The phrase "man arose by chance" reveals a poor understanding of probability. First, we don't know how many trillions of universes have appeared and vanished before ours Big Banged, and how many will come to be after ours (the Zorkons, who will evolve in another billion cycles of the universe, will also claim that there existence is unique and improbable). Secondly, low probability systems come into being all the time - every time you knock over a salt shaker, you've created a pile whose precise configuration had an infinitesimal chance of occurring. Every time. Thirdly, evolution is not a string of random, unrelated events - there is not the same chance that an elephant will develop tiny pink wings as a thick skin. Evolutionary developments are pushed towards certain permutations and away from others by the environment. Thus, the phrase "man arose by chance" presents a false choice between pure randomness and conscious purpose. There is a third answer: an eternity of universes, and environmentally-driven evolution.

Morgan,

You are essentially correct in that purpose can come from anyone/anywhere.  But the issue is not whether you can have a purpose (you can certainly give yourself one).  Hitler had a purpose; it was to dominate the world and eradicate Judaism.  He gave himself that purpose.  Now, we all very quickly (and rightly) identify a problem with his purpose.  But your statement makes this identification impossible.  As you say "if you, God, or anyone else, want to do something with your life, then your life has purpose. Nothing else is relevant." 

 

Nothing else is relevant...really?

 

Hitler's purpose for his life is just as valid as Mother Theresa's, or Ghandi's or someone else who lives a selfless life?  If that is what your worldview really teaches, then it is inadequate because it fails to describe the world as it really is.  Something else IS relevant; it’s the fact that we all know Hitler’s purpose was wrong.  If your worldview can’t account for that, if it holds that the distinction isn’t even relevant, then it is missing a major piece of life’s puzzle...and you should re-evaluate it. 

After 35 years as an agnostic, I was on a jury and on a lunch break with two other men. One said he was an Episcopal and the other said he was a Catholic priest. I said I had once been a Catholic and the priest said my life was absurd.

Having days earlier seen "absurd" defined as meaningless, I replied that giving my life meaning was my responsibility. He so suddenly went silent and left the room that I decided my remark had frightened him. Remembering the twelve years of mental bullying I had survived in Catholic schools, I started telling myself, "Don't tell me revenge isn't sweet!" What fun it was.