What is the point of life?

[Samson]

The point is that nothing about evolution is "calculated", right? The reasons why we have large brains and are able to reason are ones of chance and natural selection, not planning or calculated effort. Same with all other evolutionary advancements like eyes, ears, legs, etc.

It is either nothing or everything that is calculated. Is the universe just a big calculator using stochastic processes to find the fittest dna sequence?

 

[warpus]

It is either nothing or everything that is calculated. Is the universe just a big calculator using stochastic processes to find the fittest dna sequence?

Not really a calculator and more a machine that copies blueprints slightly imperfectly each time. That's all you need for evolution to "kick in", assuming that you already have life for your first generation and don't have to worry about abiogenesis.

Usually a mutation (aka when copying goes wrong) does not impact much at all, since there's so many proteins in a DNA thingy.. but every once in a while a random mutation will result in a noticable change.. and occasionally that change will give the life form some sort of advantage. And so it seems to me that all you need is an imperfect copying machine (RNA/DNA) and you will end up with survival of the fittest, and each habitat containing life that's best suited for it (arrived at using a chaotic imperfect copying over millions of generations approach). i.e. it seems to imply that it isn't some profound thing that the universe is trying to achieve, but rather a simple conclusion.. i.e. given that DNA exists -> therefore giraffes have long necks. If we ran the whole thing again maybe we wouldn't have gotten giraffes or any other species that have long necks, and maybe the adaptations would have been different.. But in the end the species you'd see would all be in some way adapted to compete in their own habitats

So "the fittest" would depend on the context of the biome, the climate, the planet, etc. And the universe as a whole plays no part really, aside from its immense size and laws of physics.

In our cases we somehow ended up evolving opposable thumbs and large complex brains, as advantages to help us compete and pass on our genes. As a result we can adapt to live in all sorts of different circumstances, an ability all the other species lack (I think). So that makes us a bit unique. It's easy to think that we are some sort of an ultimate creation of evolution, but we just simply lucked out with the adaptations that we've evolved. They are unique, but random mutation of millions of iterations can produce unexpected results.. and so here we are.

Of course it seems a bit depressing to find out that the point of life is to "get it on". Or you might find it uplifting. Either way, since we have the power of reason and the ability to adapt, you can make the point of your life to be whatever you want.

 

[innonimatu]

As a species the planets better of without us.

The planet really doesn't care about us. There is no way "we" can kill the planet. It can kill us easily. Wonder what something as simple as a new Carrinton event would do? Though that technically qualifies as the Sun not caring about is

We kill the world, animals, trees and even the sea. Soon it will be all gone.
And we will still fighting each other? Of course, over the scraps that are left.

So no need to worry, the earth will easily survive us. One of the points of life is not getting wiped out accidentally by the big earth or universe or simply the large predator (we won on that one, mostly!). Some carry this point into a "religion" of space exploration. Other have more traditional religions, some inward contemplation... the meaning of life? It's up to you.

We are like those dayflies, that live for a day, why struggle so hard when you know it will be lost one day? Human spirit, lol.

But if you look outside your daily box of LIFE, why is it even there?

Me, I find it tremendously interesting. A day would be frustrating precisely because there is so much to life, it would be too short! But fortunately we're not flies. We can have nearly a century if we're lucky. Plenty of time to do and see things. So the point of life, if you ask me, is to do stuff. Whatever, it's up to you to figure out! That there is no "right" answer to that is part of the beauty of it: you can even spend years just looking at what other people do with it - historians choose that as an occupation

 

[Thorgalaeg]

The ultimate finality of any living organism including human beings is to reproduce itself, yes. But why?

The answer is because replication and increasing complexity is the best way to dissipate energy in certain conditions. So while that is apparently against the second law of thermodynamics, you know, the one that says that disorder tends to increase always, it is just the other way around: While a living organism is alive, it creates complex ordered chemical structures, true, but meanwhile it eats, breaths and defecates, messing all its surroundings, dissipating much more energy in the process than if it wasn't there, increasing entropy quicker.

