Just a fun question:
Can everything be as it should if we don’t know it is?
What do you find interesting about that question?
There are a few assumptions in the question, one being that there is a way things SHOULD be. Working with this assumption I would answer ‘No’.
You wouldn’t find it interesting because you don’t believe in such a thing as “should”.
Imagine someone argued that everything is as it should be… the perfect question to ask is, “But if I don’t know it is, how can it be?”
Well, you could say that in as much as we are able to know what things are, we can know that everything is as it should be.
Why is that the perfect question to ask? What makes you think you would know if everything is the way it should be? The perfect response to your question would probably just be, “Well, the way it should be includes, or at least previously included, you not knowing.” It’s as simple as that. But maybe you can explain why that’s the perfect question.
Should? Do you mean as everything IS in its natural state or according to physical law? Sure, unless we are so arrogant as to see only a world that is as we would like it to be or only the world as we know it.
Let’s not forget - there IS Reality and existence with or without our knowledge of it.
Aside from that, one might say that everything could not be as it - let’s say - is supposed to be - or might be - unless we are able to see the possibility or the vision of 'it - and bring it into existence ourselves.
This evokes the mysterious relationship between what any particular mind thinks it knows and everything an omniscient point of view would know. About—anything?
And if there is no omniscient point of view [which most call God] what can this possibly even mean? Will science one day discover the secular equivalent of God? A TOE?
And, if so, how can human autonomy not be just an illusory part of it?
Are these “fun” questions though?