Philosophy Now Forum

It would seem so. For example can't a rock just be a rock without figuring its origins or purpose. It seems that humans can't be satisfied without attaching a purpose. And if science can't supply an answer, then people look to God. And if religion can't supply an answer, then people turn to science. Why can't people, in general, just let things be and let curiosity not take over?

PhilX

"Why can't people, in general, just let things be and let curiosity not take over?"

Cuz we're smart, pattern making/seeking, monkeys.

It's human nature.

That is: there's no 'reason' for it...we just 'do' what we evolved to do.

Yes, next question.

Seriously though we have spent our small 200 thousand year existence as a species being curious about everything, we have made up reasons why everying is, why should existence be anything different. If religion did not exist we would make one about the lack of it. It seems the drive to evolve has also given us the drive to explain things we can not know, and in ways we could not know. Way it is.

To add what henry said though, which is: we do what we do and it is why we are here. When we can explain everything, we will stop looking for purpose, until then it is part of our nature and we will continue to make up silly fantasies on that which we cannot explain, be it in science, philosophy or religion. Only the weeding process of each differs, the means are different the ends very different too.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:It would seem so. For example can't a rock just be a rock without figuring its origins or purpose. It seems that humans can't be satisfied without attaching a purpose. And if science can't supply an answer, then people look to God. And if religion can't supply an answer, then people turn to science. Why can't people, in general, just let things be and let curiosity not take over?

PhilX

Science doesn't attach purpose to phenomena. Not to do so is the whole idea of science.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:It would seem so. For example can't a rock just be a rock without figuring its origins or purpose. It seems that humans can't be satisfied without attaching a purpose. And if science can't supply an answer, then people look to God. And if religion can't supply an answer, then people turn to science. Why can't people, in general, just let things be and let curiosity not take over?

PhilX

We humans are always in a direct response-relationship to the rest of the world, and part of having a purpose with things is knowing how to respond to the occurence of this thing in your world.

About rocks, knowing the facts about them are useful for a series of reasons, relating to geological stability, the conditions of soil, the conditions of mining or working with rock, and so forth.

Rocks are like chemical substances that react with the rest of our world, and shape foundations and conditions for our environment and our livelihood. The minerals from rocks for instance, help increasing the quality of our drinking water, and give us proper nourishment.

The "purpose" of things like rocks, therefore, is to nourish us. And sometimes the rocks disappear, like in erosion, and sometimes rocks stick badly together and you can have catastrophes. In norway a huge part of a fjord is in danger of falling into the water and drowning a village (they've made a brand new disaster movie about it). You could say it's a purpose of the rock to fall into the water sooner or later because of the conditions found in the geological formation it is part of, where water has eroded paths creating cracks that eventually will make for catastrophic outcomes.

henry quirk wrote:...

Cuz we're smart, pattern making/seeking, monkeys.
...

I thought we were Apes not Monkeys?

The Voice of Time said:

"The 'purpose' of things like rocks, therefore, is to nourish us." I'll pass along the condiments along with a knife and fork so you can enjoy your meal (just kidding).

What would happen if there were no living things on our planet? Would you say that rocks were created to nourish us?

PhilX

Here's a closely related question. Does there need to be living things on our planet (or elsewheres) for purpose to exist? (thanks to The Voice of Time for inspiring this question)

PhilX

There needs to be consciousness for purpose to exist, else how would something ask the question why do I exist or what is existence, how hence would any rock nourish a person with a mind called us? There does not have to be consciousness for things to exist. This seems self evident. Who knows how many universes contain just things, that, exist, and how many universes that have minds in it that can ask the question why or what for or indeed any question at all ..?

Seems a simple thing to say teleology resides in a mind who can ask it, not in a thing that floats around being a rock and does nothing else; one can of course excuse most politicians or lawyers or idiots, from the consciousness they claim, they float around being nothing but an object, and doing nothing that will help anyone, but that is a whole other subject.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:The Voice of Time said:

"The 'purpose' of things like rocks, therefore, is to nourish us." I'll pass along the condiments along with a knife and fork so you can enjoy your meal (just kidding).

What would happen if there were no living things on our planet? Would you say that rocks were created to nourish us?

Things can have more than one purpose and the purpose adapts according to what needs to be the purpose.

OP, you were curious enough to ask, why the effort?

'Wonder is the beginning of wisdom', but i suppose wisdom also includes what to crave for and what to let be and how to deal with it. Its sad humanity caused so much misery, not only themselves, more importantly to all but us.

But yeah, its not all bad, shooting monkeys into space and stuff, nah in all honesty, humans have achieved some amazing things too

The point of all is finding out.
You find a point, you're done.
Pointless is a point to.

It is what it is, you decide.

We Are Both Apes And Monkeys
We Are Both Apes And Monkeys

We Are Both Apes And Monkeys
We Are Both Apes And Monkeys

But we don't have tails?

Arising_uk wrote:But we don't have tails?

We have heads..thats enough for some

attofishpi wrote:

Arising_uk wrote:But we don't have tails?

We have heads..thats enough for some

And for some it's the same, as in fulfilling the same purpose.