Abstract

This essay examines the paradoxical human impulse to control meaning by scripting permanence into finite existence, a compulsion that manifests in religious, political, and personal forms. Drawing from Jeff Noonan’s account of “tarrying with meaninglessness,” it argues that the attempt to secure significance through purpose (whether divine destiny, national myth, or personal legacy) ultimately negates the fragile sources of value in lived experience. By distinguishing between meaning (the contingent significance of finite practices) and purpose (a teleological imposition oriented toward eternity) the essay clarifies how conflating the two leads to what Noonan calls a “superabundance of meaning,” wherein finite life is subordinated to transcendent narratives. Engaging Camus, Dostoyevsky, Charles Taylor, and George Grant, the analysis situates this pathology within both existential and historical contexts, showing how modernity’s will to mastery intensifies the compulsion to control meaning. Against this, the essay advances a materialist ethic of finite affirmation: by tarrying with meaninglessness, one recognizes mortality as the condition of valuation and grounds ethical life in shared vulnerability, care, and presence. Contemporary conflicts and nationalist movements illustrate the dangers of purpose-driven control, where finite lives are sacrificed for imagined permanence. By contrast, tarrying affirms finitude as the only ground for meaning and solidarity.