God is sometimes said to be a necessary being, while humans are said to be entities that can also fail to be, in other words, we are not necessary beings.

Is our existence optional?
Are we necessary beings or not?


Please discuss.

The world existed before us, it'll be here after us.

I can't really see us as "necessary" although (from your post that inspired this thread) I can see that an argument could be made for us to be so.

Necessary to who?

Necessary to who?
*************
M*W: Ourselves.

There is no ultimate purpose so the question is meaningless.

In the total sense of the universe no one is really necessary because the universe will continue with what it is until it also ends.

Is our existence optional?
What does this mean?


Are we necessary beings or not?
If all humans were to suddenly disappear, would the universe collapse? No.
But I guess you could say that we are necessary from a deterministic point of view; just as necessary as the next mosquitoe..

Ofcourse we are.
Without consciousness observation it's immaterial.

It still exists, observed or not. There's no reason to think otherwise.

Ofcourse we are.
Without consciousness observation it's immaterial.
You are, of course, assuming we are the only consciousness in the universe. This is a rather arrogant assumption.

No,

God is sometimes said to be a necessary being, while humans are said to be entities that can also fail to be, in other words, we are not necessary beings.

Is our existence optional?
Are we necessary beings or not?


Please discuss.

God does not need us atall, he needs none of his creations he is self sufficient and self sustaining.

He created us to sppreciate his creations and to witness his creative beauty, he also made us have free will, not many of his creations actualy have free will, the angels have no free will they can only obey his commands and praise him they can't go against god or his commands, The Jinn also have free will they were created before us, his animals do not have the same free will as us we are superior in every way to his other creations on earth. we are even superior to the Jinn.

God didn't "need humans" He could have created anything he wnated to perform our special role, we have something amazing the ability to judge, the ability to think and do what we want, we even have the ability to rebel against god.

But no we are not "needed" but if you want to say we or something very much akin to us is "needed" if he wants to create the certain effect he has.


PEace.

But no we are not "needed" but if you want to say we or something very much akin to us is "needed" if he wants to create the certain effect he has.


PEace.


Needed by who? Do you mean needed by God that's completely impossible, God cannot have any needs whatsoever.

Necessary??? surely you're kidding, we're very, very unimportant.

Not necessary, but very probable as energy goes through its paces in the very long time it has, which may even be forever.

As for this universe in particular, we took 14 billions years, and the sun has 5 billions years more to burn. Perhaps we caught some breaks, such as the dinosaurs and 95% of all life going away giving us an opening, without which we may not have made it in time.

A relationship of contingency doesn't necessarily render one unnecessary - as a rule we only fail when we don't acknowledge the relationship of contingency ... so its more like ignorance is unnecessary than our existence, per se

Necessary??? surely you're kidding, we're very, very unimportant.


Just because we're unimportant since there are billions of us is not exactly the reason we cannot be necessary in existence.

Just because we're unimportant since there are billions of us is not exactly the reason we cannot be necessary in existence.

Didn't mean as individuals, meant as a whole.

(It's a great big universe and we're all really puny...)

necessary in relation to what depends on us and that is still finite.

life is necessary for life (certain composition or order) but beyond that, probably not.

Didn't mean as individuals, meant as a whole.

(It's a great big universe and we're all really puny...)


It's not exactly the reason we cannot have necessary existence even if I extend to the ratio of us to the universe.

God is sometimes said to be a necessary being, while humans are said to be entities that can also fail to be, in other words, we are not necessary beings.

Is our existence optional?
Are we necessary beings or not?


Please discuss.
I think that you should go a little bit more into the detail of what you mean by necessary.

From Wikipedia:

Necessary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary) may refer to:

Something that is a required condition for something else to be the case, see necessary and sufficient condition.

A necessary truth, something that cannot fail to be true, see logical possibility.

An important task or essential thing to do at a particular time or by a particular moment.

Necessity in the context of criminal law

An action somebody may feel they must do

In some languages a "necessary" is a bathroom or toilet. In English this is an archaic usage. :D

An economic need enunciated by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt in his 1944 Second Bill of Rights

A necessity in contract law

Didn't mean as individuals, meant as a whole.

(It's a great big universe and we're all really puny...)
We're just tiny little specks, about the size of Mickey Rooney

I think that you should go a little bit more into the detail of what you mean by necessary.

Like I asked in the OP: Is our existence optional?

In the other thread you said it was.

Please provide some reasoning how our existence is optional; how can it be that we might also not exist.


(This is in the Comparative Religion section, so I think it is clear in what context the terms are to be understood.)

If you look at a quantum universe, natural states exist in distinct packets, with empty gaps between these states. Consider something man-made like the statue of liberty. This does not follow logically from the natural potentials in a quantum universe. In other words, it would not form spontaneously in nature using the potential of the quantum universe. It exists in the gap between what is natural. Humans are here to fill in the gaps between natural states.

