---

Paul Davies likes the idea that the universe has a meaning:

The universe is ordered in a meaningful way, and scientists seek reasons for why things are the way they are. If the universe as a whole is pointless, then it exists without reason. In other words, it is ultimately arbitrary and absurd. We are then invited to contemplate a state of affairs in which all scientific chains of reasoning are grounded in absurdity. The order of the world would have no foundation and its breathtaking rationality would have to spring, miraculously, from absurdity.

I've always disliked cosmological philosophy, as it attempts to place subjective reason as a rule over random chance. If the universe's existence is a random event, why would it have meaning, simply because its physical laws allow for the emergence of large and small patterns? It's like saying that flipping a coin has a meaning, beyond whatever we happen to be flipping the coin for.

The subective term here is, of course, "absurd." Absurdity would be a purely human notion, so how could you say that the universe is absurd or not? It's part of a trend of people - including those who favor Intelligent Design - who seem motivated less by logic and reason and more by pure discomfort. They just don't like certain properties of reality, while not admitting that their likes and dislikes are irrelevant from an absolute point of view, and especially not admitting that this is the source of their philosophies.

---