Ok, strange name, but I must admit that the next topic or topics reminds me a little bit of Douglas Adams' Restaraunt at the End of the Universe. Have patience. I hope you read the entire thing, so grab a hamburger and put on the soundtrack for 2001: A Space Odyssey. Enjoy.
I'm going to take a moment to explain some fundamental aspects of something and a small number of related things in an attempt to better clarify the crux of it. I do this because i believe that to get to the heart of the logic behind things, you must first reduce it until it is no longer reduceable. Now, this is not meant to discount Aristotle's "the whole is more than the sum of its parts" principle. His principle is most certainly born of sound reasoning. But we're not always looking for more when we are bound in context, we just want the best way to derive truth from the qualities of that which we are presented.
So, what is this thing? Well, for millenia, human beings have been trying to answer the question "What is the meaning of life?" or "Why are we here?". Some try to find it within religion. Others try to find it in science. Many try to develop some sort of spirtuality without religion. But a great deal of introspection must come into play at some point, frankly, because our own voice is the one voice we can't get rid of in our heads (not counting people with multiple personalities). I believe that, at this point, in order to make an informed decision we hae to try to understand each with a reasonable amount of certainty. This doesn't mean you should become a monk for a year and then go rocketing to Jupiter the next. This simply means you should educate yourself in order to make a good or right decision rather than an easy decision.
So, we'll start with religion. Religion is the belief and practice of a set of rules, morals, principles, doctrines, tenets, etc by a group of people. More often than not, this involves a deity of some sort. (There are Hindu sects that are actually atheists, believe it or not.) The difference between religion and a cult is that a cult doesn't generally have the population or 'blessing' of a significant portion of the overall population of the society. In addition to setting and adhering to social ideas, religion plays an important role for many in explaining their environment. Nearly all religions confront death and the question of an afterlife. Religion also attempts to make sense of the things we can't readily explain or that for which we might otherwise plan. It's easy to sit back and say, "I have no idea what that stinking orange ball rolling down the mountainside at us is, so it must be something God made." In this simplified example, God certainly does appea to work in mysterious ways. In the battle between Nature vs Nurture, religion takes the side of nuture more often than not. Religions, most deifnitely, try to tackle the nature side of things. However, religion is something that is nurtured. Nobody comes out of their mother holding a copy of the torah and singing hymns. Religion has to be taught to be understood much like any law code or moral doctrine. It takes time and effort to fully grasp the ideas that have been molded and developed over centuries - especially if some of them are purely conceptual ideas.
Science is the attempt to use logic to discover the order of our environment and understand it and its properties. Science is derived from millenia of thought and reasoning which in return makes up up our modern body of thought (at least in theory) and practice thereof. All true forms of science begin with the Scientific Method. The problem is that the de facto standard is often disagreed upon, and therefore revised from time to time. It is important to note though that science is dependant upon the use of such a method. If you abandon the logic, then you abandon the science. At that point, you are nothing more than a metaphysicist. But if you adhere to the principles of the current scientific standard, then you should be fine to call yourself a scientist. Thankfully there is a basic, western version that even children are able to understand, and that can be found embedded within the more complex versions. Where did we get it? Why, our good buddy and father of deductive reasoning, Aristotle. (It is important to note that there are variations that involve inductive reasoning, and are considered to be eastern versions as they were first developed in the middle east.) The basic western version can be found here:
1. Ask a question.
2. Research the problem.
3. Form a hypothesis.
4. Test that hypothesis.
5. Evaluate your findings.
6. Conclusion.
Now, of course, there are far more steps, but remember: this is the basic version. At this point, you might ask yourself, "Then if religion is nuture then that makes science nature in the age-old argument, but why?" The answer is a resounding 'yes'. We don't need to be taught to question our environment and its properties. We don't need to be nurtured to form opinions, hypotheses, or conclsions. We don't need to be taught to evaluate our findings. We are able to put our questons to the test on our own without outside interference. We may not want to do this, but we are capable to do so if we please (mental handicaps aside).
So, where does this leave us? Let us look at some very clear facts. First, we know we live on a planet in a much larger area or region we call space. We know this because we've journeyed outside of our earth to that region. Second, we know that the universe is made of two types of things: tangible and intangible. Tangible things are the things that we can use one or all of our five senses with which to interact. The intangible things are those that we can deduce or induce through reasoning, but are those things with which we cannot interact. In the case of induction, take for example the neutrino. We can't sense it, but we have created tools to sense it for us, so in a sense (no pun intended), we are not interacting with the neutrino and the neutrino certainly does not interact with us that we can tell. But rather it is our tools that interact with them on some level, and therefore we can induce, or infer, that the neutrino exists.
Third, everything in the universe seems to be in one of two states with regards to energy: high energy states and low energy states. Those things, like for instance the sun, are in high energy states and will eventually lose that energy and become something of a low energy state. Every ounce of matter in the universe is trying to get rid of its energy in order to only possess that energy sufficient to sustain its molecular vibration. Over time, this expulsion of excess energy causes the energy to change and express itself dfferently. But adding blue light to blue light doesn't make it bluer, nor does removing blue from blue make it less blue. As energy is expelled, so it the ability of the properties of the whole to cling to its individual qualities fly off from the center. Suns turn color and lose mass as they get older and burn themselves away. Rotting flesh expunges things like Carbon-14 and Methane as it breaks down and gets closer to that low energy state.
