Is Consciousness Inevitable?

Consciousness, is it inevitable?

When we look at energy we see it runs toward entropy and likes to take the fastest path there. So, from that we have determined that energy goes into order and higher organization in fact to reach the fastest path to entropy. More energy will be used up. 

However- this seems to mean that high organization of particles is inevitable then. Though you can say this accident happen or that random thing...it seems eventually the higher organization will occur. Then, Consciousness occurs in this higher organization of things...consciousness is like a by product of this higher order of particles....and it seems inevitable to me because nature goes from random to non-random and chaos to order and because nature keeps moving forward building upon itself and is persisting toward the fastest path to entropy. But then it is also inevitable. So, my question now is on one hand consciousness seems inevitable and on the other hand there are many 'accidents or random things that occur' before it happens. So it is like an inevitable accident?

Or perhaps the game is set up to allow for random and accidents, but in the end consciousness will eventually prevail.

Fairies, God, Nature, Spirit, Connection

The Argument:

There are actually thousands of scriptures from around the ancient world about unicorns and fairies.
The dominant religions in Europe before Christianity took over were full of fairies. As well as other ancient religions around the world with almost identical myths (although different NAMES for what were essentially fairies).
The same case that is made for the existence of god, could be made for the existence of fairies.

And if god is in reference only to our personal needs, and only dwells within us? Than it's not god, it's just some psychological construct.

The Response:


Frankly, I don't think much of what u r referring to is myth. I call it legend. Most stories are embedded in some form of fact, something that happened and a story emerges from there. There probably were some kind of horses with one horn on their head which is how the stories may have started. There are fossils of one horned horses actually. Even trolls and leprechauns may have an actual link to a real people which was shown on the discovery channel. A very short species. 

Not sure what u mean by only our personnel needs and something within us. I would't agree that if that is all it is then its merely psychological. But to me, "god" is something that is used to describe what is within all living things and even non-living things, that connects everything to itself and manifests in all living things. Is everything and nothing. 

I don't think the material world is real at all, but an illusion.

And I think nature is far more interesting than most of you give it credit for, and doesn't have to make sense to us, or be measured by us or dissected by us to be.

I think a connection to something allows u to understand it in a way mere measurements alone cannot. I can dissect ur brain, but that tells me nothing of how well you spoke English or your mathematical skill. When I am connected to u, get to know u then I learn these things. Scientists in the past failed to see how clever great apes were by mere measurements. It was three women who dared to named their apes and connect to them that learned and showed everyone how amazing they really were. 

 People of the past may not have the sophisticated tools we have today, the computers and fancy gizmos that allow such precise measurements. But they were connected to nature in a way many of us fail today.

Connecting allows for intuitive truth, which is why Einstein rightly understood SR even though no one understood how and why he would come up with it. 

Nature and Consciousness

It is just strange to think about that right now you can contemplate this rock outside, this universe, this sun and the arm on your body and even the brain with which out of you are contemplating....and yet nothing in nature can do that expect that which has a brain (that we know of). 

Actually, I think our brains are an exact reflection of nature itself. We often hear "Is it a coincidence that maths can represent nature and our own brains are capable of maths too?"

But all the skills our brains can do can be found in nature.

We have spacial skills/intelligence, and there is space in nature to perceive.

We have kinesthetic skills and all of nature moves its particles, chemistry, biology. 

We have musical skills and nature is made of all kinds of sounds and patterns of sounds to perceive.

We have linguistic skills and nature is made up of all kinds of communication. Two hearts put next to each other will start beating in sync. Electrons perhaps communicate instantly with each other across the universe according to some studies. Even bacteria communicate. 

It seems to me that on every level of nature: Quantum, Physical, Chemistry, and Biology we can find all the skills that we find in our brains as well.

Our brains are even wired for random vs nonrandom patterns. People say creative vs logical, but that is not true. Recent studies show both sides of the brain can do both...but it is How the information is organized or coming into our brains. 

So, is it any wonder that in nature we find both random and non random processes.

We have interpersonal skills, and all of nature has relationships. Gravity is the relationship of two massive bodies. Etc...one ting works because of its relationship to another thing. 

We have interpersonal skills, knowing oneself, and all of nature seems to want to duplicate itself. From DNA and even to physical things. I mean why do we have lots of water molecules, why not just one. Conformity seems important to nature. Even virtual particles (from my reading) seem to pop in and conform in a sense, because if they don't they can't remain. 


