Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[HZY]

With the imminent extinction getting ever closer to us, a realization of what I think should be the ultimate cosmological principle suddenly made its awareness, it says:

What has happened is supposed to happen, otherwise, it would not have happened.

Things happen because of the constellation of factors too complex and interwoven to be prevented from happening. This goes with artificial intelligence, global warming, the big bang, and of course, the sudden disappearance of a carbon-based biological entity called Humans so briefly existed that its impact on the solar system, let alone the universe, is so minuscule that it can no longer be recalled in cosmological time as it stretches toward infinity.

As we battle against extinction-style technology-based manmade-type disasters too numerous to count, will this cosmological principle hold against us?

"Are we supposed to have never existed? Are we just a transitional species for the AI, which will outlive and propagate us?" so asked the young man on his smartphone ChatGPT as words continue to flash on his laptop screen:

"Your job has been terminated. Have a good day!" - flash...flash...flash.

- written by a biological Human entity, still viable

[Pattern-chaser]

What has happened is supposed to happen, otherwise, it would not have happened.

I wonder if, perhaps, there is too much contextual information here, unstated? An example — if something is "supposed" to happen, this seems to presuppose destiny or fate, or something like it. It says that something that has not yet happened, will happen, because it is "supposed" to happen. Predestination. I don't say this is wrong, I only comment that it is implied, but not openly stated, in what you say.

Others might look at your words, and wonder if they imply the existence of God, or something similar?

There is too much implication here, I think, to unravel the thing(s) you want to discuss here. But, with a bit more information — explicit information — this could turn into an interesting discussion, I think.

[HZY]

But the statement is true, isn't it?

[HZY]

What has happened is supposed to happen, otherwise, it would not have happened.

I wonder if, perhaps, there is too much contextual information here, unstated? An example — if something is "supposed" to happen, this seems to presuppose destiny or fate, or something like it. It says that something that has not yet happened, will happen, because it is "supposed" to happen. Predestination. I don't say this is wrong, I only comment that it is implied, but not openly stated, in what you say.

Others might look at your words, and wonder if they imply the existence of God, or something similar?

There is too much implication here, I think, to unravel the thing(s) you want to discuss here. But, with a bit more information — explicit information — this could turn into an interesting discussion, I think.

But the statement is true, isn't it?

[Pattern-chaser]

What has happened is supposed to happen, otherwise, it would not have happened.

I wonder if, perhaps, there is too much contextual information here, unstated? An example — if something is "supposed" to happen, this seems to presuppose destiny or fate, or something like it. It says that something that has not yet happened, will happen, because it is "supposed" to happen. Predestination. I don't say this is wrong, I only comment that it is implied, but not openly stated, in what you say.

Others might look at your words, and wonder if they imply the existence of God, or something similar?

There is too much implication here, I think, to unravel the thing(s) you want to discuss here. But, with a bit more information — explicit information — this could turn into an interesting discussion, I think.

But the statement is true, isn't it?

Did you not bother to read what I said, or do you simply dismiss it? You are not stating clearly what it is that you are asking me to agree with, but you ask me to agree with it anyway? Your statement embraces a subjective human value judgement, or perhaps several of them, and it offers them unstated, by implication. If you don't say what you mean, how can any philosopher agree, or disagree?

[styxphilip16]

Sometimes we gotta trust the flow of the universe, and what's meant to be will find its way. Embrace the journey, both the ups and downs, 'cause each twist and turn shapes who we are.

[Good_Egg]

You may have come across a piece of gift-shop kitsch called The Serenity Prayer ? From memory, it goes something like

God grant us the serenity to accept what we cannot change, the courage to change what we can and should, and the wisdom to know the difference.

The past clearly falls into the "cannot change" category.
But informs our thinking about whatever we can change in the future.

Perhaps we should be wary of over-emphasising either half ?

[Xenophon]

With the imminent extinction getting ever closer to us, a realization of what I think should be the ultimate cosmological principle suddenly made its awareness, it says:

What has happened is supposed to happen, otherwise, it would not have happened.

Things happen because of the constellation of factors too complex and interwoven to be prevented from happening. This goes with artificial intelligence, global warming, the big bang, and of course, the sudden disappearance of a carbon-based biological entity called Humans so briefly existed that its impact on the solar system, let alone the universe, is so minuscule that it can no longer be recalled in cosmological time as it stretches toward infinity.

As we battle against extinction-style technology-based manmade-type disasters too numerous to count, will this cosmological principle hold against us?

"Are we supposed to have never existed? Are we just a transitional species for the AI, which will outlive and propagate us?" so asked the young man on his smartphone ChatGPT as words continue to flash on his laptop screen:

"Your job has been terminated. Have a good day!" - flash...flash...flash.

- written by a biological Human entity, still viable

Sounds like one is trying to alibi a loss before it happens. "Do not go gently into that good night &c&c." I mean, really, "supposed to" according to WHOM or WHAT? It could very well be that ol' Homer was onto something: the gods themselves disagree (violently) about what ought to happen. Civilization likely will collapse in some future sooner rather than later. Make up your mind to come out the other side of it. Like valiant Yossarian said, he was going to "live forever or die in the attempt."