What is the Organizing Principle of the Universe? Obviously, the universe is organized. From quarks, to subatomic particles, to atoms and molecules, to dust and planets and stars and galaxies, we can trace a hierarchy of structure.
We can also see that the universe is organized into four contextual components: space, time, energy and mass. These four components are so strongly inter-related as to be considered a single thing, space- time and energy-mass, or space-time-energy-mass. Time seems to consist of three components in continual flux--- past, present and future. Although in some cosmological models, all three of these are really the same thing, and our perception of the passage of time is an illusion. However little we understand the structure of the universe, it becomes clear to us that there is, in fact, a structure, an organization of the universe into discernible "parts," so to speak. This brings us to the question: what principle organizes the universe into the way we see it organized? Remember that prior to the big bang, the universe was (theoretically) a point particle, homogenized, with neither discrete components nor passage of time. Nevertheless, in order for the universe to organize itself afterward, there had to be inherent in that primordial point- particle, the principle which eventually gave rise to what we see. This is a crucial idea: that there should be some fundamental governing principle which gives rise to observed phenomena. Such an idea is itself axiomatic, defying definition. And as with all axioms, the best proof of its truth is to examine what would be the case if the axiom were not true. Gravity is a subordinate of the central organizing principle. Gravity explains our observation of falling objects (among other observations). If there were no gravity, we would not see objects falling. In like manner, if there were no organizing principle of the universe, we should expect there to be no organization observed. Then the question proceeds to infinite sequences of principles. By what principle is the principle brought into being? As always in such cases, we must settle on the idea of an ultimate, self-existent absolute. It simply is. Nothing brings it into being, but rather, it is the final principle upon which all else is founded. Some thinkers deny that there is any final principle, but only an infinite progression of them. But even that begs the question, since by what principle is there an infinite progression of principles? It is axiomatic that there is a final, underlying reality upon which all else is founded. Denial of the axiom brings us only to an endless sequence of useless conclusions. But when we admit of a final, ultimate absolute, we are confronted with the question of an inherent life force, an inherent consciousness, intelligence, and supreme being overarching all of nature, all of reality. We, finite and transient mortals, can never hope to know anything whatsoever about this ultimate absolute except for two possibilities: it reveals itself to us, and it endows us with the capacity to understand what it reveals. We could never reason our way to God. On the contrary, we are utterly dependent upon Him to show Himself, and to give us eyes with which to see Him. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
