We Don't Know versus The Burden of Proof

No one knows how the universe ~ and things like human consciousness ~ originated. Do we have an obligation to propose, and defend, a theory that competes with, or even replaces, the theories of others?" Fritz Mungo Fanshaw [1998]

Thoughts?

@fmf said
No one knows how the universe ~ and things like human consciousness ~ originated. Do we have an obligation to propose, and defend, a theory that competes with, or even replaces, the theories of others?" Fritz Mungo Fanshaw [1998]

Thoughts?

No. It's an option, not an obligation.

@fmf said
No one knows how the universe ~ and things like human consciousness ~ originated. Do we have an obligation to propose, and defend, a theory that competes with, or even replaces, the theories of others?" Fritz Mungo Fanshaw [1998]

Thoughts?

Directed panspermia ?

@karoly-aczel said
Directed panspermia ?

Further to what moonbus said, whether to spit or swallow panspermia is an option, not an obligation.

@fmf said
No one knows how the universe ~ and things like human consciousness ~ originated. Do we have an obligation to propose, and defend, a theory that competes with, or even replaces, the theories of others?" Fritz Mungo Fanshaw [1998]

Thoughts?

No one knows, we must go with what is the most reasonable explanation, or
stick our heads in the sand and attempt to ignore the questions altogether. What
makes more sense for a mindless explanation that involves dead dirt to first show
up without any cause out of nothing or some cause?

Is it reasonable that a mindless explanation that involves processes without goals,
plans, or any ability to recognize success or failure, alter the physical world's matter
so it comes together through unguided chemical reactions and suddenly gives rise
to not just biology, but consciousness, thought, reasoning, love, morals, and things
of that nature that are immaterial we know are here in the physical world.

If mindlessness isn't up to the task, that leaves a mind, a plan, a purpose, for
all things from the smallest what we would consider the most meaningless
to the big things we acknowledge. Thus making everything and everyone here
is here due to a purpose with meaning that transcends the world itself.

@fmf said
Further to what moonbus said, whether to spit or swallow panspermia is an option, not an obligation.

I asked a friend how many metaphors can be sexual. He said 100% .....lol

@kellyjay said
No one knows, we must go with what is the most reasonable explanation, or
stick our heads in the sand and attempt to ignore the questions altogether.

Admitting we do not know is not "sticking our hands in the sand".

Admitting we do not know is not "ignoring the questions altogether".

@kellyjay said
No one knows, we must go with what is the most reasonable explanation, or
stick our heads in the sand and attempt to ignore the questions altogether. What
makes more sense for a mindless explanation that involves dead dirt to first show
up without any cause out of nothing or some cause?

Is it reasonable that a mindless explanation that involves processes without goals ...[text shortened]... verything and everyone here
is here due to a purpose with meaning that transcends the world itself.

Look at the development of Quantum Mechanics. Trying to find a 'reasonable' explanation for what was going on got scientists nowhere.

What did work was throwing preconceptions out the window, carefully gathering new evidence, and continually modifying theory to match experiment.

The Universe doesn't care if we find its behavior to be 'reasonable' or not.

@bigdogg said
Look at the development of Quantum Mechanics. Trying to find a 'reasonable' explanation for what was going on got scientists nowhere.

What did work was throwing preconceptions out the window, carefully gathering new evidence, and continually modifying theory to match experiment.

The Universe doesn't care if we find its behavior to be 'reasonable' or not.

The universe isn’t alive with thoughts and agendas that doesn’t mean what caused the universe isn’t both alive and does care!

@fmf said
Admitting we do not know is not "sticking our hands in the sand".

Admitting we do not know is not "ignoring the questions altogether".

Not caring is, thinking it is unimportant is.

@fmf said
No one knows how the universe ~ and things like human consciousness ~ originated. Do we have an obligation to propose, and defend, a theory that competes with, or even replaces, the theories of others?" Fritz Mungo Fanshaw [1998]

Thoughts?

I don't think we have an obligation to propose or defend a theory that competes with, or even replaces, the theories of others. Most of us have lives to lead, and work to do. I'll leave the proposing of theories to the scientific community.

@kellyjay said
The universe isn’t alive with thoughts and agendas that doesn’t mean what caused the universe isn’t both alive and does care!

It was a figure of speech.

@bigdogg said
It was a figure of speech.

Mine wasn’t

@kellyjay said
Mine wasn’t

Shrug.

@kellyjay said
Not caring is, thinking it is unimportant is.

Who has said they don't care or that human knowledge about the universe is "unimportant"?