The Reason for Reality

Introspective and Non-introspective Universes The significance of this world picture can be tested by asking what differ- ence does it make to have introspective elements in a reality over that of having no introspective entities present. Several cases can be presented: firstly, a universe with no biospheres or introspective minds to contemplate one’s existence and secondly, a limit- ing case of one biosphere in the universe (all that is needed for the argument) which has evolved introspective organisms. And thirdly, there is the case of a universe with an, as yet, potentially developing introspec- tive biosphere. In the first case one has a reality but it is not being analyzed, inspected, or contemplated as to its meaning or significance. The third example is in a similar state. The second example has its reality under scrutiny (like what is being done here). The question is; what difference does it make in the significance of the meaning of reality between an ‘introspective universe’ and a ‘non-introspective universe’? Theologically one can say that an introspective universe allows one to give thanks to a creator for one’s existence. A non-theological viewpoint would lead to such considerations as an infinitely pulsating universe (singularity/‘big bang’ expansion/'big crunch’ contraction/singularity cycles) where a godless universe seems sufficient for it does not require an originator. God would be reduced to a superfluous entity. The significance of a non-introspective universe does not lend itself to any empathetic behavior and indeed the pre-hominid (non-introspective reality) history of this biosphere did not seem to possess any help for unfortunate organisms from others beyond perhaps maternal, among others, instinctive driven behavior. Since the occurrence of the less fortunate is derivable from biological mechanisms, the introspective type reality attempts (teleological) to com- pensate or cope with this situation, whereas a non-introspective reality would not. The non-introspective universe gives little insight into the meaning of reality. However, since there is at least one introspective biosphere in our present reality, it becomes a moot point. There is a very important feature of the introspective universe in that it originally was non-introspective, i.e., for instance, at the primordial pre- atomic particle soup stage—it definitely was not introspective. Then at a later stage, I am introspecting from this same system. Thus, non-introspec- tive systems can create an entirely new kind of system by evolving complicated systems organisms with holistic/gestaltic abilities that ad- vance to introspective awareness. The big question is "Why does this occur?” Although the evolution of an introspective universe could be deterministic and be caused by natural selection mechanisms, it still does not delude the choice selecting one under the limits of using quasi-free will. The fact that an introspective quasi-freewill system will break from the deterministic path to create a new behaving system that of a non-deterministic and In summary, a non-introspective/non-quasi free will system (e.g., pre- atomic soup) creates another more complicated non-introspective non-quasi free will system (e.g., an amoeba) that in turn creates an introspec- tive/quasi-free will system (e.g., human) that has fortunate people that can help less fortunate people that are necessarily evolved from the overall biological variation processes (genetic and environmental variations). Thus reality consists of entities that have the capacity for empathy, aes- thetics, etc. Does this answer the question of ”Why reality?” I think not. If there were a minimum of unfortunates, then one might declare the reason for reality is because of all the goodness and pleasure that exists. However, based upon this biosphere (the earth considered as being an average biosphere), there are too many unfortunates in broad terms and too great an amount of pain induced in restricted terms, to say that the reason why reality exists is based upon some pleasure principle (e.g., the evolution of the central nervous system could be based upon seeking pleasure). The ultimate answer may require theological concepts. For now we have this ’picture’ of reality but only immediate reasons related to real- ity—to help correct its imperfections, to enjoy its pleasures, to be able to do creative innovation, etc. In conclusion, the ultimate reason for reality remains to be derived. But let us attempt to derive it. Reality exists, but why?