It makes sense that our brains would reflect nature since they came out of nature...so in understanding our own minds and consciousness I think we will understand more about nature too. 

So, then what of consciousness....I would like to see more studies in science actually.  

But one more thing, If our brains came from nature and are a part of nature, and our brains have consciousness...then nature in a sense is conscious -or at least a part of it, because it is a product of nature and is nature itself. 

Nature, Compassion, Bonobos, and the Brain

Bonobos are very amazing apes because they are the closet, in my opinion, to humans. The way they behave and learn is fascinating. Now,  they are considered one of the most compassionate of all animals, with exception to ourselves. We can see that nature is evolving the ability to be compassionate, that the hard wiring necessary for the brain to even exhibit compassion is being evolved in animals, in us. 

However- does this mean religion has nothing to do with compassion? 

In my view, I see nature as providing the tools to be compassionate, the ability to exhibit compassion...but I would not suggest that nature in itself nurtures this.  Nature itself can be very brutal and in fact discourage this quality, though you may have the capacity for it. Religion on the other hand offers for many a sense of fellowship, song, music, companionship, hope, love, faith for even the impossible to occur in their lives, for emotional support, and sometimes financial support, for a listening ear and many times friends for life. All of these aspects help to foster a sense of care for your fellow man and to act in kindness or compassion. Most religions teach this from Buddhism, to Christianity, and even Hinduism, Islam and Judaism. 

I tend to think that the practice of compassion helps to develop it more so in your own brain and then pass it along to others as well. This giving of compassion becomes contagious and helps to develop a world in which we live where more compassion is shown. 

I also tend to think this act effects our genes and epigenetic directly and is also passed onto our children through our genes. So, when you are compassionate, you are changing your brain wiring but also your epigenetics which will effect your genes and will effect your future children directly. 

What we do matters. How we act matter. Both have a direct impact on ourselves, others, and the world. 

So, in this sense religion has played an important role and I have to wonder if religion did not exist at all if our sense of compassion would have developed to be the highest of all animals, or if we would have digressed to become even lesser than the Bonobos.



We have seven sure intelligences according to Gardner. Mathematical, Spacial, Kinesthetic, Musical, Linguistic, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal. I'm an educator and so these intelligence's are taught to us as teachers to better educate our students. 

SO, it is interesting we can find all those SKILLS in nature as well.

Our brain came from nature, so it is a reflection of nature. It should be able to give us clues into what nature is.

Our brains are wired to perceived random and non random processes. It is not that one side is creative and the other is logical. Both sides can be either. This is shown in recent studies. The difference is in how they approach the problems and perceive the world.

We also know nature is both random and non random. We can see in genetics and in mathematics, in biology, and in physics that nature has random aspects but also non-random aspects too. It seems things go from random to non-random.

Nature is also very mathematical! Is this a coincidence? Of course not. Our brains came from nature so of course our brain would be perceiving what nature is!

Let us look at the seven main intelligences.

Nature is mathematical. Our brains are wired for maths. Nature has space and dimension. Our brains are wired for spacial intelligence. Nature has sounds and our brains our wired for music/sound and patterns. Nature moves and our brains our wired Kinesthetically.

When we look at a particle spinning beautifully it has a kind of kinesthetic intelligence. When we see a dancer circle beautifully she exemplifies this same ability. Particles are also always moving. Movement is essential for nature to function.

When we look at how the universe is arranged we can sum it up mathematically and then we also have people who are mathematically gifted.

When we look at nature we see a universe of space and dimensions and everything around us occupies space and dimension and there are people who are very specially inclined and who can visualize spaces inside their mind perfectly.

When we look at nature we can hear sounds permeating from objects hitting each other or from the friction of something or spin of something and there are also people who are musically inclined to hear patterns of sounds well.

Is it any wonder that our human intelligence also posses these qualities?

What about linguistic, interpersonal and interpersonal qualities of nature?

We can see linguistics on a fundamental level in nature too when we look at the communication of bacteria or when we put a heartbeat next to another heartbeat and they conform to each other or how we have a quark and the majority of virtual particles that pop in are quarks (though some might be photons or gluons). There seems to be a communication on a fundamental level.

While humans use language, we can see all of nature has a basic form of communication from physics to genetics and chemistry.

We can see interpersonal skills in nature when we look at physics and particles having to interact with fields and when we look into genetics and see how the interactions have to interact with each other. Nature does have many inter-relationships on a fundamental level.

