A casual profundity from Lileks:
The sidewalk due to be replaced had a semicircle cut in one side, because once upon a time there was a stout tree on the boulevard. For decades the semicircle was the only sign the tree had been there at all. Now it’ll be replaced. There’s about a hundred years of history reflected in that process, and as far as the universe is concerned it’s the flutter of a hummingbird’s ventricle. That’s why we’re here: the passing of time has no meaning unless experienced by conscious beings. Better if they have imaginations, too: look at the depth of the cut in the sidewalk. Stout trunk, tall tree. An elm, probably. Whoever lived in that house in ’41 parked under the tree in the afternoon in July so the steering wheel didn’t feel like gripping a steam iron. Dad rued the leaves. The kids loved the smell when he burned them in fall.
“That’s why we’re here.” That’s also why we should go into space, whose vastness similarly has no meaning unless someone is out there to experience it.
For an atheist, you’re making a pretty profound religious point. Very moving, thank you.
Actually, I’m not an atheist, I’m a skeptic. But this is essentially my religion — that our purpose is to help the universe come to know itself. It’s an unscientific teleology, but it’s my belief.
I can live with that, Rand.
Further, either alien intelligences exist and we should find out what they make of the universe or they don’t and in the words of the Sergeant calming the nervous young soldier in the movie Zulu, “it’s just us” to help the universe to know itself.
Perhaps this is something believers, skeptics and atheists can find common ground on. For believers, the way to praise their god or gods is to better know his/her/its creation or help it to know itself, skeptics and atheists should have little trouble with Rand’s position. In any case this is humanity’s sacred mission.
Why we should go into space…
Best summation ever.
Wow. No tears, but the eyes got a wee bit moist on that one.
The following doesn’t represent my views, but I find the implications of your views interesting.
Two thoughts:
!) Why do you suppose it took so long for intelligence to emerge on Earth? I’m not suggesting you should have an answer, I’m just suggesting that if you’re in the mood to dabble in unscientific teleology, the question might be interesting.
2) If our purpose is to help the universe come to know itself, the same is roughly true of non-human animals. Surely a dog or a cat is a way for the universe to experience itself – maybe not as much as a human might, but much more so than a rock. Such thoughts might lead you to reconsider your positions on animal rights.
Also, such thoughts might lead you to reconsider your positions on environmentalism: You could think of an animal as just one of the many ways for the universe to come to know itself. People do it one way (or, arguably, each person does it his or her own way), and each animal has a unique way of knowing the universe too. And so, when we work to prevent the extinction of animal species, we work to prevent the universe from losing a unique way of knowing itself.
The above doesn’t represent my views, but I find the implications of your views interesting.
Bob, right now, at this very moment, I’m killing millions of animals. That’s the cycle of life. If the highest intelligence were dogs or cats, who would care? There would be no point.
Rand’s point is profound because human intelligence exists. It’s not the same point if only dog intelligence exists. Excuse me while I eat my chicken.
There also might be implications in Rand’s position regarding other humans. I suggested people do a global replace on the string “humans” with “dogs” in Rand’s formulation, just to see what conclusions you personally come to. I also suggest replacing all instances of “humans” with “Nazis” or even “Adolf Hitler himself”, just to make any differences between Rand’s position and traditional religions more obvious.
You do know how to kill the joy in life, don’t you Bob?
Sorry you feel that way. I thought Lileks’ post, Rand’s comments, and this whole thread were all a lot of fun!
Been watching Babylon 5, Rand? 😉 That was the foundation of the Minbari religion, if I remember correctly.
I actually never watched much Babylon 5.
I tried it for the depiction of an O’Neil cylinder, and got hooked on the story.
Seriously, though, I appreciated the link and your comments, and I agree with Mike Borgelt about finding common ground. The joy of discovery and a sense of wonder are two of the best parts of being human.
Thanks for the link Rand, the whole piece is profound.
Don’t forget the corollary necessary to make that happen:
.. whose vastness similarly has no value unless someone is out there to exploit it.