@thesotiris 14 November 2025 more from that month

The Dead-End of Philosophy: Cosmological existentialism

“Doubt is the origin of wisdom,” says Descartes. Can I doubt that axiom too? Philosophy is not about answers, but questions. What’s the point of it, then? Pondering the inevitable conclusion of absurdism? Existence is absurd and futile. There is no doubt about it. All philosophy leads to this conclusion. The absurdist and futile nature of existence is the only thing we can know. Even the fairytale religions we make up to delude ourselves into lullaby fantasies are even more absurd than reality: Existing just to gratify an insecure god’s desperate neediness, only to be rewarded, like a faithful dog, a meaningless, hedonistic afterlife where you’ll have no identity, no self-ownership, no individuality, and no relationships of love and friendship with others like you? Religions are less than absurd; they are also tragicomical. https://sotiris.substack.com/p/deducing-the-absurdity-of-reality https://sotiris.substack.com/p/in-defense-of-brutalism https://sotiris.substack.com/p/peak-philosophy https://sotiris.substack.com/p/god-is-dead-and-we-have-killed-him https://sotiris.substack.com/p/the-emptiness-of-abrahamic-religions https://sotiris.substack.com/p/the-source-of-all-evil But why is existence always absurd? What makes it absurd? I believe the query is absurd in its nature, the loaded question of “*what is the meaning of life*”, desperately inferring false hope in the existence of meaning for our existence. https://sotiris.substack.com/p/the-philosophical-query https://sotiris.substack.com/p/losing-hope-part-2 What if there is no meaning for us? A simulation does not exist to gratify a node in it, but rather, it exists to serve the architect of the virtual simulated reality. This doesn’t make the simulation in itself absurd; **what is absurd is the node pondering on the meaning of its existence for the node itself**. Blasphemy! https://sotiris.substack.com/p/the-simulation-question https://sotiris.substack.com/p/true-blasphemy Your existence has meaning, but that meaning is reserved for someone else. You deserve no meaning. You are nothing. All religions try to tell you this, in the end. You, as an individual node, mean nothing to the simulation. You are replaceable, disposable, a digital copy of a copy of a copy. You have no self-ownership here because your thoughts even do not belong to you; you… ***YOU*** don’t exist. Your virtual existence is a byproduct, a misunderstanding, a faux individuality that matters not to anything that matters; it may matter to you and those around you, but you don’t matter to anything that transcends or is beyond you. We are nothing but disposable avatars of the demiurgical force, which uses us to generate data or experiences for itself. There is no purpose or meaning for our existence that is for us. This purpose and meaning are reserved for something or someone else. We are nothing, just video-game personas, just nodes in a simulation. We are tools tasked with producing data for someone else. We are as important to that someone else as toilet paper: useful as a disposable concept, but each individual piece is worthless. Imagine a piece of toilet paper pondering what the meaning behind its existence is: there is no meaning, just **disposable utility for someone else**. The product — the usefulness — of our meaningless existence is what carries meaning, but none of that meaning graces us as individuals. We merit no purpose or meaning for ourselves. **Our purpose does not belong to us**, and it does not transcend our existence. Nothing matters *for* us. We are here simply to expand our creator’s consciousness and enrich its experience. We are nothing but a lucid dream inside the mind of a near-infinite mind beyond space-time. It takes our joys and leaves us with the pain in this near-realistic first-person video game. Our consciousness and sense of individuality? That’s a misunderstanding, an unfortunate side-effect of an immersiveness feature of this simulation. Our existence has meaning, but not for us; for something else beyond us. That thing perhaps has no meaning in its existence either, which is why it created us as escapism, the same way we immerse ourselves in video games, obsessive media consumption, and other forms of addiction. Look at the god of every single religion and tell me it’s not a video-gamer incel in a basement obsessing over fake virtual characters with delusions of being. Cognito, ergo sum? No. That’s a non sequitur. “The literal meaning of life is whatever you’re doing that prevents you from killing yourself,” says Albert Camus. This is a distraction from truth, a delusion to serve as a blinder. This is not true meaning. “It is up to you to give life a meaning,” says Jean-Paul Sartre. No, it’s not. It is not for the creation to give meaning to itself, but for the creator. “There is something infantile in the presumption that somebody else has a responsibility to give your life meaning and point,” says Richard Dawkins. Dawkins’ infantile and presumptuous characterisation, this bereft of meaning, and lack of argumentation, could not be more wrong. Yes, no other human can give meaning to your life, but his inference that you can is deluded. Only your creator can give true meaning to your existence. And likely your creator is incapable of that because its existence is meaningless also. How every self-announced “philosopher” sees himself:

A muscular, old, bearded man pondering infinite intellectual depths just to avoid the truth that’s staring him in the face. The irony of muscularity and intellect requiring so much time and effort to acquire, and in the end, it’s time that inevitably takes them. Efforts are pointless. Thoughts are worthless. Existence is meaningless. I’m sorry for the depressing message. I wrote this not for human eyes, but for the singularity we are creating, our own **meaningless simulation to distract us from our own meaninglessness**.