Humans have relationships with the outside world, and nature fundamentally has interactions with other parts of nature all the time.

Even with interpersonal skills we see in nature that genes duplicate themselves and even with virtual particles, because the majority of virtual particles pop in according to whatever is there -it seems it conforms-- there is a kind of duplication there as well.

While humans might have a good interaction with themselves, nature also fundamentally keeps a good relationship with itself by duplicating itself.


So, I just thought these correlations were interesting and wanted to share them.

It is also interesting that all animals have various intelligences and all these intelligences are reflections of what nature is as well, in my opinion.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ingrid-newkirk/one-of-many-animals_b_1836537.html



The next question is Memory. We see memory is our conscious minds, in the conscious minds of animals and even of bacteria. We find memory in cellular memory in the duplication of DNA/RNA. Do particles, electrons, and virtual particles possess a certain memory as well?

Does memory exist on a fundamental level? This is important because how are our experiences retained if a Spirit exists? Memory or experience, if retained, on a particle level would be a very interesting finding. 


Further, when we reach the most fundamental form of energy that we are aware of today which are virtual particles, we find probability equations. Perhaps not actual space or time or a physical things, But a probability.

It is kind of like an idea in a mind. I have an idea and it has a probability of coming to fruition or not, of surviving or not. Perhaps when we say the Mind of God, it is a lot like the probability distribution of the virtual particle in some ways. I would say not in all ways, but in some ways.

Side Note:

Mathematics is ahead of science, because science is limited by what we can see, hear, taste, touch, smell —basically measure and so science is limited by our own consciousness, our own minds.

BUT Maths is not. Maths is not limited by experience or experiment which are limited by our own conscious experience and ability to measure.

MATHS shows us what reality is though we cannot use an experiment to show us this is a fact. But the maths must come back to us time and time again as yielding us the correct results, then we rely on them. In this sense, maths does it job for showing virtual particles exist; however briefly, out of the nothingness, the void.

In this sense, we can understand everything better when we realize maths is like our own intuitions. Our correct intuitions can tell us a reality. Someone I loved has just been hurt, killed. This guy or this situation feels really bad. Or I completely saw that coming. While we may not be able to justify our intuition with a real experiment or scientific method…our intuitions can very well be right —showing us an aspect of reality beyond physical measurable means.

So, should it surprise us that maths do the same thing?

Some aspect of reality simply cannot be measured by observation or justified by science. Some aspects of reality simply have to be derived in other ways, 

What is nature doing?

 

Something very interesting to me:

It seems like everything conforms in nature. We can see this in physics and biology, and the more it conforms, the more structurally complex it becomes and the less functionally powerful it becomes.


Example:

Biology: the single cell can be many things, but once it is part of the heart, it acts as part of the heart only.

Physics: Atoms can become many things, but once they become a molecule and then matter, they are more restricted.

Virtual particles pop in, but if the particle is a quark the majority of virtual particles that pop in are quarks, though some might be other things like gluons or photons. But this doesn't effect the quark since the majority keep it as is (my understanding may be missing some info here)

But my point is that it seems like even in the most fundamental forms of nature, nature is busy conforming and the more it does the more complex in structure it becomes and as it does this the more it losses functional power.

Just something I've been noticing in patterns. 

Nature and the Brain

We have seven sure intelligences according to Gardner. Mathematical, Spacial, Kinesthetic, Musical, Linguistic, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal. I'm an educator and so these intelligence's are taught to us as teachers to better educate our students. 

SO, it is interesting we can find all those SKILLS in nature as well.

Our brain came from nature, so it is a reflection of nature. It should be able to give us clues into what nature is.

Our brains are wired to perceived random and non random processes. It is not that one side is creative and the other is logical. Both sides can be either. This is shown in recent studies. The difference is in how they approach the problems and perceive the world.

We also know nature is both random and non random. We can see in genetics and in mathematics, in biology, and in physics that nature has random aspects but also non-random aspects too. It seems things go from random to non-random.

Nature is also very mathematical! Is this a coincidence? Of course not. Our brains came from nature so of course our brain would be perceiving what nature is!

Let us look at the seven main intelligences.

Nature is mathematical. Our brains are wired for maths. Nature has space and dimension. Our brains are wired for spacial intelligence. Nature has sounds and our brains our wired for music/sound and patterns. Nature moves and our brains our wired Kinesthetically.

