Philosophical musings on Quanta & Qualia; Materialism & Spiritualism; Science & Religion; Pragmatism & Idealism, etc.
Post 116. October 4, 2021 . . . . . continued
The Anthropic Cosmological Principle
Intentional versus Accidental Creation
In their introduction, the authors present several interpretations of the Strong version of the WAP. These include A> the prerequisite of intentional design, B> that observers are necessary to assist in bringing the universe into being, C> and that other possible universes were selected against via an “optimizing principle”. Then they briefly discuss their own Final Anthropic Principle, asserting that “intelligent information-processing must come into existence . . . and once it comes into existence, it will never die out”. Now that sounds more like a prophecy than a theory. But they also insist that FAP is the “physical precondition for moral values to arise”, and that it “seems to imply a melioristic⁶ cosmos”. As I said, they are not timid in proposing a controversial theory of how & why the world began, and speculations on what it will evolve into.
Teleological design arguments didn’t wait for cosmological science to compile the physical facts. Ancient philosophers and sages, using only their imagination and reason, constructed then-plausible stories to answer the child-like “why” questions of curious humans. Again, Genesis is perhaps the most famous of the origin and destiny myths. The authors note that “the idea of a partially anthropocentric universe with teleological aspects is the warp and woof of the Judeo-Christian world-view that underlies the growth of Western civilization”. However, “the renaissance view which superceded the Greek view was less analogical, but the paradigm had changed from the organic to the mechanical”. For philosophical clarity, the authors draw a distinction between “teleological⁷arguments – which argue that because of the laws of causality order must have a consequent purpose, and eutaxiological arguments – which argue that order must have a cause”. They say that the latter is similar to the WAP. Then they note that “teleological arguments go hand in hand with a holistic synthetic and global world view whilst the eutaxiological approach is wedded to the local and analytical perspective that typifies modern physics”.
By referring to their hypothesis as “analytical” and “eutaxiological”, the authors are obviously trying to avoid being lumped into the religious-nut category of Intelligent Design theories. But I doubt that many atheists will be convinced of that distinction. Nevertheless, my own tentative Intelligent Evolution myth⁸ is an attempt to create a philosophical hypothesis that is completely compatible with the known facts and theories, if not with their atheistic interpretations. To the extent that it goes beyond a purely mechanical format though, it too will be dismissed as religious, even though that was not the intent. Ironically, even “big-bang-basher”, astronomer Fred Hoyle was forced to conclude that the evolution of our world is teleological ; “I do not believe that any scientist who examines the evidence would fail to draw the inference that the laws of nuclear physics have been deliberately designed . . . . If not then we are back again at a monstrous sequence of accidents”.
Post 116 continued . . . . Click Next
ACP analogies :
1. Organism : The world was born (big bang) and develops over time like a living being. It may need parental nurturing at first.
2. Mechanism : The universe resulted from the “inflation” of a pre-existing Singularity, driven by inertia & energy, and operates according to inherent mechanical laws. Thinking beings are merely little machines
3. Information processor : The world system began like a computer program, with an operating system (laws) and an explicit or implicit problem to solve
4. All the above : Each cosmic model is animated and moving toward some ultimate end, or output, or goal. The First Cause and Final Cause and Status of Humans are subject to personal interpretation.
6. Melioristic : “The doctrine that the world tends to become better of itself, or that it may improve more rapidly by proper human assistance”.
7. Teleological : Purpose-driven evolution, as opposed to Eutaxiological, meaning simply that evolution must have had a First Cause, even if the Final Cause (purpose) is unknown. Anthropic theories infer from scientific evidence that human-like organisms are the necessary result of some direction imparted by the Big Bang, even though we are not able to divine (via revelation) what the ultimate goal might be.
1996 “. . . A series of mysterious coincidences between the numerical values of the the fundamental constants of Nature. The possibility of our own existence seems to hinge precariously upon these coincidences..”
NEXT
BACK
Forum
