An Assessment of Existence.

[BlackBear94]

Hello fellow thinkers,
If you have read some of my other points and ideas, I see now how they might not have made sense, I believe this is because these ideas have formed over a better part of a year, undergoing logical ridicule and brainstorming processes. ( and yes i do question all of my ideas and beliefs constantly). one cannot simply spew out a number on a test without showing one's work.

So to paint you a better picture of where the hell my mind wonders off too. I'll try to adequately describe my working definition of the universe.

I have noticed that when one brings up a notion of their understanding of the world most critics tend to look towards topics like staving children in Africa, "try telling the starving kids that this world is perfect" and the like. But when i talk about existence i speak of the human race only in the structural sense, any socio-economic concepts have no critical validity since this thread will observe the relationship between humans and the universe not interpersonal interactions.

Any way I try to see the universe, i always come to the same conclusion. It is beautiful, and there is no way in which it could be any better.

Here's a list of things that go through my mind in science class:

-This universe is impossible.

-Not only does this universe have perfect harmonies at both extremes (electrons zooming around protons, and billions of stars grouping together to form galaxies.) but this cold dark universe has a race of intelligent people to acknowledge its vast endlessness.

-the very first spark of life had an inexplicable sense of self preservation, system for consuming nutrients, and process for replication. all this quite literally came out of nowhere.

-even though that cell had no consciousness, it's structure was "programmed to survive"

-it's like our bodies are our owners/parents, yes it sounds crazy but think about it, there's a reward center of your brain that makes you feel good whenever you eat, drink, rest, warm up in the winter, or cool down in the summer. why would our bodies need to motivate us (our consciousness) to survive? it's like giving a dog a treat when he rolls over.

-everything we need to do to survive is on auto pilot, imagine how hard it would be to live if you had to consciously beat your heart, digest your food, inhale and exhale, regulate your body temperature, and mend your body when you sleep.

-Existing is the easiest thing in the world to do. your body does everything for you (in terms of life support) the water of life falls right on us from the sky, we have a perfect oxygen recycling system with plants. they breathe what we exhale and we breathe what they exhale.

-Doubt is good. we are built to doubt, it's as important as our survival instinct. I don't care if you believe in god or not, that fact is no one knows. so no matter how much you believe in god a little part of you will always wonder what if he doesn't exist? the same goes for athiests, no matter how much you believe there is no god, it's human nature to wonder what if? (this train of thought got away from me, I should recall my point shortly)
P.S. I'm tired now, i didn't realize how long this was going to be. if you have any questions, comments, corrections, or arguments, Shoot Away!

 

[punkdbass]

Interesting post, I enjoyed reading it.

So correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like your hinting towards the idea that since everything in the universe seems to have fallen into place perfectly for a life sustaining planet, that it was the result of intelligent design by God?

I know a lot of theists try to use this argument to prove the existence of God, but I'm not really sure what I think about the idea. The main point of such an argument is that the chances/odds getting all of the pieces of the universe to align correctly in order to create an environment for sustainable life is astronomically small.. so it must have been God's will and not sheer coincidence.

A typical counterargument would be something like this: Get a salt shaker and a pan. Pour a few cups of salt into the pan, if you get a magnifying glass or zoom in far enough, you will notice each individual salt crystal will have landed a specific way.. and if you calculated the odds of having the billions of salt crystals in the pan land the exact way they did, they too would be astronomically small.. but the fact of the matter is the salt crystals DID in fact land the way they did, despite the astronomically small odds. In other words, it DID and can happen despite the odds. So to put this idea in practical terms for the universe, considering how ridiculously large the universe is, even if the odds for a life sustaining planet are infinitely small, it doesnt mean it cant happen. And if you consider the idea that scientists believe their are billions of galaxies and possibly multiple unverses, one might just conclude that having a life sustaining planet is a lot more probable than you might think.