When we look at a particle spinning beautifully it has a kind of kinesthetic intelligence. When we see a dancer circle beautifully she exemplifies this same ability. Particles are also always moving. Movement is essential for nature to function.

When we look at how the universe is arranged we can sum it up mathematically and then we also have people who are mathematically gifted.

When we look at nature we see a universe of space and dimensions and everything around us occupies space and dimension and there are people who are very specially inclined and who can visualize spaces inside their mind perfectly.

When we look at nature we can hear sounds permeating from objects hitting each other or from the friction of something or spin of something and there are also people who are musically inclined to hear patterns of sounds well.

Is it any wonder that our human intelligence also posses these qualities?

What about linguistic, interpersonal and interpersonal qualities of nature?

We can see linguistics on a fundamental level in nature too when we look at the communication of bacteria or when we put a heartbeat next to another heartbeat and they conform to each other or how we have a quark and the majority of virtual particles that pop in are quarks (though some might be photons or gluons). There seems to be a communication on a fundamental level.

While humans use language, we can see all of nature has a basic form of communication from physics to genetics and chemistry.

We can see interpersonal skills in nature when we look at physics and particles having to interact with fields and when we look into genetics and see how the interactions have to interact with each other. Nature does have many inter-relationships on a fundamental level.

Humans have relationships with the outside world, and nature fundamentally has interactions with other parts of nature all the time.

Even with interpersonal skills we see in nature that genes duplicate themselves and even with virtual particles, because the majority of virtual particles pop in according to whatever is there -it seems it conforms-- there is a kind of duplication there as well.

While humans might have a good interaction with themselves, nature also fundamentally keeps a good relationship with itself by duplicating itself.


So, I just thought these correlations were interesting and wanted to share them.

It is also interesting that all animals have various intelligences and all these intelligences are reflections of what nature is as well, in my opinion.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ingrid-newkirk/one-of-many-animals_b_1836537.html



The next question is Memory. We see memory is our conscious minds, in the conscious minds of animals and even of bacteria. We find memory in cellular memory in the duplication of DNA/RNA. Do particles, electrons, and virtual particles possess a certain memory as well?

Does memory exist on a fundamental level? This is important because how are our experiences retained if a Spirit exists? Memory or experience, if retained, on a particle level would be a very interesting finding. 


Further, when we reach the most fundamental form of energy that we are aware of today which are virtual particles, we find probability equations. Perhaps not actual space or time or a physical things, But a probability.

It is kind of like an idea in a mind. I have an idea and it has a probability of coming to fruition or not, of surviving or not. Perhaps when we say the Mind of God, it is a lot like the probability distribution of the virtual particle in some ways. I would say not in all ways, but in some ways.

Side Note:

Mathematics is ahead of science, because science is limited by what we can see, hear, taste, touch, smell —basically measure and so science is limited by our own consciousness, our own minds.

BUT Maths is not. Maths is not limited by experience or experiment which are limited by our own conscious experience and ability to measure.

MATHS shows us what reality is though we cannot use an experiment to show us this is a fact. But the maths must come back to us time and time again as yielding us the correct results, then we rely on them. In this sense, maths does it job for showing virtual particles exist; however briefly, out of the nothingness, the void.

In this sense, we can understand everything better when we realize maths is like our own intuitions. Our correct intuitions can tell us a reality. Someone I loved has just been hurt, killed. This guy or this situation feels really bad. Or I completely saw that coming. While we may not be able to justify our intuition with a real experiment or scientific method…our intuitions can very well be right —showing us an aspect of reality beyond physical measurable means.

So, should it surprise us that maths do the same thing?

Some aspect of reality simply cannot be measured by observation or justified by science. Some aspects of reality simply have to be derived in other ways, 

Is God Supernatural?

Why does God have to be supernatural? What if nature is simply an aspect of God? What if the Spirit is an aspect of the consciousness which is the result of the brain and evolution which was inevitable from the creation point of everything from nothing?


It seems likely that life would have evolved eventually in this universe and this universe would have been born eventually and something would have happened eventually from nothing and so we would be a by product eventually...so if a God exists, then in creating this it would mean we were bound to happen. 

I agree with Rowan in that design is always a bad word because we associate it with our own designs and it depends on your intentions and purposes from where you are judging. My perfect design could be your total mess and vice versus. Further design implies interruptions and my view is 'God' would not have interfered at all. God closed. The immaterial closed and this is how the material formed in my view. 

