Absurdism

[The Omnissiunt One]

I agree a great deal with Absurdism as far as meaning and value is concerned, I firmly believe that all values that exist are the products of or are in relation to desires and there is therefore no intrinsic value in the universe, but as far as Metaethics is concerned I tend to disagree, I do believe that there are objective facts to be determined about what desires are good/bad in terms of their ability to promote or thwart other desires and we can therefore make meaningful and useful claims about moral right and wrong that are based solely on phenomenon that we are certain exists.

I don't want to turn this into a debate about meta-ethics, but I'd point out that the meaningfulness of moral claims in this case would depend on our accepting the view that promoting the fulfillment of people's desires is good, in the sense that we ought to do it, irrespective of our own wishes (a categorical imperative, as opposed to a hypothetical one, to use Kant's language). I happen to agree with desirism for the most part, but it's still only a view, and the objectivity of moral claims therefore depends on a non-objective assumption.

As for Absurdism, I find it highly appealing, although I'd question whether objective meaning is a coherent concept. Whether God exists or not makes no difference; any meaning assigned to us from an external source is still not objective, any more than if some parents had a child in order to raise him or her as a chimney sweep; this meaning would not be objective for the child.