Why Is The Universe Meaningless

1. The cosmos as we know it demands that there be an intelligent designer behind it.

If all the order that we observe is not in some way the product of intelligent design—then what? Did the universe just happen by chance? The odds of that having happened, someone has argued, are similar to the odds of a magical tornado blowing through a dormitory and leaving every bed made and every empty pizza box in a trash can. Alternatively, if the order we witness is not the product of blind, purposeless forces, then it must be attributed to some kind of intelligent design. Therefore, the second premise stands.

David states that the widely accepted cause of the universe, which consists of a very large explosion whose aftermath was the universe, “doesn’t really account for that original… something that exploded.” (Woody 14). This quotes demonstrates how even though it explains the universe’s beginning, the big bang theory does not explain how the things that caused it, which is the quantum vacuum and a singularity in it, came to be. David thus

Part of the problem is, in fact, that it does not necessity a God nor prove a God, however, neither does it disprove.  It does suggest there is another reason, or cause, for which the universe is as it is.    Still, the greater the odds, the less likely such things occur of accident.  The chances of life occurring on this planet, of all planets, in the whole universe, is less than 1 chance in 10182. Others, considering the possibility of life on other planets, based on evolution, hold it to be less than 0.01 per cent over four billion years.  ( (Staff 2008)) Even scientifically, these probabilities are practically null.

The purpose of David Christian’s lecture is to answer the following question: “In a universe ruled by the second law of thermodynamics, how is it possible to generate the sort of complexity... represented by you and me?” To answer this question, Christian had to establish what a universe – our universe – ruled by the law of entropy looks like, and according to him, “...the general tendency of the universe is to move from order and structure to lack of order...” Christian then explains how in a universe that naturally “returns to mush”, complexity can form in pockets of perfect environments – Goldilocks zones – places in the universe where various factors that would usually cause a decline in the chance of the growth instead cause an increase,

Hence: it is likely that the universe is an outcome of intelligent design and has an aim.

“Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindboggingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God” (Adams 97)

Swinburne instead thought the Argument from design could be revamped using Temporal Order. Swinburne bases his argument of Design from temporal order; there are laws of nature across the universe that have in the past been and by our powers of deduction we can conclude they will also exist in the future falling the very limited life-permitting range i.e. Gravitational Constant: 6.673 x 10-11m3 kg-1 s-2, Speed of Light: 299,792,458 ms-1, and so forth. If any of these laws were infinitesimally changed, no physical, interactive life of any kind would be able to exist. It is reasonable to conclude that the universe shows order, benefit, purpose, suitability for human life and appearance. The universe might have been chaotic but it is not; not only is it not chaotic, it is ”shockingly orderly”.

The fine-tuning argument by Collins highlights a universe which has been perfectly created for suitable life and that the smallest miscalculation would have been unbearable to sustain life. According to the first premise, the reality of the fine-tuning is not improbable under theism, while premise two states, the fine-tuning is very improbable under the atheistic single-universe hypothesis. The conclusion is that fine-tuning data support robust evidence to support the design hypothesis over the atheistic singe-universe hypothesis. As already noted, most critics would reject the fine tuning-argument by making a compelling argument that there are likely many other big bang that we are probably unaware of and that it is highly probable the universe

Why does matter,Matter? Matter matters because if ice did not do what it did a lot of fish and sea life would die. For example if ice was to heavy it would fall and it would come back when it got more heavier it would fall again if it kept on doing the same thing eventually it will freeze the lakes in the ponds and the lakes solid. That would cause the summer to be shorter and every year eventually there would be no summer it would affect the whole climate. Question is how would the climate change well it would change because as it gets colder in a lake ice forms and then because that ice would be heavier than normal and a crack in the ice would form and all that ice fall down to the bottom . Then as this ice capped on repeating

Moreover, he disagrees with Parfit and states that one substance (God) can cause all the other substances to exist. Swinburne believes that the existence of our universe makes the existence of God more probable, and continues by arguing that the simplest explanation “compatible with observed events” (Swinburne p. 2) is the most believable one. He states that his explanation is simpler than Parfit’s theory that there are many worlds and therefore is the more likely

If you took a deck of 52 cards and dealt our four hands of 13 cards like you find in the game of bridge, the odds of you getting 13 spades are the exact same odds of you getting 13 cards that a player would consider complete a junk hand. The only reason that the 13 spades appear to have significance is because we imbue it with significance. We care about getting this good hand and the same thing goes for the universe. The only reason we look around and say “Wow, this is remarkable and this seems all made for me” is because we have this big fat bias towards order.

Another reason I do not believe that the universe has a purpose is due to the brutality of nature, rather than peaceful harmony. As put forward by Herbert Spencer, a 19th century

Over time people have made the future their own by expanding human understanding of the earth, and looking beyond what is thought impossible. Although the Oxford Dictionary defines impossible as not able to exist, or be done, the word impossible can't be defined in a single definition , because the definition changes as people’s ideas change, people's beliefs change, and life in general passes on.

Throughout human existence, people have often contemplated about the meaning of life. Why do we exist? What purpose do we serve as human beings? Who created us? Is there a mission that humans are supposed to complete while alive? Richard Taylor sought out to answer these questions through his paper The Meaning of Life. He particularly uses the myth on Sisyphus and his life throughout the paper to help prove his point.