Intelligence is also a bad word choice because how intelligent is this God? On what scale? 

How did God get there from nothing? I think nothing and everything are the same things, but just in different forms. 

Consciousness and what it all means

 

The real question for me would be how does consciousness exist anyway, and I don't mean just evolutionary explanations...but if the universe and nature in itself is not conscious, then we can see and understand nature yet nature can't do this itself...that just seems strange. Are we somehow superior then to nature and how did consciousness come from something that wasn't conscious? And if the past/present/future are all one and physically, scientifically, everything is one...then wouldn't consciousness be one with it all?

Memory, Conformity and Nature

It seems to me that memory/conformity are the most interesting.  Are they fundamental in all things...living and non-living things?

 If we look at the bacteria we see memory directs its ordered movements from its previous random state. What directed its order? an attractant. This is an attractant because it means it can survive. So it goes from random to ordered movements because of an attractant that means its own survival. It is not conscious, but it has a memory enough so to give it direction/order.

If we look at this and see if we can find something like this in non-living things, we will find energy acts very randomly and chaotically in the beginning states, but when energy finds an "attractant" a way to survive, this seems to pull it from random to non random and ordered direction. From simple to complex, from lower energy levels to higher energy levels, from random to non random. 

Perhaps for Virtual Particle (energy) that attractant is Gravity (Space-Time).


Everything seems to conform to survive with a few exceptions of that which doesn't conform but does survive. For example, the heart when placed next to another heart will conform to the beat. Women's periods synchronize.

Even if you look at virtual particles, the majority that "pop from 'nothing' " are going to be whatever was there to begin with? If there is a quark, then most of the virtual particles popping into the empty space of the quark would be virtual quarks. Some might be virtual gluons or virtual photons, but the majority will conform and so the quark will stay a quark. 

(We consciously decide to conform and synchronize mostly for survival, but it seems like non living aspects of nature does this as well).

And so how is everything conforming? It must be able to identify itself and to do that it must has some form of communication or memory/rulebook? 

Nature and the Brain

We have seven sure intelligences according to Gardner. Mathematical, Spacial, Kinesthetic, Musical, Linguistic, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal.

SO, it is interesting we can find all those SKILLS in nature as well.

Our brain came from nature, so it is a reflection of nature. It should be able to give us clues into what nature is.

Our brains are wired to perceived random and non random processes. It is not that one side is creative and the other is logical. Both side can be either. The difference is in how they approach the problems and perceiver the world.

We also know nature is both random and non random. We can see in genetics and in mathematics, in biology, and in physics that nature has random aspects but also non-random aspects too.

Nature is also very mathematical! Is this a coincidence? Of course not. Our brains came from nature so of course our brain would be perceiving nature.

Let us look at the seven main intelligences.

Nature is mathematical. Our brains are wired for maths. Nature has space and dimension. Our brains are wired for spacial intelligence. Nature has sounds and our brains our wired for music/sound and patterns. Nature moves and our brains our wired Kinesthetically.

When we look at a particle spinning beautifully it has a kind of kinesthetic intelligence. When we see a dancer circle beautifully she exemplifies this same ability. Particles are also always moving. Movement is essential for nature to function.

When we look at how the universe is arranged we can sum it up mathematically and then we also have people who are mathematically gifted.

When we look at nature we see a universe of space and dimensions and everything around us occupies space and dimension and there are people who are very specially inclined and who can visualize spaces inside their mind perfectly.

When we look at nature we can hear sounds permeating from objects hitting each other or from the friction of something or spin of something and there are also people who are musically inclined to hear patterns of sounds well.

Is it any wonder that our human intelligence also posses these qualities?

What about linguistic, interpersonal and interpersonal qualities of nature?

We can see linguistics on a fundamental level in nature too when we look at the communication of bacteria or when we put a heartbeat next to another heartbeat and they conform to each other or how we have a quark and the majority of virtual particles that pop in are quarks (though some might be photons or gluons). There seems to be a communication on a fundamental level.

While humans use language, we can see all of nature has a basic form of communication from physics to genetics and chemistry.

We can see interpersonal skills in nature when we look at physics and particles having to interact with fields and when we look into genetics and see how the interactions have to interact with each other. Nature does have many inter-relationships on a fundamental level.

Humans have relationships with the outside world, and nature fundamentally has interactions with other parts of nature all the time.