For example, lets say the odds of a life sustaining planet are 1 in a billion. Now lets say there are 10 billion galaxies out there that exist(just imagine how many planets and stars thered be..) It be like rolling a dice hundreds of billions of times.. eventually your bound to get a star/planet with life.

So although I believe in God, the argument your describing wouldnt persuade me too much unfortunately, definitely interesting to talk about though

Oh and one last thing, although I think the salt in a pan example is a very good counterargument, obviously no matter how many times you poor salt into a pan your not going to create life lol. So I must admit that the conditions for creating life must be super complicated and the odds must be infinity small.. its just that I wouldnt consider it to be proof of God. Given the size of our universe, it might not be as unlikely as we think(as I demonstrated), and definitely isn't impossible.. afterall, we do exist

 

[BlackBear94]

So correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like your hinting towards the idea that since everything in the universe seems to have fallen into place perfectly for a life sustaining planet, that it was the result of intelligent design by God?

My conclusion is simply this. There must be some outside force causing things to be/exist. Without some sort of unerring force existing could just have easily been an unbearable hassle and the universe could have remained silent.

 

[Scott1]

Interesting read -- bit over my head, but I appreciate your post.

Have some frubals!

 

[PolyHedral]

My conclusion is simply this. There must be some outside force causing things to be/exist. Without some sort of unerring force existing could just have easily been an unbearable hassle and the universe could have remained silent.

But then, why does the force exist?

 

[BlackBear94]

I know a lot of theists try to use this argument to prove the existence of God, but I'm not really sure what I think about the idea. The main point of such an argument is that the chances/odds getting all of the pieces of the universe to align correctly in order to create an environment for sustainable life is astronomically small.. so it must have been God's will and not sheer coincidence.

A typical counterargument would be something like this: Get a salt shaker and a pan. Pour a few cups of salt into the pan, if you get a magnifying glass or zoom in far enough, you will notice each individual salt crystal will have landed a specific way.. and if you calculated the odds of having the billions of salt crystals in the pan land the exact way they did, they too would be astronomically small.. but the fact of the matter is the salt crystals DID in fact land the way they did, despite the astronomically small odds. In other words, it DID and can happen despite the odds. So to put this idea in practical terms for the universe, considering how ridiculously large the universe is, even if the odds for a life sustaining planet are infinitely small, it doesnt mean it cant happen. And if you consider the idea that scientists believe their are billions of galaxies and possibly multiple unverses, one might just conclude that having a life sustaining planet is a lot more probable than you might think.

For example, lets say the odds of a life sustaining planet are 1 in a billion. Now lets say there are 10 billion galaxies out there that exist(just imagine how many planets and stars thered be..) It be like rolling a dice hundreds of billions of times.. eventually your bound to get a star/planet with life.

The statistics aren't my point i agree that even if the chances are 1^-25 % it is inevitable to occur with there being a big enough number of planets. my point lies not with the chances of winning the lottery. it's with the set up of this lottery.

At the risk of straying too far into the abstract. What are the chances that we were born into this existence, which is so perfect, not because of it's self sustaining systems and survival instincts and it's awesome nachos, but because the rules by which it is bound permit said systems and instincts and awesome nachos.

basically the universe is perfect because It's rules permit such advancements.

where would life stand if there was no way for the suns rays to be converted into food?
where would life stand if there was no gravity binding it to the one place where it can survive?
where would life stand if there was no friction stopping us from unwanted perpetual motion?
Where would life stand if there was no such thing as magnetism creating the earths magnetosphere which protects the planet from solar winds?

 

[Looncall]

My conclusion is simply this. There must be some outside force causing things to be/exist. Without some sort of unerring force existing could just have easily been an unbearable hassle and the universe could have remained silent.

You are ignoring the fact that the universe has properties, which we describe using physics, chemistry etc. Those properties govern what happens. It is not random and it is not nearly as complicated as you seem to think.

