Does Nature have a preference for life to exist?

[ding]

That's the thing though, they all did. It is hardwired into life.

So even if you studied the life forms that died out, you would have still seen these traits. So saying that that is what you would expect to see from the ones that survived still doesn't explain why all of them had the desire to survive and procreate.

Actually, there could be all sorts of life forms that did not survive and procreate. We wouldn't know it, because if they didn't survive and procreate, there would likely be no evidence of their ever existing.

But really, it goes back to whether one assumes a purpose behind something simply because it is. Life on this planet does, in large part, fight to survive and procreate. Does that mean it was designed, or inevitable based on the laws which govern the universe, or could it be random chance? Could there be a life form in the universe that does not fight to survive, but because it developed in conditions with few natural dangers, thrived anyway?

And really, does all life on Earth fight to survive? How are you defining fighting to survive? That is a phrase I would normally associate with animal life.

Procreation and survival are hardwired fundamental properties of life required for itelligence to arise.

So no, there couldn't be that somewhere in the universe as matter and living things are fundamentally the same universally.

Matter has complexified from day one. The continual march has led to the creation of intelligence/consciousness. You can't keep intelligence from emerging from matter because the laws of the universe are such that it will produce it given enough time and the right conditions. Intelligence and consciousness are properties of matter and energy. They are literally the pinnacle of creation.

That just jumped quickly into assumption and opinion.

How so? Can you name anything more complex or evolutionary advanced than consciousness and intelligence?

Consciousness and intelligence are realized potentiallities. If you were wondering what matter and energy would grow up to be look no further.

How so? The laws of the universe inevitably leading to intelligence is assumption. That intelligence and consciousness are the pinnacle of creation is opinion.

The laws of nature and natural processes are one in the same and shows that intelligence is what matter complexifies to given enough time and the right conditions. It is the natural outcome of the complex adaptive system which we call space time and energy and matter.

 

[ding]

If life wasn't designed by an intelligence, it seems likely that that life which fought to survive and procreate is the life which survived and procreated.

That's the thing though, they all did. It is hardwired into life.

So even if you studied the life forms that died out, you would have still seen these traits. So saying that that is what you would expect to see from the ones that survived still doesn't explain why all of them had the desire to survive and procreate.

Actually, there could be all sorts of life forms that did not survive and procreate. We wouldn't know it, because if they didn't survive and procreate, there would likely be no evidence of their ever existing.

But really, it goes back to whether one assumes a purpose behind something simply because it is. Life on this planet does, in large part, fight to survive and procreate. Does that mean it was designed, or inevitable based on the laws which govern the universe, or could it be random chance? Could there be a life form in the universe that does not fight to survive, but because it developed in conditions with few natural dangers, thrived anyway?

And really, does all life on Earth fight to survive? How are you defining fighting to survive? That is a phrase I would normally associate with animal life.

Procreation and survival are hardwired fundamental properties of life required for itelligence to arise.

So no, there couldn't be that somewhere in the universe as matter and living things are fundamentally the same universally.

Matter has complexified from day one. The continual march has led to the creation of intelligence/consciousness. You can't keep intelligence from emerging from matter because the laws of the universe are such that it will produce it given enough time and the right conditions. Intelligence and consciousness are properties of matter and energy. They are literally the pinnacle of creation.

However...the universe only produced intelligence once. In fact it has produced life only once. Why would that be?

Maybe it did and maybe it didn't. 14 billion years is a very long time.

 

[ding]

The will to survive for one. Nature has programmed into us the will to survive. Why?

Thats an easy one. A tendency to replicate is what fuels evolution. And in higher animals a will to survive will count as a tendency to replicate. When you ask that question its like asking why water is wet. Evolution selects for replication and it can be no other way,

Why would nature care if we replicated?

 

[Montrovant]

Actually, there could be all sorts of life forms that did not survive and procreate. We wouldn't know it, because if they didn't survive and procreate, there would likely be no evidence of their ever existing.

But really, it goes back to whether one assumes a purpose behind something simply because it is. Life on this planet does, in large part, fight to survive and procreate. Does that mean it was designed, or inevitable based on the laws which govern the universe, or could it be random chance? Could there be a life form in the universe that does not fight to survive, but because it developed in conditions with few natural dangers, thrived anyway?

And really, does all life on Earth fight to survive? How are you defining fighting to survive? That is a phrase I would normally associate with animal life.

