Re: Linux poised to shape software and society

From: Stefaan A Eeckels (hoendech_at_ecc.lu)
Date: 08/26/03 

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 10:22:21 +0200

On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 03:20:12 GMT
believer <believe@believer.org> wrote:

>
> Why do people keep asking "Why is the meaning of life?" ?
> If it is just to multiply ... then you might as well kill yourself after
> you have kids.

Which is effectively what happens - once we've passed our
"reproductive" years, we grow old and die. "Kill oneself"
through a mechanical act (like a knife in the chest) is
out of reach of all animals but humans, so it's hardly a
surprise it doesn't get done. Notice though that certain
animals (like salmon) do indeed die just after procreation.

>
> Oh but you can't! Why not ? Why do you have a conscience ?
> Why do you have this thing programmed in your mind to keep your self
> alive ?

Because it works. Older humans have always been useful
to the younger generations, first as parents (meaning
you'll have to stay alive at least 12 to 20 years after
the birth of your last child), after that as minders and
educators (to allow the parents to gather the resources
needed for survival of the children). After that, we're
no longer particularly useful, so old age catches up and
we die.

> Tell me then ... what are the chances that life can happen out of an
> accident, given that you have the entire universe ?

The possibility is 1. We're the proof. But I would disagree
with the qualification "accident". Under conditions similar
to those on Earth, matter behaves (don't take that as an
antropomorphism, please) as on Earth. Given conditions similar
to those on Mars, it'll behave like what we observe on Mars.
It doesn't follow that lifeforms on an Earth-like planet will
be the same as lifeforms on Earth, but there will be carbon-based
lifeforms for sure. The question is whether there are other
planets that have conditions similar to Earth, and we don't
know. Given the number of stars in the universe, it would
be amazing if there were none. Notice that this doesn't mean
that any of the carbon-based lifeforms need to exhibit the
behaviour we call "intelligence".
 
> That's the point. It's more complex than a house and yet you say: "There
> is no intelligence involved in how it existed."

Complexity doesn't require intelligence (the faculty that allows
us to have this conversation). Thinking that the universe has to
have been created by something akin to ourselves is a very insidious
form of hubris, related to the hubris that makes us believe we're
somehow outside nature. The only sensible thing we can say about
the universe is that it exists, and that it has certain properties.
It's possible that our (observable, measurable) universe was
created by something - but the assumption that this something
should have anything in common with humanity is pure hubris.

> So where are the pre-Crambrian rocks that shows fossils of life before
> the Crambrian period ?
>
> Why is that, all of a sudden, there was a burst of life at the Crambrian
> period ?

The fossil record is incomplete. Even though we have found fossils
of unicellular organisms, the chances that creatures without hard
bodyparts yield fossils is very, very low. That being said, nothing
in geology or paleontology is verifiable by independent proof.
We have scraps of information, and we puzzle the sequence of events
together, on a best effort basis.
No absolute proof, but a reasonable indication of what happened.
Creationism, on the other hand, is totally devoid of any element
of proof. The Bible isn't proof of anything - making it an axiom
that it was written by (humans acting as stenographers for) God
doesn't make it valid proof. The trilobite in the rock on my
mantlepiece is some kind of proof, as it wasn't made by humans.
Explaining it by saying that God placed some kind of artefact in
a rock to create jobs for paleontologists just doesn't cut it.

> > OTOH, if you were to argue that some deity X created the single-celled
> > organisms, then abandoned them to their fates, I might have some
> > sympathy.
>
> He did not abandon them to ther fates ... People abandon Him.
> He made it clear to the Jews the consequence of disobedience.

Since when are Jews single-celled organisms? 

-- 
Stefaan (who has an MSc in Geology)
-- 
"What is stated clearly conceives easily."  -- Inspired sales droid