If i may interject for a moment Arminus, and forgive Zinnat, i think we are getting to the crux of this argument. The Black Hole, or holes, are certain keys of some type. It is arguable whether the holes or life are the stronger force, on a teleological or an ontological level. I say let’s do both.
Vygotsky and Piaget have a very diametrically opposed view of autism. Piaget argues that internal (solopsistic) speech precedes audible ‘public utterance’ (George Steiner, On Difficulty)
Vygotsky proposes otherwise. He proposes that internal language is a ‘late borrowing from external discourse’. The final word between these two views is still out, so actually there is no ‘solution’ to whether one or the other is the correct view.
What does this have with the larger , posed question at hand? If Vygotsy may be proved to be the correct view, it has enormous implication toward clarifying not only the very broad questions posed by the forum, but tangential questions such as cited above. Solipsism, if interpreted in the light of an evolving relationship if stretched to it’s teleological limit, could reduce the problem of the black hole/evolving life differentiation as simply a dynamic relationship in re, where one has no distinct polarity from the other. Various physical interpretations of black holes have already been shown to cast doubt of previous thoughts, namely that black holes impinge on all matter getting into it’s range of influence, or that they are actual cosmological ‘things’ in the traditional astronomical sense. These have all been debunked in favor of describing them as sort of giant transformers, where they at certain energy levels throw back converted mass-energy. There is a sort of giant cosmic relationship going on , and the black hole seems to have shifted it’s ontological meaning on basis of it’s function. This function has like all cosmological elements , relatedness as it’s primary teleological focus, they are related to the light and dark forces as some sort of intermediary.
There is no positing of either life, nor the darkness, and darkness is not a constant maker. It evolves, in an eternal hybrid between the relational two, where there never is a pure either/or, of either. Where there is one, there is another. In the primordial form they are perhaps undifferentiated, and as life forms and evolves out of it, the teleological differentiation separates them.
Like i indicated earlier to James, , i really think that the either/or problem has never been a problem, it’s a phase in human development, where the understanding separates the two, but is yet not able to make a third. Cosmology and ontology are separately thought entities, and have not yet been unified. Now i know that it is very early to declare that a unified field theory has been successfully arrived at on basis of inadequate information, however it seems very likely that the cosmic egg idea will win out.
As far as men and machines are concerned, if the relational aspect is stressed, than the self fulfilling , sought after harmony will no longer be a problem to be solved, but a work in progress.
At that point, concerns about an evil machine taking over, will no longer be a concern, and machines will not allow themselves to completely replace human beings, because they will realize that they need human beings, if they are to survive. The cyborg, men, and robots, will concurrently work toward a common cause, realizing their essential co=dependence.