Does the Universe have a purpose?
The great philosopher Plato believed that everything in the world has
a purpose. Why do plants grow? To be a source of food to the animals.
When their purpose ends, they die.The reason human beings and every
other creature in the world is created because each of them has a
purpose. Life is created for the fulfillment of its purpose. Our world
therefore must serve a purpose as well. And the world is a small part
of the momentous and gigantic universe. So does the universe have a
purpose as well?
If we consider religion, then the universe definitely has a purpose.
In most of the major religions of the world, the establishment of the
universe is not an accident. If the Great Design had been to create a
universe, then there must be some purpose behind it.
Another argument for the universe having purpose is that it is not
everlasting. Because the universe has an end, it makes me think that
it has a purpose. The pattern is similar to those things with a
purpose, a book, a plant or a cow—it is created, it serves its
purpose, and it demolishes. I feel inclined to believe that creation
arises when there is need, in other words, the “created” has a purpose
to serve.
Science also supports the purposeful universe. First of all, the vast
and enigmatic universe goads the scientists on their quest to find the
“meaning”. It in itself is serving a huge purpose by providing the way
for scientific study. Also, the universe holds many substances, carbon
atoms most specifically, in abundance. It is well designed and not
just a haphazard amalgamation of everything. Thus, it must have a
purpose.
“Everything happens for a reason”—can the creation of the universe be
just a mistake or a coincidence? How can something so well designed
develop from folly? One look at the universe tells us that there is
planning behind it. However, what is the purpose of the universe is a
more difficult question to answer. In fact, I think this question
doesn’t have a definite answer at all, yet. The challenge to find the
answer is something we have taken up and in the course we might make
several extraordinary discoveries. Can this not be a purpose of the
Universe?
Does moral action depend on reasoning?
Human beings are born with innate conscience. Even though it might be
dormant or less developed in some people, it can be argued more or
less strongly that all human beings possess conscience—the ability to
identify right from wrong. The fact may be that the conscience present
in a person is very rudimentary and that interaction with the social
world and mental development through learning process flourishes it to
give it a full-fledged form. In that case, conscience will differ from
person to person, depending on their social, moral and cultural
upbringing and the quality of their education. However, the true
essence of conscience must be similar for every human.
I think conscience plays a big role in deciding our moral actions.
Even if you do something against your conscience, you will feel guilty
about it and try to amend it in most cases. But does conscience always
coincide with our reasoning? Reasoning is also present in every human;
it is one of the distinguishing characteristics of humans. Reasoning
surely develops from brain but so does conscience—really? Conscience
has been attributed to the soul by ancient Greek philosophers. But if
we are to decide that, then we must debate on the existence of soul, a
separate entity from the mind and body.
When someone acts against common sense of reasoning, we deem them to
be “crazy”. However, when someone opposes his conscience, it does not
mean he is without the faculty of reasoning.
A sudden action may not depend on either but last second impulses. It
is easy for a person to take part in a fire drill but when an actual
fire breaks out, what the person will do may not depend either on his
conscience or reasoning but his instinct to survive. I had read a book
called “The Selfish Gene”, where the author claims that human genes
are “selfish”, that is, their most important task is to live in. It is
by their manipulation that humans try to save their life. The author
has also given persuasive examples. I will quote a short one:
When a train is about to crash, a man, who was travelling with his
wife and son, throws his son out of the window to a safe distance. His
first instinct was to save his son. The author claims that it was the
doing of the “selfish gene” in him. The son is the carrier of the
man’s genes and will be able to pass them on to the next generation.
This means that by saving the son, the genes will be able to live on
and be passed on. Thus this seeming act of altruism is actually
selfish indeed.
I feel that reason is not enough to decide moral action.
In the present world we are obsessed about gaining knowledge;
knowledge that will help us to survive in the increasingly competitive
world. We ask many questions that help us to know more but
epistemology takes us back to the most fundamental question of them
all: what is knowledge? What is this “substance” that people in the
ancient times sought and we still search for?
According to philosophers, knowledge is comprised of 3 worlds
1. Physical world, physical perception
2. Cognition, subjective personal perceptions
3. Abstract items , objective abstract products of human mind
The quest for the meaning of knowledge thus begins. First of all,
there are two ways in which we can view the topic; one is objective
where the reality we experience everyday is considered the truth, the
other is the subjective way where the reality we experience is our
version of the truth. So subjectivism splits ‘me’ from the ‘us’ and
looks at me as an individual of the society. My version of truth may
not match with someone else’s; my reality may be someone else’s dream.
Knowledge is that which we interpret according to subjectivism however
in objectivist’s view, knowledge may or may not be known to us but it
is fixed.
Epistemology has developed throughout the age. The earliest known
theory associated with this subject may be behaviorism. Behaviorism is
about motivation and rewards and is connected mainly with people’s
intentions and desires which decide their course of action or
behavior. Many theories have also been suggested regarding
epistemology, to name a few: cognitivist theory, interactionalist
theory and adult learning theory.
