Why is a certain subset of the pop sci crowd so vehemently hostile to any way of thinking about the universe that...

Are you new to Veeky Forums
We like to be contrarians
Why do you think we hate Reddit so much

This post is made of cringe

Prove me wrong

You'd be surprised how willing people are to engage across lines. But you have to ask genuine questions, be ready for hostile answers, and be totally ready to not justify a shred of spite or vitriol in for the sake of argument.

TL;DR, try and keep trying and you'll find some civil discussions in the mess.

He literally just proved you right with his unqualified, unjustified contrarianism.

>we
>we
>we
Is this your first year? Make sure you read up on all Veeky Forums culture on Know Your Meme™ and have a great time!

google Rupert Sheldrake

Why is a certain subset of the a group I disagree withso vehemently hostile to any way of thinking about the universe that shit that I like but has little to no evidential baasis? Why are people who disagree with me so absolutely hellbent on denying my euphoria?

They need to constantly canvas/astroturf this place to make it a safe space for religious/altright proselytizing.

>why doesn't reality conform to my beliefs

Being a Christian must be so depressing.

>le evidence

This is exactly what I'm talking about. The fuck kind of evidence do you want for "the universe is engineered to produce life" besides the fact we're having this conversation you dumb fucking nigger?

There's never going to be a situation where people are saying "gee, this universe sure isn't suited for life"

Kind of a selection bias there.

>there isn't going to be any evidence for my claim so you should feel bad about implying that I need any to make the claim
Seriously?

But the counter-assertion that there's no "evidence" for this view or the implication you're a drooling mong to even have the audacity to bring it up in CURRENT YEAR is retarded.

You really are thick aren't you?

They gain solace by having martyrdom complexes and escapist daydreams of final victory.

You see, intelligent people tend to avoid superimposing their desires onto ambiguous situations.

us intelligent people amirite?

Well, in this context, I can only judge you based on the evidence you've chosen to give me.

You sound like a mouth breather.

But that's not true OP.

Just because we exist doesn't mean the universe "privileges" life.

You're just ignoring all the other millions upon millions of planets that are barren and not hospitable for life at all.

Walk me through your vision of reality then.

>le floating rocks and empty void
>le nothing means anything
>suddenly a phenomenon that is a difference of kind instead of degree (dead, inert matter becoming living, self-aware matter) occurs
>le doesn't mean anything PROOF?

nigger please

just like earth didn't "privilege" life thousands and thousands of years ago because there were only a million of us, tops. what a shitty argument

>just like earth didn't "privilege" life thousands and thousands of years ago because there were only a million of us, tops. what a shitty argument

This is some stellar b8.

>le floating rocks and empty void
>le nothing means anything

Why is this so ridiculous to accept

>I'm a rational person
>I base my view of reality on what I find emotionally satisfying rather than what the evidence tells me

It's your right to do that. It's my right to make fun of you.

>don't privilege life fag, it's 2016
>you should privilege the void instead

holy shit, a literal self-cucking

what exactly does "the evidence tell me", m8? that rocks exist? it also tells me life exists?

just what the fuck are you mongs even arguing? you're incoherent. is your argument just a roundabout way of saying "we're just atoms"? wow, we're made of stuff, where's your empirical proof that being made of stuff = nothing matters?

...

Creationists deserve to be shot to death in the streets. They are the most annoying group of people I've ever had the misfortune of vaguely knowing.

just what the fuck do you mean by "privileging life"

the universe is a self-perfecting system that exists to evolve life and consciousness, after which consciousness takes over (really just bits of the universe with agency and self-awareness) to continue the drive to perfection

I know exactly what you mean OP, but I can't pin it down. I think it's their strict belief in hard evidence and ignorance or rejection of the philosophies surrounding these questions science hopes to answer.

>"the evidence tell me", m8? that rocks exist? it also tells me life exists?

Yeah.

The evidence is telling you nothing.

If you want to believe something, go for it, but don't try to pretend it's rational.

Neither is the "evidence" confirming your worldview.

So there exists a system that has no meaning except for the meaning we make... sounds like a meaning to me, dipshit.

What makes you think the fact that we're not special to the universe itself means we lack dignity? Dignity is a human concept. Why should the universe respect it to be special?

I honestly suspect there's a deeper undercurrent of nihilism among the people that seek for (or assert) grand universal meaning than among those that reject it, because the general notion seems to be that if it isn't etched into the universe itself then nothing truly matters, whereas the so called "nihilists" themselves seem to be quite content to live, love, and create without it.

