Why Are We Here?
Late last night I entered into a conversation that some would perceive as luxuriously self-indulgent, others would see as needlessly complex, and maybe a few would view as completely unnecessary. I don't remember the exact chain of expression that led to the question- but when I left to go home to sleep, I brought home with me what could be the ultimate existentialist query- "Why are we here?" Perhaps its very nature is one of folly. Obviously each individual carries with him/her a multitude of shifting answers to that question. One's response might be affected by an infinite number of transient variables. But in this particular discussion, my friend and I were searching for a "larger truth".
The mystery becomes somewhat less complex when we limit our consideration to ourselves. As Robert Anton Wilson would say, our perception is limited to our reality tunnel. Or maybe he would say that it at least appears to be so. It's only if we accept the existence of an external reality with any possibility of "objectivity" that a possible solution to this puzzle lies within our grasp. I'm not going to commit to an authoritative position on that issue. But for the purpose of identifying a direction for humanity, let us assume that a consensual reality is possible.
Our consideration necessitates a number of other assumptions as well. This is the tricky part, and involves a set of foundational beliefs on which there is clearly no social consensus. If you are a fundamentalist Christian you are going to have a very specific starting point. If we limit the discussion to premises consistent with the scientific tradition, then we begin from a wholly different place. Last night we confined the thread of our talk to the latter. Therefore we started with the theory of the "Big Bang" origination of the universe. Neither of us are trained in physics, and so we had to rely on a very rudimentary set of definitions. At some point in the past we agreed that there was dispersal of energy into the time and space of what we refer to as "the universe".
That energy eventually transformed into particles of matter, some of which we interact with on a daily basis here on Earth. We have also made a qualitative distinction in order to classify certain conglomerations or manifestations of this matter- certain examples we refer to as "organic", and others we call "inorganic". This may appear to be an entirely arbitrary classification through the perception of non-human entities, but for our purposes it will have to temporarily serve. Over the last several hundred years certain representatives of our "species" have developed a structured hierarchy, at the top of which (not surprisingly) humans reside. And we are rewarded this privileged position by dint of our "consciousness".
But this concept of "consciousness" is even more amorphous than all the other elements from which we've constructed our underlying premises. This is where we discover the most divergence of opinion and belief. This is the realm of "philosophers"- a group of people (traditionally white men) who have occupied a refined and received seat of learning... an entitlement only made possible by other groups of people laboring to provide the survival necessities of these lucky few. It has been the convention for "ordinary people" to defer to their convictions regarding the nature and meaning of "consciousness". Perhaps their very existence is enough to refute the countervailing forces of "determinism"- which would discount the whole concept of "consciousness" as a myth.
Regardless, the game we have now allowed ourselves to engage in (without proper education or training) is called "Why are we here?" My friend and I were apostates, rejecting the convention that dictates that we look to spiritual authorities or worldly leaders to determine this issue for us. Was it merely by coincidence that we had discovered ourselves trodding on this sacred ground? Maybe the solution to the mystery lies in the question itself. Could it be that the reason "We are here" is to search and explore in a quest to arrive at our own answers? It appears to be cyclical logic, doesn't it? That reminds me of a Zen koan, but I can't tell you about it here....
The mystery becomes somewhat less complex when we limit our consideration to ourselves. As Robert Anton Wilson would say, our perception is limited to our reality tunnel. Or maybe he would say that it at least appears to be so. It's only if we accept the existence of an external reality with any possibility of "objectivity" that a possible solution to this puzzle lies within our grasp. I'm not going to commit to an authoritative position on that issue. But for the purpose of identifying a direction for humanity, let us assume that a consensual reality is possible.
