Evolution, entropy, and 'the end'

[IJesusChrist]

hola.

This question has plagued me since I was taught evolution;

Where is evolution going? Why is it, that even though entropy wants to increase, we still have maximum order here on planet earth. I understand total entropy still diverges, but why is it that any type of evolution takes place?

We have these 4 known forces (soon to be 5) that have seemed to congeal matter in a very intricate way, a very precise manner - there is no chaos and no randomness. But where is it going? What is evolution headed for? You see - all the forces act upon one another to assume the lowest state of energy, i.e. maximum entropy. Yet evolution in itself has tried to maximize order - we as a species and as creators are creating a more and more complex and intricate world. How? Why? Given no free will, and determinism, how may this ever be possible, what is it that evolution is headed towards?

Again, I want you to think, what is it that evolution is headed towards?

I am not speaking about darwin's theory, i.e. survival of the fittest, I am speaking broader, grander. Why is it that life forms? Why is it that there seems to be an infinite amount of complexity possible? What is infinite complexity? Why is infinite complexity seemingly the goal of evolution, however the entire universe diverges to inifinite disorder? Is this simply a race against time?

Tah dah!

[Dan Rowden]

Attributing any teleological dimension to evolution is a serious mistake. It's to misunderstand its very nature.

[IJesusChrist]

Ahh or is it?

You're not thinking wide enough.

[Pincho Paxton]

Plasticine has perfect entropy, but it can be any shape to fit any hole. I think that evolution is just trying to fit a hole. Birds beaks changing to be used as different tools is my reasoning. I think that humans are trying to fill the hole in the Universe where all of the planets are dead. Or maybe they are trying to fill the hole in their minds where they find boredom? Or maybe they are trying to fill the holes in their pockets where they require money?

[IJesusChrist]

I am not addressing evolution of life specifically.

[Dan Rowden]

It doesn't matter. Teleology is merely a product of human consciousness. An Infinite Reality, which is what we have, cannot have a teleological aspect.

[Alex T. Jacob]

If teleology is a product of human consciousness, and human consciousness, say, re-engineers itself into a new form or a more enduring form, or finds a way to increase consciousness tremendously, and perhaps begins to work as an accelerator for the evolution of other life forms, and we humans decide on a given 'telos', we make that determination, or respond to something in 'the cosmos' that impels us in that direction, we are operating within the natural construct and---therefor---life can be said to be teleological or to have teleological purposes.

If it occurs in our consciousness, it seems it exists.

[Dan Rowden]

If teleology is a product of human consciousness, and human consciousness, say, re-engineers itself into a new form or a more enduring form, or finds a way to increase consciousness tremendously, and perhaps begins to work as an accelerator for the evolution of other life forms, and we humans decide on a given 'telos', we make that determination, or respond to something in 'the cosmos' that impels us in that direction, we are operating within the natural construct and---therefor---life can be said to be teleological or to have teleological purposes.

If it occurs in our consciousness, it seems it exists.

I don't see the relevance of this, Alex. Of course teleology exists. All subjective manifestations of consciousnesses exist. That's not the point.

[Alex T. Jacob]

I thought it was evident: if we devise, invent, enforce teleology, if we decide to bring things to a certain 'telos', 'telos' therefor exists, and we are nature's expression of it.

Deja vu wrote: 'The universe itself, ie. infinity, is not conscious.'

I think I understand why you-plural think the universe and 'infinity' is not and cannot be conscious. Some philosophical systems pull a fast one, and say-imagine that the supreme being wills the universe we know into existence, unfathomably incomprehensibly. That is of course how the Jewish Kabalists (choose to) see it.

But how do you go about explaining a non-conscious universe, just out of curiosity? You would almost have to say, 'ontological speculations are simply not possible'. (?)

[IJesusChrist]

So the beginning and the end are based on nothing, they are chaos, amongst chaos, forever?

This would be, or there would be teleology.

Ahh, but of course there is no beginning, and there is no end - but there is still teleology.

The fact that we exist, is enough purpose for us to exist. We exist, BECAUSE we exist.

No, I hate philosophy, I am not here for that, I am here for answers.

