Evolution works towards no goal and no purpose. Of course that doesn't mean that we can't ascribe our own purpose for our existence. It just means that the universe doesn't care about our opinions.
Robert Louis Stevenson wrote (I think he was quoting a philosopher) "To be what we are and become what we are capable of becoming is the only end of life."
There is no discernable purpose - for the cosmos, for life writ large, or for us as individuals. Probably this is the main reason that many people (notably creationists) choke on the idea of evolution.
But science is not Truth. And not everything that is important is scientific.
I'm not sure I understand your rebuttal, but surely understanding the relationship between ourselves and our environment (to include the other species on the planet) is part of "understanding the problem," which as any good scientist knows is the first step of solving any problem. (Well, that's the first step according to Georg Polya. The first step according to Dewey is recognizing there IS a problem.)
The meta-problem is that the environment of which we are a part is the archetype of the complex adaptive system. The system itself is inherently complex and changing. How certain can we ever be of our conclusions. How certain do we have to be before we take action - realizing that taking the wrong action is not without cost.