My worldview is that we don't know shit.

It's more a deeply felt recognition of the status of being an existing, rational being when it could have just been an eternity of nothing at all

There's nothing wrong with that. But why does it need to matter on a grand universal scale? I think I matter, but I have no illusions that the universe cares about me or was somehow structured to allow my existence.

Do you think I'm arguing all 93 billion ly of the observable universe cares about me, or my family? You get I'm saying, as an objective phenomenon, life, consciousness, matters more than rocks and void because without someone to perceive it, there wouldn't be any universe to speak of in the first place?

Then we're not really that far off in reasoning. Of course I acknowledge that we matter more than the universe, because it's basically required to do so to function as a social organism. I just don't think we have any sort of objective significance. Sapience is just one of many phenomena in the universe, perhaps not even the most spectacular.

The reason I say this kind "existence just has to mean something" thinking has a nihilistic bent is the fact it seems as though it's only a thing skin against the kind of nihilism that commonly gets touted as the "typical" nihilism (versus the more common variety, which seems to just involve people living normal lives), in which you have the despairing lout who has had the wind taken from his sails by his lack of meaning.

I just don't get this line of reasoning. it isn't a grasping for meaning, but a very honest acknowledgment (that is arrived at after a nihilistic crisis, actually), that if this universe is supposedly the dead, dying, empty, cold meaningless system that it is, nonetheless even the most ardent fedoracuck can't explain what the fuck life is doing in what should just be a void with particulates floating around

>The present posture of most Western scientists is to deny any sense of purpose and direction to the world around us, believing that to do so would be to introduce mysticism and superstition Yet what could be more superstitious than to believe that the world in which we live and where we have our most intimate personal experiences is not really trustworthy and that another, mathematical world exists that represents a true reality?

fedoracucks blown the absolute fuck out

So this proves the earth is 6,000 years old.

Got it. Fuckin magnets how do they work.

That's your problem, not anyone else's.

>he can't see the fedora's appeal to some deeper, "meaningless" reality is essentially the same thing they accuse christcucks of doing

I'm not even christian. nice strawman you hysterical faggot

>fedoracuck

Oh good lord.

That kind of reasoning is idiotic, because you could extend it to any kind of phenomena in the universe. Life and sapience aren't special, and in fact occupy only a very tiny portion of the universe, which mostly is just a void with dead shit.

The reasoning here is to not make assertions about things you don't understand. So you claim there is no apparent meaning because there's no reason to believe there is meaning.

>it isn't grasping at meaning

Yes, it is. You have no basis for believing that there's a meaning, yet still desperately try to assert one. That's pretty much textbook "grasping."

le enlightened science man has it all figured out but has not deigned to reveal his illumined knowledge to the ignorant masses, got it

nigga please

>people looking for evidence and then acting on the evidence is the same as my mindless blathering

So this proves the earth is 6,000 years old.

Oh hey, it's the "NIHILISM, LMAO" fag.

After all this time, you're still at it. You're still fucking booty bothered that people don't agree that the universe has obvious meaning.

Do I have to dumb it down for you?

But you're the only one here "revealing illumined knowledge to the ignorant masses here." Since you're the asshole who seems to think you've got it all figured out.

do you not understand what a "difference in kind" means? so there's this void with dead shit, but there's also some alive shit (as if the locality of a phenomenon is an argument against it, nigga what the fuck?), but don't ask about the alive shit because you'd be sounding like a superstitious goatherder LOL I FUCKIN' LOVE SCIENCE

so much for intellectual honesty

I don't know how fuckin more intuitive I can make my argument. You don't get it.

>you're only allowed to be smug if you agree with my worldview

lmao

So this proves the Earth is 6,000 years old

Some kind of evidence. If you pick up a watch and claim it's been built to tell time, you can typically point to tool marks on the pieces for instance. So perhaps some sort of indicator of a creator that isn't better explained by naturalistic forces.

haha those dumb walmart christians, what will they think of next

upboated XDD

So this proves the Earth is 6,000 years old

You mean you are pissy that others don't just assume your pet theory is right and keep demanding you have a REASON to for your belief.

I know what you mean. My friends keep telling me that thetans don't exist just because I have no sound reason to expect them to exist let alone prove them, but that shouldn't matter.

So this proves the Earth is 6,000 years old

the naturalistic forces themselves you dipshit lmao

>the universe isn't some sunday school caricature of eden so everything is meaningless lmao

haha THETANS just like that episode of south park XDDD EPIC

>You don't get it.

