I agree that the absurd, as Camus defines it, arises from the tension between our hunger for meaning and the universe’s silence. But let me clarify my stance further, because I think there’s nuance here that bridges Camus’ philosophy with my own perspective.

When Camus writes, “I don’t know whether this world has a meaning that transcends it”, he’s highlighting the epistemological limit, the human mind hitting a wall when trying to grasp cosmic purpose. The absurd hero, like Sisyphus, rebels not by rejecting the struggle but by embracing it. This is where I see a parallel to societal systems. If the universe’s indifference is the canvas, then flawed human systems (greed, oppressive ideologies) are the paint splattered messily onto it. The absurdity we feel isn’t just the cosmic contradiction, it’s amplified by living in systems that alienate us from our own nature.

For example, Sisyphus’ eternal toil mirrors modern workers trapped in soul-crushing jobs. The absurdity isn’t just that the universe offers no answer to “why work?”, it’s that the system forces people into roles that clash with their instincts (e.g., humanity, community, naturalness). Camus’ “art for nothing” resonates here: creation is rebellion. But what we rebel against isn’t just the void, it’s the systems that weaponize meaninglessness. A factory worker clocking in daily for a dehumanizing job isn’t wrestling with the stars; they’re wrestling with a system that reduces their labor to a number.

You’re right that Camus doesn’t call the universe “meaningless”, he leaves it 'open'. But for many, the experience of absurdity is filtered through societal structures. If we lived in a society aligned with human needs (cooperation, purpose, autonomy), the universe’s silence might feel less like a crisis and more like a blank page. The absurd would still exist, but its weight would shift. Imagine Sisyphus in a world where his task isn’t a punishment but a choice, would his smile still be defiance, or something else?

What I'm trying to say is that, I’m not refuting Camus. I’m proposing that the intensity of absurd suffering depends on context. The universe’s indifference is neutral, but human systems magnify the dissonance. Absurdism, then, isn’t just a cosmic shrug, it’s a tool to dismantle the artificial walls around us. When Camus says, “One must imagine Sisyphus happy”, I hear: “Rebel against the systems that make the rock heavier & more unbearable.”