Is our existence optional?
Are we necessary beings or not?

Do you mean personally or humans as a whole?

It's optional in the way you can take it by jumping off a bridge if you like.
Necessary? Only to those that depend on us, such as our babies.

Needed by who? Do you mean needed by God that's completely impossible, God cannot have any needs whatsoever.

.................................................. .................

Necessary? Is it necessary for me to drink my own urine? No! But I do it anyway, cause it's sterile and I like the taste.- Patches O'houliham

Could we be necessary to fulfill some omnipotent beings cycles of complete and utter boredom? Maybe just a toy in god's eye... possibly apprentices...

Maybe the light of consciousness ignites stars. If not I can't see how we are necessary.

Maybe the universe itself is a living creature and we fulfill some vital role in its existence. Doubtful.

Perhaps that is our mission... to find better ways to cope with the boredom of being eternal. How people watch people, the universe watches more closely.

Like I asked in the OP: Is our existence optional?

In the other thread you said it was.

Please provide some reasoning how our existence is optional; how can it be that we might also not exist.


(This is in the Comparative Religion section, so I think it is clear in what context the terms are to be understood.)
Ok, we are not necessary beings, but contingent beings. The only being which is necessary is that which could not have been otherwise. Existence is a very part of the definition of a necessary being, it would be impossible to think of them not having existed in the past or ceasing to exist in the future.

Does that apply to us? No. We did not exist before our life on earth began. Our soul does not pre-exist the body, but the soul and body are two parts of a composite whole. We are not existence itself, but rather we get our existence from some other cause. If something receives its act of existence from a source other than itself, it is by definition not necessary being.

God could have not created us. It is theoretically possible. You may argue that since He did create us, we cannot cease to exist, but that does not mean that we are necessary beings just because we are immortal.

MoM -

I won't address this directly myself as I am not that qualified, but I have invited Lightgigantic.

I consider myself a sentient being who happens to be living in a human body. I could be any of a trillion different forms on as many planets but I would still be the same sentient being.

I think this is why God made the Universe- to produce sentience: to have an audience... to have people to talk to.

I think we are very neccesary beings because we are sentient.

And I think it'll be at least several hundred years before we can digitally immortalize it and send us off into deep space for meaningless amounts of time to make contact in our immortal robot bodies.

MoM -

I won't address this directly myself as I am not that qualified, but I have invited Lightgigantic.
Is lightgigantic a Catholic? There isn't a Catholic apologist who would disagree with that, as the fact that God is necessary being and we are not is absolutely fundamental to Catholicism, Christianity, or really Theism in general, thought I suppose some theories of emanationism might argue that creation is necessary in an analogous sense. I am afraid the topic might not be interesting if you are expecting a debate an opposing viewpoint

LG isn't Catholic, or Christian.

Indeed, it might not be interesting to debate viewpoints that are very different.

I was more interested in seeing how you two would handle that difference.

God is sometimes said to be a necessary being, while humans are said to be entities that can also fail to be, in other words, we are not necessary beings.

Is our existence optional?
Are we necessary beings or not?


Please discuss.The only existence that I can see as necessary is one's own. I.e. each person can say that without themselves existing there is nothing. They can not say that about anyone else. If everyone else did suddenly didn't exist... I still would. But if I suddenly did not exist... then to me nothing would exist... not even myself.

Hence, to me, I am the only necessary being.

That is solipsism!

The world existed before us, it'll be here after us.

Unless your consciousness is non-physical, and somehow
lives on.
The whole
world will cease to exist once your dead.
Won't it?

jan.

Unless your consciousness is non-physical, and somehow
lives on.
The whole
world will cease to exist once your dead.
Won't it?

jan.

Depends on how centric your viewpoint is.

It will cease for me. I have serious doubt that the whole universe is dependent on my existence though. I hope for everyone's sake I'm right. :)

That is solipsism!Not entirely, although it's along the same path. I'm not saying that nothing other than my mind exists or isn't real... but to me I am the only thing that is necessary.
It's more just an entirely subjective viewpoint rather than anything too far down the solispsist path.

Objectively I can't seen any existence as necessary... because I don't consider existence itself to be necessary... it begs the question of "necessary to who/what?"

I dont know about neccessary you would have to specify relating to what.

BUT! I believe consciousness is neccessary because it exists. That's proof enough for me.

Your logic is fascinating.

Your lack of logic is fascinating.

Your lack of logic is fascinating.
Your "rebuttal" is puerile and faulty.
Which particular part of the definition of "necessary" fits your claim that consciousness is necessary because it exists?
Does this also mean that the piece of fluff on the "5" key on my keyboard is "necessary"?
That the spider just outside my door is necessary?

