Sean Carroll - Why the Cosmos?
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 04. 2024
- For subscriber-only benefits like early access to new episodes, register for free today at closertotruth.com/.
The search for meaning and purpose is humanity’s never-ending quest. Some say that ‘how’ questions belong to the realm of science, but ‘why’ questions do not. Yet extraordinary scientific discoveries offer radical powers of explanation. Can ‘why’ questions be brought into science? What about the biggest ‘why’ of them all?
Watch more videos on the laws of the cosmos: shorturl.at/kpSU7
Sean Carroll is Homewood Professor of Natural Philosophy at Johns Hopkins University and fractal faculty at the Santa Fe Institute. His research focuses on fundamental physics and cosmology.
Subscribe to the Closer To Truth podcast with new episodes on Wednesdays: shorturl.at/mtJP4
Closer To Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
Sean carrols voice is beautiful. There is no hostility or aggression, it’s simply peaceful. He is obviously well grounded in his beliefs
meh!!!
It's called Strong Delusion.
@@EnthusiasticTent-xt8fh
It’s called trusting the evidence.
Sean is such a clear thinker and communicator.
@frojojo5717 I cannot listen to Sean for more than a minute. He keeps beating around the burning bush.
He said nothing..... In a beautiful voice.
Just because we beings have been gifted with intelligence does not mean that that intelligence is enough for us humans to work out how the universe works and came about. Our intelligence is on the first rung of the ladder and we will be lucky to climb several more rungs, far short of a seemingly never ending ladder.
Gifted? Or Cursed? It’s the source of most of our stress, anxiety, and suffering. Look at the life of a dog with no worry about the future or the past always living perfectly happy in the moment.
Professor Phillip J Fry is one of my favorites you have on I like how he explains things
Thanks CTT, Professor Carrol is Clearly a Smart Man.
Perhaps, but he doesn't know many true things.
@@EnthusiasticTent-xt8fh You do?
@tomjackson7755 Almost everything I know is true, at least 99% and that 1% is atheist propaganda.
'How do the three articulate?' Nice turn of phrase.
"Purpose" is an emergent concept.
It is emergent, but like so far down the line it’s meaningless. The universe does fine without us.
Purpose presupposes mind, and mind, life. This I take to be a naturalistic truism.
Poetic naturalism. The universe doesn’t provide meaning for us, we bring meaning to the universe.
Big responsibility. Let’s do our best.
We are the universe. If you give yourself meaning/purpose, the universe has given itself meaning/purpose, which means the universe itself has meaning/purpose.
@@dthom71 I agree. We are little bits of the universe, and any “meaning” that can ever exist comes through us (and by “us” I mean all conscious observers).
The purpose of the universe, as defined by what it does, is to progress from a high entropy state to an entropy state that is lower and lower.
I think it comes down to how people are wired. Some have an involuntary necessity for deep meaning behind it all... accompanied by a need for assurance and control of well-being. Therefore, God.
All I want to know is the truth, no matter how amazing or painful or painfully amazing it is.
Why is the most important question on a human level only, because it can provide growth and acceptance for individuals.
"What" is the most important question. "What" is the theory of everything? "What" is life?
Then "how" is the next important question. It provides understanding & contentment.
I like how to the point I like how to the point Carroll is. Direct answers. Not a ton of fluff. Just concise definitions, explanations and opinions.
Love these sorts of discussions about, nature, reality, well established scientific laws to have a meaningful yet ongoing discussion between very knowledgeable individuals
sean carroll is amazing.
i fail to understand why someone could need to believe that the universe must have "A Purpose", or life "a Meaning".
i guess is a cultural thing, but i've been raised in a very christian (though not conservative) family, and religion and purpose of life (and universe) were a big thing in my familiar education, but i've never ever, since my early childhood, understand why any individual need to have "A Purpose" in life (in the same way i've never felt the need for believing in the existence of a supreme beeing).
i mean, i want my family and fellow humans to have a good life, and i try to do my best in that path, but that´s because i see that is a good thing, not because it's my purpose, and i find that there's a lot of people perfectly happy without one.
*"i fail to understand why someone could need to believe that the universe must have "A Purpose", or life "a Meaning". "*
... It's based on the "Principle of Sufficient Reason." i.e., No action takes place without justification. There was a *specific reason* why you wrote your comment. That PoSR embedded within your comment carries all the way down to the core of "Existence."
