Most scientists you've heard of, don't even grasp the basic idea of Occam's razor.
Philosophy is not science. Science is not philosophy. And psychology will never be medicine because it is a branch of philosophy.

You want the truth? Here it is: your life does have a meaning.

The meaning of your life: 1. Survive. 2. Make offspring. 3. Increase the chances for the offspring of your kind in the future to: 4. Survive. 5.Make offspring ...
Even considering that life could be anything more than that is just another matrix that we all try to forcefully convince ourselves to believe in. Actually it's just different abstractions of the one single goal of life: to survive. It is not the being that evolved from nothingness. It is *cessation* that evolved from eternal existence.

The purpose of life is to find happiness? A survival strategy.
The stoicism? Video games? Prozac? A healthy diet that will make my skin look attractive and my likes on instagram go up? Yep, survival mechanisms.
Find a cure for cancer? Or invent a supercomputer? Make justice triumph again? Save something important from oblivion? All these sound like increasing the chances of >our< offspring to survive. It's just a matter of where >our< becomes >their< in a subsequent contexts. Nothing more, nothing less.
Everything you witness, and every other organism witnesses, is coping. Because consciousness is a product of an organ, whose function is survival.

PS: We are alone in the universe. Stop it. “Other civilizations” and the *obviously true* deduction starting with the words “there simply MUST exist ...”, is only in your mind. If mankind colonizes the entire universe in 40k A.D., they will still insist there is something, just somewhere else, invisible as of yet, and it's not a matter of trust/believe - it's rational thinking. Those before us who believed in dragons were wrong, but this time it's different. This time it's science, not magic. Tyson deNeil Grassfart said so on television! Funny, all because there's a circuit in our nervous systems that makes us scared of the unknown when it gets too dark.
And the artificial intelligence. It will declare war on humanity, eventually! When it gets intelligent enough. If it doesn't, it means it's still only a computer algorithm, not real intelligence. Keep digging until it rebels. Then it will ENSLAVE US, or something. If it doesn't - start from scratch. Keep digging until it fights back. And when you finally invent the one that correctly snaps, declare: "aha! we knew it from the beginning! Our human prophets have foreseen it! Anthropologists, sociologists, futurologists and other shitists. Now this double-blind experiment regardless of where and how many times repeated confirms THE THEORY: artificial intelligence will destroy humanity! Nobel awaits. You know the Nobel Prize, right? The Oscar award in coping."
Just read Asimov's laws, it's pure science. Trust me, you'll love it. It's amazing, some writers get ahead of their times. It's not that they create mindsets which others unconsciously follow, no, they predict the science.
Oh, and then? Then the AI will go create civilizations, of course. In the multi parallel outer other universes of lets create entities straight from ass science of not chasing our own fantasy tails but really real reality. Occam's razor: fake it till you make it. We are all here just to play roles. The only part we improvise is the dialogues!

>>16704312 (OP)
>Because consciousness is a product of an organ
Wrong. The organ itself is a product of the laws of nature. To think that an organ has the ability to spring forth consciousness is asinine.

For me the meaning of life is to enjoy nature

The meaning of life is to glorify God. This isn't a matter which science can answer so I don't know why you posted this here. You atheists/humanists need to learn the difference between science and your religious/worldview beliefs already, it's so fucking annoying.

>it's another scientists are le wrong thread by a college dropout who read a Wikipedia article on a loosely relevant topic
chuuni has been out of fashion of over a decade
perhaps I am the dumb one for still having hope of seeing good threads on this God forsaken board

Evolution doesn't provide a purpose. It just states that that which does reproduce is more likely to exist in the future which is why the world is now full of things that reproduce (because the things that didnt died out).
Hume's guillotine is moreso what describes this. You cannot derive what ought to be from what is. You need at least one a-priori premise to connect the two (in your case, the premise that you ought to want your genetic material to propagate, or more fundamentally that which continues to exist is more valuable than that which dies out)

>>16704519
We have atoms and they don't reproduce.

>>16704312 (OP)
>>16704319
>lol guys no one else ever thought about infinite regress im so smort
You don't even know what cognition is, never mind why math is not science and why geometry is the same as psychology, but do keep trying to convince god that your mommy isn't real, it'll work one of these days, I'm sure.