It seems to me that what we are discussing is the relationship between society and philosophy. You identify two examples (corrupt societies and religion) where the society pressures, limits philosophy.

I would say that what underlies your concerns is conserving freedom of thought.

I agree that corrupt societies and religions limit thought, and more specifically they limit communication. However, isn't this true of all societies and of all schools of thought?

In this generalized sense, we must acknowledge the creative power of castration. By this I mean: societal thought limits are the shared limits of culture. But these elements can be taken constructively and creatively, and what are shared limitations are also shared platforms upon which we create new thought.

Perhaps we could say that in corrupt societies, castration is overdone.

I very much like your idea that "those who aren't afraid of thinking, philosophize". It would seem to me that the courage one must have is the courage to overcome one's castrations; to question that which is forbidden.

Meaning is something which only makes sense as a property of something that is communication. For instance, a hunk of metal has no meaning. But if we shape this hunk of metal, we can give meaning to it: it becomes sculpture.

Humankind, understood as the set of all humans who lived and will live, has no meaning. The essence of it - if there is such a thing - would be the set of biological mechanisms which have lived. Again, they have no meaning, except as being an object of the biological science.

That being said, we can interpret non-meaningful things as having meaning. It is the power of imagination. We can say that clouds have shapes of animals. In the same vein, we can consider human life (or life in general) as a narrative, and then attribute meaning to its elements within the broader narrative.

What is the story of life? It came about, it will end.

Therefore, we must search for the meaning of life in its finitude: we die, the Sun will swallow the Earth, the Big Crunch will end it all.

When we search for the meaning of life, we impose something which comes from consciousness (meaning) unto something which is temporary existence. We humans, the universe knowing itself, believe in something greater than ourselves: meaning to our brief existence.

Personally, as an atheist, I find that this line of reasoning reeks of spiritualism. And therefore I content myself in attributing no meaning to life, although as an anthropological insight, it seems to me that those who see meaning in life are affirming some sort of spiritual reality.