"The Universe is Indifferent to Us": Fact or Opinion?

[Shadow Wolf]

But I am also willing to accept the the opposite implication- of observed reality-we are the only sentient life forms we know of, the only means by which the universe can contemplate it's own existence.

Why would the universe contemplate its existence through us when we are really less germs living on a moss-covered speck of iron drifting through a space larger than all the oceans combined. It seems foolish to experience itself through such very tiny and limited and linear beings.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

We don't know if it is or not. Many scientists do strongly believe that given the size of the universe, and the number of planets, the universe probably does have other intelligent life out there somewhere. Personally, I'd be more surprised to learn we are alone, and think that has much greater implications, than if there is a universe teeming with life. In all reality, we've barely seen but a small flake of the universe, and we've had visions of xrays and gamma rays, discovering many planets, but just do not currently have the means to actually explore those planets.
But, if we are the only, it still doesn't mean the universe is catered to us, or even this planet, as natural disasters destroy entire villages and there are a number of objects in heavens large enough to destroy life on the planet, with some of them coming close enough to make scientists run their calculations hundreds of times before assuring us we dodged a bullet....this time.

It's a fascinating question- because either answer- alone or not alone, is so profound right? But when you start crunching the numbers, I don't think the odds of ET are looking too great, I think the universe is way too small to make that a probability.

I'm not sure we can separate challenges from human intelligence- from making tools, clothes, shelter, weapons, medicine, you name it-. Jellyfish have zero challenges, and hence zero brains

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Why would the universe contemplate its existence through us when we are really less germs living on a moss-covered speck of iron drifting through a space larger than all the oceans combined. It seems foolish to experience itself through such very tiny and limited and linear beings.

Yet we are able to gaze across time and space to the very beginning of the universe.- and calculate the structure of atoms and universal constants. But aside from that, physics and chemistry are for the most part consistent across the universe, we have pretty much everything right here to examine, learn about, utilize- what better way to appreciate anything?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

we have pretty much everything right here to examine, learn about, utilize-

I very seriously doubt that. In a universe that has billions upon billions of galaxies, stars, and planets, why should it be assumed we have it all here?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think the universe is way too small to make that a probability.

Way too small? It's at least no smaller than billions and billions and billions of light years in size. It's easier to just learn scientific notation that trying to write out all the zeroes required for the distance of various objects in the universe, let alone the size of the universe.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

I very seriously doubt that. In a universe that has billions upon billions of galaxies, stars, and planets, why should it be assumed we have it all here?

Because it all came from the same place, and only a certain combination of chemical elements make life possible. We not only have that combination, but most of the inhospitable one's also- either right here on Earth or in our solar system- probably not too much else to see...

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Way too small? It's at least no smaller than billions and billions and billions of light years in size. It's easier to just learn scientific notation that trying to write out all the zeroes required for the distance of various objects in the universe, let alone the size of the universe.

Well there seems to be a rough consensus of about 10^24 stars in the observable universe, or in the order of hundreds of billions of trillions, 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. perhaps a couple more zeros for the unobservable if we can consider that even existing to any practical extent..

But that's just one side of the equation, on the other side are all the compounded improbabilities of a planet like Earth existing around any one of them.

if you allow a generous 1 in 10 probability of a nice sized inner rocky planet in the habitable zone, and a generous 1 in 10 chance of it having a good sized magnetic field to deflect radiation- those two modest improbabilities compound to 1 in 100-
so there goes 2 of the 24 zeros already- you get to zilch really fast with very conservative odds.-


And that's not even taking into account the improbability of intelligent life on Earth- we are the one species in millions that has it. i.e. even if we found a million planets identical to Earth, we might only find Dinosaurs at best on any of them, considering they ruled here for 100's of millions of years.

 

[Neo Deist]

Dammit, I find myself agreeing with and liking what @Shadow Wolf has been saying in this thread about the universe.

I think I caught a whiff of sulfur and hear the faint hoofbeats of 4 horses...

 

[Geoff-Allen]

Interesting thread!

I voted "No" based on the title of the thread then noticed I should have voted yes if that makes sense!

A Google search for universe support you tosses up some interesting viewpoints - yet 2 explore fully.

I used to think the universe was totally indifferent towards humanity but my beliefs have shifted over the years. It's a key question really - if you don't believe the universe is supporting you, that could be a source of anxiety and worry when you look at all the "bad" things that could happen to you in this world.

Thanks for the thread.

Namaste

 

[Brickjectivity]

...We could be god's boogers for all I know....

Put that on a t-shirt and sell it!

 

[Brickjectivity]

Why would the universe contemplate its existence through us when we are really less germs living on a moss-covered speck of iron drifting through a space larger than all the oceans combined. It seems foolish to experience itself through such very tiny and limited and linear beings.

Our size isn't necessarily important. For analogy consider your eyes, which are so important to you, but they're small and squishy.

