can you explain what we "know" now that changes the question?
Maybe it actually is and this is some crazy, meaningless meat hallucination. I don’t have a way to confirm that and it doesn’t seem to be the case, so the questions Camus raises still seem pertinent.
Apologies if I’m misunderstanding where you’re coming from, I have the sense that I might not be reading you correctly.
Although I’m happy to be wrong.
It seems only possible to do so properly with a tremendous amount of input and support from other people. Certainly we can navigate the information we encounter and measure and consider what we are doing, but fundamentally none of it is possible without other people. To me, that detail is absolutely crucial.