I think that agency only makes sense as part of a model of an intentional system: Something must care. The universe is very likely not equipped with means and reasons to care, and even if it did, that could not manifest in ways that ground our own agency.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
The translation of human-centric motives to the possible agency of the universe doesn't hold up, but that doesn't mean the universe doesn't have some impetus to develop that includes the emergence of intelligent agents within it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RitaJKing
I think that it may not be the universe, but evolution, and the universe just holds the possibility for evolution. And the global optimum of evolution is not the conscious mind, but the perfect devourer. We are just a defective local optimum.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
-
-
Replying to @RitaJKing
The way I see it, self-organizing structure is only supported in very small regions of the universe; life feeds on tiny bubbles of negentropy that are not already eaten up by more efficient, dumb chemical reactions, until entropy suffocates it.
2 replies 3 retweets 4 likes -
-
Replying to @RitaJKing
Personally, I beg to disagree. Existence and inexistence are neutral, but evolution is quite horrible for most participants.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
Regardless, I will never lose my sense of wonder and gratitude for this tiny window.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Lucky you! I struggle very hard to maintain it. Some people are at odds with their families or their governments, I am at odds with this universe.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.