Well, if you're lookin' to boost yer ego, you came to the wrong place! It even feels like we were sent here, to this universe, to be put in our place: If you listen carefully, you can hear the cosmos yellin' at you/us "You're nuthin'! You hear, nuthin'!"

Nevertheless, a book on Raja yoga (royal yoga) I read thousands of years ago asks the practitioner to meditate on being, get this, the center of the universe - it makes sense, this, in a solipsistic kinda way, oui? I gave it my best shot but as fate would have it I was unable to complete the training. I had such high hopes that I could do it!

It's at most an argument that "sentient life" is rare and that sapience is (maybe exponentially) even rarer still. What makes sapients (like us) significant, however, is that (we) can know this – that (we) can know the cosmos and that its fundamental constraints make knowing it possible.

A quick question:

Did we evolve from bacteria/viruses (complexification/bottom-up) or did bacteria/viruses evolve from us (simplification/top-down)?

Depends on how you measure significance.
Or do you suppose there is a way to measure significance empirically?

It is my understanding that life in general was impossible in the universe for the strong majority of time and will be impossible again. Maybe 0.00001% or less of time is when life can exist, and sentient life is even fewer and farther between. — TiredThinker

That sounds about right. But what do we know?
How much time and effort do we spend in wonder?
I was intrigued by your questions:

Is this more an argument that sentient life is special and valuable or insignificant and an anomaly? Or neither? The universe never fails to humble us, but rarely seems to lift us up. Lol. — TiredThinker

How does the universe humble us? In its sheer existence, immensity?
If some even stop to consider this, then it can overwhelm or excite with its awesomeness.
Bring down or lift up. It can provide perspective.

This morning, I read this Aeon article which has something to say about significance:
https://aeon.co/essays/think-about-it-your-existence-is-utterly-astonishing

The emotion of astonishment at our existence. Why don't we see the specialness of who we are?
Even this little effort at communication; we take it for granted, sometimes not even valued.
Just another brick in the wall?
Not really.

Like your thread, I enjoyed this article for making me think again.
About the way we are. How we think or progress, this or that way. Our crossing paths.
The importance of cultivating the right emotions.

Sometimes, we are so entangled in deep knots of confusion that it's difficult to see why we even bother.
@TiredThinker - Life can look bleak and wearisome.
But I can imagine the hellishness of WWI and the fact that both my grandfathers survived.
And so, here I am. Astonished.

The thrill has not yet gone. Stay cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgXSomPE_FY

Maybe both, but I assume simple to complex happened first.

Maybe both, but I assume simple to complex happened first. — TiredThinker

Breaking down (simplification) seems simpler than building up (complexification). It's easier if we look at it as losing qualities rather than gaining them (less magical).

Bacteria & viruses inhabit us, we don't inhabit bacteria & viruses. :mask:

Bacteria & viruses inhabit us, we don't inhabit bacteria & viruses. :mask: — 180 Proof

:ok:

Depends on how you measure significance.
Or do you suppose there is a way to measure significance empirically? — Yohan

Or it depends on what you mean by 'significance'.
A simple answer would be something is significant if it is important enough to warrant special attention.

Life, and how we experience it, is high on the list of human considerations.
In a particular sense, life's importance is determined by our perceptions, values, beliefs and culture.

Some look at life, our place in it and judge how effectively we exist within our ecosystem.
Perhaps that might partly answer your question as to measurement?

With reference to bacteria and viruses,
They are one of our biggest challenges. As we are to them.
How effectively we manage the environment would seem to be significant, no?
How would you measure that?

It is my understanding that life in general was impossible in the universe for the strong majority of time and will be impossible again. Maybe 0.00001% or less of time is when life can exist, and sentient life is even fewer and farther between.

Is this more an argument that sentient life is special and valuable or insignificant and an anomaly? Or neither? The universe never fails to humble us, but rarely seems to lift us up. Lol. — TiredThinker

It means absolutely nothing at all. Given infinite time, sapience will happen countless of times, That seems to make us rather insiginificant. That does not make us any less significant to ourselves though. Our knowledge of our insiginificance of a universal scale is matched by our knowledge of our significance on a particular scale.

That does not make us any less significant to ourselves though. Our knowledge of our insiginificance of a universal scale is matched by our knowledge of our significance on a particular scale. — Tobias

:fire:

The universe never fails to humble us, but rarely seems to lift us up. Lol. — TiredThinker

Nice and believable figure of spech. "Hey, throw us a bone, man!" :grin:

Given infinite time, sapience will happen countless of times, — Tobias

If it is infinite, which is not yet clear.

One thing to mention here is that intelligence seems to be a lethal mutation: the vast majority of life shows not signs of it at all. The more sophisticated the creature is, the less likely they manage to survive.

We don't know if this generalizes to other places.

How do you mean? And there is also the specificity of a creature. A bacteria may live over many years of generations, but will also have many mutations so it isn't necessary the same thing before long. A complex creature with the same number of mutations may still be call human after more time because of the relative small changes.