So, be it;
We have a beginning, and no end - can there be teleology?
We have no beginning and no end - can there be teleology?

The latter, I find to be most truthful, but to answer the question, yes. Evolution has a purpose, and it is to proceed with the order, forever.

[Alex T. Jacob]

Deja vu wrote: "lol That need not be said at all! All explanations are born of experience, however one looks at it. Our consciousness does not make the universe itself conscious. The question (and there is no way this cannot remain a question with respect to infinity) of whether a conscious universe lies behind our consciousness, is superfluous to any consideration of what the evolution of our consciousness may result in."

Well, obviously so many have made the 'mistake' of conflating their own awareness---this core---with that of what surrounds them. It is not at all hard to see why this 'error' was made. It comes naturally, right?

But the fact that consciousness arises, for so many people, tends to produce a strong conviction that they are part-and-parcel of a greater consciousness. Also understandable (if one is in a generous mood).

What, strictly speaking, produces the conviction that the Universe is not, somehow, also conscious? Or created, inconceivably, by an indecipherable potency? I know that according to you it is 'pure reason'.

I don't, of course, have any argument against that view. I don't think any argument is possible.

The only avenue to Divinity is in a mystical appreciation/relationship. It always sees itself as a step or two above 'pure reason'. Is this just arrogance? Or smug stupidity?

[Blair]

No, I hate philosophy, I am not here for that, I am here for answers.

So, be it;
We have a beginning, and no end - can there be teleology?
We have no beginning and no end - can there be teleology?

The latter, I find to be most truthful, but to answer the question, yes. Evolution has a purpose, and it is to proceed with the order, forever.

There is a definite beginning and end to every "thing" including the universe itself. Meaning is only derived from this fact. You are possessed of a human intellect which is (uniquely among animals) able to compress the concept of "time" into a singular moment of realization. There is only now, and now has already gone.

Evolution doesn't proceed forever, it has an arc which arches back on itself to closure. This is an ordered mechanism that repeats. What humans do in the meantime, with its advances in technology etc, is all for nought.

[Alex T. Jacob]

Why would eschatology hold any interest for you?

Infinity is just an idea, really. It doesn't really describe anything, and in a certain sense doesn't 'touch' the world/universe/kosmos.

I must ask---insist really---that you please allow for an entirely conscious universe to exist. Is it too much to ask?

[Loki]

It doesn't matter. Teleology is merely a product of human consciousness. An Infinite Reality, which is what we have, cannot have a teleological aspect.

The totality itself, because it's necessarily non-dual, cannot have a teleological nature, I agree.

However, that doesn't mean a smaller universe within the totality cannot have a teleological nature. Like a stream or river gravitates down toward the lowest possible point, life itself can be drawn by an attractor of sorts.

So saying an infinite reality cannot have a teleological aspect seems pedantic.

[Pincho Paxton]

If we presume that everything is paired with an opposite, and opposites nullify each other, it might just be that we are trying to outweigh our opposites. Both black, and white do not wish to become grey, they either want to be all white, or all black, so I can imagine war as the struggle against entropy. Man has already struggled to rise against gravity, and the next step is to rise against entropy. Old age I believe is where the struggle ends, and man becomes entropy with the Earth. So old age is the next barrier to overcome.

[Gurrb]

we are not evolving, we are devolving. we are becoming more powerful. our power will implode, destroying us. wouldn't becoming closer to our end suggest the opposite of evolving?

[Pincho Paxton]

we are not evolving, we are devolving. we are becoming more powerful. our power will implode, destroying us. wouldn't becoming closer to our end suggest the opposite of evolving?

Power is the opposite to entropy, that is what we want. The power to maintain our shape, the power to be different from everyone else, the power to mix black with white without it becoming grey. Black stockings are a display of this power, and we love them. The penguin dinner suit is a display of this power, and we show it off. White on the inside, black on the outside, this seems to be the desirable way to display our power over entropy. So that is the desire for evolution. Michael Jackson seemed to be full of entropy, he made the song Black or White, and he wore the suit although as a negative, and the shoes. He was a powerful human, even displaying that he could change his face colour, think about it.