@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC so, if something has a reason to happen, that means it has a purpose? and i'm talking (like these guys) about "A Purpose", a trascendental one, not a simple physical one. i still fail to see it.
i mean, i had a personal reason and a purpose to wrote my comment, but what would be the trascendental purpose of, let's say, any random chemical reaction in the universe?
@@juanaq Consider the puddle argument and what the purpose of that puddle is.
How about it's purpose is just "being".
@@ngcastronerd4791 yeah, well... so when the puddle evaporates it's purpose is being smaller,and then just not being... feels a little feeble as a purpose, and just the same as not having one.
hey, I'm just talking, I have no idea about the subject, and maybe no purpose 😁
@@juanaq *"so, if something has a reason to happen, that means it has a purpose? "*
... Purpose and reason go hand-in-hand. You don't rise from a chair without first establishing a purpose in doing so.
*"and i'm talking (like these guys) about "A Purpose", a trascendental one, not a simple physical one. i still fail to see it."*
... Humans demonstrate purpose and meaning every moment of our lives. You demonstrate purpose every time you set your alarm clock at night and your day is steeped in purpose and meaning the instant it goes off.
*"i mean, i had a personal reason and a purpose to wrote my comment, but what would be the trascendental purpose of, let's say, any random chemical reaction in the universe?"*
... Reductionists and physicists like to take everything down to their fundamental particles and properties, and nobody has any problems with that. However, do the same with "purpose and meaning" and suddenly there's a major issue. If we clearly demonstrate purpose and meaning during our daily lives, then it's not that far-fetched to consider the same permeates all the way down to the very core of "Existence."
The chemical reactions happening in your car's engine are no different than the chemical reactions taking place in the universe. The only difference is that you know "why" they're happening inside your engine.
Just because you haven't figured out "why" they also happen out in the universe doesn't mean they aren't happening for a specific reason.
To me 'transcendent' means 'I shouldn't have to explain this such that you could understand it, but if you don't understand it, well, then there must be something wrong with you. '
Steven Weinberg. I don't know him from Adam. 'The more we understood the world the more we find it is pointless.' Now I ask you, could that remark be about 'the world' per se or could it be about an answer to some who say 'Oh, the purpose of life is exactness this and this' ? Does anybody think he, in his scientific thinking, was looking for a purpose in life?
An objective morally must be thought of to come from somewhere, form some authority. This authority, say, a book thought of as sacred, must be trusted OR the people who told you 'This is a sacred book' are trusted. Another question is this: Can you pick and choose what seems reasonable out of a sacred book and let the rest lie?
Why does mainstream science ignore all the decades of UAP's data?
Because otherwise we wouldn't be here to contemplate this question.
Make the species the purpose, that it continue to survive
"meaning - were just fooling ourselves in the process." ah, he gets it
If the universe had a purpose, that purpose would have to come from something like a creator. A purpose always stems from something/somebody giving that purpose. So if indeed the universe had a purpose, would that mean that you should enslave yourself to that purpose? As a free agent myself i prefer to define my own purpose. And that's even independent of the question about a universal purpose being present.
causation could have meaning? time might have purpose?
Would love to see you talk with Billy Carson
Becareful with Carson, he has an agenda. He degrade Jesus christ and being Zeus, but Christ teaches the philosophy of the Buddha and too, derives from KRSNA. Carson won't tell you this. I don't follow him any longer. Carson is a fraud - he's rich. However, Zeus is acknowledged by the Greeks. Like KSNA acknowledged by Indian.
A better man to follow, than Carson, is William Donahue. Now, carson knows of him, but ignores his teachings.
I don’t quite know why, but Sean Carroll is like the McDonalds of physics to me. Maybe it’s his voice.
The cosmos exists so there will be silly people discussing the hows and whys of the obvious in a way that makes the normal person question their sanity. The normal person also questions whether the discussants even know what the word "cosmos" actually means.
This leads to laughter and rude comments and a general enjoyment of life.
mathematical laws and constants of nature?
Why not.
Leave Why, and ask How,
at the 'bottom', it is about the Cause-Less Cause.'
(Eternal Life)
`You are using the term in two different ways.' Yes, absolutely. The denial, capital M and capital P, is denying your thesis by innuendo that M and P are indeed real transcendent things. (Find my definition of 'transcendent' in another post. ) And the other usage, 'meaning' and 'purpose', in people's actual lives. In my mind, M and P are, indeed, empty categories--- Not even filled with words!
