Do atheists believe that mankind is the greatest entity, intellectually, to have appeared in the universe thus far? ***********************************************************8 05-05-05, 03:09 PM frankvan I can only speak for one atheist, although I have a fair idea that many who call themselves atheists or agnostics would answer your question in a similar manner. I believe only those things for which I am convinced sufficient evidence, probability, or proof exists, or for which there seems to be some need to form a belief, pro or con. To speculate about some alien life form in existence in other parts of the universe would, for me, fall into the category of things I can imagine but would hesitate to either "believe" or "disbelieve". On this planet, I believe that man is probably the highest intellectual being up to the present stage of evolution, but as someone, I forget who, said: "L'homme, seul dans l'univers n'est pas fini". Wink
05-05-05, 03:15 PM Kendor
quote: Originally posted by frankvan: "L'homme, seul dans l'univers n'est pas fini". Wink
Can you please translate frank? Something about the end or size of the universe?
05-05-05, 06:53 PM frankvan Man, alone in the universe, is not finished. I take it to mean that, in his opinion, man still has some evolving to do. I wish I could remember who said it - 'senior moment'. Wink
05-06-05, 12:32 AM tsaeb What is that quote's context? It sounds as though maybe man needs woman. Smile Or, does it mean that no man is an island? Confused
05-06-05, 07:33 AM DorianGreyed "What is that quote's context? It sounds as though maybe man needs woman. Smile Or, does it mean that no man is an island? Confused " - tsaeb
It could mean that man isn't finished until he has a woman. Then, presumably, he is really finished.
05-06-05, 08:39 AM frankvan Now how did women get into that quote? I guess it would have been better if I had punctuated it differently. "Man alone, in the universe, is not finished." I have a vague feeling that it was Julian Huxley in ? "On the Origin of Species", quoting some French scientist of the opinion that evolution was pretty well over for most of the other animals, but man still was not completely evolved. Sorry, but I couldn't find any source in Google so perhaps it was a figment of my imagination ? No man is an island, is Johm Donne, if memory serves.
05-06-05, 08:54 AM juanruiz I might point out that, in the Romance languages, "l'homme," "l'uomo," "el hombre," etc. also means "mankind" (i.e., men and women).
05-06-05, 10:32 AM aminator2002 And "fini" can also mean finite.
So I would go with some translation a little less directly translated meaning "Only for mankind is the universe infinite"
Something along those lines...
05-06-05, 12:21 PM frankvan Granted that "l'homme" just like the word "man" can mean mankind and "fini" can mean finite. I would insist that the most likely interpretation is, (based on the context I remember imperfectly, and more loosely translated for the sake of accuracy of meaning) is: "Of all the animals known, only man hasn't yet finished evolving." I may have the wrong book, and wrong author, but I'm reasonably sure of the relevance of the quote. Smile
05-06-05, 12:25 PM Sarai
quote: Originally posted by Kendor: Do atheists believe that mankind is the greatest entity, intellectually, to have appeared in the universe thus far?
Without reference to the French, which I don't speak, I agree with FrankVan. I don't know the answer, but man is the most intellectually developed entity that I know to exist. That doesn't mean there aren't others who are more developed - I just don't know about them.
05-06-05, 12:39 PM juanruiz It also depends what is meant by "intellectually." Neanderthal had a larger cranium than Homo sapiens does, therefore, likely a larger brain. Look what it got him.
05-06-05, 12:53 PM frankvan This bit is not in French but it IS Julian Huxley speaking: "Man is not a finished product incapable of further progress. He has a long history behind him, and it is a history not of a fall, but of an ascent. And he has the possibility of further progressive evolution before him."
And, Juan -- I believe I've read that Isaac Newton had a smaller than average brain, and look what he did with it! Wink
05-07-05, 07:26 AM frankvan Kendor, why atheists? Do theists have some other opinion, and, if so, what?
05-07-05, 09:43 AM Kendor Well it's obvious that theists believe in a higher intellect, hence their theism. I've just always wondered just what why where when and how atheists explain the nature of our existence if they believe that the greatest entity is the young and ignorant human race. (I know this has been discussed a great deal but I've never been satisfied with any one explanation, and most likely never will be. BTW, same holds true with any theistic theory).
05-07-05, 09:57 AM juanruiz
quote: how atheists explain the nature of our existence
I don't worry about it. Although this is a component of theist debate.
"If there is no God how did everything come to be?"
"Beats me"
"Aha, so I have the answer and you don't. I must be right."
05-07-05, 10:48 AM Kendor
quote: Originally posted by juanruiz: I don't worry about it.
But don't you ever wonder? I used to lie in bed at night and frighten myself with thoughts of existence/non-existence. Not life/death but more of universe/no universe. What would fill the void that the expanse space of the universe currently fills if there were no universe? (And just where is this void)? Sounds like an oxymoron but it boggles me.
05-07-05, 10:53 AM juanruiz I'm sure everyone wonders about it. That is one of the key elements of all religions, an explanation of creation. I don't worry about it because I don't believe an explanation will be had in my lifetime...so why sweat it? We're here, might as well make the best of it.
