Does The Universe Have a Purpose?

[AVG-JOE]

I like what Neil says.

Neil rocks. ​

An intelligent and logical argument, but pure speculation. His statement about the chances of his being correct can only be described as faith. I get why he believes what he believes, but that does not make it any less belief.

I never said it was proof. I said that I agree with his speculations and conclusions.

I'll ALWAYS be the first to say that faith is required in a decent discussion of unprovable questions like Origins.

Possibilities!​

 

[PratchettFan]

I like what Neil says.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pL5vzIMAhs

Neil rocks. ​

An intelligent and logical argument, but pure speculation. His statement about the chances of his being correct can only be described as faith. I get why he believes what he believes, but that does not make it any less belief.

I never said it was proof. I said that I agree with his speculations and conclusions.

I'll ALWAYS be the first to say that faith is required in a decent discussion of unprovable questions like Origins.

Possibilities!​

I can't argue with that.

 

[Sallow]

Actually, it's not a belief.

It's a "conclusion" based on observation which is subject to change if some event comes along to prove that conclusion wrong.

In a nutshell? That's science.

Observation of what? As Dr. Tyson points out, we have been in the universe for a very short time and restricted to a miniscule part of it. The period of time in which we have been observing much of anything beyond our own atmosphere would, on a universal clock, be counted in small percentages of a millisecond. Yet he says he is 99% certain? I think not. On a universal scale, we have observed almost nothing.

In the absence of evidence, any conclusion is belief. The only evidence presented in that video was that of our own ignorance. I certainly concede that point. But I do not follow how our ignorance is evidence of our knowledge.

We don't only have the ability to observe the present, we can also look into the past (and do so).

But I also agree, 99% certainty is quite a stretch.

99% certainty is that religion is wrong.

There is no "purpose" for the universe.

I agree with that.

 

[AVG-JOE]

I think Neil is one of the most overrated philosophers of our time.

Meh... Ratings are a matter of personal opinion.

At least he's not boring. ​

 

[PratchettFan]

Observation of what? As Dr. Tyson points out, we have been in the universe for a very short time and restricted to a miniscule part of it. The period of time in which we have been observing much of anything beyond our own atmosphere would, on a universal clock, be counted in small percentages of a millisecond. Yet he says he is 99% certain? I think not. On a universal scale, we have observed almost nothing.

In the absence of evidence, any conclusion is belief. The only evidence presented in that video was that of our own ignorance. I certainly concede that point. But I do not follow how our ignorance is evidence of our knowledge.

We don't only have the ability to observe the present, we can also look into the past (and do so).

But I also agree, 99% certainty is quite a stretch.

99% certainty is that religion is wrong.

There is no "purpose" for the universe.

I agree with that.

Understood. But it is still a belief, like any other belief.

 

[CorvusRexus]

Wow. I had been expecting to be flamed after calling God a little kid with anger issues and the universe his sandbox.
You all have legitimately surprised me.

 

[PratchettFan]

Wow. I had been expecting to be flamed after calling God a little kid with anger issues and the universe his sandbox.
You all have legitimately surprised me.

You are entitled to believe in your own version of God.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Wow. I had been expecting to be flamed after calling God a little kid with anger issues and the universe his sandbox.
You all have legitimately surprised me.

I know....you thought we read your posts....

 

[Delta4Embassy]

In all likelyhood, the human race will either wipe itself out, or be wiped out by a natural disaster before we perfect interplanetary or interstellar travel to colonize new worlds. Once we're gone is the universe's 'purpose' still extant, or did its purpose require us being here to ask the question?

 

[PratchettFan]

In all likelyhood, the human race will either wipe itself out, or be wiped out by a natural disaster before we perfect interplanetary or interstellar travel to colonize new worlds. Once we're gone is the universe's 'purpose' still extant, or did its purpose require us being here to ask the question?

I do not share your pessimism, but I think extremely arrogant to think the entire universe is here because of us. Whether we are here or not, the universe will continue on its merry way. When it finally runs down, it also won't matter whether we are here or not.

 

[dilloduck]

Observation of what? As Dr. Tyson points out, we have been in the universe for a very short time and restricted to a miniscule part of it. The period of time in which we have been observing much of anything beyond our own atmosphere would, on a universal clock, be counted in small percentages of a millisecond. Yet he says he is 99% certain? I think not. On a universal scale, we have observed almost nothing.

In the absence of evidence, any conclusion is belief. The only evidence presented in that video was that of our own ignorance. I certainly concede that point. But I do not follow how our ignorance is evidence of our knowledge.

We don't only have the ability to observe the present, we can also look into the past (and do so).

But I also agree, 99% certainty is quite a stretch.

99% certainty is that religion is wrong.

There is no "purpose" for the universe.

I agree with that.

99% certainty that science can't come up with a purpose for the universe any more than religion can.

 

[AVG-JOE]

In all likelyhood, the human race will either wipe itself out, or be wiped out by a natural disaster before we perfect interplanetary or interstellar travel to colonize new worlds. Once we're gone is the universe's 'purpose' still extant, or did its purpose require us being here to ask the question?

I hope not. Monkeys have a LOT of potential!

Just look at the variety among Monkeys!


Between the complicated way that the Americans do it, and the different ways that the Europeans do it, and the stoic way that the Chinese do it, and the traditional way that the Russians do it, and the loosely-organized way that the Southeast Asians do it, and the... and the... and the...


The kind of political and industrial variety that we see on earth today is EXACTLY what we need as the technology age dawns, ass-u-me-ing that a Sentient World is the goal.



I'm long in every market. Baring natural disaster, I'm betting that Momma's little bastards are going to reach for the Stars and make it as a Sentient World, and I'm guessing that's rare.

`​

 

[AVG-JOE]

"Hey, Hey, we're The Monkeys!!"

 

[dilloduck]

People say we're monkeyin around

 

[PratchettFan]

People say we're monkeyin around

But we're too busy singin'
To put anybody down

 

[Delta4Embassy]

In all likelyhood, the human race will either wipe itself out, or be wiped out by a natural disaster before we perfect interplanetary or interstellar travel to colonize new worlds. Once we're gone is the universe's 'purpose' still extant, or did its purpose require us being here to ask the question?

I do not share your pessimism, but I think extremely arrogant to think the entire universe is here because of us. Whether we are here or not, the universe will continue on its merry way. When it finally runs down, it also won't matter whether we are here or not.

Isn't pessimism but an acknowledgement of reality and how past disasters have wiped out species like the dinosaurs, supervolcanic eruptions, etc. One such super volcano eruption reduced the human population down to (geneticists say) maybe as few as 10,000 people planet-wide. And that was 70k years ago (Toba eruption et al.) And historically, Yellowstone is "overdo" for a super eruption. And any second of every day a big rock or snowball could hit the planet and take us all out. And there isn't a darned thing we could do about it.

Nothing lasts forever. Not people, not animals, no planets, or the stars themselves. Everything that is, eventually isn't. This is just the way it is and will continue to be. Pessimism is like GIS saying it's imminent. I just say it's inevitable.

 

[dblack]

People say we're monkeyin around

But we're too busy singin'
To put anybody down

Nonsense. Putting people down is trivial. You can do it even when you're quite busy. They're just being lazy.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Everything we're doing, but for a few exceptions is trivial. Until we colonize other planets or asteroids thus ensuring an asteroid strike on Earth doesn't end the human story, everything else is just wasting time and resources. All our eggs are in one basket right now. We need to diversify quick. First choke point's coming up in 2029, then again in 2036. If we're here in 2037 we can take another breath.