Philip's and Keith's awkward acting at the beginning was once again brilliant 😂 Absolutely nailed it this time. Good to see Keith finally being himself and not pretending to be a conscious being
Thank you, Philip & Keith, for this video and for this channel! I don't think that "this universe" is more specific than "our universe", because we are not detachable from the universe in the way that we are detachable from the room we happen to be in. The properties of the room are not our properties, whereas the physical constants of the universe are our physical constants, they apply to ourselves in the same way that they apply to any other part or feature of the universe
14:52 Theology uses personification which is a very efficient method from the point of live neurocomputing. Purpose and goal have slightly different semantics, but for practical applications - doesn't matter.
Suggestion for a guest who would challenge both of you in a constructive (i.e. academically sound) manner: Jeffrey Mishlove. (He has a fascinating and popular channel here.) IMO, post-materialist philosophy eventually has to accommodate apparently anomalous aspects of human experience; for starters the placebo effect.
I'm going to have to follow this again. In any case, not everyone believes in many-worlds hypothesis , so it's maybe irrelevant to fine tuning. I could write a fast time simulation in which only a mini-world created on a Tuesday contains an agent who says 'this universe is special,' whereas it's only because it was a Tuesday.
Hey @philipgoff7897, why is the fine tuning argument compelling for you to begin with? If we live in the only universe there is, then there is no statistical aspect to its existence.
Hm, I don't think argument is that fine-tuning makes the multiverse probable. That would be the inverse gambler's fallacy. I think the argument is simply that the multiverse is the best non-theistic explanation of fine-tuning. The multiverse makes the fine tuning we observe probable. This is common in inferences to the best explanation.
If Philip is basing directedness of the purpose based on the process of evolution , let me dispel that. First off , there are two parts to the process of evolution - selection over variations and the environment in which this operates. If the environment remains constant, then by the process of selection (which is not an active process but the statistical effect) produces organisms better suited for that environment as long as there is enough population that does not die out due to more random, bad variations over good variations. However, if the environment changes, the trend of phenotypes may change - even in the opposite direction. Let me give an example : if there is ice age and earth is snow covered over an extended period, more and more animals with fur will survive. Over time the the amount of fur may grow. Because of better camouflage, white fur may be preferred. However if ice age goes away and the temperatures rise, the animals with a lot of fur may die by overheating and trend will turn opposite and animals with less fur and in extreme condition with no fur at all will increase in population. This simply happens because of the interaction of phenotype and the environment. That is all. It is simply a statistical process. There is no active purpose or intentional goal involved.
Evolution is just the universe trying anything and everything in its ability, good/bad, stable/unstable/important/unimportant, useful/meaningless, to expand its abilities in attempt to reach a level of consciousness so it can reproduce itself and collectively creat an ultimately infinite structure
Shame about your use of the term “bad” versus “good” variations. This implies evolution has a purpose. If life is trying to stay alive and spread its DNA it has a purpose.
@danzigvssartre The variation or mutations are random. Some just happen to be good for the organism, and some happen to be bad for the organism. Statistics takes care of the rest of how things play out. Nothing is intending them to be good or bad. My example of furry animals, shows what is good or bad can flip. The word purpose has several connotations - function, reason, intent.
@@SandipChitale random, but never the same. New every time, creating new possibilities with each life, converging to infinity. You don’t see variations or mutations in chemistry or physics. That’s the fundamental similarity all life shares, which is a strategy consciously employed by the universe, allowing it to expand it’s repertoire..
@@danzigvssartre there is not only a purpose to evolution, it is an actual strategy. The universe uses it to regulate the gases and mass on the surface and atmosphere each planet to keep them spinning correctly while maintaining their alignment with their star.The mutations that work based on the planetary needs are retained with minimal recourses wasted on what doesn’t. The reason for keeping the planets aligned is to organize and consolidate the resources in creation of ever new and increasingly more complex crystalline structures (all life and minerals) Eventually these complex structures will sense the all conscious, ever expanding universal mind, having access to all resources and knowledge. At that point the universe is in position to reproduce itself, by tradition, and continue the cycle.
The universe is allocating it’s remaining energy left over after the expense of maintaining it’s structure in order to create life which it then commissions to reach a level of technology where it is possible to make another universe. The universe is in the process of reproducing itsef
What could possibly be the unknown purpose of the unknown things that we are? My guess is that only when we finally understand what we are, will we understand the true purpose or purposelessness of the Universe. Good discussion though.
Philip's and Keith's awkward acting at the beginning was once again brilliant 😂 Absolutely nailed it this time. Good to see Keith finally being himself and not pretending to be a conscious being
"It keeps me friends with you Keith" made me laugh out loud. Love you guys!
