Darwinian evolution is in collision with physical science.
Our purest science based upon mathematics teaches us that the Universe is destined for extinction, an unavoidable and entirely natural end to its life. Long, long before the Universe dies, however, all the stars will be extinct and the Universe a cold and dark place. A creature in these final hours would witness its home star as a pale disc in the sky emitting little or no light or heat. Not long after this time the atomic nuclei begin to disintegrate, the forces which hold matter together facing their own extinction. The continued existence of physical structures becomes an impossibility. Eventually, even black holes begin to evaporate away.
Even now the galaxies are imperceptibly darkening as they accelerate apart from each other. Their increasing speed and trajectory a sign of the inevitable end of the world.
yes, we all watched ‘The Universe’ on History Channel too…
just because the known universe will end in some hundred billion years or whatever, does not however say anything about “survival” itself, particularly with regard to living beings, whose lifespans are unbelievably shorter than the span of existence for the universe itself. and in addition, since physics posits the existence of multiple universes and dimensions, the eventual end of our universe says nothing as to these other areas of reality.
so, are you trying to say that if something is not eternal/indestructible, then it is somehow nonexistent, false or meaningless…?
There is no experimental evidence for parallel universes. But the idea is generally welcomed by Christians and New Age mystics. I believe you can prove the existence of ghosts and U.F.O’s using quantum mechanics.
I’d thought I made it clear in the OP that it is the finite nature of the world which is the real truth, as opposed to the falsehood of eternity. Or are you just impatient to expose me as a nihilist, because what cannot be manipulated into something of practical benefit infuriates and frustrates the American mind?
Evolution is a weakening of the organism, a growing away from nature; a continual progression towards death. Increasing awareness of our situation the burden of greater sentience.
well, that is why i said “physics posits the existence” of these things; they are theoretical, and the evidence for them is mathematical, not empirical. either way, it doesnt matter whether ghosts, UFOs, parallel dimensions are real or not, i was only making a point that your leap from “the universe is not eternal” to “survival is a myth” is absurd.
it is absurd because first of all the definition of survival is not “eternal survival”, and second of all, because (which was my point) even though OUR universe will someday end, that does not mean that other universes perhaps will not exist for indefinite or indeterminate periods of time.
no, you did not make this clear. so the physical world will decay and end sometime, so what? eternity and finitude are different, yes we get that… once again i have to ask, what is your point?
and you did not answer my question.
another blatant falsehood. your understanding of evolution is childish and completely mistaken. evolution is a natural process of change, following natural laws, and resultant from selection forces. evolution has nothing to do with a “progression towards death”.
meaningless, not the least so because its not even a sentence, and doesnt make any sense.
please show me where i call you a nihilist.
as for “manipulated into a tacky consumable infuriates and frustrates” i dont have the faintest idea what you are talking about, sorry. you might as well be speaking chinese for all i know, or care.
Neither does it rule out the existence of Christ like figures in those other Universes, who may actually have the power to save the world. In some even pigs may be flying.
The title of this thread makes it clear. That there is nothing of practical benefit to you in such a philosophy you find frustrating.
All of nature tends towards extinction, as nature goes through regeneration information is lost. This is why humans have lost their body hair and grown weaker than their primate ancestors, it’s why the scale of living organisms is decreasing over time.
It makes perfect sense, but you are determined to avoid any connotation of suffering.
Please show me where I said you did.
Of course you don’t. It’s like putting a blackboard of equations in front of a dog.
Your so terrified that someone is going to take your Big Mac and fries away from you. American philosophy - an oxymoron.
i understand that you do not possess the mental ability to comprehend reason or logic, much less separate truth from fantasy… i will give you one more courtesy of a response here, show you where you are obviously wrong, and then leave it at that. good luck.
you totally ignore the point i made, that survival can still be real and meaningful even if it eventually ends. why dont you address the criticism i bring to your incorrect understanding of survival, rather than try to distract the conversation with “flying pigs” or whatever…?
yes, there is nothing of practical benefit to your ideas because there is no real content in them at all.
humans did not lose their body hair because of “information loss” from “regeneration”; we lost our body hair because there was no longer a selection pressure keeping body hair in the gene pool, since we had invented fire/housing/clothing and reduced freezing to death as a threat. evolution works by selecting traits based on whether they appear in individuals who reproduce, and rejecting traits that are in individuals who do not reproduce. people with less/no body hair in the past tended to die more frequently than those with more body hair-- so genes for body hair were passed along more often. now, since the genes for body hair have no impact in reproduction, they tend to get dilluted each generation, and the phenotype is lost over time.