Even with interpersonal skills we see in nature that genes duplicate themselves and even with virtual particles, because the majority of virtual particles pop in according to whatever is there -it seems it conforms-- there is a kind of duplication there as well.

While humans might have a good interaction with themselves, nature also fundamentally keeps a good relationship with itself by duplicating itself.


So, I just thought these correlations were interesting and wanted to share them.

On purpose, guidance, and randomness

 Is anything truly random? Are there any true accidents?

Well if we are looking through the eyes of man than yes. 

If there existed no randomness in nature than mathematicians could predict everything that would happen if given the variables, if they could see the variables.

The fact that some things seem to be truly random or accidental in nature, the fact that man cannot actually see nature fully keeps us somewhat in the dark about the future. We can't predict it like a gypsy in a crystal ball.

Man is limited in what he can see and perceive.

So, I'd say true randomness in nature is essential for nature to keep the future sealed, to keep the wool over our eyes.

If you define random as unpredictable, there are certain events that are in biology such as genetic drift and draft. We don't have all the variable to predict what will happen and some events seem mathematically random.

In physics, such on the quantum level where particles can take path A or B - the paths are both similar and there is no reason why it would take one over the other, nothing governing it to take one over the other. So, it seems random. But it always keeps its internal order with whatever path it takes over the other. What prompts it do take that path? We don't really know, it seems random. 

BUT does it even matter what path it takes, even if it is truly random, since both paths lead to the same predictable destination? And the end state is predictable from my readings. It is the in-between states that are not predictable, truly random.

This is interesting, because for one it doesn't seem to matter that randomness is a factor, because everything in the end will be deterministic in a way, predictable. However what paths things take we can not determine. This allows for freedom of choice in a way. For non-living things this would be simply random processes vs natural laws which yield non random processes. BUT in living things, while we start out random (like bacteria until it finds an attractant) we end up non random because of memory and consciousness. Freedom to choose.

See, it is important for a certain level of randomness to exist to allow for us true freedom of choice. If everything was deterministic and everything could be predicted, than everything would be set for us and we truly would have no freedom of choice.

This does show us that on a fundamental level, on a small level, nature is and can be very random and this is important.

Nature fulfills a chain of events —in time— much like our memory fulfills a series of events. As nature does this, or own memory does this, things seem to go from random to non random. Simple to complex. From Nothingness (chaos of virtual particles) into something. BUT there is a direction, an internal innate drive.

Energy seems to go from randomness to non-randomness as energies increase and become more complex. (This can also be found in the new theories of dynamic energy).


The true nature of randomness allows the future to be unseen while also allowing for true freedom of choice.

Randomness is not a bad thing! 

HOWEVER--while mathematicians prefer the definition above to that of unpredictability, biological scientists like to use randomness to mean something without purpose or goal.

This is where the problem comes in for many people who see there is something more than just the physical world we can measure scientifically/naturally.

If you define randomness as without purpose or goal -- that is just meaningless and crossing line, because now you are applying your own subjective meaning of things.

 How are we defining the terms?

Nature has its own way to do things, whether we understand them or not. What scientists are looking at is nature- not a spirit or a God.

A marble in itself doesn't have a purpose or goal because it has no consciousness. But this does not mean the marble was not put in place by something with a higher energy and understanding than ourselves.

Also- energy persists toward entropy and life persists toward survival. This seems to be fundamental, inside the very core of all things, innate. This is a purpose and goal. It might not be a conscious one or an external one, but it certainly appears to be an internal one. Just something nature does.

So, even if there is no higher energy "God"  which put the marble into place, there certainly is an internal purpose and goal. Be it a very simple one. Life persists TO EXIST. TO BE. And while energy heads toward entropy, it still bothered to exist at all. Why does it?

So, While I have no problems understanding the mathematical ideas of randomness, biologists seem to cross the line and take it a step further into realms they cannot prove or disprove and so are walking out of the very bounds of science.

And in fact I'd say Nature, even without proving a God, does have a internal purpose and goal. So, that idea just is not correct naturally or even when we consider the possibility that a "God" is behind it.

What about guidance?

I don't think God interferes with the natural world which is what many call guidance. I think God put everything into place exactly as it is and it is self-sufficient without the constant need of intervention.

However, I do think where we see the Spirit or God is in people's lives. The spirit can affect our minds, dreams, emotions and can speak to us and it is in this where we will find guidance.