Monday, January 02, 2006
The Necessity Of The Random
While pondering evolution the other day, it dawned on me that despite it's claim to describe the origin of the speices, it might not really do so. The rise of the mammal, which has lead to mankind, has been traced to the cataclysmic meteor collision in what is now the Gulf of Mexico causing the mass extinction that ended the reign of dinosaurs as the dominant life form on the planet. Absent that event would the ecological niches have even existed to drive the evolutionary force to our current state?
So what caused the rise of man, evolution - or that meteor?
No doubt, conjecture, data and pontificating will come in mass quantities following such a question, all the while missing the point.
Seemingly random events have massive influence on the course of events. Lest one argue that astronomy can predict such a collision - fine that does not change its randomness -- we have no control over it just because we can predict it. Randomness reflects causation, or lack thereof, not foreknowledge.
We know a great deal, we control far less. Even a scientist must admit this. What does that say about our place in and our relationship to, the universe?
So what caused the rise of man, evolution - or that meteor?
No doubt, conjecture, data and pontificating will come in mass quantities following such a question, all the while missing the point.
Seemingly random events have massive influence on the course of events. Lest one argue that astronomy can predict such a collision - fine that does not change its randomness -- we have no control over it just because we can predict it. Randomness reflects causation, or lack thereof, not foreknowledge.
We know a great deal, we control far less. Even a scientist must admit this. What does that say about our place in and our relationship to, the universe?
