a-biological-optimization-problem#comment16710_8674). Do not expect a _full_ answer here when the topic is too broad. Feel more than free to ask follow-up questions as separate posts, linking back here.
Steven Jeuris
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-26T20:34:43.863Z
@Steven Jeuris: agreed. The reason the question is so broadly formulated is that this is also an attempt to perhaps redefine it or narrow it down, but I need some input from actual (cognitive) scientists to do it appropriately - i.e. what specific questions have been researched or could be researched, what is out of current technology's ken etc. I would be more than happy to receive partial answers or pointers that would help me to ask more specific subquestions. Another problem is that SE network doesn't have a site for such multidisciplinary questions (which I believe are important).
w128
<cognitive-psychology><neuroscience><cognitive-neuroscience><philosophy-of-mind><theory-of-mind>
Is meaning-seeking behavior a biological optimization problem?
w128
# Is meaning-seeking behavior a biological optimization problem?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-11-20)

In short, I'm interested in cognitive, neuroscientific, biological and/or computational perspectives on what we vaguely refer to as meaning seeking. Of course, this is a large topic, but any information would be highly appreciated.

## Background

Humans tend to desire meaning in their lives. While it would be hard to agree on a precise definition of *meaning*, it often refers to positioning oneself in a way that is compatible with one's beliefs, ambitions and values, allowing the individual to make sense of the world and of himself, and to pursue whatever (often transcendental) goals he considers worthy (i.e. meaningful). In simpler words, meaning could refer to making peace with the perceived reality of the world and with oneself. At first glance, it seems to me that a meaningful existence requires **the absence of cognitive dissonances**, but I wonder what science would have to say about this, and if there is any empirical basis for claiming this. Or perhaps the questions is misformulated and such behavior should not be put into the domain of meaning?

## Possible explanations

A simple evolutionary argument could be that meaning-seeking behavior originates from our impulse to belong (isolation means death), but how do we then explain hermits or dissidents or all other individuals who have effectively made themselves suffer/die in order to uphold meaning in their lives (i.e. dying for one's beliefs)? So the argument that meaning-seeking behavior is a purely evolutionary phenomenon that serves only to maximize one's potential for reproduction doesn't appear sufficient.

## Questions

1. Can meaning seeking be thought of as an **optimization problem of some
   biological parameters** on an individual level, e.g. in terms of
   energy required for various cellular processes, homeostatic gene
   expression dynamics etc.? For example, depression (which can have an
   existential origin) is damaging to health and has been linked to
   epigenetic modifications ([Sun et al. 2012](http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v38/n1/full/npp201273a.html)), so having a mechanism that would seek
   to minimize such damage would seem to be beneficial for an organism.
2. Can we construct a more formal definition of meaning that would be
   less anthropocentric? In other words, how far would we need to curb
   the definition so that humans would no longer qualify as the only
   meaning-seeking organisms? Or are we indeed the only species with the required neural capacity to express such behavior?
3. Could modern experimental methods such as EEG, fMRI, gene
   expression profiling and epigenome sequencing be used to answer some of these questions at
   least to a degree? E.g. would a comparison of individuals who claim
   to live a meaningful life vs those who don't make any sense? Of
   course, even if a some significant differences were observed, an
   obvious next question would be what caused them, i.e. a mind-body-environment
   problem ...

I'd be happy to know at least if there are some research groups or labs that try to tackle such questions.

**Tags:** cognitive-psychology, neuroscience, cognitive-neuroscience, philosophy-of-mind, theory-of-mind

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I can chime in that there are kinds of personalities who are more interested in meaning seeking and poorly tolerate lack of meaning in ones life. This personality type is Myers Briggs rational (NT) temperament. INTP in particular, and it persists throughout lifetime. Maybe there is a genetic component to meaning seeking, otherwise the trait would not be so well identified.  
> **username_2**: Finally an actual scientific question. +1  
> **username_3**: Nice framing of the question(s), but possibly follow-up questions only make sense once you have received additional answers to frame them even better (or they might no longer apply?). Focus is important as broad pages long answers are not a suitable format here. This seems to be [in line with Arnon's comment](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/8652/is-meaning-seeking-behavior-a-biological-optimization-problem#comment16710_8674). Do not expect a _full_ answer here when the topic is too broad. Feel more than free to ask follow-up questions as separate posts, linking back here.  
> **username_0**: @username_3: agreed. The reason the question is so broadly formulated is that this is also an attempt to perhaps redefine it or narrow it down, but I need some input from actual (cognitive) scientists to do it appropriately - i.e. what specific questions have been researched or could be researched, what is out of current technology's ken etc. I would be more than happy to receive partial answers or pointers that would help me to ask more specific subquestions. Another problem is that SE network doesn't have a site for such multidisciplinary questions (which I believe are important).  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_4 on 2014-11-24. Score: 4

> it seems to me that a meaningful existence requires
> the absence of cognitive dissonances, but I wonder what science would
> have to say about this, and if there is any empirical basis for
> claiming this.

