Human Purpose in our Unconscious Universe

Collage of human head, molecules and various abstract elements on the subject of modern science, chemistry, physics, human and artificial minds

The Universe is either blind or not. A belief in God is a belief in a universe that knows itself because it can perceive itself. The difficulty with the idea of God is primarily the problem of conceiving how this omniscience could possibly be. If we manage to do this we believe we face an even greater difficulty – if the Universe can perceive itself, what is the purpose of life in such a universe? For a conscious universe, life, and its own perception of the universe could only be a distraction for the universe and its own perception of itself. In a conscious universe, life would be undesirable as it would distort the same, pure consciousness of the Universe itself.

As such, we believe that the presence of life in the Universe proves that the Universe cannot be self-conscious.

The Universe is blind. It is an eye which cannot see itself, and it has nothing to see outside itself. Nevertheless, the evolution of the Universe and its cosmological fine tuning indicates that it intuits itself in an unconscious way. At some time in its blind creation it came to intuit its own possibility of Being. It even seems possessed of a primitive determinism that has been capable of organising itself into its present complex form with complex organisms like human beings.

However, in order to be sure of its own existence, the blind Universe must create a way of seeing itself for what it is. How can this be done if it can only operate within itself? It only has power inside its own limits of space and time.

The Universe can only operate according to its own laws of physics, within its own material reality. To see itself, the eye that does not see must create a perceiving entity within itself. A kind of mind’s eye. An imagination for itself. To perceive itself, the Universe had to create something that could perceive within itself. It needed to create life.

The Universe is either blind or not. A belief in God is a belief in a universe that knows itself because it can perceive itself. The difficulty with the idea of God is primarily the problem of conceiving how this omniscience could possibly be. If we manage to do this we believe we face an even greater difficulty – if the Universe can perceive itself, what is the purpose of life in such a universe? For a conscious universe, life, and its own perception of the universe could only be a distraction for the universe and its own perception of itself. In a conscious universe, life would be undesirable as it would distort the same, pure consciousness of the Universe itself.

As such, we believe that the presence of life in the Universe proves that the Universe cannot be self-conscious.

The Universe is blind. It is an eye which cannot see itself, and it has nothing to see outside itself. Nevertheless, the evolution of the Universe and its cosmological fine tuning indicates that it intuits itself in an unconscious way. At some time in its blind creation it came to intuit its own possibility of Being. It even seems possessed of a primitive determinism that has been capable of organising itself into its present complex form with complex organisms like human beings.

However, in order to be sure of its own existence, the blind Universe must create a way of seeing itself for what it is. How can this be done if it can only operate within itself? It only has power inside its own limits of space and time.

The Universe can only operate according to its own laws of physics, within its own material reality. To see itself, the eye that does not see must create a perceiving entity within itself. A kind of mind’s eye. An imagination for itself. To perceive itself, the Universe had to create something that could perceive within itself. It needed to create life.

Hieronymus_Bosch_-_The_Garden_of_Earthly_Delights_-_The_exterior_(shutters)

The Universe is the subject that does not know itself. It is substance evolving toward subject. But how can such an evolution take place? What we are talking about is an evolution of consciousness, evolving from perception into knowing. It’s an evolution we have seen in our own world. The evolution of our own species: the process that transformed the protozoa into a Da Vinci or an Einstein. Human purpose is to know the Universe, both without and within – to invent and create according to our knowledge and sculpt from the material that is to create an even better Universe, the Universe that ought to be.

The Universe is the subject that does not know itself. It is substance evolving toward subject. But how can such an evolution take place? What we are talking about is an evolution of consciousness, evolving from perception into knowing. It’s an evolution we have seen in our own world. The evolution of our own species: the process that transformed the protozoa into a Da Vinci or an Einstein. Human purpose is to know the Universe, both without and within – to invent and create according to our knowledge and sculpt from the material that is to create an even better Universe, the Universe that ought to be.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Human Purpose in our Unconscious Universe

    • Thank you for your comment, Gordon. But, please explain, : what is this other possibility “that is implicit in the creation”?
      From we understand: implicit in “the creation” means that the Universe had a creator. But that kind of cause and effect positing immediately throws us against the question of – what created the creator?
      We can say:
      the Creator created all things.
      If the Creator is a thing – did the Creator create itself? If this is possible, then it could well be that we are part of this process of self-creating. The Universe could be regarded as the same Creator and we are part of the process of that Creation, which is what we are proposing in our articles.
      If the Creator did not create itself, but it created all things except itself, then… what is left to create the Creator?
      Nothing is left. Which implies that the Creator was created out of nothing.
      Now we do not necessarily need the Creator any more. Unless this is not the first creation… but, assuming that this is the first creation and that it came out of nothing, then we can ignore the idea of the Creator and focus on the Everything created out of nothing which is the Universe.
      After that… we can return to the article that we started from…
      The Universe is either blind or not… etc.

      • Hi Paul,

        The clue I find implicit in the Creation is this: the Creator created once, and then did not continue creating. Rather, he hard-wired pro-creation into us and every living thing in a big way. He gave us a role in the Creation process. Why would he do that?

        Asking “what created the Creator” throws us into an infinite regress. Thus the reason that Christian theology has always maintained that the Creator exists apart from the Universe itself and outside of time. There must be a first cause. That first cause demonstrates what we call intelligence by creating a highly ordered Universe. And so we have an always existing intelligence (but not a thing) that created all that is.

        I agree with you that if we do not accept the Christian conclusion, then the only other rational conclusion is your blind Universe. I would contend that by ascribing purpose to that blind Universe as you do by saying that we are part of the process of self-creation, you acknowledge an intelligence to it all. This brings you back around to the historic Judeo-Christian view.

        I start with the Christian view of the Creator, and then come to essentially the same conclusion that the Creator intentionally made us part of the process of self-creation when he hardwired all living things for pro-creation. From there I go into the finer details of the Genesis story about eating the forbidden fruit, where I find a reason that it all had to be this way.

      • Yes, but that is an old story, and it has brought us where we are now. In its essence nihilistic and creates herds of people willing to subject themselves to fantastical dogmas.

      • I do not disagree that the “old story” is what brought us to where we are now, and that it is deficient. What I have found is that it is not the “whole story”. When I read Genesis, I agree with the theologians, but then I see what you see. We have a role to play in a process of self-creation. This is both explicit in the story, and implicit in creation as I explained above. It is this element that the theologians have missed.

        And in fact, this points to the only purpose that would NOT make us a distraction for the universe, as you put it. God created us, gave us free will, and gave us the ability to procreate, and then stepped back and watched to see if we could put the clues together to figure out our larger role of self-creation that goes far beyond the mere reproduction of our species. Why did he do this? Because it was the only way he could reproduce himself!

        Far from being a distraction, we are the seed of the Creator. And it does appear that he is still waiting to see if we will sprout.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s