Friday, April 06, 2007

Why life on Earth?

michelangelo.jpg

Let’s, for the sake of argument, assume that we (humans) exist and that our conscious recognition of that “fact” is real.

Then why is this so? That is, why do we exist? Why did life originate on Earth? And human life in particular?

The argument from design is interesting, but then so is Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.

Both have elements that make them agreeable to lots of persons; one based in faith and circumstantial evidence, the other based in tangible evidence and fossil records.

That aside, why did life originate here? The accidental implication of Darwin’s hypothesis is without serious flaw.

The purposeful implications of design and a God-oriented creation make sense – if one posits a God, with a purpose for creation, here, on this one planet, in all of space and the universe, rather than anywhere else.

If there is a God (and the arguments for Him will not be addressed here), why would such a divinity select this place, in this space-time, to create a race of beings that are truly insignificant in the great scheme of things – the total reality of the universe?

The purpose of being seems more likely to be found in the outreaches of the universe than here on this picayune planet.

It makes little sense for an omnipresent, omniscient deity to select this one little ball of material to create a race of creatures who matter not in the great scheme of things: the universe as it seems to exist.

If, as contend elsewhere, the Supreme Being, is playing a game with humanity – that is, God wants man to discover His ploy – why just here, in this moment, when a Prime Mover would likely, if we can discern His thought processes, have better venues in which to ply His shenanigans?

If, however, God, or the Force that is the Universe or total being, is an unaware entity, that is just pure existence – His or Its essence, and that alone – one has to accept the idea that this creation, on this Earth, was, as Darwin (and others) postulate, accidental, unless….

…unless existence itself is purposeful, in some strange way that is without consciousness and direction, a paradoxical thrust or stasis that mankind can never understand or fathom.

This may be the goal of scientists, physicists mainly, and/or theologians without an axe to grind: to discern what the pattern of life, existence, is or means.

Did the discovery of quarks help in this discernment? Does string theory work toward that understanding?

Does a faith in God bring about meaning? Only if one is Gaia-centric and believes that this one place, in all the universe(s), is where a God would place His or Its raison d’etre.

2 comments:

Rich said...

Whoever or whatever, if anything, created this place, it certainly seems to lack feelings. In my opinion (I dare even say fact), no amount of "sin" or whatever else we presently "know" can justify this world. Imagine countless humans and animals in various states of agony over time...a symphony of agony right from the very start...don't bother handing me "original sin," or anything else. I'll just hand you again the countless people/animals who have been or are being tortured, of which the weight of this would (and more importantly should) collapse the HEART of the mightiest...God, whoever or whatever WITH ANY FEELINGS OR CARE FOR ANYONE OR ANYTHING ELSE! The ugly, ugly, sick...sicker than sick truth.

RRRGroup said...

Rich, you've hit on the very thing that creates atheists.

But we contend that God, as Dawkins says, and others before him, seems to be malevolent, evil even.

That is, the god beneath God, as the Gnostics indicated.

The real God, if there is one, is ineffable, beyond comprehension, and very likely impervious to creation, His or otherwise.