http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_chain_of_being
Some claim that all existing things are without any meaning. Considered philosophically and scientifically, does the fact of the chain of being provide a fundamental meaning to man's existence and his world?
I have pondered this question ever since I read Lovejoy's great book. http://www.amazon.com/Great-Chain-Being ... 132&sr=1-1
Or is the question invalid because of the naturalistic fallacy?
naturalistic fallacy
According to G. E. Moore, the mistake of identifying moral good with any natural property. Moore argued that since any such identification gives rise to an open question, it can never be correct. This constitutes a significant reason for concluding that fact and value remain irreducibly distinct.
Regarding the explanation of the existence of anything rather than nothing, are the only alternatives those of the brute fact (no meaning) v. the Great chain of being (a minimal meaning)? http://www.answers.com/topic/brute-fact
What do you think?