LIFE...
Some view it to be a miracle, a gift from a divine creator. The universe was created with the purpose of bringing about life, and not just life but HUMAN LIFE...

Whatever means this life came about -- whether it was through spoken word, the molding of clay or the evolution of species -- the purpose of the universe, this planet, and of life was to bring about us. We are not the means to a divine end but rather the end of divine means, the gleam in a parent's eye.

The world is ours to command. The water, plants and animals who share our ecosystem are not equals. They were put there to serve us and our purposes, whatever they may be. Sometimes we receive this information through divine texts and revelation, sometimes from our own experiences and perceptions of the world.

What I want to discuss here, though, is the prospect that those people are wrong. I want to talk about the idea that some of us are being misled by a broad sense of arrogance supported both by our lifestyle and our faiths.

What if instead life is an ongoing phenomena, not too dissimilar from a blackhole or other natural force? Many around the globe subscribe to some idea of creation, but what would it mean for us and the way we live if life were just a spark in the universe, a naturally occurring event throughout the universe taking different forms from dogs to humans to any form our imagination might conceive?

The theory of ABIOGENESIS is given little attention, but it remains a theory just the same. However you view the probability of it, the probability is there. And with so vast a universe, with so many events occurring at any given moment throughout that universe, even mind boggling odds can become remarkably feasible, if you are to wrap your mind around it.

So perhaps life is the result of a random, or seemingly random, set of circumstances here on Earth, in our atmosphere or perhaps only within the immediate area of our solar system (PANSPERMIA). Skepticism is welcome and expected, but don't lose sight of the fact that it's possible.

What might such realization and acceptance mean for the way we live our lives? Some might say it would erode our sense of morality, leave us with no ethics. For many there can be no morality without God; they view the two to be inseparable. I would disagree, but I'll save the details of my disagreement for when and if they are needed.

If this were the case, it seems to me that we would certainly be dispelling the most extreme representation of human arrogance ever displayed. Instead of being the picture at the end of a chaotic puzzle of pieces we would be but a single, confusing piece needing the others to find our way. Perhaps such realization could lead us to eliminate other elitist views. We might even be inclined to set aside material goods for the sake of life and the health of our species... something most religions proclaim to seek, yet appear to fail miserably at.

First of all, how open to such a possibility are you personally? Explain your position...
Do you think people could accept such a possibility?
How might this change your life, and how do you think it would change the lives of others?
What implications would this have on morality, and do you think it would further or reverse the positive steps religions seek to take?

I realize these can be deep and confusing questions, if not entirely conflicting with deeply held beliefs. Answer however many of the questions as you like and do please offer explanations for why you feel the way you do. And ::ahem:: if you feel such questions aren't worth your time to consider or debate, you need not post just to inform us as much...

I'm open to the probability that life is built into creation, and that it will and must happen whenever physical conditions are right for it to happen.

Last time I examined anything on physics at this level, one of the questions is how come the Universe isn't an amorphous mass of energy? What perturbed the initial blast of outgoing energy to form matter?

Well, maybe that's just the way these things go. We don't have an amorphous universe with which to do a comparison.

Edited to add: Hey, I finally got this one: If a tree falls in the woods and nobody is there to witness it, does it make a sound?

Answer: NO! Because if a universe blasts out and matter doesn't form, nothing can observe that universe. Whoooo--simple!

Now for that single hand clapping thing. . .



For some, sure. Most don't due to superstition and a lack of curiosity. You also have all the professional brainwashers out there filling heads full of concerns that ultimately lead to the brainwasher's coffers.



I've already gone through this change of life. Others might find it a liberating experience as layer upon layer of illusion falls away, leaving what's left. And that's pretty darn beautiful!



I think established religion has done more to enslave people than any other institution invented by humans, with the exception of slavery itself. Reducing illusion and accepting reality is a moral action, for by doing so, one finds the connections among all things and beings.

That sounds pretty Buddhist, doesn't it? Oh well, so be it.

Is life sacred? If you look up the meaning of "sacred," the only definition that seems to fit is that life is protected--either by a deity or by society. Regarding deity protection, some religions take that up for human life but not other species. My feeling is that this is one of the many illusions we have with our concepts of self, our centered perceptions. Of course human life is sacred! Why, that's our species for crying out loud!

But what if you come to the realization that all life is sacred? What, do you head into vegetarianism? But plant life is sacred too! Oh, my, what a conundrum. Alright, synthesize everything! But wait--all of creation is sacred, too. Man, oh man. Okay, just starve to death.

And that is just plain stupid.

No deity wants us to be stupid. So eat something, will yah? Stop angsting about protecting this and that. Stop trying to be a deity yourself. Eat something, just realize that it's all interconnected and quite sacred. Cool!