So, what does this all have to do with the main question(s) here? We are all stardust. The material elements of the known universe (which includes us), save hydrogen and helium, were created in stars. How do we know this? Because we can observe the properties of this process of creating elements in the colors of the stars, and we can also see what happens when we combine related observances with that knowledge. These elements are the ones that exist in our bodies and make up our matter. But the energy of our bodies are also in a high energy state, and over time, it will seek out that low energy state. This describes the cycle of life as it relates to living and dying under normal situations; we are born, we live, we die. (In this sort of aspect, it's very caesarian - Veni!, Vidi! Vici!) But this is where we come back to the main question. What happens then? As the universe would dictate, it is still trying to reduce the energy of our molecules to a lower state of energy. We can't sense this because, well, at this point we are dead. But what about consciousness? What about the soul? While, I personally, don't believe in the soul, I will at the very least consider the notion that they are one in the same. In order for those to exist in the universe and function in the manner that we believe them to function, they must have energy of some kind. Therefore, their energy added to the existing energy of our bodies allows them to be released as energy after we die. Therefore, our energy is absorbed by the universe, thus completing the cycle of energy. It may be added to another system, it may be used to fuel something else, it may never be used - it doesn't matter. If you like, however, you can think of it as a part of you being in everything else with which that energy comes into contact. I, however, will be eating a sandwich and doing the crossword while you let this sink in.
So, what's the point? What is the meaning of life? Why are we here? All these questions are fine to ask occasionally, but they aren't very good questions. They are too broad to succinctly answer. What context are we using here? What defition and usage are we applying to the words that make up this question? Perhaps we should rephrase the question to better find the answer. 'Meaning' is something you apply to things. In this context, it means the reason which really just brings us back the second question: Why are we here? One way you can answer "why" is in the context of what it was that created us. Another way you can take this is to question a context of answering "or what purpose are we here?" These are really two distinct, different questions entirely. In fact, to even suggest that they are the same question is, frankly, fallacious or showing a distinct lack of sound logic. It's a flawed conclusion. Now, to be fair, it doesn't mean that it's untrue, the logic is simply flawed and does not directly connect A to B. It does, however, suggest a high probability that suggestion is untrue. (I'm going to refrain from explaining this because it would take an extended amount of time, and is frankly out of scope of this essay.) But, again, why? Because it implies that something that has quantity is the same as something without quantity but rather quality alone. Again, let's let that one sink in. What does this mean? Anything tat satisfies the question 'what' can tangibly exist where there are more than one 'what'. For example, two robots can build, or create, one car. But 'purpose' is a concept and therefore intangible. While you can have more than one concept about an idea, we cannot hold each one in our hand and juggle them. In other words, we don't actually interact with our concepts; we neither feel, hear, smell, taste, or see them. Again, we induce, or infer, that they exist because we are able to see the results of their expressions.
Now that we have actually split the question of "Why are we here?" into two separate ideas, we can begin to address each one individually. From this point, everything is pure philosophy and only philosophy. First, we tackle the idea of reason. We ask, for what purpose do we exist? To answer this, I ask "Well, what is the human body designed to do as far as we can tell?" The human body is designed to convert matter into energy, and reproduce itself. It's a machine on the simplest level. Garbage in, garbage out. Energy in, energy out. Rinse and repeat until it breaks. Buy a new one along the way, and start all over. But in as much as its simplistic mechanized view, the machine that is the human body is prompted by gratification to perpetuate, so, in a nutshell, we do the things that we do to make ourselves happy. Your stomach hurts from hunger pains so you eat to feel good. The urge to pee is unpleasant so we alleviate that by getting rid of our excess water which, well, feels pretty good thus giving us relief. Finally, we have our answer to half of everything! The purpose in life is to be happy as often as you can be. Do that which is most gratifying.
We have solved one of life's msysteries already. Now we set our sights on the second half of the quandary: By what were we created? Chances are that if you are religious, you have already answered this for yourself, and that is perfectly fine if it makes you happy. You may go back to your double-stuff cookies and fuzzy flip-flops now. But if you aren't satisfed yet, why not consider that in the context of everything we've talked about in this essay that you were created by your mother and father (and possibly one or more contributors!). In context of energy states, two tangible things in high energy states were combined to create you, another one thing in a state of high energy. Going back to Aristotle, the whole is, indeed, more than the sum of its parts. Sperm will eventually lose their vigor if left to their own devices. Eggs will eventually be expelled from the body and die. But when combined, they feed on one another and grow into a being of greater quantity and greater quality. In all this, however, it doesn't really answer the question if we don't believe in a deity or deities nor we believe in the mother-father concept. What then? Well, what came first: the chicken or the egg? If you believe in a deity, then you might say chickens because deities have a way of creating animals rather than eggs. Otherwise, the universe created the first one of us millions of years ago if not billions. Remember that every element other than helium and hydrogen come from stars? The fundamental elements of our biology are Carbon, Hydrogen, Nitrogen, and Oxygen. Three of four of those were created by nuclear fusion of Hydrogen and Helium and other elements in the center of stars. Mixx them up in the right proportions and 'bake at 350 for two hours, turning once when the one side is golden brown' (Ok, maybe not, but you get the right idea), and you have the first strands of amino acids which form the simplest beginnngs of life as we know it to be.
In summary, be happy and do things that make you happy. Live. Breathe. Eat chocolate pizza if that makes you happy. Stop worrying about the 'what ifs' and the 'why nots'. We're all made from stars and one day you are going to end back up in one. You're part of a universal cycle. Just be glad that you are included. Now, here. Have some toys and a banana, and go outside and play with your friends. Daddy's busy.
Buh-bye!
Invino Veritas
11/17/11
EOF
No comments:
Post a Comment