Procreation and survival are hardwired fundamental properties of life required for itelligence to arise.

So no, there couldn't be that somewhere in the universe as matter and living things are fundamentally the same universally.

Matter has complexified from day one. The continual march has led to the creation of intelligence/consciousness. You can't keep intelligence from emerging from matter because the laws of the universe are such that it will produce it given enough time and the right conditions. Intelligence and consciousness are properties of matter and energy. They are literally the pinnacle of creation.

That just jumped quickly into assumption and opinion.

How so? Can you name anything more complex or evolutionary advanced than consciousness and intelligence?

Consciousness and intelligence are realized potentiallities. If you were wondering what matter and energy would grow up to be look no further.

How so? The laws of the universe inevitably leading to intelligence is assumption. That intelligence and consciousness are the pinnacle of creation is opinion.

The laws of nature and natural processes are one in the same and shows that intelligence is what matter complexifies to given enough time and the right conditions. It is the natural outcome of the complex adaptive system which we call space time and energy and matter.

Well, sure, given "the right conditions." That's easy enough to say when life clearly already exists. What we don't know is exactly what those conditions need to be and if those conditions have existed anywhere else in the universe. The fact that we have not seen any evidence of life elsewhere yet would seem to indicate that nature does not have a preference for life. In fact, based on humanity's observations to date, a much more reasonable argument would be that the laws of nature, the physical makeup of the universe, is mostly hostile to life.

It could be that our universe is unusual for having life. Perhaps there are/have been many universes which formed in much the same way, with the same basic rules governing them, yet ours is the only one with life. Again, it's all speculation.

What is known is that life exists on Earth. That's it. Extrapolating from that that the physical laws of the universe make life an inevitability, or further saying that nature has a preference for life, seems like a real stretch.

 

[DOTR]

Why would nature care if we replicated?

It eliminates non replicators.

 

[Montrovant]

The will to survive for one. Nature has programmed into us the will to survive. Why?

Thats an easy one. A tendency to replicate is what fuels evolution. And in higher animals a will to survive will count as a tendency to replicate. When you ask that question its like asking why water is wet. Evolution selects for replication and it can be no other way,

Why would nature care if we replicated?

Who says nature is capable of caring about anything? That would require nature to be an intelligence.

 

[DOTR]

Maybe it did and maybe it didn't. 14 billion years is a very long time.

In that case.."where is everybody"?

Fermi paradox - Wikipedia

 

[ding]

Why would nature care if we replicated?

It eliminates non replicators.

So what?

 

[ding]

Maybe it did and maybe it didn't. 14 billion years is a very long time.

In that case.."where is everybody"?

Fermi paradox - Wikipedia

It isn't really practical to expect to know through contact.

 

[ding]

The will to survive for one. Nature has programmed into us the will to survive. Why?

Thats an easy one. A tendency to replicate is what fuels evolution. And in higher animals a will to survive will count as a tendency to replicate. When you ask that question its like asking why water is wet. Evolution selects for replication and it can be no other way,

Why would nature care if we replicated?

Who says nature is capable of caring about anything? That would require nature to be an intelligence.

It's a figure of speech. How about preference instead? Nature has preferentially selected life to survive and replicate. So much so that it is fundamental to life. We might as well say that living things don't want to die. Living things want to remain living. Why?

 

[ding]

If we are to believe that life came from dust so to speak, then we must recognize the rich tapestry life has created and the ever increasing tendency for it to produce sentience.

 

[BreezeWood]

Actually, there could be all sorts of life forms that did not survive and procreate. We wouldn't know it, because if they didn't survive and procreate, there would likely be no evidence of their ever existing.

But really, it goes back to whether one assumes a purpose behind something simply because it is. Life on this planet does, in large part, fight to survive and procreate. Does that mean it was designed, or inevitable based on the laws which govern the universe, or could it be random chance? Could there be a life form in the universe that does not fight to survive, but because it developed in conditions with few natural dangers, thrived anyway?

And really, does all life on Earth fight to survive? How are you defining fighting to survive? That is a phrase I would normally associate with animal life.

Procreation and survival are hardwired fundamental properties of life required for itelligence to arise.

So no, there couldn't be that somewhere in the universe as matter and living things are fundamentally the same universally.

Matter has complexified from day one. The continual march has led to the creation of intelligence/consciousness. You can't keep intelligence from emerging from matter because the laws of the universe are such that it will produce it given enough time and the right conditions. Intelligence and consciousness are properties of matter and energy. They are literally the pinnacle of creation.

