Junk DNA: goodbye!: Review article (Introduction)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Wednesday, March 18, 2015, 04:58 (3328 days ago) @ dhw

DHW: You wrote that the universe is fine tuned “for the universe as we know it to even exist”. I see no difference between “as we know it” and “in its current state”. If the parameters of physics were not as they are, they would be different, and so we might have a different universe. Nobody knows what is possible because we have nothing to compare our universe to, and so both sides insist that because the universe is as it is, it has to be as it is, and somehow that supports their case. I still see this “if” as a dead end.
>-Actually I wrote ""If the parameters of physics were not as they are, the universe could not exist. Period." Not that it could not exist in it's current state, it simply could not exist."-"If the parameters of physics were not as they are, they would be different, and so we might have a different universe." is pure speculation on your part, and is in essence the Multiverse theory. -> 
>>DHW: There are two chasms. A person of reason will agree that there is no evidence that chance can create life. A person of reason will agree that there is no evidence of a vast, eternal, sourceless, superintelligent mind/power/being that somehow knew from nothing how to create a universe and life. A person of reason can then decide to leap towards chance, or leap towards God, and fill the gaps in his/her knowledge with all kinds of unprovable theories. Or a person of reason can decide not to leap at all.-If "A person of reason will agree that there is no evidence that chance can create life" then there is only one other possibility.

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.