Back to square one then... No simple answer, no final meaning.
True poetry is finding meaning even in what seems meaningless. It coats meaninglessness with beauty and depth. How? With words and emotions. The best exponents are artists and prophets.
You make your own purpose.
When we consider the purpose for life and we look back at what the purpose for life has been, we see that it has been ever changing. There is no reason to think this will not continue. A purpose for life could be seen as trying to discover the next purpose. I don't see why finding the next purpose can't be the ultimate purpose for life. All due respect for the late great Steven Weinburg.
As (what once was) Western Civilization increasingly follows these Godless, rootless "naturalist" philosophies, the more we see Western Civilization descend into lawlessness, barrenness (have you seen our reproduction rate lately?), and confusion to the point where "gender dysphoria" is sweeping across the youth. We've lost our mojo, our core.
My recommendation to Sean Carrol and others: go out and buy a good study Bible, and work your way through it. When studied in context, it is beautiful and poetic, gives great meaning to life, and civilizations the have followed it have flourished. Western Civilization was founded on a melding of Greek reasoning with Christian (with its Jewish underpinnings) theology. We need to get back there, and quickly - everything is falling apart.
As Proverbs 9:10 says: "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom". In this case, "fear" = love, respect, and an understanding of consequences.
I'd rather recommend the Bhagavad-Gita
Purpose destroys beauty. ❤
What are they saying to each other?
Sean Carrol, per usual, is hitting homeruns out of the park to all questions science-related.
They are speaking English to each other. May I suggest subtitles?
That told me nothing just Sean's opinion
The question "Why the Cosmos?" is best answered by "Why not the Cosmos?"
No, dumb
But that is a question
@@TheSpeedOfC Isn't that the whole point . . .
@@Jun_kid right but you said its an answer. Its like saying why blue? why not blue? blue has a reason/answer
@@TheSpeedOfC Ah . . . but Cosmos and Blue are not equivalent.
Distinguishing between naturalism and views like physicalism/materialism is crucial, as often people think that by attacking/refuting the latter you have attacked/refuted the former. The average theist makes that mistake frequently.
Naturalism is right at home in ontologies that include things in the metaphysical foundation beyond the narrowly physical, such as phenomenal states, objective moral values, abstract objects, and final causes.
As philosopher Jaegwon Kim puts it:
“Naturalism is not physicalism or materialism, and naturalization does not require physicalization or physical reduction.”
Or as philosopher Felipe Leon distinguishes between three kinds of naturalism: Conservative naturalism, Moderate naturalism, Liberal naturalism.
Conservative naturalists are straight physicalists - nothing exists but the physical.
Moderate naturalists differ in that they expand their conception of the natural world so as to include abstract objects (propositions, properties, possible worlds etc.).
Finally, liberal naturalists differ in that they allow in their ontology concreta that have more properties and powers than the conservatives and moderates allow. Examples include Spinozism, Russellian monism (also known as panprotopsychism) or the naturalistic dualism of David Chalmers.
honest question (and I'm a complete layman on the subject): how could these "abstract objects (propositions, properties, possible worlds etc.)" even exist without a physical substrate? i mean, a physical brain that make the proposition or have the idea that other worlds could exist, or the physical object that has the mentioned properties.
even if we could call them abstract, wouldn't they still be part of the physical word, born from physical processes and expressed and manifested in physical ways?
@@juanaq There are two approaches to that. You can say there is this eternal Platonic realm of abstract objects that exists alongside the physical realm, or you can take an emergentist approach where all those abstract objects/facts supervene on physical objects/facts. There is an ontological dependence on the physical, but they are still irreducible to the physical. In both cases, they are not physical.
(0:30) *SC: **_"Poetic is meant to emphasize a certain 'flavor' of naturalism."_* ... Ideological "flavors." Now, I've seen it all. Anymore, people can't adopt a particular stance and simply *stick with it.* No, in these times, people need to _water down_ their positions with trendy "qualifiers" to insulate themselves from any and all ideological scrutiny.
I can envision me trying to pin down a "Poetic Naturalist" on a particular point and having them say, _"Well, I kinda see it both ways."_ in response. ... Then why act like you have a position at all?
Words should be used in *support* of a position and not repurposed as an *escape hatch* to avoid ideological commitment.