Our consideration necessitates a number of other assumptions as well. This is the tricky part, and involves a set of foundational beliefs on which there is clearly no social consensus. If you are a fundamentalist Christian you are going to have a very specific starting point. If we limit the discussion to premises consistent with the scientific tradition, then we begin from a wholly different place. Last night we confined the thread of our talk to the latter. Therefore we started with the theory of the "Big Bang" origination of the universe. Neither of us are trained in physics, and so we had to rely on a very rudimentary set of definitions. At some point in the past we agreed that there was dispersal of energy into the time and space of what we refer to as "the universe".
That energy eventually transformed into particles of matter, some of which we interact with on a daily basis here on Earth. We have also made a qualitative distinction in order to classify certain conglomerations or manifestations of this matter- certain examples we refer to as "organic", and others we call "inorganic". This may appear to be an entirely arbitrary classification through the perception of non-human entities, but for our purposes it will have to temporarily serve. Over the last several hundred years certain representatives of our "species" have developed a structured hierarchy, at the top of which (not surprisingly) humans reside. And we are rewarded this privileged position by dint of our "consciousness".
But this concept of "consciousness" is even more amorphous than all the other elements from which we've constructed our underlying premises. This is where we discover the most divergence of opinion and belief. This is the realm of "philosophers"- a group of people (traditionally white men) who have occupied a refined and received seat of learning... an entitlement only made possible by other groups of people laboring to provide the survival necessities of these lucky few. It has been the convention for "ordinary people" to defer to their convictions regarding the nature and meaning of "consciousness". Perhaps their very existence is enough to refute the countervailing forces of "determinism"- which would discount the whole concept of "consciousness" as a myth.
Regardless, the game we have now allowed ourselves to engage in (without proper education or training) is called "Why are we here?" My friend and I were apostates, rejecting the convention that dictates that we look to spiritual authorities or worldly leaders to determine this issue for us. Was it merely by coincidence that we had discovered ourselves trodding on this sacred ground? Maybe the solution to the mystery lies in the question itself. Could it be that the reason "We are here" is to search and explore in a quest to arrive at our own answers? It appears to be cyclical logic, doesn't it? That reminds me of a Zen koan, but I can't tell you about it here....
Labels: Consciousness, Philosophy, Robert Anton Wilson
posted by Merge Divide at 4:30 PM
6 Comments:
It's easy to get caught in a revolving loop of thought
that has no real conclusion. That's a bit scary.
Just live, be, and enjoy the best you can. Sounds elementary.... simple... but the alternative could be endless frustration for answers.Beauty and wander can be found in every moment...try not to waist them.....pm
Cool blog, I just found your your blog today, great writing. I will be back often...
peace - John
Here I was just thinking it was one crazy, happy accident.
pm,
I agree that getting caught in a loop is easy. Perhaps it's natural too, considering the natural cycle of life. I see it more as a spiral (like DNA) than a pure circle. I'm actually fine with the absence of a conclusion. Conclusions have a knack for scaring me more than the lack of them.
Trying to avoid ultimate conclusions does not keep me from enjoying the beauty of life. I personally love the complexity I see in it. By thinking about things deeply, I believe I experience them fully. But that is just my way, and I wouldn't claim that it's better or right.
A journey of exploration can be just as enjoyable as finding whatever you are looking for.
John,
I'm glad you got something out of this blog. I appreciate you taking the time to tell me. It's easy to feel sometimes that I'm "whistling into the wind".
Interesting, and a coincidence, that on our travels this week, MK asked me if I believed in heaven, and whether people will reunite after they die. It led us into a short discussion of man versus other animals, man as simply another animal, and what brought us to the human condition we find ourselves. While I'm open to various possibilities, I tend to believe we are just a higher form of animals, and that we have evolved to this state from a series of nearly unbelievable circumstances and events. Then, it becomes the what to do with the unbelievable part (i.e.; that all this could have happened as a series of timely "accidents"). My mind cannot resolve it, which leads me back the open-mindedness. All in all, I suppose it's better to believe there is some form of existence after death, but the lack of same should not deter us of appreciating, enjoying, and contributing to the life we do have while here.
Post a Comment
<< Home