“it’s why the scale of living organisms is decreasing over time” WTF does this even mean?? you are acting incompetent, and you flaunt it by not even trying to define these meaningless ambiguous statements of yours… seriously, maybe you are just using this website as a playground, but if you would leave the rational intellectual convirsations to people who are actually rational and intellectual, i think we would all be better off.
no, actually, your sentence does not make sense… and you didnt mention suffering at all, what are you even talking about? why dont you try defining your terms if you want intelligent responses to them?
ok:
im pretty sure that “manipulated into a tacky consumable infuriates and frustrates” is not a math equation. just a thought, but since you seem so sure of yourself, i wonder why you are so opposed to just defining and explaining what you mean… your automatic defensiveness and inability to clarify anything you say are quite revealing…
i do not eat at mcdonalds-- the preservatives/aspartame/msg/HFCS give you cancer.
Interesting, coming from someone who has already spilled out garbage concerning parallel universes and other dimensions. Why can’t you just admit your trying to sell me something, I’d have more respect for you.
No such thing.
My understanding of survival is as it relates to the concerns of this thread which is the cosmological inevitability of death - proven beyond any doubt by physical science - and what this entails for philosophy. Your interest is in preserving an artificial and disposable way of life in the face of something greater and more enduring.
“survival can still be real and meaningful even if eventually ends” Really, have you any idea how shallow this little butt dribble sounds? It reeks of a cheap advertizing cliche, I feel like you are going to try and sell me a vacuum cleaner, something to turn my life around and make me shiny and happy.
But I’m such a cynic, sure life can be real and meaningful, Disneyland is real and meaningful if your stupid and shallow or a child, Father Christmas and faeries can be real and meaningful if your ignorant of reality, philosophy is real and meaningful if your intelligent and deep. Give me some good vibes about a real and meaningful life without trying to sell me something while you do it. I bet you can’t.
Here we are reminded of a quote by that great German philosopher Herman Goering: “Whenever I hear the word culture, I reach for my revolver.”
How many animals covered in fur freeze to death? Is this an example of your powers of reasoning? Humans originated in the hot deserts of east Africa, begging the question, according to your profound logic, why did they even have hair in the first place? But, giving you the benefit of the doubt, which you don’t deserve, perhaps it was rather err… cold at night? But when your covered in fur so what?
And this is all very interesting considering Africans who live near the equator are the most hairless people on earth.
Perhaps you should go with the one about disease carrying parasites causing hair loss, it’s a bit harder to refute, but equally as redolent of minds which prefer the safety of dreams to an unbearable reality.
Your attempts at thinking are entertaining though, even if you are only regurgitating someone elses thoughts.
(The attempt to compensate for physical humiliation by introducing a technological catalyst for loss is typical of how easily the mind turns its atrophying situation into a fantasy of intellectual triumph. At once we reveal the fragile lattice of human knwowledge as it is imagined, suspended over the abyss, and expose the lie of the overmind).
Again, due to the err… freezing temperatures around the equator? What if they were less likely to contract fatal diseases as a result of parasites like fleas and tics?
Binary logic fails to comprehend nature. As I have already said, evolution is a process of physical erosion and refinement, with death as its final state.
Child, have you ever had an original thought of your own?
It’s a toughy for sure, it might simply mean a tendency for things to get smaller but considering the complexity of the grammar it’s hard to say.
An example of how frustrated Americans get at things which are not laid out simply from A to Z. Your mind to me appears like a map of an American city, a square grid, simple to read and easy to follow. I know you want the world to be the same.
My fear about being exposed as an intellectual weakling causes me to use vague, ambiguous terms and overreact when criticized.
Your powers of psychoanalysis are indeed formidable. I’m frightened by the ease with which you peer into my empty soul.
Are you the Pope?
Cancer can actually help you, a proximity to death focuses the mind and casts off what the superfluous, at the moment you appear as a door to door salesman peddling a dream with a suitcase full of cheap plastic lies.
Isn’t it interesting that in The Matrix Western people have devolved into a subterranean, multiracial, tribal hell existence awaiting a religious savior? Little more than worms in fact.
Can you blame the machine mind, with its clarity and precision, from wanting to exterminate them?
I can’t blame the machine mind because it will not feel guilty or shame about the blame. Torching the mainframe on flame, now thats another ball game, all together.
Does that machine recognize that sounds that rhyme give us the reason for reaction time?
No, logic needs not match emotional tone, so I’m going to light a match, throw a stone, on an angle, to a degree. Artifical apple from a digital tree. But will this philosophy die with me? Probably possible. Game over. New guy.
The need to exterminate after the original need to create, that doesn’t seem like precision. It is a clear waste. How could a machine stoop so low as to be inefficient?
Humans are farmed for food to feed a superior organism, there is no hope anymore than there is for the cows or chickens we farm, so a savior is imagined. You can see how easily religion began amongst the oppressed.
Neo was really a machine. There just breaking it to us softly.
(Consider how intelligence dominates the world and that evolution cannot go backwards, contrary to the wishes and desires of hypocritical liberals).