3:58 what happens if everyone discovered their own purpose in life, at the same time 🤔
Then I suppose everyone would start acting purposefully, as against... er... 🤷
@@simonhibbs887what happens to free will when everyone knew exactly what they were supposed to do...
@@r2c3 Good point, it's just as well that it's up to us. Which is actually the point I was making, when I look around I see a lot of people acting as though they have a pretty good ideas of what they want to do already.
we've covered this previously... a person gives up parts of their free will during their work hours, in exchange for other benefits...
When Professor Carroll pretends not to be a philosopher 😂
What? He embraces the title of a philosopher?
I would say you have free will if you "get up in the morning" you decide you eat your dinner and after that do some meditation and go to bed as it is already evening. Now, that would be free will ;) You are already very much limited when you get up in the morning and have to eat breakfast because it is morning. It is very much determined ;) God knows how far the limitation go. You are just in an illusion of having free will.
"Why" implies a god. There is no god in physics.
absurd - humans and life on earth - interesting to us - but insignificant to the universe
And yet light needs eyes to be
Everything is an illusion
They are making lovesense
A more sensible question is "why does my poop have to stink? Why can't it smell like roses?"
There is a profound theological, philosophical, and deeply significant answer to that question: "because it comes out of you."
To dung beetles and flies it does, because for them poop is food. For us it's toxic, so we have evolved a natural response to avoid it.
@@Minion-kh1tq I wonder what Socrates had to say about that.
@@andreasplosky8516 Or Plato. I'd also like to know what Aristotle would say about that: he was the scientist of the three.
@@Minion-kh1tq As most early philosophers, modern rationalists, and most theists do, they invent metaphysical terms, label them as "objective," in the sense that they are real and distinct from the material, and claim they derive their natures and "reasons" from such objectives.
You are using your mental limitations as the frontier of existence. That means you will never go beyond that boundary of ignorance.
Will you?
@@SextusHempiryk Anyone can, provided they recognise their ignorant state and are willing to explore other fields beyond their scope of knowledge.
@@peweegangloku6428 And how would one do that?
@@peweegangloku6428 Hello! Any details or just empty claims?
His purpose is selling pop books... Nothing new.
انا اختكم من اليمن والله ماتكلمت الا من جوع ومن ضيق الحال انا وامي واخوتي نستقبل رمضان بالعبرٱت والدموع نحن في حاله لايعلم بها الا الله حسبنا الله ونعم الوكيل في من اوصلنا الى هاذا الحال 💔💔وًّالَلَهَ الَعَظَيَمَ مَا كتَبَتَ هَذا الَمَنَاشَدَهَ غَيَرَ مَنَ الَضَيَقَ وّالَفَقَر يَاعَالَمَ حَسَوّا فَيَنَا ارَجَوّكمَ وّالَلَهَ الَعَظَيَمَ رَبَ الَعَرَشَ الَعَظَيَمَ انَه الَاكلَ مَا فَيَ عَنَدَيَ بَالَبَيَتَ وًّالَلَهَ يَا اخَوّانَيَ انَهَ اخَوًّنَيَ بَقَعَدَوًّ بَالَيَوًّمَيَنَ مَافَى اكلَ وًّالَلَهَ وًّضَعَنَا كثَيَرَ صَعَبَ نَحَنَ 4 نَفَرَ دَاخَلَ الَبَيَتَ وًّابَيَ مَتَوًّفَيَ وًّلَا يَوًّجَدَ مَنَ يَعَوًّلَ عَلَيَنَا وًّسَاكنَيَنَ فَيَ بَيَتَ اجَارَ لَانَسَتَطَيَعَ دَفَعَ الَاجَارَ الَلَيَ بَاقَيَ عَلَيَنَا ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' اخي اول كلامي انا اقسم بالله على كتاب الله اني لااكذب عليك ولا انصب ولا احتال اني بنت يمنيه نازحين من الحرب انا واسرتي بيننا ایجار الشهرب 20 الف يمني والان علينا 60 الف حق 3 شهور وصاحب البيت من الناس الي ماترحم والله يا اخي انه يجي كل يوم يبهدلنا ويتكلم علينا ويريد من البيت للشارع لانناماقدرنا ندفعله الأجار شافونا الجيران نبكي ورجعو تكلمو الجيران ومهلنالاخره الأسبوع معادفعنا له حلف يمين بالله هذا بيخرجنا إلى الشارع رحمه واحنا. بلادنا بسبب هذا الحرب ولانجد قوت يومنا وعايشين اناوامي واخوتي سفار والدنا متوفي الله يرحمه ومامعنا أحد في هذا الدنيا جاانبنا في هذه الظروف القاسيه اخوتي الصغار خرجو للشارع وشافو الجيران ياكلو واوقفو عند بابهم لجل يعطوهم ولو كسره خبز والله الذي له ملك السموات والارض انهم غلفو الباب وطردوهم ورجعو یبکو ایموتو من الجوع ما احد رحمهم وعطلة ردها لقمت عیش والان لوما احدنا ساعدنا في إيكيلو دقيق اقسم بالله انموت من الجوع فيا اخي انا دخيله على الله ثم عليك واريد منك المساعده لوجه الله انشدك بالله تحب الخير واتساعدني ولو ب ||| ماتستطيع مع تراسلي واتساب على هذا الرقم 00967716649494 وتطلب اسم بطاقتي وترسلي ولاتتاخر وايعوضك الله بكل خير اخواتي سغار شوف كيف حالتهم وساعدنا وأنقذنا قبل أن يطردونا في الشارع تتبهدل أو نموت من الجوع وانا واسرتي نسالك بالله لولك مقدره على مساعد لاتتاخر علينا وجزاك الله خيررا`/-~~««« ~: ~؛ΠΠΠΠΠ💔💔💔πππππ↑^^^•••^