Unless you have some specific evidence for this force you mention, including it is just an elaborate way of giving up before making the effort to understand.

 

[punkdbass]

My conclusion is simply this. There must be some outside force causing things to be/exist. Without some sort of unerring force existing could just have easily been an unbearable hassle and the universe could have remained silent.

Yeah, I thought you were implying that.

What's a bigger puzzle to me, is why do laws exist in this universe(like gravity and other laws of physics)? If the laws of physics are essentially responsible for a life sustaining planet(and all other things in the universe for that matter), then why do these laws exist? What caused their existence?

As human's we like to ask "why?" a lot, we want to understand the reasons and meaning behind things.. but maybe there doesn't have to be "why," maybe the laws just exist because they do, and don't need a reason. I dont know what I think.. but these topics interest me a lot

The statistics aren't my point i agree that even if the chances are 1^-25 % it is inevitable to occur with there being a big enough number of planets. my point lies not with the chances of winning the lottery. it's with the set up of this lottery.

At the risk of straying too far into the abstract. What are the chances that we were born into this existence, which is so perfect, not because of it's self sustaining systems and survival instincts and it's awesome nachos, but because the rules by which it is bound permit said systems and instincts and awesome nachos.

basically the universe is perfect because It's rules permit such advancements.

where would life stand if there was no way for the suns rays to be converted into food?
where would life stand if there was no gravity binding it to the one place where it can survive?
where would life stand if there was no friction stopping us from unwanted perpetual motion?
Where would life stand if there was no such thing as magnetism creating the earths magnetosphere which protects the planet from solar winds?

Oh okay gotcha. So your more so saying you think God is responsible simply because of the beauty of the universe and how "perfectly" constructed it seems to be, especially for life -- and your less concerned with the odds of such things as you said.

I remember watching a debate between a famous athiest and a famous christian about the existance of God. The Christian used your argument for God's existance, and the athiest brilliantly and cleverly argued that the universe really isn't that perfect.. in fact there are a lot of imperfections about it, if you think about it, which he would then use examples to conclude that the universe surly couldnt be the result of intelligent design, that the designer couldn't have been too "intelligent." I can't remember any examples the athiest gave, but I'm just showing that there are good counterarguments out there. I think he said something about how there are thousands of galaxies(or was it universes?) that collide with each other and get destroyed, in other words there is a heck of a lot of gigantic pointless stuff out there in the universe.

Whether or not the universe seems perfect or perfect for life is definitely a subjective subject though. I understand you see perfection in the universe, or intelligent design, while other's might see it as coincidence or unintelligent design. Not sure what I think, just trying to give you and otheres stuff to think about.

 

[CarlinKnew]

The earth appears so well suited for life because life adapted to the earth. It's not a miracle that we have oxygen to breathe. We evolved the need for oxygen because it was available.

 

[BlackBear94]

The earth appears so well suited for life because life adapted to the earth. It's not a miracle that we have oxygen to breathe. We evolved the need for oxygen because it was available.

Here is another aspect of life i will never truly be able to understand. Adaptation.
What part of the organism allows it to adapt to it's surroundings? I mean i understand something gradual like Darwin's Finches. But what about something as fundamental as using oxygen for a continuous source of energy? how can you adapt to something you NEED for life? in other words if you don't have something you need for life, then how do you live long enough to reproduce adapted offspring?

 

[CarlinKnew]

Here is another aspect of life i will never truly be able to understand. Adaptation.
What part of the organism allows it to adapt to it's surroundings? I mean i understand something gradual like Darwin's Finches. But what about something as fundamental as using oxygen for a continuous source of energy? how can you adapt to something you NEED for life? in other words if you don't have something you need for life, then how do you live long enough to reproduce adapted offspring?

The way evolution works is that the thing might've done just fine without its new adaptation (oxygen-use in our example), but the mutation (to start using oxygen) whether useful or not, has a chance of being passed on to its offspring.