One of the functions of myth, according to Joseph Campbell, is to help people find that connection to something bigger than the self. For me, myth does not do that because I know it is fiction. But science, on the other hand, provides me with a different explanation, one that does describe my connection to the Earth and every living thing on it. The difference is that the scientific explanation is believable, because it is based on lots of evidence. And the attitude the science engenders is different than that of the religions rooted in the Old Testament. They assume man's role to be one of dominion over the world and the other creatures, whereas science teaches us that we have kinship with other species, and along with our evolutionary gifts of a large brain, opposable thumbs, and symbolic language, a responsibility for good stewardship of the planet.

It ties in well. Being alive. The responsibility to do so resides solely with me.

I think it's just another way of saying we want to find life sufficiently compelling to be worth the bother.

Personally I don't think there's any such thing as some sort of "rapture of being alive", not sustainably, anyway. Also, a lot of the things one feels during one's life are not experiences one would wish to repeat. If that happens too much, some people experience emotional numbness and it's not even voluntary. It just happens. One's subconscious just goes on "tilt" and shuts off the overloaded circuits. Sometimes that's even a permanent state of affairs.

So a philosophy of life that insists that everything always turn up unicorns and rainbows might not be the most flexible and successful approach, but one thing I have invariably found true is that those who are fortunate enough to have such an experience invariably feel everyone else is just whining and Not Doing It Right. All I know is that expecting 24/7 transcendence and join de vivre is, for most of us, a recipe for disappointment.

I am of a more stoic bent, I prefer to have minimal expectations or attachments to particular outcomes.

I think he said that in a way to convey that he felt it was the "experience" of life, more than a "meaning" of life, when asked the question. I do like what he said and have remembered it from so many years ago, so it does likely play into how I live my life, to feel the experience of being alive and to nudge my experiences to align with my innermost desires for my life. So, I guess in a way it helps me to steer my attitude about things, if not my actions and reactions to some degree.

Life is to survive and reproduce before the inevitable ending of death begins the cycle over again. Many years ago, we decided to group together and form cities and civilizations. In doing so we began to work together for our common survival. Therefore, while we are here we should make it so that our actions reflect positively on future generations what ever actions those may be.

I think the goal of life is too follow the path set by your nature as a thinking being combined with the nurture or influences you were molded by in your childhood and youth. Too me the greatest lie of humanity tells itself is we are intrinsically good or evil. I think we are born with tendencies and those tendencies fit or do not fit with our surrounding culture and society and that can strongly define our path in life. If you are a psychopath who enjoys inflicting pain on others and see others as objects to be used as one sees fit or to be avoided for ones own self interest then growing up into 1930's Germany you could very easily have a satisfying life at least up until the fall of the Third Reich. Perhaps if you were smart and resourceful enough you found your way to South America or the US and lived the rest of your life in comfort hiding from justice. The goal of life is avoiding pain and seeking pleasure. Humans are just really good at making it really really complicated.