I don't really think the universe us contemplating itself through us, but it is possible that our existence and the principle of self-similarity indicates the possible existence of a more complex being. I do not know how such a being would come to exist of course, but self similarity is an observed principle in nature. Such a higher order being probably could contemplate the universe if it exists, and I am not talking about 'God' just a higher order being. God is a different concept altogether.

 

[David T]

Do you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a fact or an opinion? By "indifferent", I mean that the universe does not care about you, and is neither against you nor for you.

If you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a fact, do you also believe you could prove that it was indifferent to us? If so, how?

That's a popular opinion, but no professional logician subscribes to it. For one thing, the statement "You cannot prove a general negative" is itself a negative, so if it were true, it would be false.

Is that A sort of

Do you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a fact or an opinion? By "indifferent", I mean that the universe does not care about you, and is neither against you nor for you.

If you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a fact, do you also believe you could prove that it was indifferent to us? If so, how?

If you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a mere opinion, do you also believe you could prove that it is deferential to us (that is, that it somehow sides for or against us)? If so, how?

 

[David T]

If I thought the universe did not care I would feel how that feels, in feeling that I would assume that my feelings confirm my thoughts, which always leads to more thoughts and onward down I might go. I could think it does care and the inverse could happen. And inward onward up may the cycle of thoughts and feelings go. Both are rather dangerous unchecked over time. Both start with "I think". Extended timeouts in nature answers the question because it reframe it for you regardless if you listen..

 

[Jesuslightoftheworld]

I believe the universe, the sun, the moon, the earth was solely created for us and only us. I don't think the universe has a mind to care either way. The universe and everything in it all the way down to an animal cell works in perfect harmony according to God's Laws and does not need us for it to continue. The law of nature is the strong survive. I don't think the top of the food chain being gone would affect anything. We need it, without us however, it would serve no purpose. So I think it's kind of a waste of time to try and ponder it and a silly notion.

 

[arthra]

If you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a mere opinion, do you also believe you could prove that it is deferential to us (that is, that it somehow sides for or against us)? If so, how?

Thanks for offering such a provocative and stirring question! I was thinking that the answer might rest on our view or perspective of space and time and what constitutes the universe... a very broad subject indeed!

My view of the universe is alas very limited and so I must defer to cosmologists... to attempt to gain some answer...
It would seem to me that the universe has neither beginning nor end... Yes portions of it do appear to have beginnings (big bangs) and endings but to me the universe includes an infinite number of such beginnings (bangs) and endings. Yes we could end our existence in this dimension tomorrow in a flash from a nearby super nova or maybe eventually a black hole but for beings on this particular infinitesimal planet it's really beyond our every day comprehension to appreciate such vast cosmic happenings.

As a poor student of history which somewhat derives from the benevolence of mother earth I would suggest that we can surmise a movement in history for the past five thousand years or so and similarly from the advancement of our species generally from the last ice age. We have I believe much to be thankful for in that our current knowledge limited as it is suggests we are better able to deal with earthly issues than past generations...

I have long been intrigued by the likelihood of sentient beings on other worlds and that we as sentient beings are not restricted to one infinitesimal sphere we call the "earth" ... Do I have evidence for the existence of such beings? Not really.. but if there are similar earth type worlds in the universe it suggests there could be similar living beings that have appeared.. so there could well be a kind of sentience as a natural outcome in the universe...

Finally there appears in my view to be the possibility of what are known as "parallel universes" and conceivably these could be related to reports of near death experiences by many people from various walks of life who have little or no social contact with each other...thus implying the likelihood such experiences suggest our continuation after leaving or separating from this universe.. the one we "live" in.

 

[Willamena]

I can't equate humans on an insignificant planet in the galaxy with
the universe.
We are but a spec of dust compared to the universe.

Every spec of the universe is the universe.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Maybe Its us. Thinking were somehow separate from the universe.

Depends if one cares or not.

 

[The Master Motive]

If I Am the Universe, I Am going to make a way for all things to be possible. I'll tell you that much for sure.

 

[Milton Platt]

Do you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a fact or an opinion? By "indifferent", I mean that the universe does not care about you, and is neither against you nor for you.

If you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a fact, do you also believe you could prove that it was indifferent to us? If so, how?

If you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a mere opinion, do you also believe you could prove that it is deferential to us (that is, that it somehow sides for or against us)? If so, how?

Why would non-living material be concerned with a few organisms clinging to the surface of one rocky ball of material out of hundreds of billions? I would think the burden of proof lies with those who would make the statement that somehow it does.

 

[Fool]

Do you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a fact or an opinion? By "indifferent", I mean that the universe does not care about you, and is neither against you nor for you.

If you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a fact, do you also believe you could prove that it was indifferent to us? If so, how?

If you consider the notion that the universe is indifferent to us to be a mere opinion, do you also believe you could prove that it is deferential to us (that is, that it somehow sides for or against us)? If so, how?

the universe cannot be indifferent to itself, or any aspect of itself. we, seemingly individuals, do not exist outside of the universe, or absolute.