So there you have it: life is a complicated shortcut nature has found to dissipate energy more efficiently, to make electrons reach the least energetic levels more easily, in other words to get "colder" quicker. Trying to find a further meaning to that is like trying to find a further meaning of a bunch of rocks rolling downhill.

If any, it could be said that the point of life is to die quicker.

 

[Gori the Grey]

If any, it could be said that the point of life is to die quicker.

You underdelivered. With your set-up, the closing line should have been "What's the point of life? The heat death of the universe!"

 

[Thorgalaeg]

You underdelivered. With your set-up, the closing line should have been "What's the point of life? The heat death of the universe!"

Yep, i meant that.

 

[Farm Boy]

Talk about cop-out goals.

 

[gozpel]

My goodness, I was worried today at work that I would be ridiculed for a stupid question, but not in this place.

All started with me overhearing two workmates, they got some change in their work area.
What's the point of this?
There's no point at all.

I work at a machine all day and have all the time to think of stuff, so: Why is life? And off my brain went.

So if life doesn't have a point, it certainly got a purpose or end term goal, Total Domination! Civ6 Deity. Modded with 10 times barbs and all angry civs. Doesn't matter, we win.
It will take hold in any area they fit and can survive, if they don't survive directly, they evolve and move in later.

If mankind went to a habitable barren planet, and brought some particles or waste of themselves with it or even planted some hardy stuff, it wouldn't take long until this life would find a way
to try take over the planet. It would take time, but time is life's best asset.

So another point, pun not intended. We live, we have a spark or an energy to keep us ticking. When we die, supposedly this energy goes back to either nature or the great unknown.
If that is the universe, is the universe "alive" as well?

I need a beer.

Thanks all for your great posts, now my brain will fry tomorrow.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Maybe, for such a person of the future, our own timeline will seem as boring and useless as the medieval era seems to us.

My 10th-century SCA persona disapproves of this view.

Science and math basically stopped, due to endless barbarian hordes. Even in the ancient era you would have a much bigger chance to witness something of interest in those fields.

The Arab astronomers and mathematicians would not be happy to be told that their work didn't count. We owe a lot to them, both for what they discovered and for what they preserved.

Kyriakos, you write books. How do you suppose your books would get known to people (forget ebooks or online; I'm talking about physical, hold-in-your-hand books), how would they read them, think "wow, this guy is into depressing stuff, but it's really interesting!", and buy more of your books?

The printing press. Movable type, no matter who invented it. We're all here, reading one another's words, because we learned to read via the medium of printed text that was made possible centuries ago when Johann Gutenberg invented the European version of movable type (specified so because I'm not in the mood for an argument about "the Chinese invented it first"). This is the reason that Gutenberg was selected (in a 2-part A&E special 21 years ago) as the most influential person of the last 1000 years. Movable type made books easier to copy, and there were more available to sell. Literacy improved, to the point where we just expect that modern people are able to read in at least one language (and quite a number of CFC members are literate in multiple languages).

BTW... there's a website called Project Gutenberg that's always in need of volunteer proofreaders in multiple languages, to make out-of-copyright books available for the public to read. Each book listed on the site goes through three rounds of proofreading, and it can take quite a long time.

Anyway... my 12 years active in the SCA and the subsequent decades of reading about various aspects of medieval history tells me it was most definitely not a boring era.

I recommend trying turkey with chocolate sauce. The Aztecs liked it, we tried it for one of our feasts, and it went over very well. Your taste buds will be happy.

Progress is slow even now, I suppose. The internet happened something like 25 years ago (on a mass scale), and one would have expected things to pick up. Even in movies from the 80s (or even the 30s...) you would see a much more futuristic and advanced version of the 21st century.

That said, it is true that people went from horse-drawn carriages to airplanes, in the space of half a century. So who knows.

We should have had Moon colonies by now.

What have the romans ever done for us!!!

The alphabet, for one thing.

Rest in reason and move with passion.

I spent part of tonight on a Dune channel on YouTube, and apparently was convincing enough to prompt one person to say they could tell how 'passionate' I am about that novel series. I think most of us are passionate about at least one thing. I'd guess most people on this forum would measure that list in much greater numbers.

