If you found out that the Christian God was real, and all the things in the Bible were true, would you change your behavior? What if, instead, you found out you are in The Matrix, and you could take a pill to escape to the real world?

I suspect that such revelations would instantly change your values and actions. You would know that the concerns of this universe are less important than the bigger Universe^[1] that contains it.

Currently, we don’t have any such revelations, so most people align themselves with the smaller universe. They value smaller values, and act toward smaller goals.

In this post, I will argue that we ought to pursue bigger values and goals, even though we don’t know they exist. In order to mindfully choose what to type into The Terminal, we must consider what we know, what we don’t know, and the grandeur of what we might gain. The unknowns of the Universe beckon us toward a purpose that transcends than our current pursuits.

You likely don’t agree with me yet. Many of us have adopted a common framework for purpose, one rooted in existentialist ideas. But this logic, while intuitive, may limit us. Let’s examine it together—including its limiting assumption—and explore a more rational, open-minded way to view the universe.

The flawed popular logic

Many people today answer the question of purpose like this: We should pursue goals like authentic freedom, social justice, creative expression, happiness. These vague goals, while admirable, are based on limited understandings of the world. They assume that conscious experience is the most important aspect of reality to maximize. Is this a safe assumption? Do you share it? Here’s how the logic works:

Premise 1: The universe began at the Big Bang and will end with the heat death.
Premise 2: Reality is limited to what science currently describes.
Premise 3: Meaning is tied to temporary conscious experience.
Conclusion: Therefore, temporary conscious experience is the only source of meaning in all of reality.

I understand the appeal of this logic because I once believed it. It tries to derive meaning from our current scientific knowledge. That’s a noble approach, far better than attempting to glean meaning from ancient religious texts.

But let’s examine Premise 2 more closely. “Reality is limted to what science currently describes.” It can be phrased as Russell’s teapot...

Posts

Wikitag Contributions

Comments

Posts

Wikitag Contributions

Comments