Why are we here?

Perhaps you came here, curious about my book, “A Ballplayer”. Perhaps you came here by random chance (or Google search ;0). Perhaps it was simply providential. I welcome you regardless of your motivations, as long as you remain open-minded and respectful. In the end, the above question, “Why are we here?” is the most important question a human can ask. Followed closely by, “Where are we going?” We must know the answer to the first before we can pursue the answer to the second.

From a philosophical perspective, the world today and throughout history has postulated many foundational thoughts for the origin of all things and ultimately humanity’s existence. I think we can distill these ideas into two major camps:

1) Humanist thought: Man exists in a material world, evolving after:

a. the “Big Bang (Theory)”

b. the spontaneous creation of life (a chain of evolution from the first single-celled organisms until homo sapiens walked the earth.)

Although “The Bang” itself seems to escape the scientific laws of time, space, and matter that followed, since the Bang, humanists view the universe as molecules in motion following mechanistic laws (observed through science but without origin or “lawmaker”) placing our universe at its current time, space, and material configuration. Likewise, while the initial establishment of life from nonlife seems to defy our understanding of the natural laws, (life from nonlife), once life began, it evolved based on chance aberrations in a species and natural selection. Simplified as “survival of the fittest”, evolution of life led to our current existence where humanity exists. Each individual is here by evolutionary forces, the result of matter in motion, molecules in random contact, in what is a chemical or “natural” process. Natural selection occurs over billions of years as minor differences (imperfections) in the chemical (DNA) makeup of living organisms eliminates the weaker, less viable alternatives (mutations) of a species finally becoming a new species such that the stronger adapt and survive within the environment. This is an “upward” process, if you will, as species and qualities, in all ways, evolve to a better, stronger, more capable state as inferior, less desirable traits die out. There is, one must note, no moral restrictions or promotion in evolution. Even the idea that the strong survive can be a misnomer—as the environment does not qualify strength per se, rather environmental changes (asteroid strike, volcanic activity, global warming/cooling) can make previously “strong” candidates inviable to changing conditions. (I.E., dinosaurs wiped out by asteroid theory.)

Humanists translate evolution on a universal scale to societal change. Such evolution correlates to species advance through stronger societal constructs replacing weaker by attributing human society to evolutionary change as if humanity itself were an evolving organism where society’s morals and norms change and adapt based on humanity’s societal trials and growth. Described by humanists as a search for happiness, or a drive to eliminate human suffering, society acts as an evolving organism. At the individual (human) level, this means what we do, what is morally right and wrong, must evolve with societal norms (no absolute morality) and old norms ‘discarded’ when shown less viable, less conducive to eliminating human suffering. Hence, rules, values and norms decided by the society newly align the individual’s moral compass or pathway, ensuring the betterment of society.

Please note, the two critical suppositions of Humanist cosmos, the Big Bang Theory where nothing produces everything and life comes from non-life, have no evidence and have never been reproduced in any scientific or clinical environment. While theories exist for the universe’s beginning (time, space, and matter banged into existence) such as String theory and Steven Hawing’s multiverse theory, for example, no experiment or proof has ever verified the theories. Life has never spontaneously developed from non-life and there is zero historical evidence that life came from nonlife. In short, Big Bang Theory and Evolution—of individual species or society norms (Morals) are theoretical and require what can only be called faith. Open minds examining the evidence would understand humanists and evolution’s proponents give one explanation for our universe, but it remains an unproven theory and may be true of false.

2) Theistic thought: Evidence of a “Big Bang” should be separated from the theory commonly known as the Big Bang Theory of evolution and humanist thought, as other explanations for the beginning of time, space, and matter exist. Big Bang Theory’s “Something from nothing” evidence is explained by Theistic Creationism as a willful act of a powerful immaterial being establishing time, space, and matter from a being outside of the physical universe. While polytheism sets multiple gods creating the universe, I will refer primarily to monotheism for this camp as the example of theistic thought. Such a theistic theory of the universe simply stated is the Biblical text Genesis 1:1; “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” In a theistic view of the universe, evidence of the big bang is congruous with the act of creation by a supernatural being, I.E. God. Furthermore, this same supernatural being (without material, or not of ‘natural cause;’ uncaused and timeless), then becomes the explanation of the creation of life within the universe He created. Indeed, the step that I will take is while God could have used evolutionary creation, it appears God was a personal creator to create man specifically after creating a series of very specific, highly tuned variables in the material universe to allow for man’s creation and sustainment. (Earth and it’s cosmic attributes). Thus, like humanistic thought, theistic thought attempts to answer how the universe came into being and how life, and man specifically, exists. In theistic theory, the universe’s beginning with the Big Bang and the life within, both result from the willful creation by a supreme being, the grand design of a Creator God. The finite universe, beginning with the “Big Bang” and life and man’s existence are evidence, says theologians like Dr. Frank Turek, of a supernatural being that is self-existing, infinite (unlimited), simple (undivided in purpose or parts, fully self-actualized), immaterial, timeless, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient.

What then, do these two theories speak to each of us as individuals, regarding our original question, why are we here?

The humanist postulates a universe ultimately meaningless, especially when it comes to individuals within species. At the individual level, what happened 50,000 years ago is forgotten. 10000 years from now, anything we do, is rendered meaningless. Hitler and Mother Teresa were just dancing to their DNA. Humanity has no free will, as moist robots, following a path set by chance and chemical processes, for which we have no individual responsibility, and even if we do, it will becomes meaningless once we are gone.

Theism has very different implications, if true. The supernatural creator now must be the standard by which we measure all things. Creation becomes an act of will of a supreme being. The universal laws of science, logic and morality come from the creator lawgiver. The universe must thus have a purpose, and so too, the created life found within. If we live in such a universe, we are not just molecules in motion. Made with a purpose, not by chance, and evidently endowed with free will, each human being is unique and uniquely purposed by a creator, “God.”

These opposing beliefs man postulates fall into one of the two categories above - simplified: humanists insist random chance built the universe and life within. As part of this universe, humanity follows a meaningless existence, where ultimate morality is fiction and living is simply a fulfillment of evolutionary DNA programming. The unfit are eliminated and the fit survive to procreate until another meaningless generation is born. Theists postulate an alternative belief: A purposely built universe created by the will of an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-present, timeless, immaterial being made with divine purpose and intent: for all of creation, right down to each individual. The individual has a specific purpose, and a future of meaning specifically planned and created by God imbued the humanity he created, free will.

One or the other must be true. One or the other is foundational to a thinking, self-aware being. Which one is correct and what does it mean to you and me? That is the question of our existence. I propose to you, man is a creature yearning to understand his existence, to seek and find his purpose. Let’s work together and explore the possibilities. Let’s examine the evidence: Logical, historical, and scientific, and answer our question, “Why am I here?”