And each and every life form still has that biological drive to continue reproducing (except maybe Pandas).

And those of us who have consciously decided not to reproduce.

I don't think self-awareness was meant to be part of the program. Sometimes the bug takes over. Particularly if it comes to the point that the alternative is total termination.

Animals are dumb. They don't seem to mind much even if their own die (sometimes they will also kill and even eat their own, including family members). The bug, however, is of a different type, and the ultimate end of any parasite is to be no longer in need of the host organism.

It depends on the animal. Cats and dogs will risk their lives for others, whether their own offspring or someone they value of another species.

Some carry this point into a "religion" of space exploration. Other have more traditional religions, some inward contemplation... the meaning of life? It's up to you.

Could we please not risk an argument developing over whether science is a religion? It's not, and I'd prefer to only say that once.

Space exploration is something that a person can be passionate about (I daresay hobbsyoyo wouldn't disagree with that), but no more so than someone else who might be passionate about sports, music, or whatever their profession is.

We live, we have a spark or an energy to keep us ticking. When we die, supposedly this energy goes back to either nature or the great unknown.
If that is the universe, is the universe "alive" as well?

Of course the universe is alive. At least our part of it is, since all of us are part of it and we're alive.

The universe is not "out there" (okay, most of it is, but that's not my point). It's right here, where each of us is.

 

[Akka]

There is no "point" in life, life is just a consequence.
As for the individual, I'd say the point is to enjoy it until it ends, nothing more.

 

[Kyriakos]

Because mutations that lead to an advantage in movement would have been "selected for" by virtue of those organisms having a better chance of passing on their genes. It is not a case of anyone or anything attempting to create a creature that can walk better.

Evolution doesn't work like this: "Hey there's a problem! We need better feets".

It works more like: "Hey a slightly mutated leg! Good luck with that!"

I spoke of movement means formed in the first place. Unless you imagine that movement means (of the most primitive type) existed before any development. In which case, we are in agreement, and I noted that for those to exist there would have to be a "sense" they are needed.

 

[caketastydelish]

There doesn't have to a point, from my moral, philosophical, or ideological point of view, to life. Science is something that just happens.

 

[Kyriakos]

If any, it could be said that the point of life is to die quicker.

I actually suspect this may be true.
Although it would need to involve some built-in antithesis, since clearly the beginning allowed for a different state.
It would be easier to view this as practical, if you assume the cosmos is just part of something larger and therefore not having to be itself more than a culling center.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

I actually suspect this may be true.
Although it would need to involve some built-in antithesis, since clearly the beginning allowed for a different state.

It seems obvious that there was necessarily a point of maximum energy, call it Big Bang, Big Bounce, Brane Collision or whatever, and since then everything have been downhill. How that maximum happened on the first place will always be a matter of speculation probably.

 

[Kyriakos]

It seems obvious that there was necessarily a point of maximum energy, call it Big Bang, Big Bounce, Brane Collision or whatever, and since then everything have been downhill. How that maximum happened on the first place will always be a matter of speculation probably.

My point was just that it couldn't have happened without anything before, so the cosmos being not a closed system seems likely (assuming there was such a first event anyway).
Whether or not this will matter for (future/advanced) humans, remains to be seen. Certainly doesn't matter for us now.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

....

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Disappointed no-one has inserted a Conan quote by page 3.

 

[Sarin]

Disappointed no-one has inserted a Conan quote by page 3.

Because obviously, the REAL answer is: Hot water, good dentist and soft toilet paper.

Or 42, depending on how you look at things.

 

[El_Machinae]

The answer is because replication and increasing complexity is the best way to dissipate energy in certain conditions.

We're currently seeking to export fission and fusion technologies to the galaxy, so we're not just speeding up the breakdown of chemical energy! We're literally speeding the total decay!

Biologically, the point of human life is to engage in pleasure seeking and pain mitigation, tempered by the goals created by us through philosophy. Evolution encourages reproduction or survival, but that is enforced in humans through pleasure seeking or pain mitigation and is somewhat tempered by philosophy. A 'point' requires

 

[AmazonQueen]

I think this song sums up the process of looking for a definitive answer to this question.