Life: The Greatest Accident?

[ThaiGreenTea]

Every human being, every animal, every plant, and every living organism on this Earth originated by either chance or mutation.

Does this simply mean we, life as a whole, are a mistake? Are we just random blips coming across the universe? Were we ever meant to be? Think about it.


[I realize this is very Mass Effect-ish, but it did raise a good point.]

[redbaren]

I remember seeing a show in science class that talked about this, they said (of course this is a theory) that the chances of all the materials on earth needed to create life to combine were about 1 in 1 million. But if you think about it for how long earth has been here it the materials would have to combine some time.

[Beery Swine]

Mistake? As if physical laws have any sort of underlying intelligence and will behind them? How can a tree make a mistake? Do glaciers accidently melt or recede?

[Antares]

I remember seeing a show in science class that talked about this, they said (of course this is a theory) that the chances of all the materials on earth needed to create life to combine were about 1 in 1 million. But if you think about it for how long earth has been here it the materials would have to combine some time.

And there are (a fairly conservative estimate) one billion billion planets in our observable universe. Talk about playing with chance.

[Jakalwarrior]

As the others have hinted at, with the way the universe is setup, I think it is more an inevitability or natural process rather than an accident.

[Monte314]

Every human being, every animal, every plant, and every living organism on this Earth originated by either chance or mutation.

Petitio Principii.

[blueback]

I think it was inevitable. Not in the sense that people were inevitable but in the sense that increasing complexity was inevitable.

Atoms bond, they can't help it. As long as atoms want to bond and gravity keeps forcing them together they will eventually form more complex shapes. Once they have formed more complex shapes they will eventually form a shape that can make copies of itself. Once that happens a few of the copies will inevitably survive random destruction long enough to become more complex and still copy themselves.

At that point it's only a matter of a lot of time and a little luck before something that can ponder the improbability of its own existence shows up.

[SirJac]

Given the size of the universe, I don't think there are many things that are highly improbable. There is no reason to think that this planet, this galaxy is somehow any more significant then any other except that we originate from here and not somewhere else.

The only thing that seems to be extrodinarily unlikely is the fact that there is a universe at all. Perhaps we will eventually get a clearer picture of this as partical accelorators get bigger and more powerful. But then again the more we know, the more we realise how much we don't know. Each new discovery gives an answer, but it also raises 2 more questions.

[Lout]

I find it amusing that many people can't digest the fact that they're little, insignificant specs in the big picture.

So maybe we were formed entirely out of chance. Maybe there's no higher purpose, no higher order, no grand scheme of things. Why should that change anything?

[Sara27]

No mistakes. Just events.

What a crazy happenstance!

If we were meant to be here or not doesn't matter. I don't hear my imaginary friend complaining that he doesn't exist. I'm just trying to enjoy the ride.

[Marcus]

Every living person was created by chance. There were millions of spermatozoon and only one, carrying half of your your DNA (that was different from the DNA in other spermatozoon) penetrated the ovum to form a zygote.

[blueback]

gesundheit


1,000th post baby! My little bar is 1/4 full. . .whatever that means.

[True Rune]

I think it was inevitable. Not in the sense that people were inevitable but in the sense that increasing complexity was inevitable.

Atoms bond, they can't help it. As long as atoms want to bond and gravity keeps forcing them together they will eventually form more complex shapes. Once they have formed more complex shapes they will eventually form a shape that can make copies of itself. Once that happens a few of the copies will inevitably survive random destruction long enough to become more complex and still copy themselves.

At that point it's only a matter of a lot of time and a little luck before something that can ponder the improbability of its own existence shows up.
I wonder, what are the chances of our universe creating a "god"? Or something that can create? Just a random thought.

[blueback]

I wonder, what are the chances of our universe creating a "god"?
I like Asimov's take on it. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Saint]

... accident ... mistake? ... meant to be?

Think about it.

I think you just implied a shitload of intentionality.

I wasn't aware the universe had intentions. Stick with "chance or mutation" instead of those other words.

[Monte314]

I think you just implied a shitload of intentionality.

I wasn't aware the universe had intentions. Stick with "chance or mutation" instead of those other words.

Indeed; this is exactly what I said (more tersely) in my first post in this thread. Further, your choice of words is doing violence to the beloved preconceptions of the hard-core materialists posting here. As you are now experiencing, the Dysteleology Police will jump down your throat if they sense open-mindedness about this matter.

[Saint]

I don't mind if he has an opinion or theory that's out of this world, but I'm not so sure he meant to say quite as much as he said.

"Accident", "Mistake", and "meant to be" are some heavyweight words without a little context.

[zibber]

What does "either chance or mutation" mean? Why either?

[Henry]

Every human being, every animal, every plant, and every living organism on this Earth originated by either chance or mutation.

Prove it, or rather disprove the religous or even the deists.

Accept the deeply uncomfortable truth: you don't and can't credibly know.


What does "either chance or mutation" mean? Why either?

Because the OP is getting their ideas secondhand from video games.

[AgentofGaming]

Does this simply mean we, life as a whole, are a mistake? Are we just random blips coming across the universe? Were we ever meant to be? Think about it.

It "just happened" does not mean it's a mistake or an accident, since mistake or accident imply something is wrong or undesirable with the situation.
There was a chance and it occurred that's all there is to it.

There's also no such thing as "meant to be" in that sense. If we didn't exist to judge that who'd be there to determine "meant to be" anyways?

[Homini Lupus]

I think the more striking problem is how our self (the I in the expression "I thinc so I am") generated. "Life" after all coul be many things if we don't stick to carbonium based life. Many planets and an incredible amount of time can explain the birth of life (after all when we say that a planet can't host life we refer to forms of life we know). Still, I can't figure out why my self exists.

[zibber]

I think the more striking problem is how our self (the I in the expression "I thinc so I am") generated. "Life" after all coul be many things if we don't stick to carbonium based life. Many planets and an incredible amount of time can explain the birth of life (after all when we say that a planet can't host life we refer to forms of life we know). Still, I can't figure out why my self exists.

Maybe your I makes your I seem a lot more coherent than it actually is, being an emergent property of a complex neural network.

[Homini Lupus]

Maybe your I makes your I seem a lot more coherent than it actually is, being an emergent property of a complex neural network.

Not exactly. The brain is most likely the source of "think", but it doesn't clearly explains the "I". A machine able to work like a brain (an advanced AI) can think, but even if it may state it has an I and say "I'm alive" or show feelings, I'm not sure it would have an I. Sorry if I'm not clear, but I don't think there's a proper word to explain the problem of the existence of conscience wich clearly separates the ability to think and feel emotion (wich can be explained in materialist terms) and the existance of an "I", wich is consient of what the body elaborates (in terms of thinking and sensations and feelings).