This is what I've always, more or less believed. Ever since I was a child in sunday school and the priest told me to shut up and stop asking questions, I've known there was no God. All that stuff about creation and the sanctity of life is just a big boat load of fertiliser. All it takes is one hard fact and the whole ship sinks.

Life is possible any where as long as the right chemicals are mixed together, and most likely in other forms which we cannot easily conceive.

I don't think people like to think about this though, especially religous people, because I think, they are scared of reality. They need a parent figure to hold their hand as they pass through this world into what ever follows it. I believe that the idea that every thing we do has no meaning at all scares the pants off them, so they invent fictious gods and religons to calm their fears. You can see how scared they are by the amount of fuss they kick up if any one challenges their perception of the world. In the mean time, they are born, grow old and die without ever once opening their eyes to the truth of life.

It is up to us as individuals to find and embrace a meaning for our lives, because no one else, and certainly not some celestial supreme being, is going to do it for us.

The universe is a vast great balance of energy and we are just a passing flicker of thought.

Look upon this image and tell me what its meaning is... That is the galaxy NGC 3079. It danced in the eternal night long before our star was born, and it will continue to dance long after our star has burned out.

For me, it only exists as long as I am alive to witness it, but I know that it will continue to exist long after I die. For me, it is only my existence that gives it meaning, as it is with all things. In effect, I am the God of my perception
There is no other God... only hydrogen. Frozen light.



Morality?

What is morality but choice? I choose to act as I do, based on my perceptions and the experiences I have gained. I know from experience that I am not a violent person, but I also know that I make the choice not to be violent because I gain no satisfaction from the outcome.
Like all human beings, I have the ability to kill. But I do not do so because I choose not to do so, because I would not like the end result of my actions.

This summing up of decisions based on experience is morality. There is no higher purpose to it, its just my mind making decisions to keep itself happy.

Abiogenesis seems perfectly reasonable to me. As I said in the other thread about life, the line between non-living and living is somewhat fuzzy. It is no surprise to me that it should be possible to cross that line.

Panspermia seems possible, but I see no strong evidence for it. It seems somewhat irrelevant, anyway. If life moves from one place to another in the universe, you still need to explain how it started.

I think most people, even those with strong religious beliefs, can accept the idea of a completely natural mechanism for the beginning of life on this planet. This does not exclude the possibility of this natural process being directed by a deity.

I don't think this would change the lives of most people. Do those people with religious beliefs really think "The only reason I must be ethical is because my deity demands it"? I suspect not. I suspect that most people have a socialized sense of ethics, messy and incomplete as it may be, that may be reinforced by religion. (It may also be weakened or distorted by religion.)

The fact that we are biological creatures, subject to the laws of physics, in no way diminishes the fact that we can minimize the suffering of our fellows.

My views broadly converge with the others here, with the notable exception that I think our miniscule unimportance on the universal scale is what makes us so colossally significant.

This is because of my belief in life's essentially random and directionless nature, I feel enormously privileged that I am here, the random result of that sperm and that egg, living among other, similarly miraculous creatures (of all species) on a beautiful, fragile, unimportant planet. It is enormously significant to me that I am here with everyone and everything else as they are, as I believe it should be to everybody else that they (and I) are here, and indeed that "here" is here.

I could believe that everything has unfolded according to a predetermined plan in the mind of some super-being, but how much more fantastic and awe-inspiring is it to think that uncounted billions of random processes have followed the path that has led here, and not one of the innumerable other possibilities that would have resulted in something other than humanity, or someone other than me?

In fact, for me, the biggest turn-off in the idea of a creator (in practically all religions) is the insistence of most believers that They have pre-destined every event, and that They actively intervene to direct events in the direction They have decided suits Them best.

A creator that is omniscient and omnipotent, but that CHOSE to create a universe that would unfold randomly over aeons according to the rules that They set at the beginning, to produce something unpredictable and surprising, even to the extent that Their interventions would produce unpredictable consequences - THAT is a creator I think I could relate to. Maybe a creator like that could be aware of all the possible outcomes, but still not know for certain which one would come to pass, because of the physical laws of the universe that They chose to implement. If we have been made in God's image, maybe He is as prone to boredom and as inspired by His curiosity as we are, but on a far, far larger scale?

I'm not a widely-read theologian, but I'm not aware of any in the religious community of ANY faith that have interpreted the universe in these terms, much less any Christian theorists. It would not clash with modern science and scientific theories AT ALL - as all they would be doing is trying to explain how the Creator did it.

Instead, they seem to prefer to believe the literal truth of a set of Bronze Age middle eastern myths that has been translated so many times that a "young woman" (or even a child bride - paedophilia, anyone?) becomes a "virgin" and that a "day" can never have been anything other than 24 hours, even though we have to have leap years to account for the fact that it is not that now.

(edited to add some points I forgot the first time, and correct some grammatical errors)

Human empathy is a surer guide to morality than ancient books and threats.