Interesting ....

I do not agree with their description for the word: persona as a rational thinking being. Quite the opposite.Persona means: sounding through i.e. mask as was worn by actors in a play. What they sounded like might have been true, humorous, sad, tear-jerking, whatever. The fact is: they are players in a scheme.

Man is not a person. A person is a creation of men with a function. With an objective. With a part.

Asking: What is the meaning of life for a living being is just plain mistaking being man with a person.

A man cannot be proven, as the proof of live always falls back onto him or herself. Hence, man is self-evident. A person need identification and legitimization and is subject to all kinds of regulation. Man is not such a device.

Life, or lijf is the same as leib. It means the wholeness of your physical manifestation. Body = corporate = Leichnahm or lichaam = dead.

So, when you point to your life, you mean your vessel that contains you, your lijf.

Because of lacking of interest in what we sound when we speak words, discussions on topics like this are difficult through obfuscation.

For instance. Mankind had to become become human kind, but what does that mean? It is just a neologism, whereas man = mens = mensk, is both attributed to men and women. It is ideology that pushes the emptiness and refill with new meaning of words that have served us well in the past.

Take the discussion of dignity. This is about worthiness. As if man, being self-evident, needs his value assigned or assessed. WTF?

obfuscated in language: judgement, from ius = right and talk. Verdict is the same thing. In Diets it is Urteil= part of the source. And then what is your part of the source as a born of your mother?

That is why a judge can never VER-DICT= speak true on man, as he can only opine, assume, suppose, de-liberate on persons, which, as creations of government, are subject to the parts that are allowed for you to be had after it is assigned to you.