Single celled organisms are still with us, in some form or another, for 3.7 billion years. We have been around as is, roughly 100,000 years. Most creatures more complicated than simple organisms die off completely.

The more complex the creature, in terms of biological complexity, organs, never mind self-consciousness, the less likely it will be around to pass on its genes. Intelligence may be a mistake, meaning, not good for survival in general - we may happened to have lucked out of extinction.

I think that's entirely plausible given the evidence we currently have of life on Earth.

Goes further than sentience, doesn't it...?
Markedly further, as far as I can tell.

A hundred years ago, what were the chances that I'd be sitting here, typing this stuff now, on this device, hooked up to this network?
A million years ago?
Both seem vanishingly small, quickly converging on zero the longer ago.
(Unless we go by strict determinism I guess.)
Well, here I am, typing, at present a chance of 100% when expressed in those terms.

Extending the inquiry, what's the chance of our present world among all possible worlds?
Vanishingly small?
Whatever it might be, I'm not sure it's possible to make such an assessment.
The forum is going regardless, and about to be polluted with my comment, of all things. :)

By the way, I wouldn't restrict life to life as we know it.
In analogy, it's harder to imagine a (similarly) different sort of sentience, but I wouldn't restrict to sentience as we know it either.

But how little appreciation we have for life, in a world where a futuristic outlook such as soylent green is conceivable? The vanishingly small chance of intelligent life is matched only by the monstrous tragedy of self-denial, abuse and destruction it spawns.

Sorry if my post was a bit discordant, but I'm getting so f'ed up I'm barely able to function, so thanks for the brief diversion anyways. You're probably doing better than me, trust me aargh!

It completely slipped my mind that Buddhism has an interesting story to tell about the probability of sentient life (being born aa a human).

The Turtle.

There's a blind turtle who dwells at the bottom of an infinite ocean. Every 5 billion years it surfaces to take a breath of air. There's floating on this ocean a yoke that's being blown hither and thither, randomly, by a raging storm. Your odds of being born as a human are far, far less than that of the turtle's head going through the yoke!!!

Human beings are special but with population explosion, we're becoming more and more ordinary, commonplace, mediocre!

This rarity of human life should motivate us to lead more fulfilling lives, and not to miss seizing the opportunity for nirvana.

On the flip side though, gravity doesn't care whether you're a buddha or a serial killer, both (will) die from a fall off the Eiffel tower.

But how little appreciation we have for life, in a world where a futuristic outlook such as soylent green is conceivable? The vanishingly small chance of intelligent life is matched only by the monstrous tragedy of self-denial, abuse and destruction it spawns. — Enrique

Hello Enrique
It is because we attend to life with all its possibilities that people, such as yourself, can imagine different outlooks. Or even backlooks by inlooks.
This is intelligent life. The ability to learn, understand and communicate. Amongst other things.
For sure, it can spawn negative destruction, at any level you care to think of.
But the opposite is also true. Creative destruction. Restructure. Whatever.
The stories tell us so.

I recognised your name from the Short Stories event.
The title of your story - not so short! - chimes well in this thread.
'Earth: A Tall Tale of Morality'.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13185/earth-a-tall-tale-of-morality-by-enrique

[ I didn't participate in comments this year but I've since had a quick look. There are some beautiful words, thoughts, and processes in yours. The origins and ethics of language for one! The ongoing tensions. So many of the stories used dreams...]

Sorry if my post was a bit discordant, but I'm getting so f'ed up I'm barely able to function, so thanks for the brief diversion anyways. You're probably doing better than me, trust me aargh! — Enrique

How was it discordant? And what's wrong with that, anyway?
We don't all bend to the same bells.
I don't think this needs to be a 'brief diversion'. It can be more, depending on our state of mind.
But yes, I too thank @TiredThinker for starting a thread that can lead almost anywhere. Not just the scientific...

Is this more an argument that sentient life is special and valuable or insignificant and an anomaly? Or neither? The universe never fails to humble us, but rarely seems to lift us up. Lol. — TiredThinker

Why would we expect the universe to lift us up? And what's funny about it...

Perhaps this:

We talked and talked for decades until we had touched upon every conceivable meaning and were even able to invent new languages ourselves. Then one day we all finally paused. I took the lead and said to the ruler spirit, “we’ve mastered language, but what are we supposed to do next?”

The ruler spirit replied, “I suppose you’d erupt a volcano or tool around on Neptune, but you can’t move.” — Enrique

That does make intelligence interesting if it actually impedes survival. It must than serve a different purpose. Hopefully one that makes us special even if not enduring.

Likewise. Antiaging research gives me hope of functioning again.

Antiaging research gives me hope of functioning again. — TiredThinker

Not at all a misplaced hope. With the amount of effort going into antiaging research, some amazing progress is going to come very soon.

We may not experience the full benefits, but I wouldn't be surprised if those currently alive will be the last generations to die of natural causes.