There's nothing like listening to an eminent philosopher in dialogue with an eminent neuroscientist about the promise of artificial intelligence followed by a visit to the planetarium to make one feel rather small and wonder, "Do we matter?"
If I were to answer based on aforementioned dialogue, wherein "matter" meant the "stuff" of which everything is comprised, I'd be inclined to answer, "Not so much."
We are, according to the neuroscientist's claim, the "from the ground-up" evolution of matter that, at some point, developed a brain facility which could reason, write and reflect on its progress. But, being such an infinitesimally small part of a vast universe, does that make us significant or not? Moreover, there is a concept there may be more than one universe, which could make us even more "insignificant."
Plus, what, if anything, unifies us, anyway? Both culturally and individually, we see, hear, taste, smell and tangibly feel things differently. Life, some, therefore, contend, is only an individual illusion...or, to others, merely a hologram.
So, as our galaxy moves at 2 million kilometers per hour relative to the expanding fabric of space, while, concurrently, our solar system orbits this Milky Way at 800 thousand kilometers per hour and, in turn, our planet orbits around the sun at 108 thousand kilometers per hour as it spins on its own axis at 1,250 kilometers an hour
at the point where I'm writing, I ask, "Are we made for this universe or is it made for us?"
And, here are some thoughts....
But, first, what is the construct of "thoughts?"
Political structures, philosophies and religions developed by our brains have long sought to establish a common groundwork of building blocks or principles that could be agreed upon. Now, science seeks a common language through repeatable, i.e., "proven," causes and effects, as well.
How's all that been working out?
Well, for example, it's brought us to the point where, if we stopped the buildup of CO2 emissions today, it would take our ocean 50 years to recover. And, if we wait another 35 years, it would take a thousand years!
A lot of re-thinking or better thinking is in order.
One of the "problems" may be that there are lots of languages...sounds that try to express many of the same things, yet have, not only different nuances, but different definitions for the same sound, the same word.
Let's take "universe." Does multiple "universes" merely mean the energy sucked into black holes explodes into new universes on the other side of the hole? Well, to me, that would just make them facets of the same whole, i.e., one universe. Or, is the argument for other universes actually an unconscious perception or admission of other planes of existence or other dimensions...perhaps like the one spiritualists have professed since we "from the ground-up" creatures started reasoning?
I contend it may be the latter and that these perceptions, whether conscious or unconscious, make sense.
This small piece of the universe we inhabit might best be thought of as a lab in which we, originally, "from the ground-up" creatures began, at some point, to be infused..."from the 'top'-down"...with what I'll call 4-D minds or "souls" and have been testing, along with the help of another...5-D or "angelic"... plane how to co-create a visible or 3-D version of the Idea conceived by an even higher...6-D?... entity, i.e., Creator.
In this scenario, it is beneficial to have as many unique views as possible to enrich what I think of as a grand mosaic...as long as there is a caveat of mutual respect and adherence to "Do no harm." Those are the only necessary precepts. And, it doesn't take any thinking to perceive them. No languages nor even sounds are needed. Only heart.
So, to me, each of us more than matters and each individual spec of this universe is of value. On this plane, we may all come from the same stuff, but, at some point, we poked our heads through the ether and star stuff was elevated to particles of the Divine.
Let me know your thoughts.
PS: I chose Raphael's School of Athens image, above, because the difference between Plato's and Aristotle's philosophies are expressed in the up and down hand gestures of the two. No words are necessary to understand there have always been arguments on "from the ground-up" and "from the top-down."
