As Dawkins and co. do not mention enough, even evolutionary theory cannot (yet?) explain biogenesis - the origin of life itself.
A few years ago, whilst visiting the Science Museum in London, I bought "The Fifth Miracle" by Paul Davies which discusses what we know about biogenesis and explanations for it.
A couple of years after buying it, a miracle did happen: I actually read it.
I am not really a scientist but I managed quite well with this book.
Can't remember a great deal about it now but remember realising that we really don't yet know what caused biogenesis.
Paul Davies is not really a megastar like Richard Dawkins, but I think he's good.
He is a cosmologist who seems to think that there is some kind of order in the universe.
Thankfully he seems keen to steer clear of advocating any kind of religion.
Though he may contribute to giving succour to a religious world view of some kind.
--------
The following is an extract from an interview with him published in Loaded magazine - yes amazingly it was Loaded magazine. It was a really good special issue called "The Meaning of Life" issue. Been trying to get hold of that back issue.
Anyway here's the extract:
Does the universe have a meaning, a purpose?“I’m convinced on the basis of my scientific work that there is something like a meaning or purpose of physical existence. I base that on the fact that the underlying laws of physics, which are the basic laws of the universe, seem to be remarkably ingenious in the way that they operate - ....
The real universe is such an exquisite mix of order and chaos, of law and openness and creativity, that this leads me to believe in some evidence of meaning and purpose – that there is something beyond our daily lives which the universe is about.”
Is the universe organic?
“The underlying laws of the universe are bio-friendly, so the emergence of life and mind are written into the basic laws of the universe in a fundamental way.”
But that makes human beings pretty pointless…
“From what I understand of the universe, there is a point to it, and human beings… our role may not be central.
I think that, in some small but significant way, we are part of a larger grand scheme, and this scheme includes the emergence of life and mind – not specifically homo sapiens, but we happen to be representatives of that trend and I do think that is written into the basic laws of the universe. I don’t think our existence is an accident.
..the general trend from simple to complex, with the emergence of life and mind, is written into the basic structure of the universe, and so we are connected into that basic structure – so whatever the meaning of the universe is, our lives form part of that meaning.”
Paul Davies in “Loaded” Magazine (“Meaning of Life” Issue).
------
And now an extract from one of his speeches which I will put here because it's interesting:
"Where do we human beings fit into this great cosmic scheme? Can we gaze out into the cosmos, as did our remote ancestors, and declare: "God made all this for us"? I think not.
Are we then but an accident of nature, the freakish outcome of blind and purposeless forces, incidental by-product of a mindless, mechanistic universe? I reject that, too.
The emergence of life and consciousness, I maintain, are written into the laws of the universe in a very basic way.
True, the actual physical form and general mental make-up of Homo sapiens contain many accidental features of no particular significance. If the universe were rerun a second time, there would be no solar system, no Earth, and no people. But the emergence of life and consciousness somewhere and somewhen in the cosmos is, I believe, assured by the underlying laws of nature. The origin of life and consciousness were not interventionist miracles, but nor were they stupendously improbable accidents. They were, I believe, part of the natural outworking of the laws of nature, and as such our existence as conscious enquiring beings springs ultimately from the bedrock of physical existence - those ingenious, felicitous laws.
That is the sense in which I wrote in The Mind of God: "We are truly meant to be here." I mean "we" in the sense of conscious beings, not Homo sapiens specifically. Thus although we are not at the center of the universe, human existence does have a powerful wider significance. Whatever the universe as a whole may be about, the scientific evidence suggests that we, in some limited yet ultimately still profound way, are an integral part of its purpose.
How can we test these ideas scientifically? One of the great challenges to science is to understand the nature of consciousness in general and human consciousness in particular. We still have no clue how mind and matter are related, or what process led to the emergence of mind from matter in the first place. This is an area of research that is attracting considerable attention at present, and for my part I intend to pursue my own research in this field. I expect that when we do come to understand how consciousness fits into the physical universe, my contention that mind is an emergent and in principle predictable product of the laws of the universe will be borne out.
Moreover, if I am right that the universe is fundamentally creative in a pervasive and continuing manner, and that the laws of nature encourage matter and energy to self-organize and self-complexify to the point that life and consciousness emerge naturally, then there will be a universal trend or directionality towards the emergence of great complexity and diversity. We might then expect life and consciousness to exist throughout the universe. That is why I attach such importance to the search for extraterrestrial organisms, be they bacteria on Mars or advanced technological communities on the other side of the galaxy.
The search may prove hopeless-the distances and numbers are certainly daunting - but it is a glorious quest. If we are alone in the universe, if the Earth is the only life-bearing planet among countless trillions, then the choice is stark. Either we are the product of a unique supernatural event in a universe of profligate over-provision, or else an accident of mind-numbing improbability and irrelevance. On the other hand, if life and mind are universal phenomena, if they are written into nature at its deepest level, then the case for an ultimate purpose to existence would be compelling."
