1 / 13

LECTURE 21

LECTURE 21. WHAT RATIONAL BEINGS ARE THERE?. VAN INWAGEN’S CHARACTERIZATION OF “RATIONAL”.

maya
Download Presentation

LECTURE 21

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LECTURE 21 WHAT RATIONAL BEINGS ARE THERE?

  2. VAN INWAGEN’S CHARACTERIZATION OF “RATIONAL” HE AVOIDS THE USE OF THE WORD “INTELLIGENT” IN FAVOR OF “RATIONAL”. THE LATTER IS APPLIED TO BEINGS HAVING CERTAIN KIND OF MENTAL CAPACITIES – CAPACITIES NOT PRESENT IN EVEN THE SMARTEST APES. THE QUOTE ON P. 171 AND IS TOO LONG TO PRESENT VIA SLIDES. (QUOTE)

  3. VAN INWAGEN EMPHASIZES THE GREAT DISCONTINUITY BETWEEN US AND DEVELOPED BEASTS • CF. THE DISCUSSION ON PP. 171-2.

  4. THE ONLY NON-CONTROVERSIAL RATIONAL BEINGS WE KNOW OF ARE US IF RATIONAL COMPUTERS ARE POSSIBLE, THEY WOULD OF COURSE BE, WELL, RATIONAL. WE DON’T KNOW IF IT IS POSSIBLE TO DESIGN A COMPUTER HAVING THE REQUIRED CAPACITIES. WE HAVE ENCOUNTERED SUCH IN VARIOUS WORKS OF FICTION, BUT THAT IS NO SIGNIFICANT EVIDENCE FOR THE ACTUAL POSSIBILITY.

  5. RATIONAL EXTRA-TERRESTRIALS? UFO REPORTS (I HAVE NOT KEPT UP WITH THE MORE RECENT REPORTS, BUT I AVIDLY RESEARCHED THE AVAILABLE EVIDENCE SOME YEARS AGO.): VAN INWAGEN POINTS OUT THAT IF ETS ARE AS TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED SO AS TO BE ABLE TO TRAVEL THE VAST DISTANCES TO EVEN THE NEAREST STARS (OTHER THAN SOL) AND WANTED US TO KNOW ABOUT THEM, IT WOULD BE UNMISTAKABLE THAT THEY ARE HERE.

  6. THE EVIDENCE IS (OR WAS) DISTURBINGLY THIN AND SEARCHES FOR RADIO SIGNALS INDICATING RATIONALITY IN OTHER GALAXIES HAS (SO FAR) PRODUCED NOTHING SIGNIFICANT. VAN INWAGEN SUGGESTS THAT WE JUST HAVE TO SAY “WE DON’T KNOW THAT THERE ARE ETS” AND “WE DON’T KNOW THAT THERE AREN’T ETS.” (CF. PP. 176-177)

  7. MANY PEOPLE SEEM TO HOPE THAT THERE ARE RATIONAL BEINGS OUT THERE WE MAY NEVER KNOW, EVEN IF THERE ARE RATIONAL BEINGS ON OTHER PLANETS. ATTEMPTS TO QUANTIFY THE PROBABILITY OF SUCH BEINGS DO NOT SEEM TO HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL (ALTHOUGH SOME ASTRONOMERS SEEM ANXIOUS TO DISPLAY SUCH A NUMBER).

  8. WHY ARE THERE RATIONAL BEINGS? • VAN INWAGEN LIMITS THE DISCUSSION TO THESE TWO ALTERNATIVES: • (1) THE EXISTENCE OF RATIONAL ANIMALS (US) HAS NO REASON THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION IN THE INDICATED SENSE. THERE IS NO MEANING OR PURPOSE FOR THERE BEING SUCH THINGS. RATIONAL ANIMALS ARE (ULTIMATELY) DUE TO CHANCE. (P. 179)

  9. THE SECOND INTERESTING OPTION • THE EXISTENCE OF RATIONAL ANIMALS IS DUE TO THE PURPOSEFUL ACTION OF A NON-HUMAN BEING. IF THE FIRST ANSWER IS COMBINED WITH THE CLAIM THAT THE PAST IS LITERALLY INFINITE, THEN ONE CAN GIVE A SORT OF PROBABILISTIC ARGUMENT. IN AN INFINITE PERIOD OF TIME (IT SEEMS) EVERY POSSIBILITY WOULD OCCUR AT SOME TIME.

  10. BUT NOWADAYS VIRTUALLY EVERY COSMOLOGIST CLAIMS THAT THE EVIDENCE FOR A “BIG BANG” IS COMPELLING WE WILL TAKE THEIR WORD FOR IT. THIS RUINS THE “INFINITE PAST” ARGUMENT JUST GIVEN. SOME PHILOSOPHERS HAVE ARGUED THAT AN ACTUALLY INFINITE PAST IS IMPOSSIBLE(!)

  11. HOW DID RATIONAL BEINGS ARISE? • VAN INWAGEN THEN CONSIDERS SOME SPECULATIONS ABOUT HOW THE COSMOS COULD HAVE PRODUCED RATIONAL BEINGS. • THIS SPECULATION HAS CONTINUED, BUT AT PRESENT THERE IS NO KNOWN PLAUSIBLE MECHANISM FOR HOW A SELF-REPRODUCING ENITY MIGHT ARISE. (P. 181). BUT PERHAPS ONE WILL BE ENVISIONED.

  12. AN INTERESTING FEATURE OF THE LAWS OF PHYSICS PHYSICAL LAWS TYPICALLY CONTAIN ONE OR MORE “CONSTANTS”, QUANTITIES WHOSE VALUES ARE NOT A CONSEQUENCE OF THE OTHER LAWS. THESE CONSTANTS (AND THERE ARE MANY) HAVE BEEN DETERMINED BY EXPERIMENTS AND CALCULATION. IT IS NOW ALMOST A COMMONPLACE THAT IF THESE CONSTANTS HAD HAD VERY SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT VALUES, LIFE WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSSIBL;E.

  13. THIS HAS LED TO A DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER THIS MAKES FOR A STRONG “ARGUMENT FROM DESIGN” (A.K.A. “TELEOLOGICAL” ARGUMENT) BEFORE THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION WAS FORMULATED, SUCH ARGUMENTS TYPICALLY REFERRED TO APPARENTLY PURPOSIVE FEATURES OF LIVING CREATURES. WILLIAM PALEY ARGUED THUS.

More Related