If we briefly summarize each of the aforementioned theory for quicker
understanding, we can observe several new theories branching from
them.
Cognitivist theory focuses on the acquisition of knowledge through
cognitive structure. This is important because many philosophers
believed that “thoughts and reasons are legitimate sources of
knowledge”. This includes:
1. Meaningful receptional learning which is learning through
association. The new things that we learn have to be linked to the
things we already know for improved learning.
2. Cognitive information processing, which holds the human memory and
processing in a computer model. Through Rehearsal and Chunking (chunks
of information) the learner can put information in the Long-Term
Memory and retrieve that information if it is needed for responses.
Interactionalist theory focuses on the social and cultural factors of
learning. This includes:
1. Vygotsky’s interactional theory which is related to the method
followed in our SAT class. Effective learning can take place through a
discourse between the instructor, who is more knowledgeable, and the
students. This kind of social interaction leads to the development of
cognition and reasoning.
2. Bruner’s interaction theory is related to MRL. It states that the
knowers, or to be knowers, form a new idea in their mind by
associating it with past or present knowledge. However this raises a
question: when a child first learns something new, he does not have
any pre-knowledge, so how can the association theory work? Does this
mean every human being has some innate knowledge from birth or do they
just use their mental reason?
3. Schema theory-I did not quite understand this theory but it is
stated that “schemas are non-hierarchical templates (data structures)
for representing the generic concepts stored in memory.” This seems to
be related to the CIP.
Adult learning theory mainly focuses on the fact that the learning
process of adults and children is not same. However, learning is a
process that occurs continuously throughout life, but the rate varies
at different periods of one’s life. Usually we consider childhood to
be one’s learning age and this may decrease an adult’s receptiveness
to knowledge. This includes:
1. Constructivism is the application of knowledge, that is, applying
existing knowledge to solve new problems. Unless constructivism can be
achieved through learning, the learning has less meaning.
2. Andragogy is recognizing the fact that children and adults learn
differently. They respond differently to the information offered to
them.
3. Self directed learning is the most interesting form of learning. We
usually indulge into this type of learning the most. This is when we
pursue a topic of interest; so obviously, the subject varies from
person to person. Since this type of learning is driven by one’s own
will, it is less burdensome than any other types.
4. Transformational learning aims to change how we know rather than
what we know.
Zarat.
The great philosopher Plato believed that everything in the world has
a purpose. Why do plants grow? To be a source of food to the animals.
When their purpose ends, they die.The reason human beings and every
other creature in the world is created because each of them has a
purpose. Life is created for the fulfillment of its purpose. Our world
therefore must serve a purpose as well. And the world is a small part
of the momentous and gigantic universe. So does the universe have a
purpose as well?
If we consider religion, then the universe definitely has a purpose.
In most of the major religions of the world, the establishment of the
universe is not an accident. If the Great Design had been to create a
universe, then there must be some purpose behind it.
Another argument for the universe having purpose is that it is not
everlasting. Because the universe has an end, it makes me think that
it has a purpose. The pattern is similar to those things with a
purpose, a book, a plant or a cow—it is created, it serves its
purpose, and it demolishes. I feel inclined to believe that creation
arises when there is need, in other words, the “created” has a purpose
to serve.
Science also supports the purposeful universe. First of all, the vast
and enigmatic universe goads the scientists on their quest to find the
“meaning”. It in itself is serving a huge purpose by providing the way
for scientific study. Also, the universe holds many substances, carbon
atoms most specifically, in abundance. It is well designed and not
just a haphazard amalgamation of everything. Thus, it must have a
purpose.
“Everything happens for a reason”—can the creation of the universe be
just a mistake or a coincidence? How can something so well designed
develop from folly? One look at the universe tells us that there is
planning behind it. However, what is the purpose of the universe is a
more difficult question to answer. In fact, I think this question
doesn’t have a definite answer at all, yet. The challenge to find the
answer is something we have taken up and in the course we might make
several extraordinary discoveries. Can this not be a purpose of the
Universe?
Does moral action depend on reasoning?
Human beings are born with innate conscience. Even though it might be
dormant or less developed in some people, it can be argued more or
less strongly that all human beings possess conscience—the ability to
identify right from wrong. The fact may be that the conscience present
in a person is very rudimentary and that interaction with the social
world and mental development through learning process flourishes it to
give it a full-fledged form. In that case, conscience will differ from
person to person, depending on their social, moral and cultural
upbringing and the quality of their education. However, the true
essence of conscience must be similar for every human.
I think conscience plays a big role in deciding our moral actions.
Even if you do something against your conscience, you will feel guilty
about it and try to amend it in most cases. But does conscience always
coincide with our reasoning? Reasoning is also present in every human;
it is one of the distinguishing characteristics of humans. Reasoning
surely develops from brain but so does conscience—really? Conscience
has been attributed to the soul by ancient Greek philosophers. But if
we are to decide that, then we must debate on the existence of soul, a
separate entity from the mind and body.