[Pincho Paxton]

Infinity describes the universe. It is an actuality. There is no multiverse, nor an infinite membrane encapsulating a finite universe (sorry Pincho), just the universe, always.

But now you have several problems. The universe is expanding, and accelerating. You can't expand infinity, it is already infinite, and expanding it gives it nowhere to go. You therefore have to have infinite nothing to expand into, which is a paradox. Your example doesn't work for me, I can't visualize expansion into nothing, and I don't think that anyone should be able to visualize it. You also have at least 4 more Paradox, the first is that the Universe started as infinite nothing, and therefore you are going back to the singularity Big Bang which science is now saying is wrong. The second Paradox is that nothing created something, which is a terrible assumption. The third is that if you fly forward fast enough you will fly into the infinite nothing. The fourth is what happened before the Big Bang?

Your problem here is that you are agreeing with science, even though science no longer believes in itself.

[Animus]

Teleology may not be a valid thinking process, but to answer the question "Where is evolution going?" we might come up with something teleonomic. Teleonomy was coined to contrast teleology, the view of goal-directedness as imposed by an agency. Teleonomically speaking processes like evolution are goal-directed by not as a consequence of supernatural agency, rather as a consequence of survival constraints. That is to say the teleonomic purpose of opposable thumbs is increased manipulation of the environment for increased survival. To speak broadly of the teleonomic purpose of evolution; to develop adaptations suitable for survivability.

[IJesusChrist]

There is a definite beginning and end to every "thing" including the universe itself. Meaning is only derived from this fact. You are possessed of a human intellect which is (uniquely among animals) able to compress the concept of "time" into a singular moment of realization. There is only now, and now has already gone.

Evolution doesn't proceed forever, it has an arc which arches back on itself to closure. This is an ordered mechanism that repeats. What humans do in the meantime, with its advances in technology etc, is all for nought.

That makes absolutely no sense. I can't even try to make sense of that. How the hell do you know it arches back in on itself?

[IJesusChrist]

Pincho:
But now you have several problems. The universe is expanding, and accelerating. You can't expand infinity, it is already infinite, and expanding it gives it nowhere to go.

What? Space is infinite, and you can stille expand matter in an infinite void, you don't understand infinity do you? You can expand the space between matter until each distance is infinite...

What the hell guys.

[Pincho Paxton]

Pincho:
But now you have several problems. The universe is expanding, and accelerating. You can't expand infinity, it is already infinite, and expanding it gives it nowhere to go.

What? Space is infinite, and you can stille expand matter in an infinite void, you don't understand infinity do you? You can expand the space between matter until each distance is infinite...

What the hell guys.

I am actually the only person that does understand infinity. The problem is that you use the word space without working out what space is, you just use it as a word. Without working out what space is you have accepted infinity by using words which you do not understand. I know what space is, therefore I know what the universe is, and I know what matter is. You are trying to compete with your words against my knowledge, but words do not mean anything. Explain what space is, and maybe I will listen to you, but being as I am the only person that knows what space is it is unlikely that you will be correct.

[Pincho Paxton]

Pincho:

I am actually the only person that does understand infinity.

(:D)

How?

Because it the first stage of my Theory Of Everything... the Aether membrane.

So many things on Earth have a membrane of themselves. Apple peel, Orange peel, human skin, insect exoskeleton, bubble membrane, tree bark, fish scales, water surface tension, grape skin, Earth's crust, egg shell, nut shell, seed shell etc.

The universe is inside an infinite membrane of itself. If the Universe is considered infinite then it must be. It's very logical.

[Pincho Paxton]

Of itself ---Now you're talking! Like a true creature of the aether! It's not just penguin power, it's, well...maybe it is!

But you have to be specific! It's all I ask. The scientists will never wise up otherwise.

But, the Universe still ends at its membrane. everything ends at its skin. if you had long hair, and spiked it up with hair gel, I would still measure your height to your skin. therefore although the membrane is infinite, the Universe has an end, because we live inside it like an egg. It's membrane has no map references to move through, it repeats itself forever, therefore it is not the size that we would measure.

[Pincho Paxton]

Stopped working for me again. No end. We live inside it quite unlike an egg.

The sea evaporates, and creates clouds, but where do you think the sea ends?