Chemical Evolution

I am rather puzzled by the need for argument here. I was responding to Hambre. I will await his response.Believe what you will...

Really? Did you notice that this is a debate board? What I believe is unrelated to the question I had asked.You said: I asked a simple question about your assertion.Why?AbE: you might also want to note that Mr. Hambre posted that message on 07-26-2004 at 04:28 PM.Edited by jar, : No reason given.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, that is interesting isn't it! Thanks, I didn't notice... Tuning implies creating for a purpose or cause. And if the universe has, as it's -objective nature-, or as it's -base reality-, an uncaused or unpurposed existence (if it is untuned) then you and I cannot assume a tuning (or any other reality or nature) without being in direct opposition to it's underlying purposelessness. For lack of a better word, it would be unnatural for us to do so. We would not have a reason to do so.

Well, in a word, no. Tuning does not imply creating. And other than showing that you did not read what I wrote, what is your point?What I said was that we are the product of the Universe. It is not the Universe that is finely tuned for us, but rather that we are just barely adequately tuned to live in it. And the tuning even there is not very good. Almost all critters that have even existed went extinct.We can even see just how that minimal tuning is done. Really? Why not?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Ok then, why is a piano tuned? Or a vehicle? Or whatever?So look man, whoever you are. In a word, yes.If I am missing something, please explain. Please dispense with simple rejections.

What you said was that the universe just is. And if it just is, and we are a product of it as you say, then how can you say the tuning is not very good? How do you make a judgement about reality being bad?e.g. What is wrong with extinction? It just is!Now I don't believe that for a minute, but you said that you do!And I said that is why I feel the need to invoke a metaphysic that is beyond what I see. Because it is the only place I can gather a straight line, by which to measure the ones I think are bent.

That has NOTHING to do with creating. It is not creating a piano, creating a vehicle or creating whatever.The Universe is not finely tuned for us. We are barely adequately tuned to survive in it. Look around at life and what you find is that it is just barely good enough to survive. As I said, almost all species that ever lived in what you seem to think is a finely tuned universe died out. They went extinct. Daid. Gonner. No longer around.In addition you said: And I asked, why not? Why is it unnatural for us to try to tune our immediate environment? What possible reason might there be for us NOT to try to tune our environment?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I can say that the tuning is not very good because, as I have said several times to you now, almost every species that ever lived died off, went extinct. That's no judgment, it is called fact.Life, life that we have found so far, all life that we know of in the past, is not finely tuned to the finely tuned universe you claim exists. It is just good enough.That is Evolution. It is the history of them critters that lived just long enough to reproduce. The design of the critters is not fine, hell it is not even good, it is just barely good enough to get by. No more than that, And even then, when the conditions in this finely tuned universe you imagine change, the critters are usually found to be NOT good enough to get by.Edited by jar, : No reason given.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Let me jump in here for a sec - this "universe" that jar is talking about is only about a ten-mile-thick veneer on one little-bitty planet, as far as we know today. If there are other places in the cosmos that support any sort of life, they're almost surely veneers on other little planets. Nearly ALL of the universe is "tuned" to EXCLUDE life of any sort whatever: it's almost entirely either vacuum or highly ionized gas. And yes, I agree with jar as to the degree of tuning for our little apple-peel biosphere. We scrape by, for now.

Why? Why is it insufficient simply to desire that things be better, and work toward that goal?I mean can you go out to a restaurant without invoking a metaphysical purpose for hunger? If existence just is, what makes you think that we don't get to stop him? The nonexistence of metaphysical purpose isn't carte blanche for bad people to do bad things. The good people who want to restrain them are similarly unconstrained, after all. While there may be no metaphysical laws to enforce, by the same token, it's a violation of no metaphysical or moral law to enforce the temporal laws we, as the community of humans, decide we want to have enforced.Anything else is to suggest that bad people are free but good people are prevented from doing anything about it. And why on Earth should that be the case? If Amedidajad is metaphysically free to do whatever he wants to Israel, I'm free to do whatever I want to him - like try to stop him, or help him, or whatever. I don't see what your own personal incredulity has to do with anything. No, actually, he didn't. Hitler was a Christian who believed in the soul, and believed he had God's mandate for the extermination of Europe's Jews. Why? Why is practical necessity insufficient?And if the universe has a moral code, why can't anybody agree on what it is? Why does everybody who seems to percieve this "universal moral code" percieve, coincidentally, the exact moral code that privliges them and outlaws behaviors that they didn't even like in the first place?If the universe has a moral law, like physical laws, how is it even possible to act immorally? You don't get to break physical laws; how is it possible to break moral ones? Well, we don't have the ability to tune. Like Scotty says: "You canna change the laws a' physics, ca'tn!" It seems pretty obvious to me. If the universe was fine-tuned for life, life wouldn't be such a miniscule part of the universe, hanging on to existence by a fingernail on an unremarkable planet circling an unremarkable star in an unremarkable galaxy, among countless trillions. If the universe was fine-tuned for life there'd be a lot more life in the universe, don't you think?Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.

Do you see the words not very good in your comment?The fact is that all creatures die. But to say that it is 'not very good' is to express a judgement.Here you did it again-All highlighted texts are value judgements. How can we judge facts?I get the impression that you think life is good. Well it is not good. It's not bad. It just is. That's evolution.It's not an accident. And it's not designed. It just is.Corporate greed? Religious fanatacism? Kids walking into school with guns and killing fellow students?
None of those are bad... it is just the way it is.The only way we can say otherwise, is if there is something more to the story beyond what is appearent.I agree with you that life is good. And I find death to be unsatisfactory. But I cannot say that unless there is something more to this picture.I sometimes wonder if the universe is fine tuned. Very fine tuned indeed! Perhaps our need to make value judgements is reflecting part of the tuning. I hope so. Because if it just is, then we cannot presume to make value judgements. They would have to match an underlying tune.Pianos are tuned to create ordered and flowing music. Automobiles are tuned to create smooth and efficient transportation.Laws are tuned to create ordered and smooth societies.But if this universe is not tuned for ordered societies, then we are trying to do the impossible.If the universe is tuned for ordered societies, then the tune would already be there.Perhaps it is we, who do not follow the tune.

you seem to be working with extremes here.If the room isn't pitch black, then it must be white bright. That isn't always the case. A lack of cause does not mean chance alone. No universal moral code does not mean that we can't have reasons for stopping HitlerYou seem to be suggesting that if there isn't everything then there is nothing. Why can't there be a middle position? That there is something, its not nothing, but it isn't everything.

Perhaps it's already declining, but probably a good idea to put in this request, anyway. A bit more colleagiality, please! Thanks!

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Me?

I sometimes issue general advisements in the hope that everyone asks, "Does he mean me?", whether I meant them or not. Guess it works!

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director