When someone acts against common sense of reasoning, we deem them to
be “crazy”. However, when someone opposes his conscience, it does not
mean he is without the faculty of reasoning.
A sudden action may not depend on either but last second impulses. It
is easy for a person to take part in a fire drill but when an actual
fire breaks out, what the person will do may not depend either on his
conscience or reasoning but his instinct to survive. I had read a book
called “The Selfish Gene”, where the author claims that human genes
are “selfish”, that is, their most important task is to live in. It is
by their manipulation that humans try to save their life. The author
has also given persuasive examples. I will quote a short one:
When a train is about to crash, a man, who was travelling with his
wife and son, throws his son out of the window to a safe distance. His
first instinct was to save his son. The author claims that it was the
doing of the “selfish gene” in him. The son is the carrier of the
man’s genes and will be able to pass them on to the next generation.
This means that by saving the son, the genes will be able to live on
and be passed on. Thus this seeming act of altruism is actually
selfish indeed.
I feel that reason is not enough to decide moral action.
In the present world we are obsessed about gaining knowledge;
knowledge that will help us to survive in the increasingly competitive
world. We ask many questions that help us to know more but
epistemology takes us back to the most fundamental question of them
all: what is knowledge? What is this “substance” that people in the
ancient times sought and we still search for?
According to philosophers, knowledge is comprised of 3 worlds
1. Physical world, physical perception
2. Cognition, subjective personal perceptions
3. Abstract items , objective abstract products of human mind
The quest for the meaning of knowledge thus begins. First of all,
there are two ways in which we can view the topic; one is objective
where the reality we experience everyday is considered the truth, the
other is the subjective way where the reality we experience is our
version of the truth. So subjectivism splits ‘me’ from the ‘us’ and
looks at me as an individual of the society. My version of truth may
not match with someone else’s; my reality may be someone else’s dream.
Knowledge is that which we interpret according to subjectivism however
in objectivist’s view, knowledge may or may not be known to us but it
is fixed.
Epistemology has developed throughout the age. The earliest known
theory associated with this subject may be behaviorism. Behaviorism is
about motivation and rewards and is connected mainly with people’s
intentions and desires which decide their course of action or
behavior. Many theories have also been suggested regarding
epistemology, to name a few: cognitivist theory, interactionalist
theory and adult learning theory.
If we briefly summarize each of the aforementioned theory for quicker
understanding, we can observe several new theories branching from
them.
Cognitivist theory focuses on the acquisition of knowledge through
cognitive structure. This is important because many philosophers
believed that “thoughts and reasons are legitimate sources of
knowledge”. This includes:
1. Meaningful receptional learning which is learning through
association. The new things that we learn have to be linked to the
things we already know for improved learning.
2. Cognitive information processing, which holds the human memory and
processing in a computer model. Through Rehearsal and Chunking (chunks
of information) the learner can put information in the Long-Term
Memory and retrieve that information if it is needed for responses.
Interactionalist theory focuses on the social and cultural factors of
learning. This includes:
1. Vygotsky’s interactional theory which is related to the method
followed in our SAT class. Effective learning can take place through a
discourse between the instructor, who is more knowledgeable, and the
students. This kind of social interaction leads to the development of
cognition and reasoning.
2. Bruner’s interaction theory is related to MRL. It states that the
knowers, or to be knowers, form a new idea in their mind by
associating it with past or present knowledge. However this raises a
question: when a child first learns something new, he does not have
any pre-knowledge, so how can the association theory work? Does this
mean every human being has some innate knowledge from birth or do they
just use their mental reason?
3. Schema theory-I did not quite understand this theory but it is
stated that “schemas are non-hierarchical templates (data structures)
for representing the generic concepts stored in memory.” This seems to
be related to the CIP.
Adult learning theory mainly focuses on the fact that the learning
process of adults and children is not same. However, learning is a
process that occurs continuously throughout life, but the rate varies
at different periods of one’s life. Usually we consider childhood to
be one’s learning age and this may decrease an adult’s receptiveness
to knowledge. This includes:
1. Constructivism is the application of knowledge, that is, applying
existing knowledge to solve new problems. Unless constructivism can be
achieved through learning, the learning has less meaning.
2. Andragogy is recognizing the fact that children and adults learn
differently. They respond differently to the information offered to
them.
3. Self directed learning is the most interesting form of learning. We
usually indulge into this type of learning the most. This is when we
pursue a topic of interest; so obviously, the subject varies from
person to person. Since this type of learning is driven by one’s own
will, it is less burdensome than any other types.
4. Transformational learning aims to change how we know rather than
what we know.
Zarat.
1 comment:
I don't understand how this post can have a 'funny' tag! Did the people really read it?
Post a Comment