My point isn't that everything is meaningless necessarily. I would say that the more one thinks about death the harder it is to make arguments for meaningfulness. I wouldn't make an argument for meaninglessness, I would just say that you can't really extrapolate a positive value system from the fact that life is short.
It feels like you're arguing in favor of narrowing our vantage as a way to preserve meaningfulness, which is totally valid to me. But it's basically using a belief (the meaning of temporary things as you put it) as comfort. My point, as was pointed out below, is that you may as well move but you also may as well stay still.
As an aside, it seems strange that Jobs is the illustrative example here, as if it's primitive that we should all want to be Him. Given the option to gain a problematic and presumably painful personal life and what I understand was a totally unnecessary early death along with creating apple and "changing" an arbitrarily tiny subset of human history, that seems like a very easy thing to decline. I take his decision to avoid treatment to reflect profound pain that I would love to avoid.
I concur with most of your arguments, I do concur with you that there seems to be over importance given to Job's personal-life than it should. But, your last paragraph about Job's life seems to be out of line with your philosophy. You are claiming that Job's death was unnecessary. Unnecessary in whose terms? Is the purpose of life living the longest possible life? Here, by saying that his death was unnecessary or untimely, you are implying there is a time for a person of his stature to die. Now, its no more about making decisions that make you happy or not worrying about the shortness of life, or the lack of meaningfulness of life, but rather you are now preaching how somebody should live their life(or make certain decisions) just like the author or the article is trying to do.
P.S- I do think Steve Jobs contributed greatly to his field and I admire him & his products. The arguments made above are purely for discourse
I guess I was making the observation personally that my priorities are very out of sync with wishing for Jobs' life. I don't think anyone else should have the same priorities as I do. I'm terrified of dying and would like to life as long as I can. I would also feel badly if I knew I died earlier than necessary for psychological reasons.
It feels like you're arguing in favor of narrowing our vantage as a way to preserve meaningfulness, which is totally valid to me. But it's basically using a belief (the meaning of temporary things as you put it) as comfort. My point, as was pointed out below, is that you may as well move but you also may as well stay still.
As an aside, it seems strange that Jobs is the illustrative example here, as if it's primitive that we should all want to be Him. Given the option to gain a problematic and presumably painful personal life and what I understand was a totally unnecessary early death along with creating apple and "changing" an arbitrarily tiny subset of human history, that seems like a very easy thing to decline. I take his decision to avoid treatment to reflect profound pain that I would love to avoid.