Two things, really:
a. can somebody cancel Armstrong;
b. do you really go out with the camera telling yourself you are going to create
At best, it might be limiting your chances, and at worst it sounds a damn pretentious approach to photography to me.
Relax, take the thing as it happens and see what surprises mamma nature can throw your way; much in life comes to you when you least expect it and that's the basis for an old Indian proverb (Asian) which says: the secret of success is to be ready when your opportunity comes. Simple, but very true.
Ciao - Rob C
Whether you have 'something meaningful' in mind or not is your own choice. I see nothing wrong with going photographing looking specifically for compositions that support a particular viewpoint or story, that convey a certain idea or meaning that you have. In that case, your success hinges both on finding and executing such compositions and on whether the viewpoint is "strong" enough to succeed (as art or by influencing opinion or whatever). If the viewpoint is strong, it can give the pictures that extra punch that makes them successfull, but if it is weak it may do no more than make otherwise good pictures look pretentious.
If you go photographing with no conscious viewpoint, your pictures will have to stand on their own to a larger degree, for better or for worse. I would venture that even if you haven't stated it consciously, you probably do have something you want to say, be it only (and very validly) "this place is beautiful". Your viewpoint, conscious or not, is what determines how you compose your photos, whether you frame a flower or a discarded bottle. You can choose to state your viewpoint explicitly, which means your photos will be seen with the viewpoint in mind and judged accordingly, or you can let the viewers derive what they want from your pictures.
I guess there's a certain risk associated with making the viewpoint explicit: It could be one that you just find you can't make photos to support, or it can be a viewpoint that nobody cares about. (I'm assuming there's some kind of coimmercial intent for the photography, such as selling fine art prints.)
Photojournalism is a genre where you always have a viewpoint, namely that of illustrating a news story. For arts, it's up to the artist - Yann Arthus-Bertrand for instance has an explicit environmental message and has success with it, I'm pretty sure he goes out looking for 'something meaningful' rather than just taking it as it happens.
That's a long ramble just to say: Both approaches are valid.