That just jumped quickly into assumption and opinion.

How so? Can you name anything more complex or evolutionary advanced than consciousness and intelligence?

Consciousness and intelligence are realized potentiallities. If you were wondering what matter and energy would grow up to be look no further.

How so? The laws of the universe inevitably leading to intelligence is assumption. That intelligence and consciousness are the pinnacle of creation is opinion.

The laws of nature and natural processes are one in the same and shows that intelligence is what matter complexifies to given enough time and the right conditions. It is the natural outcome of the complex adaptive system which we call space time and energy and matter.

.

The laws of nature and natural processes are one in the same and shows that intelligence is what matter complexifies to given enough time and the right conditions.

- and shows that intelligence is what matter complexifies ...

that really makes no sense, it is matter that is altered during evolution and done so by the metaphysical forces being conveyed through an independent vehicle, spirit that transmits and stores the information in the formation of its particular physiology from one generation to the next - the replication becoming its own self motivation for continued improvement. self sustaining and alive.

 

[DOTR]

It isn't really practical to expect to know through contact.

You say that like it makes sense.

 

[DOTR]

Why would nature care if we replicated?

It eliminates non replicators.

So what?

Ding: Why does water run downhill
Logical answer: Gravity pulls it
Ding: But why does nature prefer water to run downhill?
Logical answer: It doesn't. its just the way gravity works
Ding: So what?

 

[DOTR]

Ding: Why does water run downhill
Logical answer: Gravity pulls it
Ding: But why does nature prefer water to run downhill?
Logical answer: It doesn't. its just the way gravity works
Ding: So what?

Random Liberal horning in: Not all water runs downhill. Stop being gravity-centric.

 

[ding]

It isn't really practical to expect to know through contact.

You say that like it makes sense.

The distances are too great. I don't believe there is a free lunch out there.

 

[ding]

Ding: Why does water run downhill
Logical answer: Gravity pulls it
Ding: But why does nature prefer water to run downhill?
Logical answer: It doesn't. its just the way gravity works
Ding: So what?

Random Liberal horning in: Not all water runs downhill. Stop being gravity-centric.

My point is a very simple one. If there is a logical God, a personal God, one who is no thing, one who connects but is not part of, then there would be a way to know him from what he has created. So the steps that had to happen for intelligence to exist did happen, not because of random luck but because it was programmed into the very fabric of existence itself.

You don't know what something is by how it starts out. You can only know what it is by how it turns out. The universe is an intelligence creating machine. The cosmology and physics of it is poetry. To understand what the science tells us and to understand what the worlds oldest recorded wisdom tells us is mind blowing.

 

[Montrovant]

Ding: Why does water run downhill
Logical answer: Gravity pulls it
Ding: But why does nature prefer water to run downhill?
Logical answer: It doesn't. its just the way gravity works
Ding: So what?

Random Liberal horning in: Not all water runs downhill. Stop being gravity-centric.

Now that was a good one.

 

[Montrovant]

Ding: Why does water run downhill
Logical answer: Gravity pulls it
Ding: But why does nature prefer water to run downhill?
Logical answer: It doesn't. its just the way gravity works
Ding: So what?

Random Liberal horning in: Not all water runs downhill. Stop being gravity-centric.

My point is a very simple one. If there is a logical God, a personal God, one who is no thing, one who connects but is not part of, then there would be a way to know him from what he has created. So the steps that had to happen for intelligence to exist did happen, not because of random luck but because it was programmed into the very fabric of existence itself.

You don't know what something is by how it starts out. You can only know what it is by how it turns out. The universe is an intelligence creating machine. The cosmology and physics of it is poetry. To understand what the science tells us and to understand what the worlds oldest recorded wisdom tells us is mind blowing.

If the universe is an intelligence creating machine than, based on what humanity has observed so far, it's a damned inefficient machine.

 

[ding]

Ding: Why does water run downhill
Logical answer: Gravity pulls it
Ding: But why does nature prefer water to run downhill?
Logical answer: It doesn't. its just the way gravity works
Ding: So what?

Random Liberal horning in: Not all water runs downhill. Stop being gravity-centric.

Now that was a good one.

I get that you believe these are all random events, but clearly nature was building intelligence. In fact, I bet if we go down the list of requirements for intelligence to emerge you would see how much more sense it makes.