Why are we here?

[Ford]

I think there are only two possible answers to this question - random noise or the whim of the one above all. If you accept the first, then there is no further questions. If you accept the second, then the next question is what was His purpose? It would be hard to believe that all reality was done on a mere whim. Consider that...

Ah. I see where you're going with this. You asked the question figuring you had the answer in your back pocket the whole time, and wanted a few of us to chime in before you whipped out your Jesus and asserted the capital H in "Him."


We've seen this before.


In fact there are a few folks around here who did this sort of thing - proselytizing - as an avocation or even as a living.


As such, you're going to have to come at us with a little more than "either the universe is random, or God."

 

[Angry Floof]

I called it! :laughing-smiley-014

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I don't have a problem with random.

Anybody else got a problem with random?

 

[none]

this issue was settled a long time ago by consensus.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Why are we here?

Because we missed the last train to Scarsdale?

 

[none]

no the reason we are here is a secret, any other answer can be balked at.

 

[bilby]

I don't have a problem with random.

Anybody else got a problem with random?

I have a very small problem with random - we have no way of knowing if that answer is right or wrong.

We don't know, so any guess we make is likely to be wrong.

Of course, the more detailed our guess, the more likely it is to be wrong - so 'random' is about as good a guess as can reasonably be made, insofar as it is completely lacking in details - it is the least likely guess to be wrong, so it is the best guess, but still, it remains a guess.

Guesses involving intent are almost certain to be wrong; as intent requires an actor, and such a thing is complex.

Guesses involving a specific set of properties for the actor are so unlikely as to qualify as definitely wrong - so answers of the form 'We are here because of the will of the entity described in <insert name of book>' are clearly not even on the table.

You don't need to know the right answer to a question in order to determine that some classes of answer must be wrong.

The answer to 'What is the largest prime number' is 'nobody knows'. We can, however, be confident that the answer does not end in an even digit, or the digit '5'.

The answer to 'Why are we here' is 'nobody knows'; We can, however, be confident that the answer does not involve a God or Gods.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Wait. You said one of the only possible answers was a whim, then you find it hard to accept one of the only possible answers?

Picky, you know what I mean.

No, i don't.
I want to make sure of what you think you're saying before i come to judge that you're not entirely sincere in any attempt to appear even-handed.
Since i'm stuck with that you actually said, rather than what you seem to think i have assumed you meant to say, i have to ask.

And, like, you can't think of any other answers than those two?

They all can be reduced to these two.

Could you show your work, then?
Because i've become rather leery of simple dichotomies. It often seems to be someone trying to trim down any alternatives to two, one that he likes and one that he tries to make appear untenable or unattractive.

Do you have a list of the many, many possibilities you've considered and why you've drilled down to 'whim' or 'random noise?'
I mean, i don't believe in any deities, but i wouldn't consider the alternative 'random noise.' Why do you? How did you get to conclude that summed up the possibility?

Like, maybe there isn't one above all, but six or so, above many?
Would it make a difference in your evaluation if it's possible that God number one made stars, and god number 2 made people?

No, it would not.

Consider the question -- what might the whim have been that led to us being here?

I'm not there, yet. I'm asking why you consider the alternative to the action of a deity to be 'random noise?'
And why the action of a deity is referred to as a 'whim?'
Maybe the creator deity has no self-awareness. If it doesn't think, can we describe its actions as 'whims?'

 

[Keith&Co.]

I don't have a problem with random.

Anybody else got a problem with random?

Depends on what you mean by random.
In and of itself, i feel no problem in my self image to be the result of 'random noise' in the processing of the universe.
I do, however, take exception to the idea that if we don't use the actions of a goal-seeking deity to explain the universe, we have to consider the only other possible alternative to be 'random.' It may actually be inevitable. Just not part of anyone''s plan. Forces of the universe may have led step by inexorable step to the state of affairs that obtains today.
We just don't know. And i wonder how the OP has managed to trim that possibility off of the list.
Or if he ever considered it....

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Anyone have a specific answer to this question beyond "divine plan"?

You are a fluke of the universe.
You have no right to be here.
Whether you can hear it or not,
The universe is laughing behind your back.

National Lampoon - Deteriorata

This sums it up succinctly

 

[Keith&Co.]

So your answer to the question of "why are we here?" is that it is as a result of random noise?

You don't know; I don't know; Nobody knows.

It's really that simple.

Why is this so hard for you to accept?

Because all options HAVE to fit into one of his two possibilities, or else there's no way for him to continue on and prove Gawd.

- - - Updated - - -

Why are we here?

Because we missed the last train to Scarsdale?

I thought it was the last train to Clarksville? Or is that showing my age....?

 

[free radical]

I'm here bc I like to read..

 

[David123]

Free of what?

 

[Angry Floof]

Free of what?

Who are you talking to?

edit: Ah, I assume you're responding to free radical's name.

 

[David123]

In the immortal words of Buckaroo Banzai:

Because, no matter where you go, there you are.

I like it.

 

[David123]

Anyone have a specific answer to this question beyond "divine plan"?

Why are there at least 100 octillion stars, or 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars, in the universe relative to a "divine plan" all about humans on one planet around just one of those stars?

Why indeed.

 

[Angry Floof]

Why are there at least 100 octillion stars, or 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars, in the universe relative to a "divine plan" all about humans on one planet around just one of those stars?

Why indeed.

And isn't it wonderful, this mystery? No magical spooks required!

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I'm here because I'm paying the mortgage on this house, so I'm going to fucking well stay in it and you can all go and fuck off if you have a problem with that. It's my goddamned house, bitches, so back the fuck off. I don't need to answer to any of you.

 

[spikepipsqueak]

I don't have a problem with random.

Anybody else got a problem with random?

Random looks good to me.

It fits all the available facts and there is nothing extant that suggests another hypothesis might be a better fit for them.

 

[Mageth]

I didn't say so... I asked.

But that's not what I said.

Then what do you think you said? "To understand" is vague, to say the least. To understand all the function keys on my universal remote?

I would say understanding your remote may be a sort of fractal. If that helps you, go for it.

Several posts in now and still I'm no closer to understanding what is is you think we're supposed to understand, or why you think that why we are here is to understand whatever it is that you can't or won't say we're supposed to understand.

I don't think you're serious.

I'm serious. You gave "to understand" as the answer to the question "why are we here?" That's vague as hell, and it would be nice if you could clarify. So I'm asking what is it you think we're supposed to understand, and why do you think that the reason why we are here is to understand.