Icarus, your post is in itself a good succinct statement of the dominant metaphysics of our age. That is not surprising since the things one believes most deeply strike one as self-evident truths to be taken for granted.
But there are real problems with it. A very big problem is that "atoms" are in fact every bit as much of a human construction as "meaning". It is important that nihilism with respect to meaning -- the conviction that there is no objective meaning to be found, and any claim to find one is nothing more than a species of subjective or emotional chatter -- always goes hand in hand with the most shrugging Platonism with respect to mathematical objects.
The picture is one of a universe necessarily disconnected from human meaning or purpose, governed by objective mathematical laws that exist independently of the human mind, and that we may only discover through mathematical science. These laws, because they exist "out there", independent of human cognition, have the privileged status of objectivity; all other assertions cannot aspire to this status and are merely "subjective".
The trouble is that mathematical Platonism is an almost self-evidently ludicrous idea if you really examine it for a second. There is no "pi in the sky"; there are no mathematical objects that magically exist outside of human cognition. What are these objects exactly? The quite obvious reality is that we invented all these mathematical objects, just as we invented everything else. "But they work!" Yes -- we invented them so that they would work. That is their point.
Once it becomes clear that there is no privileged domain of objective Platonic truth that is necessarily disconnected from human sentience, one can also see the confusion in the idea that statements about meaning are necessarily invalid merely because we "just make them up" -- as if there were statements of any other kind! Once the idea of a sacralized mathematical domain of the only "objective reality" is removed, one observes that we proceed in life at all times as if all sorts of statements are objectively true, as if there is very much such a thing as objective reality and we deal with it, more or less successfully, at every instant. It is only when we try to do philosophy that we are so mesmerized by the notion of some impossibly hard and perfect truth that we dismiss perfectly valid ways of thinking about the world as somehow secondary and inferior to that chimeric vision.
I believe that a good starting point for thinking about the meaning of the world is to realize that there are two different things: human sentience, and the materials that surround it and of which it is made. It is not easy to understand the nature of that difference, but everyone is aware of it and acknowledges it. It does no good to deny this difference by describing us as machines governed by some external mathematical laws -- since it is we, human sentience, that invented those laws and mathematics itself in the first place.
Once this difference between sentience and materials is seen, it becomes clear that the most fundamental activity that sentience is engaged in is attempting to gain increasing control of materials. The cumulative scientific and technological progress of mankind over time is the outcome of this relentless struggle of sentience to manipulate non-sentient matter and bend it to its will. That activity can be taken as almost the definition of meaning and purpose. Thus, the most basic occupation of sentience is one that involves it with meaning and purpose at all times -- whether or not this is consciously realized.
It was unfortunate but inevitable that while dismissing the kinds of Platonism involved in religious faith, we overlooked the very similar confusions inherent in mathematical Platonism and were led to the current dominant metaphysics of nihilism. I think that this situation will eventually be rectified once the brute force consequences of technological progress -- our ability to affect the physical circumstances related to our own bodies and brains in truly game-changing ways -- begin to show people the real point of progress, and give them an instinctive understanding of how sentience proceeds vis-a-vis materials; all while increasing our raw intelligence, which will make these conclusions easier to arrive at. At some point, Wittgenstein's work in the Philosophical Investigations will also be rediscovered and it will be seen that it laid the foundations for seeing through the confusions inherent in Platonism of every variety.
But there are real problems with it. A very big problem is that "atoms" are in fact every bit as much of a human construction as "meaning". It is important that nihilism with respect to meaning -- the conviction that there is no objective meaning to be found, and any claim to find one is nothing more than a species of subjective or emotional chatter -- always goes hand in hand with the most shrugging Platonism with respect to mathematical objects.
The picture is one of a universe necessarily disconnected from human meaning or purpose, governed by objective mathematical laws that exist independently of the human mind, and that we may only discover through mathematical science. These laws, because they exist "out there", independent of human cognition, have the privileged status of objectivity; all other assertions cannot aspire to this status and are merely "subjective".
The trouble is that mathematical Platonism is an almost self-evidently ludicrous idea if you really examine it for a second. There is no "pi in the sky"; there are no mathematical objects that magically exist outside of human cognition. What are these objects exactly? The quite obvious reality is that we invented all these mathematical objects, just as we invented everything else. "But they work!" Yes -- we invented them so that they would work. That is their point.
Once it becomes clear that there is no privileged domain of objective Platonic truth that is necessarily disconnected from human sentience, one can also see the confusion in the idea that statements about meaning are necessarily invalid merely because we "just make them up" -- as if there were statements of any other kind! Once the idea of a sacralized mathematical domain of the only "objective reality" is removed, one observes that we proceed in life at all times as if all sorts of statements are objectively true, as if there is very much such a thing as objective reality and we deal with it, more or less successfully, at every instant. It is only when we try to do philosophy that we are so mesmerized by the notion of some impossibly hard and perfect truth that we dismiss perfectly valid ways of thinking about the world as somehow secondary and inferior to that chimeric vision.
I believe that a good starting point for thinking about the meaning of the world is to realize that there are two different things: human sentience, and the materials that surround it and of which it is made. It is not easy to understand the nature of that difference, but everyone is aware of it and acknowledges it. It does no good to deny this difference by describing us as machines governed by some external mathematical laws -- since it is we, human sentience, that invented those laws and mathematics itself in the first place.
Once this difference between sentience and materials is seen, it becomes clear that the most fundamental activity that sentience is engaged in is attempting to gain increasing control of materials. The cumulative scientific and technological progress of mankind over time is the outcome of this relentless struggle of sentience to manipulate non-sentient matter and bend it to its will. That activity can be taken as almost the definition of meaning and purpose. Thus, the most basic occupation of sentience is one that involves it with meaning and purpose at all times -- whether or not this is consciously realized.
It was unfortunate but inevitable that while dismissing the kinds of Platonism involved in religious faith, we overlooked the very similar confusions inherent in mathematical Platonism and were led to the current dominant metaphysics of nihilism. I think that this situation will eventually be rectified once the brute force consequences of technological progress -- our ability to affect the physical circumstances related to our own bodies and brains in truly game-changing ways -- begin to show people the real point of progress, and give them an instinctive understanding of how sentience proceeds vis-a-vis materials; all while increasing our raw intelligence, which will make these conclusions easier to arrive at. At some point, Wittgenstein's work in the Philosophical Investigations will also be rediscovered and it will be seen that it laid the foundations for seeing through the confusions inherent in Platonism of every variety.
same old shit, sixes and sevens Shaft...