Without lies Islam dies. Have a nice Ramadan.
No
Weź niepierdol
"Why Cosmos"
The following could help you understand your purpose :
This Universe was magnificently fine-tuned with imperfections for us to understand what is bad, good, better, or best, ugly or beautiful, so for us to have a hint that there is better or worse place out there (heaven & hell) to hopefully find faith in God.
So, focus more on your soul's fate because it is your immortal soul that survives when your temporary physical body dies and rots because natural calamities, diseases, or all sufferings you undergo in this Universe can NEVER destroy you immortal soul... only losing faith or without faith in a loving God can hurt your soul...
Once again, the purpose of the creation of this Cosmos or Physical Universe is for lost souls, who fell from Heaven, to have a temporary home for a chance of salvation through regaining faith in a loving God.
Our lost souls were sent here (on our request) so to have a chance of salvation by regaining the faith that we lost that ended us all in hell - a state of cold dark nothingness...We lost Heaven because we lost faith, so only by regaining this faith that we can return Home.
... In other words, we were not sent here to know but to believe because knowledge can compromise your free will to believe, so, evidence or proof is not required to have faith so for us all to be welcomed back to Heaven which is our Original Home. This is the MAIN PURPOSE of our temporary physical existence that shields knowledge of our past spiritual existence...
I do not know this. This is my understanding of the light that I believe was shared to me because of my strong faith. Believe it or not, you are free to choose.
Pls share this light to all if you believe. This may resolve religious differences to possibly unite as one religion of faith in a loving God.
As expected Sean doesn't know the answer to why the Cosmos, similarly he fails to see any divine design, in case you cannot think of any other reason. Most of the time most modern thinkers find 'luck' or 'accident as reasonable, without explaining.
Can you give a reference for anyone who makes the claim it was luck or an accident? I don't recall any guests here putting it that way.
Sorry most modern physicists are paid to promote atheism and they are fed with the luck or accident. Susskind who follows Oppenheimer suddenly endorse luck as an explanation of Anthropic Principle avoiding 'divine design'. Philosopher Dan Dennet pays believers if they convert to atheism, as if knowledge can be obtained for a price. This is due to the Jewish effect.
@@sonarbangla8711 Oh, you're one of them. Explains a lot.
@@sonarbangla8711modern physicists are paid to promote atheism? Ha ha ah oh man what a bs line.
They are only talking for nothing . Rambling. Each sentences about Science It is inconsistency with Science proceendings. Blah blah.
Carroll's explanation is way to simple...He likes to solve problems with a few simple words.....I feel cheated.....he puts humanity on the back burner.....👎👎
As far as the Cosmos goes humanity is so far away from the back burner that we can't even see the house that the stove is in that the burner in on.
In what way is it too simplistic? In what way does he put humanity on the back burner? What exactly do you mean and what are your objections?
Science loves simplicity. If an equation is pages and pages long it’s not simple or elegant.
Poetic feels good but isn’t scientific. I don’t know what to do with it.