Feedback and Notes

 

Imagine No Religion

Latest Activity

Mrs.B commented on Adriana's group Freethought and Funny Bones
2 hours ago
Stephen commented on Adriana's group Freethought and Funny Bones
4 hours ago
Mrs.B commented on Adriana's group Freethought and Funny Bones
7 hours ago
Stephen commented on Adriana's group Freethought and Funny Bones
7 hours ago
Mrs.B commented on Adriana's group Freethought and Funny Bones
7 hours ago
Mrs.B commented on Doone has Fremdschämen's group Canada, Mexico most of the World and Some Nutty Country ruled by a Cockroach Rider News
7 hours ago
Stephen commented on Adriana's group Freethought and Funny Bones
7 hours ago
Stephen commented on Adriana's group Freethought and Funny Bones
8 hours ago
Stephen commented on Doone has Fremdschämen's group Canada, Mexico most of the World and Some Nutty Country ruled by a Cockroach Rider News
8 hours ago
Joey Daniel Smith replied to Stephen's discussion Stephen Hawking makes it clear: There is no God
22 hours ago
Mrs.B commented on Doone has Fremdschämen's group Canada, Mexico most of the World and Some Nutty Country ruled by a Cockroach Rider News
yesterday
Stephen left a comment for Sunil jayasinghe
yesterday
Stephen left a comment for Greg Trombo
yesterday
Stephen commented on Doone has Fremdschämen's group Canada, Mexico most of the World and Some Nutty Country ruled by a Cockroach Rider News
yesterday
Mrs.B commented on A Former Member's group Animal | Vegetable | Mineral | Fungus or Scump
yesterday
Doone has Fremdschämen commented on A Former Member's group Animal | Vegetable | Mineral | Fungus or Scump
yesterday
Doone has Fremdschämen commented on A Former Member's group Animal | Vegetable | Mineral | Fungus or Scump
yesterday
Doone has Fremdschämen commented on A Former Member's group Animal | Vegetable | Mineral | Fungus or Scump
yesterday
Mrs.B commented on Doone has Fremdschämen's group Canada, Mexico most of the World and Some Nutty Country ruled by a Cockroach Rider News
yesterday
Stephen left a comment for Suzanne Johnson
yesterday

We are a worldwide social network of freethinkers, atheists, agnostics and secular humanists.

Be it atheists or theists, many may feel human life may be purposeless or untenable; i.e. a never ending search or a "why" question that's perhaps not worth asking.

I think there's a viable alternative to especially the "purposeless" based outlook, with the introduction of a recent concept called "teleonomy", which is an atheistic/scientific way to describe nature in purpose driven language. (In fact, as seen on Wikipedia/teleonomy, Richard Dawkins; recently introduced the treatments “archeo” and “neo” purpose. See his video/speech "the purpose of purpose".)

Anyway, for example, using the laws of thermodynamics, we can try to objectively discover non-trivial goals that humans may undertake, as far as nature goes. (i.e. grand purposes for the human species, that reasonably transcend the desires of individual humans, while seeking to be objective, much like how Science tends to follow the evidence, aiming to describe what the cosmos actually is, rather than what people may want the cosmos to be.)

Note: One may reasonably grasp an understanding of the summaries below, without clicking on the associated wikipedia etc sources. One may however get an even more wholesome understanding, by toggling the links conveniently provided throughout the summaries.




Hypothesis A - An atheist PhD psychologist named Michael Price, hypothesizes that future humans are probably supposed to replicate universes [2017]: "Michael's variant of Cosmological Natural Selection I":


The original version of CNS I stems from a concept called Cosmological Natural Selection by physicist Lee Smolin.

  1. Cosmological Natural Selection, posits that our universe likely stemmed from a process that like evolution or biological natural selection, spun many universes; where the best universe instances emerge from universes that possess excellent replication abilities/properties, through the utilization of blackholes. Intelligent life is said to be an accidental by-product of this replication process
  2. Cosmological Natural Selection I (CNS I), additionally posits that intelligent life is a viable factor for replicating universes.
  3. Michael Price’s variant of CNS I, additionally posits that intelligent life is a likely core influence on the successful generation of replicating universes, where Michael surmises that human intelligence is the most “improbably complex” outcome of the cosmos thus far. Michael ranks modern humans to be a step in the direction towards future human intelligence, that will be able to create non-arbitrary universes. Thereafter, Michael expresses that the scientific purpose of humans is reasonably, ultimately to replicate universes like ours.


Hypothesis B - An atheist computer scientist named Jordan Bennett, hypothesizes that a grand human purpose is probably to create Artificial General Intelligence [2015]: "Why the purpose of the human species is probably to create artificial general intelligence?"

  1. In understanding Jordan's hypothesis, one may imagine entropy as a currency in an economy.
  2. Agents/organisms that get work done (access to activities) in nature, must pay up some entropy, you don't do work or have access to activities, without paying up some entropy.
  3. Highly Intelligent things (like humans) reasonably pay more entropy, compared to less intelligent things or non intelligent things, because humans do more work i.e. many cognitive tasks (thinking about science, doing scientific stuff) compared to lesser intelligences or non intelligent things.
  4. In a similar way, chimps may pay more entropy than say less intelligent things, because they do more work, or have access to more complicated activities. (More access to activities result from more access to stuff called "macrostates" in the OP's second hypothesis regarding Artificial General Intelligence.)
  5. Likewise, Artificial General Intelligence[AGI] or Artificial Super Intelligence[ASI] when built, will have access to more cognitive activities, and they'll get more work done than humans. So, they'll reasonably pay more entropy to the thermodynamic system that is nature.
  6. This means there is reasonably a pattern, nature is finding more and more ways to extract more and more entropy from activities done (i.e. entropy maximization), and nature reasonably does this by building smarter and smarter things. Humans thus likely won't be the last thing nature finds to derive entropy from work; there will likely be AGI or ASI or whatever smarter thing that follows humans. (Laws of physics permits smarter things than humans overall)

Crucially, Science can reasonably describe how organic life began (namely, via evolutionary principle etc) and also, reasonably where human life perhaps seeks to go (again, via evolutionary principle etc, as described in the hypotheses above.)




