I often think about why we’re here -and of course the roman empire. And while it might be tempting to think that the purpose of life is to be happy or content, I think the over arching theme of the world is evolution. Repeating cycles of creation and destruction: biological life, planets, solar systems, black holes, etc.
It’s almost a little grim. That maybe, the reason we’re here is for the end product. Just like a farmer plants a tree for the fruit. But I guess the in-between steps are no less beautiful than then finished result. Same as the journey being as meaningful as the destination.
The VAST majority of matter and energy in the universe is in the non-purpose category—it often has activity and reaction, and effects over time, but it doesn’t strategically change it’s mechanisms in order to achieve something, it just executes.
Humans (and arguably other animals and groups distinct from indiiduals) may have purpose, and may infer purpose on things that don’t have it intrinsically. Even then, there are usually multiple simultaneous purposes (and non-purpose mechanisms) that interact, sometimes amplifying, sometimes dampening one another.
I think you’re using the wrong model for what “have a purpose” means. purpose isn’t an attribute of a thing. Purpose is a relation between an agent and a thing. An agent infers (or creates) a purpose for things (including themselves). This purpose-for-me is temporary, mutable, and relative. Different agents may have different (or no) purposes for the same thing.
Is the purpose of the universe evolution?
I often think about why we’re here -and of course the roman empire. And while it might be tempting to think that the purpose of life is to be happy or content, I think the over arching theme of the world is evolution. Repeating cycles of creation and destruction: biological life, planets, solar systems, black holes, etc.
It’s almost a little grim. That maybe, the reason we’re here is for the end product. Just like a farmer plants a tree for the fruit. But I guess the in-between steps are no less beautiful than then finished result. Same as the journey being as meaningful as the destination.
The VAST majority of matter and energy in the universe is in the non-purpose category—it often has activity and reaction, and effects over time, but it doesn’t strategically change it’s mechanisms in order to achieve something, it just executes.
Humans (and arguably other animals and groups distinct from indiiduals) may have purpose, and may infer purpose on things that don’t have it intrinsically. Even then, there are usually multiple simultaneous purposes (and non-purpose mechanisms) that interact, sometimes amplifying, sometimes dampening one another.
Locally maybe there is no purpose. But maybe it’s necessary for life to emerge elsewhere, so it could have a larger purpose.
If you isolate a napkin, it has no purpose but as soon as you need to wipe you mouth it acquires one. So maybe purpose is relative.
But yeah, looking at my original post, I’m trying to compare the purpose of the universe with the purpose of humans, which doesn’t necessarily overlap
I think you’re using the wrong model for what “have a purpose” means. purpose isn’t an attribute of a thing. Purpose is a relation between an agent and a thing. An agent infers (or creates) a purpose for things (including themselves). This purpose-for-me is temporary, mutable, and relative. Different agents may have different (or no) purposes for the same thing.