The matter boils down to two options that are laid out before us:

1. Accept that the universe has no cause (it arose by chance)

or

2. Accept that the universe has a cause (Call this 'i]first cause[/i] God or whatever you like) — TheMadFool

Another option is that we can't really make sense of the issue. The fluffy either does or does not have a gurgle.

I suggest considering the design of experiments. How do humans currently find and understand evidence for a causal relationship? We use a treatment and control group. We look at p-values.

They're critters. They have no self to save. — Wayfarer

And this effectively describes a great deal of people. Point of fact, I would move more to save the beavers. People should save themselves.

It's am mystery. But it's something we do automatically. Perhaps it might even be the single most unique thing about us as creatures in the natural world. We are able to give meaning to anything, by engaging with objects, creating new stuff, asking questions about situations and so forth. The problem is not so much how we create meaning, the problem as I see it is why do we sometimes fall into periods in which life is meaningless?

Of course, this doesn't mean that, objectively speaking, there is meaning in the world, it's just that we create it, to whatever extent each of us can. But even someone creating a simulation of the type described, why would they bother doing such a complicated thing? Surely it would be to get some meaningful results for some experiment, or some amusement of some form or other.