What we must accept if we accept evolution Part 2

Good morning to you, Omni, and thank you for the appreciation.

That "for many of us" phrase kind of underscores what Darwinism did right there. Not alone of course, there were other influences. An unfortunately fitting epitaph for noble humanity your post. So very modern.

Of course it implies no purpose. All those thinkers I mentioned took it to imply no purpose. That was THE philosophical effect of Darwinism at the time and it continues as a general undertone in culture, the psychological undercurrent of all personal identity these days. Why can't this just be acknowledged? "Not providing one" is just a species of denial. If humanity is nothing more than something the physical universe tossed up by accident it most CERTAINLY implies NO PURPOSE to our existence, and it is psychologically FELT to imply no purpose too. There was no purpose to our just happening to get evolved, it could have not happened at any point along the way. There is simply nothing special about humanity in this view. Some entirely other kind of creature could have evolved as the pinnacle of the evolutionary tree. Again, just because WE can invent purposes doesn't change this fact. But I believe Robin's point was that such a construct is not even believed by those who think it up. It's merely a logical construct that you couldn't care less about, so hypothetical it isn't even worth a passing thought, something you have hardly even thought about, just to the barest outlines. The point is that people DON'T believe in such a God and the Creator Gods they do believe in -- not the pantheons but the concepts of an omniscient omnipresent omnipotent God -- are logically incompatible with Darwinism (and let's use this term to cover all the elements involved since you protest the use of the ToE).

I didn't say anything about Providence. All I'm talking about is what seems to be the obvious, logical and in fact historically verified inference about a lack of human purpose from Darwinism. Nothing whatever. You can determine your purpose all you like. That is in fact what people do with Darwinism, make up our own purposes, invent ourselves, our own morality, live as the Aesthete or the Punk or whatever one chooses. It's wide open, not at all being prevented, but the opposite -- there is no FORMAL OBJECTIVE purpose to humanity, so all these subjective invented purposes ARE what we have. I don't understand why you think I said that "sneeringly" and I also don't understand why you think I'm "dismissing" anything. Subjective self-invented purposes for our identities ARE what we have. What we DON'T have under Darwinism is an OBJECTIVE purpose for humanity.