> In one of his books he says the meaning of life is "about experiencing existence, in all its angles and glory, for the sheer and pure sake of experience itself! We don’t eat a nice meal, make love or travel to beautiful locations just to understand or make sense of something. We do these things because the experiences themselves imbue our lives with a kind of timeless meaning, independent of comprehension." -- Kastrup, Bernardo. More Than Allegory: On Religious Myth, Truth And Belief (p 203). John Hunt Publishing.

That's an interesting perspective, but, let me poke at it bit.

If you were to be able to experience all those things you describe but had no one to share them with, would they have meaning? What if you were in a simulation so that it seemed like you were doing all these things with other people, but you knew that you are in a simulation all alone? Would these things still have meaning? Would the experience be worthwhile?

I would suggest that whilst they may still be somewhat worthwhile, without other people to share those experiences with, without a public sphere within which to express your unique and distinct story to the rest of humanity, life becomes significantly less meaningful.

To build meaning, we need both the private experiences you describe and the existence of others who can bear witness to our lives and give it an existence outside of our own minds. Yes, the experiences are valuable but they become exponentially more so when they are part of the story of our lives, communicated to our equals.