Many people live lives that appear acceptable on the outside, but are empty on the inside. Work, daily routine, responsibilities, entertainment, aging. The process continues, but there is no result. When a person disappears, the world remains exactly the same as it was before them — no change, no loss, no feeling of emptiness.
Society normalizes this emptiness. It is enough to be “decent”, “normal” or “acceptable.” However, these labels do not explain whether a person has created something that transcends their own existence. Life can be correct and meaningless at the same time.
We tend to say that the meaning of life is feelings – fulfillment and happiness. But feelings end with the person. They leave no trace. If all that has been is only an internal state, then it has never existed externally. The world has gained nothing from it.
I thought about this topic after reading Ray Bradbury’s book “Fahrenheit 451”. Here is a short quote from the book, almost from the last pages:
Everyone must leave something behind, said my grandfather, a son or a book, or a painting, a house you built yourself or at least a wall, a pair of shoes you made yourself or a garden you planted with your own hands. Everyone must leave something behind that they have touched during their lifetime and where their soul will find refuge after death, and when people look at the tree or flower they planted, at that moment they will be alive again… That is where the difference between a simple lawn mower and a real gardener lies, my grandfather said. The first comes and goes as if he never existed, but the second has gained immortality.
We are talking about a physical, real imprint on this world. The quote compares a lawn mower and a gardener. One maintains the system, the other supplements it. One repeats, the other creates. Both can be diligent, but only one leaves footprints. This difference is not social — it is existential.
The essence of the question is that people are not incapable of creating lasting value, but unwilling to do so. They live as if their presence were enough. But presence without a mark is empty.
A topic without conclusions or lessons. Only with a question that cannot be avoided: if you were not here tomorrow, what would objectively remain — not in memories or feelings, but in reality?