Nature does not have purposes in the meaning of the OP. You are now talking about a different definition of purpose; you are talking about a physical component, as in: zooplankton "serve the purpose of feeding macro-fauna", and thus, if zooplankton did not exist the macrofauna would die. It is only your assumption about how life is "supposed to" continue that leads you to this. Life is not "supposed to" "do" anything. That is once again, moving the goalposts - a logical fallacy.
yeh We ain't just individuals We are part of a collective Whatever we do(for good or ill) ripples through the collective and leaves feedback traces of the original often serving as feedback beat frequencies creating new perspectives and approaches which help the collective to evolve with the following generations. Historically, disruption of the networks within the collective has had the result of reversing or eliminating the recent evolution(in part technological---then the altered mindsets resulting from the technological advances) of the collective.
So we are all governed by some universal purpose? Individuals don't get to decide what their purpose is, because we are ruled by our biological imperative? I think I'd allow for some evolution (small 'e') in purpose when it comes to intelligence. It is not merely an incremental, quantitative improvement over lesser intelligent creatures. There is a qualitative leap for intelligent creatures in that they are are capable of self-reflection and therefore override their biological or philanthropic imperatives, and can control their own purpose through willfull action. (Such as deciding not to have children.) One example I've mentioned is hedonism - whether strongly practiced (capital 'H') or simply a laid-back philosophical approach (small 'h'). Humans are capable of deciding that their own personal purpose is simply to soak up life and enjoy what is around them to the fullest. This is not mutually-exclusive of spawning or knowledge-sharing. It also doesn't mean that those particular things in one's life must necessarily become the purpose of that life. I think there needs to be a clarification in the OP about the purpose of "life", versus the purpose of a "person". A person, unlike anything else in the universe, can decide its purpose.
And that is also the problem. Where simpler oganisms just disappear (become extinct) we don't even notice it. Stability is maintained. It is our sophisticated brain that gives us the ability to seriously impact and cause natural imbalances that may be our undoing. This is the biblical analogy of humans eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge (becoming intelligent) and choosing to live outside the natural regulatory systems. Most likely to our own demise. As Hellstrom said, there are two species which are on the increase, man and the insect. Man because we can shape our environment, the insect because it can adapt to anything man changes.
A simple example; 4.5 billion years of natural evolution of the earth, which sequestered trillions of gallons of CO2 (oil) deep underground where it could not do any damage to the chemistry of our atmosphere. Along comes man and we extract all that sequestered CO2 back into the atmosphere and, in addition, cutting down the trees which eat CO2 and release oxygen, doubling the adverse affect on our atmosphere and creating an imbalance in global temperatures. Over the past ten years we have been witnessing the slow but increasing instability of weather patterns as we speak. I am not saying that the weather on earth was ever in perfect balance, but we know the current patterns indicate strongly that human industry and "development" are in great part responsible for the current AGW and the intensification of natural events. There are no indications of other natural causes, other than human overpopulation and overuse of resources to the detriment of all other life, except the insect. Their very simplicity makes them adaptable to almost every possible environment, including building immunity to every insecticide we can throw at them, such as DDT. But then, insects have been practicing agriculture, farming, husbandry (herding) for millions of years before man came along. The difference is that the insects practiced these forms of domestication by completely natural means, without artificial fertilizers or releasing deadly toxins into the atmosphere. IOW, the insect lives in perfect balance with its environment. Humans do not.
We elect them don't we? But instead of electing people who know what they're talking about, we elect salesmen, who have the ability to say a lot, without saying anything at all.
Of course . In France the president has a philosophy degree . If I remember right . The media is the voice of the salesmen . And the media is controled by the government .
Which, in a democracy, is elected by the people, the "informed citizenry"........ Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
But the people , for the most part , have no idea that they are being controlled in the first place .