Paul Davies in “Physics and the Mind of God – The Templeton Address”.
A few years ago, whilst visiting the Science Museum in London, I bought "The Fifth Miracle" by Paul Davies which discusses what we know about biogenesis and explanations for it.
A couple of years after buying it, a miracle did happen: I actually read it.
I am not really a scientist but I managed quite well with this book.
Can't remember a great deal about it now but remember realising that we really don't yet know what caused biogenesis.
Paul Davies is not really a megastar like Richard Dawkins, but I think he's good.
He is a cosmologist who seems to think that there is some kind of order in the universe.
Thankfully he seems keen to steer clear of advocating any kind of religion.
Though he may contribute to giving succour to a religious world view of some kind.
--------
The following is an extract from an interview with him published in Loaded magazine - yes amazingly it was Loaded magazine. It was a really good special issue called "The Meaning of Life" issue. Been trying to get hold of that back issue.
Anyway here's the extract:
Does the universe have a meaning, a purpose?“I’m convinced on the basis of my scientific work that there is something like a meaning or purpose of physical existence. I base that on the fact that the underlying laws of physics, which are the basic laws of the universe, seem to be remarkably ingenious in the way that they operate - ....
The real universe is such an exquisite mix of order and chaos, of law and openness and creativity, that this leads me to believe in some evidence of meaning and purpose – that there is something beyond our daily lives which the universe is about.”
Is the universe organic?
“The underlying laws of the universe are bio-friendly, so the emergence of life and mind are written into the basic laws of the universe in a fundamental way.”
But that makes human beings pretty pointless…
“From what I understand of the universe, there is a point to it, and human beings… our role may not be central.
I think that, in some small but significant way, we are part of a larger grand scheme, and this scheme includes the emergence of life and mind – not specifically homo sapiens, but we happen to be representatives of that trend and I do think that is written into the basic laws of the universe. I don’t think our existence is an accident.
..the general trend from simple to complex, with the emergence of life and mind, is written into the basic structure of the universe, and so we are connected into that basic structure – so whatever the meaning of the universe is, our lives form part of that meaning.”
Paul Davies in “Loaded” Magazine (“Meaning of Life” Issue).
------
And now an extract from one of his speeches which I will put here because it's interesting:
"Where do we human beings fit into this great cosmic scheme? Can we gaze out into the cosmos, as did our remote ancestors, and declare: "God made all this for us"? I think not.
Are we then but an accident of nature, the freakish outcome of blind and purposeless forces, incidental by-product of a mindless, mechanistic universe? I reject that, too.
The emergence of life and consciousness, I maintain, are written into the laws of the universe in a very basic way.
True, the actual physical form and general mental make-up of Homo sapiens contain many accidental features of no particular significance. If the universe were rerun a second time, there would be no solar system, no Earth, and no people. But the emergence of life and consciousness somewhere and somewhen in the cosmos is, I believe, assured by the underlying laws of nature. The origin of life and consciousness were not interventionist miracles, but nor were they stupendously improbable accidents. They were, I believe, part of the natural outworking of the laws of nature, and as such our existence as conscious enquiring beings springs ultimately from the bedrock of physical existence - those ingenious, felicitous laws.
That is the sense in which I wrote in The Mind of God: "We are truly meant to be here." I mean "we" in the sense of conscious beings, not Homo sapiens specifically. Thus although we are not at the center of the universe, human existence does have a powerful wider significance. Whatever the universe as a whole may be about, the scientific evidence suggests that we, in some limited yet ultimately still profound way, are an integral part of its purpose.
How can we test these ideas scientifically? One of the great challenges to science is to understand the nature of consciousness in general and human consciousness in particular. We still have no clue how mind and matter are related, or what process led to the emergence of mind from matter in the first place. This is an area of research that is attracting considerable attention at present, and for my part I intend to pursue my own research in this field. I expect that when we do come to understand how consciousness fits into the physical universe, my contention that mind is an emergent and in principle predictable product of the laws of the universe will be borne out.
Moreover, if I am right that the universe is fundamentally creative in a pervasive and continuing manner, and that the laws of nature encourage matter and energy to self-organize and self-complexify to the point that life and consciousness emerge naturally, then there will be a universal trend or directionality towards the emergence of great complexity and diversity. We might then expect life and consciousness to exist throughout the universe. That is why I attach such importance to the search for extraterrestrial organisms, be they bacteria on Mars or advanced technological communities on the other side of the galaxy.
The search may prove hopeless-the distances and numbers are certainly daunting - but it is a glorious quest. If we are alone in the universe, if the Earth is the only life-bearing planet among countless trillions, then the choice is stark. Either we are the product of a unique supernatural event in a universe of profligate over-provision, or else an accident of mind-numbing improbability and irrelevance. On the other hand, if life and mind are universal phenomena, if they are written into nature at its deepest level, then the case for an ultimate purpose to existence would be compelling."
Paul Davies in “Physics and the Mind of God – The Templeton Address”.