Why are we here? from a philosophical view

[AndyF]

As a form of life and being part of this bigger life - nature, the universe - I think it is in general our purpose to develop life towards a more complex, interesting and better life,

Benedict, Thanks.

…And, all the risk is yours and you still live a coerced life.

Your site is interesting, but it still begins from that platform that precedes from the creation by another being. My philosophy also encompasses pre-creative states,queries,causes, effects,behaviour,attributes and attitudes of all beings regardless.

AndyF

 

[Benedict_Broere]

Hello AndyF,

Thanks for the reply and reading. With the hope I understand you correctly I would like to respond with saying that my philosophy starts with the behaviour of phenomena in nature and culture, to subsequently try to make plausible a pattern that connects in it, and a best fitting creative worldview. I don’t want to coerse anything on reality. I explicitly speak of fundamental uncertainty and present my ontology as a work of art. What you mean with ‘pre-creative’ I don’t comprehend. Could you elaborate on that a bit more?

About meaning you also could say: We are part of this huge process of development of universe, and it seems we are here to be part of it and participate in it, it’s development, it’s growth, and in general it’s becoming more alive I think; with in the far future it’s transformation into a huge city maybe, or maybe some kind of mandala or jewel or gem. And we will love it, developing it, seeing it grow, fascinated as we are by games and sports, adventure and discovery, art and science, life in general. This reality is about creativity looking for beauty via complexity.

 

[AndyF]

Benedict:

and a best fitting creative worldview.

this world is temporary and we are in exile. This is not our true home. We attempt to make this way-stop better in the meantime so we can become worthy of our other world.

About meaning you also could say: We are part of this huge process of development of universe, and it seems we are here to be part of it and participate in it, it’s development, it’s growth, and in general it’s becoming more alive I think;

so far so good…

… with in the far future it’s transformation into a huge city maybe, or maybe some kind of mandala or jewel or gem. And we will love it, developing it, seeing it grow, fascinated as we are by games and sports, adventure and discovery, art and science, life in general. This reality is about creativity looking for beauty via complexity.

I thought the fist line here was a metaphore but you intended literal. This view is advanced by a creature that is locked into it and would prefer others share his view and ultimate demise.

I don’t want to derail this thread, but I would make one small point in regards your mandate.

To review, we are here as servants, not to seek out what nature and experience can pleasure us with, but to offer ourselves in all humbleness and charity to assist our brothers in true fraternal love, in emulation of our master and our Lord. It is only from this work in support of the Good News which gives us hope where we should obtain true happiness. We seek not what this world can satisfy for us here, but do everything that assists us and others in acheiving our destined other world.

While we focus on this, God may bless us with worldy things, but that is not our focus.

See: Ecclesiastes

AndyF

 

[Benedict_Broere]

AndyF,
My intention is to say we are created co-creators. And I think this notion is deeply inherent to the Christian view on things. And of course do I mean to say that this universe is more than just something utilitarian. It seems we are part of something alive and it wants us to join in, in her development. And there’s meaning in that, purpose, something to do. In a very general way. But all this we don’t know for sure. There’s no mandate. It is more an invitation I think.

 

[Benedict_Broere]

By the way, concerning this possible ‘universe encompassing city’ I spoke of, I read in the very interesting Ray Kurzweil site the following in an article by James N. Gardner:

"Traditionally, scientists have offered two bleak answers to the profound issue of how the universe will end: fire or ice. The cosmos might end in fire–a cataclysmic Big Crunch in which galaxies, planets, and any life forms that might have endured to the end time are consumed in a raging inferno as the universe contracts in a kind of Big Bang, but in reverse.

Or the universe might end in ice–a ceaseless expansion of the fabric of spacetime in which the thin soup of matter and energy is eternally diluted and cooled. Under this scenario, stars wither and die, constellations of cold matter recede further and further from one another, and the vast project of cosmic evolution simply fades into quiet and endless oblivion.

The Intelligent Universe proposes a third possibility: that the universe might end in intelligent life. Not life as we know it, but life that has acquired the capacity to shape the cosmos as a whole, just as life on Earth has acquired the ability to shape the land, the sea, and the atmosphere. As Princeton physicist Freeman Dyson puts it:

Mind, through the long course of biological evolution, has established itself as a moving force in our little corner of the universe. Here on this small planet, mind has infiltrated matter and has taken control. It appears to me that the tendency of mind to infiltrate and control matter is a law of nature."

See: kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=/articles/art0690.html

All this reminds me of the Omega-project as introduced by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, who of course was inspired by Jezus’: “I am the Alpha and Omega.”

I don’t know to what extend all this is compatible with the Catholic doctrine, but to me it’s inspiring stuff.

 

[AndyF]

Benedict Broere:

…but to me it’s inspiring stuff.

So far you’ve spoken about the wonders of the “stuff” of this world, “the fireworks in the sky” of wonderment to you, but you are still unclear on explaining how it enlightens you spiritually, in a way that matters.

BTW: What is your opinion of Ecclesiastes, and how do you manage to reconcile this necessary Doctrine to your enthrallment with matter.? Assuming you are Christian of course, otherwise I’ve lost interest.

AndyF

 

[Benedict_Broere]

Hello AndyF,
This ‘Ecclesiastes’, I’ve looked it up in WIKI and the Catholic Encyclopeadia, and well, it’s really quite something. But my impression is that the author means to say that all man’s activity is futile and vain when it is not in the meaning God has with this world. The question than rises: what is exactly God’s meaning with this world? Now already since the time of Thomas we see that meaning can be looked for in the Holy Text but also in the Creation itself. And than it is clear that people like James Gardner, Freeman Dyson and Teilhard de Chardin stand in a long tradtion of looking at the creation and trying to find out what God is trying to tell us with it. You see, revelation is one source, research of creation is another. And the latter is telling us quite an inspiring story, of how human creativity can become embedded in a creative adventure: the development of this universe. And to me this is also a kind of revelation: God telling us via creation: this is what I do, become part of it, there’s meaning in it.