Let's play a game!
There are two characters: Bob and Jimmy.
Bob is a fervent materialist. He can hardly conceive that there is more to life that the mechanical processes governing the physical body. Jimmy, on the other hand, is open to the idea that there is a higher purpose to physical existence. Both men are eager to find the truth and are willing to discuss the matter in a respectful manner.
You play both characters at the same time. Your goal is to create a dialog by coming up with the strongest arguments you can find for each side. Start with a premise, and defend your ground until a position becomes practically untenable or absurd!
Here is my first attempt:
Jimmy: You know, Bob, I don't think randomness played such a significant role in the evolution of the modern human.
Bob: How so?
Jimmy: Let's rewind a little bit. What is the probability of rolling ten consecutive 5's with a fair die?
Bob: Let's see. So (1/6)^10 = 0.0000000165..., so the probability is around 0.00000165%.
Jimmy: Very low, isn't it? Now, what is the probability of randomly rolling the entire human DNA?
Bob: Extremely, extremely low... but you are missing the point!
Jimmy: What is the point?
Bob: Given enough time, there is a chance that it may happen! In fact, this has happened and that's why we are here!
Jimmy: So you are saying that we, as humans, are the result of an extremely lucky process?
Bob: Yes!
Jimmy: What happened to all the organisms that "didn't make it," i.e. that were "errors" of Nature?
Bob: They didn't survive, that's why they don't exist anymore.
Jimmy: But you see, at some point, they did exist. "Luck was on their side... until it wasn't," as you would put it.
Bob: Yes, then mutations derailed them, and they couldn't cope with their environment.
Jimmy: Well, species can go extinct without genetic failures. For example, if humans decide to kill all lions in Africa, there is not much the lions can do to stop them.
Bob: That's true, but you see, the lion's vulnerability is all coded in its genes. And so is the human's ability to destroy.
Jimmy: Isn't it fascinating that there is always a "stronger" organism that can seal the fate of a "weaker" organism?
Bob: That's the beauty of life! All organisms are pushed, through their interactions, to become the "best versions" of themselves in order to survive.
Jimmy: Isn't that a foundational principle upon which all the rest is built? I mean, whether organisms are created or destroyed, this metaphysical concept "outlives" the life cycle of any organism. It is not subject to genetic failures. You cannot touch it, it's not physical, but you can observe the way organisms behave, i.e. how this principle is applied through them, whether they are aware of it or not.
Bob: In some other universe, there could be another guiding principle. For example, organisms could seek to become the "worst versions" of themselves.
Jimmy: Is this other principle also randomly generated?
Bob: It could be. Why not?
Jimmy: What I am trying to say is that there exists a structure, or a set of rules or principles which never changes. An unstable system cannot generate a stable sub-system, because the unstable system will eventually degrade and annihilate its "stable" sub-systems along with itself, and there won't be anything left to kickstart any future system. Therefore, ultimately, at the origin, at the very core of our existence, there is a very stable system devoid of imperfections, which can produce other stable or even very unstable sub-systems. In other words, in order to make a mistake, there first has to be the opportunity of making a mistake. And that opportunity is always available, as it is granted to all possible sub-systems by the stable "master" system. We are an embodiment of the metaphysical principles stemming from that ultimate, "master" system. These principles cannot change, because they are part of the stable "master" system which will always exist. Hypothetically, if these principles were to change, it would mean that the system in question is not the "master" system.
There are two characters: Bob and Jimmy.
Bob is a fervent materialist. He can hardly conceive that there is more to life that the mechanical processes governing the physical body. Jimmy, on the other hand, is open to the idea that there is a higher purpose to physical existence. Both men are eager to find the truth and are willing to discuss the matter in a respectful manner.
You play both characters at the same time. Your goal is to create a dialog by coming up with the strongest arguments you can find for each side. Start with a premise, and defend your ground until a position becomes practically untenable or absurd!
Here is my first attempt:
Jimmy: You know, Bob, I don't think randomness played such a significant role in the evolution of the modern human.
Bob: How so?
Jimmy: Let's rewind a little bit. What is the probability of rolling ten consecutive 5's with a fair die?
Bob: Let's see. So (1/6)^10 = 0.0000000165..., so the probability is around 0.00000165%.
Jimmy: Very low, isn't it? Now, what is the probability of randomly rolling the entire human DNA?
Bob: Extremely, extremely low... but you are missing the point!
Jimmy: What is the point?
Bob: Given enough time, there is a chance that it may happen! In fact, this has happened and that's why we are here!
Jimmy: So you are saying that we, as humans, are the result of an extremely lucky process?
Bob: Yes!
Jimmy: What happened to all the organisms that "didn't make it," i.e. that were "errors" of Nature?
Bob: They didn't survive, that's why they don't exist anymore.
Jimmy: But you see, at some point, they did exist. "Luck was on their side... until it wasn't," as you would put it.
Bob: Yes, then mutations derailed them, and they couldn't cope with their environment.
Jimmy: Well, species can go extinct without genetic failures. For example, if humans decide to kill all lions in Africa, there is not much the lions can do to stop them.
Bob: That's true, but you see, the lion's vulnerability is all coded in its genes. And so is the human's ability to destroy.
Jimmy: Isn't it fascinating that there is always a "stronger" organism that can seal the fate of a "weaker" organism?
Bob: That's the beauty of life! All organisms are pushed, through their interactions, to become the "best versions" of themselves in order to survive.
Jimmy: Isn't that a foundational principle upon which all the rest is built? I mean, whether organisms are created or destroyed, this metaphysical concept "outlives" the life cycle of any organism. It is not subject to genetic failures. You cannot touch it, it's not physical, but you can observe the way organisms behave, i.e. how this principle is applied through them, whether they are aware of it or not.
Bob: In some other universe, there could be another guiding principle. For example, organisms could seek to become the "worst versions" of themselves.
Jimmy: Is this other principle also randomly generated?
Bob: It could be. Why not?
Jimmy: What I am trying to say is that there exists a structure, or a set of rules or principles which never changes. An unstable system cannot generate a stable sub-system, because the unstable system will eventually degrade and annihilate its "stable" sub-systems along with itself, and there won't be anything left to kickstart any future system. Therefore, ultimately, at the origin, at the very core of our existence, there is a very stable system devoid of imperfections, which can produce other stable or even very unstable sub-systems. In other words, in order to make a mistake, there first has to be the opportunity of making a mistake. And that opportunity is always available, as it is granted to all possible sub-systems by the stable "master" system. We are an embodiment of the metaphysical principles stemming from that ultimate, "master" system. These principles cannot change, because they are part of the stable "master" system which will always exist. Hypothetically, if these principles were to change, it would mean that the system in question is not the "master" system.