No I'm saying consciousness seems neccessary.
We are the most complex creatures at this point infered from common sense.

That piece of flugg and the 5 keyboard is absolutely neccessary because it exists. Spiders are absolutely neccessary or atleast as neccessary as chaos & order is neccessary in respect to the basis for our reality from what can be infered.

I suspect if the universe is neccessary than us as beings are too because we are all apart of the same contigent matter so to speak but in a more meaningful and a more obviously different organization. I suspect that consciousness itself is neccessary and this complex compiling of matter is a consequence of space evolving because it exists and it did not and it will exist in the future under certain conditions the universe provides.

Than again it's just my opinion. Indivisually we are unneccessary like the spider and 5 key. But the fabric from which everything is constructed is neccessary and I include everything within its range of possibilities neccessary including the items you named.

If the universe has been around for 13-14 billion years, and will be for an unclear amount of time. Then I'd have to say no, we are not necessary beings.

Is our existence optional?


You cannot choose to exist (or anything for that matter) from a non-existent state. Reality doesn't support that. You can commit suicide however, but that's not quite the same as choosing to not exist.



Are we necessary beings or not?

Necessary for what?

You cannot choose to exist (or anything for that matter) from a non-existent state. Reality doesn't support that. You can commit suicide however, but that's not quite the same as choosing to not exist.


This suggests that there is an aspect of necessity to our existence.

This suggests that there is an aspect of necessity to our existence.

I don't even see it as a suggestion. What is your reasoning behind this?

This suggests that there is an aspect of necessity to our existence.

How?

I don't even see it as a suggestion. What is your reasoning behind this?

You said -


You cannot choose to exist (or anything for that matter) from a non-existent state. Reality doesn't support that. You can commit suicide however, but that's not quite the same as choosing to not exist.


Ie. it could not have been otherwise but that we exist. This is a case of necessity.

You said -



Ie. it could not have been otherwise but that we exist. This is a case of necessity.

How on earth are you defining the word "necessity"?

For starters, 'that which cannot be otherwise'.

You are speaking in riddles.

For starters, 'that which cannot be otherwise'.

Unless this is some obscure definition, I don't think the concept matches the word. Also, all past events cannot be otherwise and all future events don't share that restriction. Your opening question amounts to "are all past events unchangeable?". As far as we can tell, the answer is yes.

Rhaedas,



It will cease for me.

Which was my point.



I have serious doubt that the whole universe is dependent on my existence though. I hope for everyone's sake I'm right. :)

Whatever the source of your existence is, that is what the universe is dependant upon.
It is the same source that is the cause, and reason for all existence.

jan.

Necessary for?

Necessary for?

???

jan.

eh, you too Jan?

I havent seen an explanation to the question "necessary for what?"

eh, you too Jan?

I havent seen an explanation to the question "necessary for what?"

I thought it was aimed at me. :)

jan.

Your "rebuttal" is puerile and faulty.
Which particular part of the definition of "necessary" fits your claim that consciousness is necessary because it exists?
Does this also mean that the piece of fluff on the "5" key on my keyboard is "necessary"?
That the spider just outside my door is necessary?

What kind of a joint do you live in???

What kind of a joint do you live in???
One with a spider just outside the door.

For starters, 'that which cannot be otherwise'.If the universe has always existed and conscious self-aware life forms have always been generative and evolvative (coined word) then the presence of intelligent life would have always been fact and it could be no other way. I can see how, in a sense, that could mean it is necessary but then it would be no more remarkable than the dust on wyddyr's key board, (assuming that has always been there :)).

Not 'necessary by who' more 'necessary for what' purpose?

God is sometimes said to be a necessary being, while humans are said to be entities that can also fail to be, in other words, we are not necessary beings.

Is our existence optional?
Are we necessary beings or not?


Please discuss.

Philosophical necessity is a state which could not logically fail to be true. There was a time when no life existed, so life is not necessary in that sense (it creates no paradoxes to imagine a lifeless universe). If modern physics is correct, this era of stars and planets is short snippet of the history of the universe that is to come, and no life will exist through most of it ... once this "Stelliferous Era" ends, life will end with it (or very shortly thereafter). As there is no paradox in that scenario, again, life seems not to be "necessary."

Even if there is a "fate" that has led us to this point, I don't see that any individual is logically necessary either. If my parents failed to meet, I would not exist. There's no paradox there and one can readily imagine that the world would go on turning. So I am not "necessary".

I suppose, if there is such a "fate" and if the fate was itself were "necessary", then I too would be necessary, but I can readily imagine a random, "unfated" universe and can discern no logical conflicts that would arise if that were our reality, so I do not see any overarching fate.

There was a time when no life existed

How do you know that?