On the question of cosmic meaning (or lack thereof)

Teleology, panpsychism, and other fashionable nonsense in modern metaphysics

Decades ago I had the vignette you see above this paragraph prominently displayed at the entrance of my office. At the time I was a graduate student in evolutionary biology at the University of Connecticut and knew that the vignette was wrong from an evolutionary perspective, because evolution is not a linear sequence of changes from “lower” to “higher” forms. Still, that wasn’t the point. The point was that human beings are the only animals — so far as we know — to ask themselves the question of meaning. Or, perhaps, the implication of the image is that we are the only animals foolish enough to ask that question.

Ever since I was a teenager I thought that the issue of meaning had been settled: (i) there is no such thing as “cosmic” or universal meaning; but (ii) meaning at the personal, local level is a real and consequential human construct shaped by our biology and culture. I still believe both propositions, for the simple reason that they are the best explanation of all the facts we have come to know so far about the life, the universe, and everything. [1]

Recently, however, some of my colleagues in philosophy have been making increasingly noisy protestations to the contrary…