The difficulty, as you've pointed out, is that there isn't agreement on the definition of "meaning" in this context. Meaning can be interpreted by different people (and cultures) variously as: "accomplishment", "social good", "altruism", "realizing potential", "inner peace", "knowledge", and on and on.

> the argument that meaning-seeking behavior is a purely evolutionary
> phenomenon that serves only to maximize one's potential for
> reproduction doesn't appear sufficient.

Read about [evolutionary explanations for altruistic behaviour](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism#Evolutionary_explanations) for example to see how this can be addressed: "Every single instance of altruistic behavior need not always increase inclusive fitness; ... it would be beneficial to err on the side of caution and usually be altruistic even if in most cases there were no benefits."

> how far would we need to curb the definition so that humans would no
> longer qualify as the only meaning-seeking organisms?

"Social good" and "[altruism](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism_%28biology%29)" are examples of meaning-seeking behaviours commonly found in many animal species.

> Could modern experimental methods such as EEG, fMRI, gene expression
> profiling and epigenome sequencing be used to answer some of these
> questions at least to a degree?

Sure, why not. [For example](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism#Neurobiology): "Altruism, the experiment suggested, was not a superior moral faculty that suppresses basic selfish urges but rather was basic to the brain, hard-wired and pleasurable."

> I'd be happy to know at least if there are some research groups or
> labs that try to tackle such questions.

The area of psychology most likely to address such an abstract concept as meaning-seeking is probably [Humanistic Psychology](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanistic_psychology): "Human beings are intentional, aim at goals, are aware that they cause future events, and seek meaning, value, and creativity."

You can read about [research done in this field](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_psychology#The_meaningful_life) - there isn't very much of it though - and also about [self-actualization](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-actualization) (another common interpretation of meaning-seeking in psychology).

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thank you for your answer. However, I don't think altruism is a particularly good example of meaning seeking in the context of this question; group-based evolutionary arguments don't seem to suffice either. Meaning seeking can be highly (purely?) individual thing (suicides out of honor, risking social exclusion to stand for your values etc.). All this considered, a more suitable explanation seems to be that we can indeed override our evolutionary/biological drives with custom interpretations of the world. The question then is how do these custom interpretaions reflect on a biomolecular level.  
> **username_4**: But honour-suicides and standing up for values are excellent examples of altruism are they not?  Self-sacrifice for the greater good...?  Why do people like Trayan Marechkov and Mahatma Gandhi commit suicide in honour or stand up for their values if not for the benefit of their family and friends, the oppressed, the minority, the people they care about?  Anyways, altruism is just a well-researched example that happens to be found in the animal kingdom.  As you said, there are many other types of meaning-seeking behaviours in humans.  
> **username_0**: But doesn't "greater good" in this sense appear too transcendental to be explained by purely evolutionary goals of an individual? How could e.g. concerns for some notion of a better future society be explained purely evolutionary (consider an individual without family, friends, children, or loved ones)? Sure, evolution has shaped and enabled such behavior, but that doesn't really answer much - e.g. evolution has also enabled me to use my arms and eyes to prepare food, but that says little about the nature of hunger. :) And it's this biology-behavior relation that I'd like to know more about.  
> **username_4**: Sure.  Not that cognitive science knows much about the biological nature of hunger, and certainly know even less about meaning-seeking, but check out the links I provided in the answer to see the current state of affairs.  If you have further questions, then consider posting a new topic.  

---

### Answer by username_5 on 2022-07-17. Score: 1

According to [Applied system-vector psychoanalysis](https://psy8.net/pages/about) meaning-seeking behaviour is a side effect of the evolutionary formation of the purported "audial vector".

"Audial vector" is a characteristic of increased audial sensitivity of primeval tribe members who carried out the function of night guards of the tribe. Given that function, they had ample time to spend in solitude and meditate over all sorts of matters, including abstract questions such as the meaning of life.)

(Important disclaimer to make is that this Neo-Freudian/evolutionary psychology concept, albeit intriguing, does not present any empirical evidence of its claims.)


---

