@Pythagorean,
Pythagorean;135167 wrote:One consequence would be that we are left permanently and utterly alone in the universe.-
But why would the default assumption be that it was false?
Especially considering the consequence.
It was said the smart man bets on God (more than once).
If the choice is to see science and nature reenchanted, alive, perceptive purposeful and striving
verses
Seeing nature as primarily mechanical machine, dead, inert, insensate and without ultimate purpose or goal.
Given that neither can be proven or disproven, why would you choose the dead universe over the living? Is it even rational to choose the less inspiring and optimistic view? Given mans existential paradox and the need to seek meaning and purpose, which choice makes sense?
---------- Post added 03-02-2010 at 10:31 PM ----------
Reconstructo;135183 wrote:That is unfortunately mostly true. But what about an island(metaphor) of the good folks, who do their best to tolerate social corruption? I agree with Spengler that the West is in moral if not technological decline.
Societies collapse when they lose their ideals, their sense of purpose. The west is currently having an identity crisis, in fact one could say humanity is having an identity crisis.