What I read you asking here, through a lens which misses the part played by energy, is why we seem so intent on defying nature, given also your take of nature being "absurd".
In terms of energy it's all pretty clear, but it leads quickly to questioning the part played by profit, which is a pretty big part, I hope you agree.
It also leads us to realising we are actually still practicing a system of energy slavery, which is the real reason we have no choice but to participate in it. The system will remove the means by which we get even the basic energy to metabolise, since how we get that is by money, unless we are lucky enough to have readily growing food stock nearby, if we dare step out of line by trying to question it, pointing out the fact that profit is an energy lie, directly responsible for the exponential rise we are seeing in temperature, in response to now ever increasing difficulty of energy extraction, which impacts profitability.
The lies needed to keep concealing the basic energy lie of profit seem to require ever more complex mental gymnastics to try to explain human behaviour without mentioning the part played by profit. The whole exercise just seems to get more and more removed from physical reality, imho.
You claim to be not religious.
Therefore you should have no problem logically questioning profit, asking questions including whether or not it is related to energy slavery.
You should have no problem questioning where the origins of slavery might have come from, and even what parts certain religions and historic events might have been involved in creating it, or starting it.
To me the acquisition and storage of seven years of grain, followed by seven years of famine, in a world that might have never have thought of the possibilities of artificial scarcification before then, had this not been advised or warned about, by some higher, more evolved intelligence at the time, via a miraculously "Burning bush", seems highly suspect.
If you accept that the basic purpose of life is to reverse entropy, since without that, there would be no life, and then traced our own use of energy via the energy lie of profit, to find that our net activity, solely because of profit, is to increase entropy, you would see almost instantly that humans killing one another, or even consuming one another, would quickly lead to the end of the species, thus the real reason we shouldn't do either or both of those things, because humans, in a scenario of use of the only energy that can be used to decrease entropy, are all valuable, all creative, all generating infinite more ability to create, no matter what they do with the energy of creation, at whatever efficiency, as long as it is used at all for anything other than just letting it go to heat.
There you have some simple, physical logical truth, easily verifyable by maths and simuluations using physical data.
Is that not easier than trying to do all the mental acrobatics necessary to avoid pinning it down to physical reality?
Would you dare question the origins of profit and the very connected energy slavery which is physically driving up entropy at exponential rate, to now critical flashpoint?
How much physical damage will you need to see, before you start to question it physically, regardless of who or what religions might get offended?