05-07-05, 10:55 AM Sarai Me too, Kendor! However, I don't have to think of what was there before the universe to feel uneasy. What is outside the universe right now? Especially considering that outside the universe, "right now" is likely an irrelevant term, since time probably does not exist there. Eek
Juan's right though - just because I don't know the answer doesn't mean I will accept an answer that doesn't ring true for me.
05-07-05, 10:56 AM Sarai
quote: Originally posted by juanruiz: I'm sure everyone wonders about it. That is one of the key elements of all religions, an explanation of creation. I don't worry about it because I don't believe an explanation will be had in my lifetime...so why sweat it? We're here, might as well make the best of it.
I worry about it! I hope an explanation will be had in my lifetime... and I REALLY hope I'll be able to understand it.
05-07-05, 11:01 AM juanruiz
In your lifetime it may happen, as long as science in the west is free to continue questioning and speculating. I'm hoping for another 30+ years, which I don't believe is enough.
05-07-05, 11:45 AM frankvan - just because I don't know the answer doesn't mean I will accept an answer that doesn't ring true for me. Sarai.
That hits the nail on the head, for my money.
That is one of the key elements of all religions, an explanation of creation. I don't worry about it because I don't believe an explanation will be had in my lifetime.. Juan.
The same sentiment rephrased. Some of us are not satisfied with some "explanations". I don't have 30+ years; possibly not 30+ months. But I take comfort in the expectation that non-existence will be pretty much like it was before birth. In any case, I'm inclined to agree with Omar Khayam: "Awake my little ones and drink the cup, before life's liquor in its cup be dry". Wink
05-07-05, 11:48 AM juanruiz
quote: I don't have 30+ years; possibly not 30+ months. But I take comfort in the expectation that non-existence will be pretty much like it was before birth.
I hope it's more, Frank. You're a good guy. And as the Italians say, "Cent'anni di più." But I agree with your view on death.
05-07-05, 08:32 PM Professor
quote: Orignally written by juanruiz: I don't worry about [an explanation of creation] because I don't believe an explanation will be had in my lifetime
I don't think anybody's holding their breath for ultimate answers. But there's compelling physical evidence that the Big Bang happened around 12 billion years ago, and that humans evolved from single-cell creatures that appeared on Earth some 3 billion years ago.
Not bad progress compared to our counterparts a century ago wondering the same thing !
05-07-05, 08:41 PM juanruiz Oh, I figure the Big Bang theory is likely on target, I just don't think I'll be around to see all the wrinkles worked out.
05-07-05, 09:33 PM Professor Funny you should say wrinkles. A nice book on big bang cosmology is Wrinkles in Time (1993) by George Smoot, who, in the early 90's, discovered the subtle "wrinkles" in cosmic background radiation that were predicted by theory.
05-08-05, 12:45 AM jusork
quote: Originally posted by Kendor:
quote: Originally posted by juanruiz: I don't worry about it.
But don't you ever wonder? I used to lie in bed at night and frighten myself with thoughts of existence/non-existence. Not life/death but more of universe/no universe. What would fill the void that the expanse space of the universe currently fills if there were no universe? (And just where is this void)? Sounds like an oxymoron but it boggles me.
I think you probably have a hard time thinking about the world actually being merely what is apparent and our world is actually quite simple within itself. What if you think about the world without the complication of some higher level of existence and so that everything that exists is actually pretty confined to the same level of complexity? So that the universe really is just space, existence pretty much consists of void and matter. And we just happen to be the inconcievably small chance of a neat little thing called life occuring from the matter in the universe. What do you think? Does that make you wonder any differently at all?
Anyway, if there's anything that us non-believers can agree on in regards to life elsewhere, it's that if there is other life out there, God doesn't exist for them either. Big Grin
This message has been edited. Last edited by: jusork, 05-08-05 03:52 PM
05-11-05, 03:13 AM tsaeb jusork: Maybe that other life is God . . . and angels. Cool
05-11-05, 03:31 PM frankvan
quote: Originally posted by tsaeb: jusork: Maybe that other life is God . . . and angels. Cool
And then again ---Maybe not! Wink
05-12-05, 10:26 PM coldfuse Come on, guys. I figured this out in college. Our solar system is an atom in the body of a cosmic being, which to us is the universe. There are a lot of them.
And this is why I never tried drugs again.
03-20-06, 12:02 PM babthrower Kendor asks: "But don't you ever wonder? I used to lie in bed at night and frighten myself with thoughts of existence/non-existence. Not life/death but more of universe/no universe."
I think we've all scared ourselves into fits thinking about 'the abyss' at one point or another.
A higher intelligence in the universe? No idea.
It's obvious to me, though, why we humans are so limited mentally. (Evidence for that comes from modern physics. We can't grasp reality. We can only infer certain attributes of it.)
It's just that evolution is parsimonious. We need to understand only three dimensions in order to hunt, and to not become someone's lunch. So that's as far as our brains have evolved -- and no farther.
I sometimes wonder if some brighter people are surviving birth trauma these days, now that surgically-assisted births allow for a larger infant skull.
Are there smarter organisms in the universe? It's quite possible. Something that hatches from an egg, perhaps, where brain size could be accommodated.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