Footnotes:

  1. An atheist PhD psychologist hypothesizes that future humans are probably supposed to replicate universes [2017]: "Cosmological Natural Selection, Cosmological Evolution and the Futu...".
  2. An atheist computer scientist hypothesizes that a grand human purpose is probably to create Artificial General Intelligence [2015]: "Why the purpose of the human species is probably to create artifici...?"
  3. Video summary:

 

Views: 251

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I like this post, it means that someone out there is exploring, thinking...alas, there can be no progress without this...Thanks for the post!  Joey

1

Joey's words:

"I like this post, it means that someone out there is exploring, thinking...alas, there can be no progress without this...Thanks for the post!  Joey"

My response:

Thanks a lot.

I wanted to like this post, but I can't because it requires me to sign in to Facebook.  The only ones that are on Facebook are the hopelessly Insane.  Joey

Joey's words:

"I wanted to like this post, but I can't because it requires me to sign in to Facebook.  The only ones that are on Facebook are the hopelessly Insane.  Joey"

My response:

The post doesn't have any facebook links, and you don't' need to download anything, because the papers are view-able in the links provided. What are you talking about?

Yes, It required me to sign into Facebook.  Not Ever!!  I am Sane! 

Chris' words:

"

The human brain replicating the universe seems anthorpormorphic and self serving.

More power to to thoese who explore both the universe and human brain.  Neither of them are reconcilable without pulling in myth and therefore religion.

If you want to talk about the absurdidy of artificial intellegence  I'm more that happy to go there."

My response:

  • Your opinion regarding replication is noted. However, Science while avoiding religion, explains how a universe like ours may have emerged. 

  • Albeit, the universe replication hypothesis, although within the realm of scientific endeavour, and although rejecting religious endeavour, is still quite speculative. The second hypothesis regarding artificial intelligence does seem more reliable.

The Universe Did Not Emerge,,,that is the thinking of a primitive.  All that exists, is existence.

Now you may, in your mind require a causal explanation for the universe...but you will never find it.  The Universe is dynamic, always changing, evolving, however, it exists in a state of dynamic equilibrium. What has apparently emerged in your mind, is the Universe as you so statically perceive it now.  Too bad.  All that exists is existence....nothing can get around, behind, in front of, or to the side of existence... Have a great day...Joey.  The Universe IS Eternal, and though you may not like that the implications for you may seem dire, that is the way it is.  Hoping for something different will bring you Squat.

Joey's words:

"

The Universe Did Not Emerge,,,that is the thinking of a primitive.  All that exists, is existence.

Now you may, in your mind require a causal explanation for the universe...but you will never find it.  The Universe is dynamic, always changing, evolving, however, it exists in a state of dynamic equilibrium. What has apparently emerged in your mind, is the Universe as you so statically perceive it now.  Too bad.  All that exists is existence....nothing can get around, behind, in front of, or to the side of existence... Have a great day...Joey.  The Universe IS Eternal, and though you may not like that the implications for you may seem dire, that is the way it is.  Hoping for something different will bring you Squat."

My words:

Actually, I somewhat agree to the latter part of your response. 

However, you may have something confused. Science indicates that the universe may have emerged from quantum fluctuation related regimes; i.e. the laws of physics may be emergent, along with space and time. The quantum fluctuation regime is predicted to have reasonably always existed.

  • So, that quantum fluctuations always existed, does not necessitate that the universe couldn't be emergent.
  • See Lawrence Krauss' "Flavors of nothing".

What is a quantum fluctuation...Do you know?  

If such a 'quantum fluctuation' occurred, it was part of existence.  Nothing cannot be the cause of something.  Joey

Joey's words:

"What is a quantum fluctuation...Do you know?  

If such a 'quantum fluctuation' occurred, it was part of existence.  Nothing cannot be the cause of something.  Joey"

My response:


It is great that you seemed to have updated your old ideas, such that you now recognize that the universe reasonably emerged, especially in light of the evidence I recently underlined for you. I thereafter maintain my prior response.

Der Mensch begreift niemals wie anthropmorphisch er ist—

Man never comprehends how anthropomorphic his conceptions are. –

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe; (1749 – 1832)

Old Hans  beat you by a couple hundred years Chris. 

Davy's words:

"Der Mensch begreift niemals wie anthropmorphisch er ist—

Man never comprehends how anthropomorphic his conceptions are. –

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe; (1749 – 1832)

Old Hans  beat you by a couple hundred years Chris. "

My response:

Science seeks to objectively describe the cosmos, independent of human desire. This is how things like computers and other technology emerged. Said technologies may aid humans, but notably, one large reason why they work, is due to the objective nature of Science.

  • Science contrasts religion, where religious holy books have a lot of subjective/anthropomorphic  properties, devoid of scientific equations. Science instead seeks to be objective, and seeks to accurately describe the cosmos, and so Science has produced results including modern technology/quantum computers etc, which holy books or religious endeavour has failed to do.

RSS

© 2019   Created by Atheist Universe.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service