Thank you, Philip & Keith, for this video and for this channel! I don't think that "this universe" is more specific than "our universe", because we are not detachable from the universe in the way that we are detachable from the room we happen to be in. The properties of the room are not our properties, whereas the physical constants of the universe are our physical constants, they apply to ourselves in the same way that they apply to any other part or feature of the universe
The best podcast on the internet! You both giggling at Mr. Goff saying "tossed well" was hilarious.
14:52 Theology uses personification which is a very efficient method from the point of live neurocomputing. Purpose and goal have slightly different semantics, but for practical applications - doesn't matter.
" we zombies have dreames..." :) love it
Suggestion for a guest who would challenge both of you in a constructive (i.e. academically sound) manner: Jeffrey Mishlove. (He has a fascinating and popular channel here.) IMO, post-materialist philosophy eventually has to accommodate apparently anomalous aspects of human experience; for starters the placebo effect.
"very bad case of existential uncertainty"... :)!
This was hilarious..."more outlandish claims" looooooooooooooooooooooool
I'm going to have to follow this again. In any case, not everyone believes in many-worlds hypothesis , so it's maybe irrelevant to fine tuning. I could write a fast time simulation in which only a mini-world created on a Tuesday contains an agent who says 'this universe is special,' whereas it's only because it was a Tuesday.
Hey @philipgoff7897, why is the fine tuning argument compelling for you to begin with? If we live in the only universe there is, then there is no statistical aspect to its existence.
Hm, I don't think argument is that fine-tuning makes the multiverse probable. That would be the inverse gambler's fallacy. I think the argument is simply that the multiverse is the best non-theistic explanation of fine-tuning. The multiverse makes the fine tuning we observe probable. This is common in inferences to the best explanation.
If Philip is basing directedness of the purpose based on the process of evolution , let me dispel that. First off , there are two parts to the process of evolution - selection over variations and the environment in which this operates. If the environment remains constant, then by the process of selection (which is not an active process but the statistical effect) produces organisms better suited for that environment as long as there is enough population that does not die out due to more random, bad variations over good variations. However, if the environment changes, the trend of phenotypes may change - even in the opposite direction. Let me give an example : if there is ice age and earth is snow covered over an extended period, more and more animals with fur will survive. Over time the the amount of fur may grow. Because of better camouflage, white fur may be preferred. However if ice age goes away and the temperatures rise, the animals with a lot of fur may die by overheating and trend will turn opposite and animals with less fur and in extreme condition with no fur at all will increase in population. This simply happens because of the interaction of phenotype and the environment. That is all. It is simply a statistical process. There is no active purpose or intentional goal involved.
Evolution is just the universe trying anything and everything in its ability, good/bad, stable/unstable/important/unimportant, useful/meaningless, to expand its abilities in attempt to reach a level of consciousness so it can reproduce itself and collectively creat an ultimately infinite structure
Shame about your use of the term “bad” versus “good” variations. This implies evolution has a purpose. If life is trying to stay alive and spread its DNA it has a purpose.
@danzigvssartre The variation or mutations are random. Some just happen to be good for the organism, and some happen to be bad for the organism. Statistics takes care of the rest of how things play out. Nothing is intending them to be good or bad. My example of furry animals, shows what is good or bad can flip.
The word purpose has several connotations - function, reason, intent.
@@SandipChitale random, but never the same. New every time, creating new possibilities with each life, converging to infinity. You don’t see variations or mutations in chemistry or physics. That’s the fundamental similarity all life shares, which is a strategy consciously employed by the universe, allowing it to expand it’s repertoire..
@@danzigvssartre there is not only a purpose to evolution, it is an actual strategy. The universe uses it to regulate the gases and mass on the surface and atmosphere each planet to keep them spinning correctly while maintaining their alignment with their star.The mutations that work based on the planetary needs are retained with minimal recourses wasted on what doesn’t. The reason for keeping the planets aligned is to organize and consolidate the resources in creation of ever new and increasingly more complex crystalline structures (all life and minerals) Eventually these complex structures will sense the all conscious, ever expanding universal mind, having access to all resources and knowledge. At that point the universe is in position to reproduce itself, by tradition, and continue the cycle.
Hey where's Keith's Halloween costume. He just looks the same to me.
Oi!
@@KeithFrankish Ha ha I got you , you didn't prepare a Halloween costume .
Maybe it’s better to say that the universe shows certain patterns/tendencies, as opposed to “purpose” or “goal directness”.
I don’t think evolution, or laws of entropy or even fine tuning count as goal-directness…It’s great video though, enjoyed watching it
I wonder if Philip actually believes in any of this (more than fifty percent credence?).
The universe is allocating it’s remaining energy left over after the expense of maintaining it’s structure in order to create life which it then commissions to reach a level of technology where it is possible to make another universe. The universe is in the process of reproducing itsef
What could possibly be the unknown purpose of the unknown things that we are? My guess is that only when we finally understand what we are, will we understand the true purpose or purposelessness of the Universe. Good discussion though.