Anthropic principle (and not "entropic")

[NielsBohr]

Hi,

On a french forum, I gave someone my intuition. This person was of the materialist determinism.

I believe to remember that she was about to tell me that (God was not necessary for the human as much as) the human was not necessary to the world.

The parenthesis because she was also atheist, but I am not sure she told this in the same post.

So, I answered her about my deep intuition. I told her that human (or at least an elaborated intelligence) should be necessary to the world!

The central purpose was to tell that a world being without clever life would be so desertic, that only some hypothetical matters would have been so hypothetic, that it wouldn't exist.

But I did not know that scientists had told so on recent years.

This is the anthropic principle:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

P.S.:
I was indeed influenced by Bohr, telling that the experimenter was bounded to his experiment.

[henry quirk]

"I told her that human (or at least an elaborated intelligence) should be necessary to the world!"

I think the universe, being what it is and how it works, tends, (in very specific places, in very specific circumstances) to produce 'life'.

That is: the universe (as it operates) necessarily produces 'life' but 'life' is not necessary to the fundamental operation of the universe.

That is: 'life' is the result (one of many) of the universe’s operation, not the reason for it.

[NielsBohr]

I see why you use life between quotes.

Because life is not the synonym of consciousness, of mind or spirit.

-Your life understand is only the process of creating molecules and then cells.

-I avoid to use against you the "Verb" as the son at the (biblical) genesis of material universe, and etymologically synonym of breath.

Obviously, the topic should concern in priority the interested people. If you then see some contradiction or even antinomy, I'll be happy to read you later.

[henry quirk]

I use 'life' cuz humans are one example of it and 'it' ('life', human and not) is the result not the cause.

Take my original post and replace 'life' with 'human individuals' and you change my meaning and intent not one bit.

Observe...

I think the universe, being what it is and how it works, tends, (in very specific places, in very specific circumstances) to produce 'human individuals'.

That is: the universe (as it operates) necessarily produces 'human individuals' but 'human individuals' (are) not necessary to the fundamental operation of the universe.

That is: 'human individuals' (are) the result (one of many) of the universe’s operation, not the reason for it.

...see? My meaning and intent is preserved.

[NielsBohr]

That does not tell anything about the spirit before to born on the Earth...

Sorry.

Take a book of metaphysics, and built up better your arguments

[henry quirk]

NB,

I can't tell you anything about "the spirit before to born on the Earth".

No one can.

Why?

Cuz there is no spirit, no soul.

We're all just meat and bone and blood.

#

"Take a book of metaphysics, and built up better your arguments"

HA!

Take your own advice...

[NielsBohr]

As you know there is no spirit, I don't need anymore.

But I think as you told about meat and bones, that you would be thinking about a book of medicine.

These topics are for metaphysics. If you believe only in physics,

[henry quirk]

"These topics are for metaphysics."

No, these are topics for human beings to talk, argue, and debate about.

You hold a position; mine opposes yours.

Seems a fine place to begin, don't you agree?

[NielsBohr]

It is my little sweet taste in trying to find a place for human being; that shall stimulate him !