We exist in a heartless world, that just so happened to have low entropy at some point due to singularity fluctuations we don't understand, and is getting back to its original state, where existence itself is a meaningless term.
Then life emerged as a quite effective way to increase entropy. And stuff evolved from there, mostly at random, but genes were pressured to keep existing, until we arrived at a human. Our main difference vs. animals is some degree of self-awareness and intelligence high enough to make a language. So we can talk about our low-level animal survival machinery in some abstract sense that each of us understands, to a degree. Sadness and happiness, love and hate are just descriptions that we made up over time to express how our basic drivers work. Even our discussion about "meaning" is tied to that ability to detach from oneself and think about grander scheme of things.
Logically, no meaning can exist in a world I just described. It's just something we ponder about, because we suffer a lot. Suffering is a signal that something is wrong with what we do, but more complex structures - societies - developed to reduce suffering only for a select few individuals at the expense of others. Those others suffered more though, so they made up a temporary plug in an idea of an afterlife. Suffer, but be rewarded later.
It resonated nicely to the pain due to loss of a close person. I believe this was also vital to survival of genes, to make people in tribes care for each other, making tribe more resilient. The bonds are conveniently formed based on some genetic similarity and shared location. With afterlife, you would never lose people, since you'll join them on the other side. Oh, but don't be a bitch and go against those who suffer less than you, or you'll be sent to a fiery saucepan and won't see them.
So, the weights were tipped by all the added suffering, driving people to think about meaning, and needed to be counterbalanced. Afterlife was a crude idea, but it worked well enough to keep majority complicit. Of course, some would think that afterlife is meaningless without afterafterlife, and so on, but they were an exception, and as long as they didn't disturb the majority, they could be allowed to exist.
Anyway, the existence of an individual is driven to keep the weights in balance, in any way possible. That's it. There's nothing more to it.
But since we can think, we can notice patterns and changes, many of us here know that our personal weights won't budge anymore, stuck in a low position until there's no "I" anymore that can perceive them. That's one step until being suicidal, that's why I'm here. But if you let go of your own ones and try to imagine what other feels, you are tipping their weights down to suffering, even if a bit. That's why they resist suicide at all costs. They hope to be dead before you do. Or that at least they don't have to think about "why", as the umbrella answer is always "lots of suffering" they don't need on their plates.
I see "Nonexistence means life is important" is just an atheist way of co-opting that coping mechanism that was traditionally religion zone. Having a need in meaning is an indicator that your scales are dangerously tipped already. You either can go on with your day to day life without one, satisfied with a non-answer, or not.