You've tried this argument countless times. Have you ever stopped to consider that maybe it's just not as persuasive as you think it is?

If the universe were truly engineered for life, why isn't there more life within it? Why has life only been observed on one of the trillions of planets that have been found? What is the rest of the universe? Waste product? What an idiotic claim.

The earth is 6,000 years old? Did you know?

What specifically about them shows evidence of a creator?

> posture of most Western scientists is to deny anything that there is no very good reason to believe
>this is somehow a bad thing
Did they shut down your pet metaphysical theory, user? I'm sorry.

THE FACT MATTER HAS A RULESET FOR SELF-ORGANIZATION IN THE FIRST PLACE JESUS FUCKING CHRIST

Ironic shitposting is still shitposting.

This proves the Earth is 6,000 years old

Is it healthy or mature to be personally offended when you discover that other people in the world don't always share your own beliefs?

>entropy reverses in a few select areas when you put energy into it
>FUCKING MIRACLES
Have you studied abiogenesis?

Why couldn't that have come about as a product of unconscious happen-stance?

Also do you not see the circularity in this reasoning? The universe has meaning because the universe exists which has meaning.

Well, is there any aspect of life that violates the regular laws of physics in the universe?

Because I'm thinking this is just basic logic.

Phenomena that repeat themselves are going to repeat themselves and thus survive.

Not this user, but furthermore, where did the complexity that made up this cosmic engineer come from?

He's been at this basically since Veeky Forums first started. His initial argument that the universe must have been created for human life because human life exists in the universe. He got blown the fuck out, sperged harder than anyone, and tries this thread on the regular, I think about once a month.

You need to provide some evidence that humans are extra special snowflakes.

>matter self-evolved to self-organize

wow thanks for supporting my argument you mong lmao what the fuck?

yeah...

that's why...

my argument is...

there being a reality where something called life...

can evolve and repeat itself and survive according to intrinsic laws of behavior...

is the whole reason why I'm arguing the universe is engineered to produce life int he first place

Jesus. Fucking. Christ

>wow thanks for supporting my argument you mong lmao what the fuck?
Wait, what? If you want to learn more about abiogenesis than I suggest the following link. It sums up leading theories pretty well.

exploringorigins.org/

>it's a "god is complex" episode

what is divine simplicity you pleb

>wow thanks for supporting my argument you mong lmao what the fuck?

That wasn't an answer. Matter supplied with an unfathomable amount of energy over the course of billions of years eventually resulted in life in one very tiny portion of the universe.

How is that not hard to grasp for you?

An asspull.

How is intelligence more fundamental to reality than anything else? Intelligence is the function of a form, the form being a physical mind, much like how toasting bread is the function of a toaster. If intelligence can be more fundamental to reality than anything else then why not the function of toasting bread?

You have no argument for intelligence being more fundamental to reality than anything else.

Okay.

You are free to believe this.

I will continue to mock you if you continue to espouse this view as a certainty or an objective truth, as there is insufficient evidence to support such a claim.

>i cant grok it so it's wrong

next.

holy shit dude im not debating models Im arguing that the universe even being able to do this in the first place is evidence enough lord give me strength

Divine toasting bread simplicity. Nothing is more simple than the act of toasting bread.

the fact the universe is intelligible to intelligence

>le ebin toaster

what is this reddit shit?

I can grok it just fine. It's just an idiotic concept meant to dodge the fucking question of "where did God come from."

The universe is also pretty good at hydrogen fusion, meteor impacts, and the Ice Capades.

If the universe was just a little different, none of these would be possible.

>holy shit dude im not debating models Im arguing that the universe even being able to do this in the first place is evidence enough lord give me strength

But it isn't. There's no reason to assume that this didn't happen as a result of a force without will. Was it the fucking tao?

>the fact the universe is intelligible to intelligence
That's not an argument.

Toasters can toast bread, therefore toasting bread must be the most fundamental thing in reality.

If you think the analogy is absurd then please realize that's how you sound.

>hydrogen fusion is fundamental to the universe
>intelligence isn't because black science man said that would be bad

Stop.

Nah, nigga, you don't grok it

I mean, hydrogen fusion is, by far, the most common thing for matter to be doing in the universe.

I'd have to guess that like 99% of the baryonic matter in the universe is doing that. Life would be like 10 orders of magnitude down from that.

What evidence do you have that life is fundamental to the universe?