Are there any substitutes for having inner peace?

I hadn't intended to joke. I was offering Whitman's poetry as a testimonial for being over becoming."I am" is subjective. "becoming me" is objective. Two different directions, or focuses. Whitman was talking about the appreciation of just being. I think there is fulfillment in that. I think that is one of the things Whitman's poetry is celebrating.lfen

Robin,I'm still having trouble seeing the connection of formal purpose being implying, entailing, whatever "objectivity".I want to drive nails and tire of whacking them with a rock which takes a long time. Using a combination of a lever (the handle) attached to a hard weighted shaped head I discover that nails go in faster with less effort on my part. I'm satisfied with my tools. It's an extension of my arm that multiplies the force and adds a capability that flesh and bone doesn't have vis a vis driving nails, or breaking head, eggs, rocks, etc.What is objective about this? My purpose is subjective. I want to build a house, or fence and needed something to better drive the nails with. Let's say a hammer escapes from an astronauts hand and somehow is picked up floating in space by an alien would they know what it was?It seems like the purpose of the hammer is as subjective as anything else I intend. I would say meaning is subjective. The objective lacks meaning. It can be measured and described but what is the meaning of a proton? Of a star?If you ask "What is the meaning of my life". You are making your life an object, or making your self an object. You seem to being saying that if God exists and created me than I am an object for God. But what about my subjectivity? My sense of "I am" that I relate to the objects that I am aware of?Hence, though Arach has offered alternate translations, God tells Moses that his name is "I am that I am". So it would appear God has no purpose. But if we are then do we have a purpose? Did God make us in his image? Or did we make God(s) in our image and then make up the story that He made us?Who am I? Is the question. But who asks the question is always subject regarding a wide range of possible objects. What if we are the source of meaning? Can the source of meaning have meaning? Perhaps to be meaningless is To Be?lfen

Okay assuming a conscious hammer. It's driving nails and feeling good as it's purpose is being fulfilled. Lunch break and designer builder sits down and discovers walnuts in his lunch. Wack! the hammer is now serving another purpose, that of cracking walnut shells for its maker to get at the walnut inside the shell to eat. Does the hammer feel unfulfilled or not? It's no longer functioning to meet it's designed purpose.It sounds to me like objective means being used by something outside and subjecive means not being used by an external agent for a purpose. Could subjective mean self directed and objective mean other directed?Why is self direction (if it exists but I'll leave that alone knowing that that bogs down for you) meaningless and other direction meaningful? Must meaning always be bestowed by something outside oneself?lfen

Okay, but I want you to explain to me why if I create meaning my life is meaningless? Why can't I be the source? Why do I have to be sourced?To do a meta reframing: Why can't the meaning of my life be to create meaning?lfen

Would you agree to this fine tuning of the language of your statement?The phenomena that we describe using the law of gravity is something we did not think up. We created models that would describe the effects of it's functioning. Aristotle's model was badly flawed. Newton's model works very well for us, and Einstein's model appears to be more accurate than Newton's over the extremes.The phenomena described by gravity is independent of our existence.lfen