The main goal of my writing is the sharing of the human condition, so even though I feel like I have lots to say about life, interpretations and reactions to it, etc., to start with settings, plots, etc., seems strange. I have respect for all those elements, no doubt -- they're crucial -- but I don't see anything emerging from them. I'm wondering if anyone else out there tends to "work backwards" and any tips they might have could be shared.
I am not sure how you do this without all the common literary devices, such as a setting and plot. If you want to explore interpretations and reactions to life, then there needs to be something that triggers those reactions... a plot. Otherwise it is just a monologue, or a sketch show, in which a character prattles tediously on about their determinations on the meaning of life. It will be like listening to a teenager who has just discovered drugs, and believe they are being achingly profound, whilst everyone around them cringes.
No, no, the reason I admire writers of fiction is because I walk away with something soul-enriching, not like social science or philosophy. I'm not talking about a vehicle for philosophical ramblings. I question whether great writers knew what the average person would experience, reading, as it pertains to life. It seems like that's where I have to start from.