Philosophical futures have shifted significantly over the past millennium, from the dark despair of the nihilistic ‘heat death’ of the universe to a more optimistic outlook based on an evolutionary ‘becoming’ paradigm.
While the scholastics of the Middle Ages discerned no significant improvement in the quality of knowledge since the Greeks, the philosophers of the enlightenment realised that significant gains had been made, particularly in physics and astronomy and in terms of an increasing awareness of human rights.
The problem was that most philosophical models lacked a rigorous scientific basis, a mechanism capable of explaining life's interaction with the cosmos in anything but the most rudimentary meta-physical terms. By the late 19th Century it had been generally accepted that a realistic view of the cosmos had to be both an evolutionary and an optimistic one. A number of philosophers and scientists eloquently defined a more melioristic outcome for humanity; a fresh and optimistic view of life's future.
Spencer had an immense influence on political philosophy at the start of the 20th Century. In Spencer's view progress would be achieved through the voluntary cooperation of individuals while retaining the goal of freedom for the individual. This would achieve an increasing amount of social diversity and heterogeneity. Henri Bergson, the great French philosopher, postulated that evolution would continually create new knowledge unpredicted by past events.
This positive outlook also clashed with the prevalent inescapable and desolate ‘heat death’ of the universe, following from the physics of the second law of thermodynamics. In this scenario, life would cease to exist in the far future due to the dissipation of all energy from the galaxies, stars and planets in the cosmos. Recent forward thinkers such as mathematical physicist Professor Frank Tipler, have gone some way towards providing an alternative to this doomsday view; arguing that in the far future life may exist in a more abstract form, with the capacity to indefinitely delay such an outcome through the generation of an infinite amount of information. Another alternative may be that life will have the capability to create and populate alternate universes.
The ‘becoming’ evolutionary philosophers have sought to infer a progression from spacetime to matter, matter to life, life to mind and finally mind to deity. In this prognosis the deity does not exist before time but comes into existence over time. Such a model of an evolving God is similar to the evolutionary hypothesis outlined in the author’s book- The Future of Life- Meta-Evolution.
Teilhard de Chardin was both a scientist-palaeontologist and a Jesuit theologian, so it was natural for him to combine catholicism with evolutionary theory. His evolutionary cosmology encompasses a melioristic cosmos, which evolves a God. Teilhard conceived of a life force or radial energy, which achieves an inevitable increase in complexity and organisation over time. Finally, in the far future, the radial energy of life force coalesces into a super being or Omega point capable of manipulating spacetime and energy to escape the heat death.
As mentioned, Professor Frank Tipler in his book The Physics of Immortality, has also come to a similar conclusion, albeit by different and more rigorous scientific route. He argues the most compelling version of the Omega point hypothesis to date. In a nutshell he presents the thesis that over eons, culminating just before the end of the universe, the accumulation of all information that ever existed is concentrated in an infinitely wise knowledge singularity or Omega point. Further, such an entity is capable of existing forever in subjective time. The theory is underpinned largely by the extrapolation of thermodynamics, general relativity and quantum theory. Tipler also argues that meta-intelligence becomes coexistent with the cosmos, with the rider that the Omega point may be the ultimate observer; which according to one extension of quantum theory is responsible for bringing the entire universe into existence. In other words, the universe has no determinate form until observed and measured.
David Tow postulates a similar outcome, albeit by an alternate hypothesis; arguing the development of knowledge structures is a cumulative process, which occurs throughout the universe at both the organic and inorganic level. Therefore it is inevitable that this process will produce an Omega type entity, not just at the end of time but throughout time- an infinite chain of Omegas each evolving from the previous ancestor.
An Omega point is therefore postulated as an inevitable outcome of a Multiverse capable of sustaining life. This has enormous philosophical ramifications for present life.
While the scholastics of the Middle Ages discerned no significant improvement in the quality of knowledge since the Greeks, the philosophers of the enlightenment realised that significant gains had been made, particularly in physics and astronomy and in terms of an increasing awareness of human rights.
The problem was that most philosophical models lacked a rigorous scientific basis, a mechanism capable of explaining life's interaction with the cosmos in anything but the most rudimentary meta-physical terms. By the late 19th Century it had been generally accepted that a realistic view of the cosmos had to be both an evolutionary and an optimistic one. A number of philosophers and scientists eloquently defined a more melioristic outcome for humanity; a fresh and optimistic view of life's future.
Spencer had an immense influence on political philosophy at the start of the 20th Century. In Spencer's view progress would be achieved through the voluntary cooperation of individuals while retaining the goal of freedom for the individual. This would achieve an increasing amount of social diversity and heterogeneity. Henri Bergson, the great French philosopher, postulated that evolution would continually create new knowledge unpredicted by past events.
This positive outlook also clashed with the prevalent inescapable and desolate ‘heat death’ of the universe, following from the physics of the second law of thermodynamics. In this scenario, life would cease to exist in the far future due to the dissipation of all energy from the galaxies, stars and planets in the cosmos. Recent forward thinkers such as mathematical physicist Professor Frank Tipler, have gone some way towards providing an alternative to this doomsday view; arguing that in the far future life may exist in a more abstract form, with the capacity to indefinitely delay such an outcome through the generation of an infinite amount of information. Another alternative may be that life will have the capability to create and populate alternate universes.
The ‘becoming’ evolutionary philosophers have sought to infer a progression from spacetime to matter, matter to life, life to mind and finally mind to deity. In this prognosis the deity does not exist before time but comes into existence over time. Such a model of an evolving God is similar to the evolutionary hypothesis outlined in the author’s book- The Future of Life- Meta-Evolution.
Teilhard de Chardin was both a scientist-palaeontologist and a Jesuit theologian, so it was natural for him to combine catholicism with evolutionary theory. His evolutionary cosmology encompasses a melioristic cosmos, which evolves a God. Teilhard conceived of a life force or radial energy, which achieves an inevitable increase in complexity and organisation over time. Finally, in the far future, the radial energy of life force coalesces into a super being or Omega point capable of manipulating spacetime and energy to escape the heat death.
As mentioned, Professor Frank Tipler in his book The Physics of Immortality, has also come to a similar conclusion, albeit by different and more rigorous scientific route. He argues the most compelling version of the Omega point hypothesis to date. In a nutshell he presents the thesis that over eons, culminating just before the end of the universe, the accumulation of all information that ever existed is concentrated in an infinitely wise knowledge singularity or Omega point. Further, such an entity is capable of existing forever in subjective time. The theory is underpinned largely by the extrapolation of thermodynamics, general relativity and quantum theory. Tipler also argues that meta-intelligence becomes coexistent with the cosmos, with the rider that the Omega point may be the ultimate observer; which according to one extension of quantum theory is responsible for bringing the entire universe into existence. In other words, the universe has no determinate form until observed and measured.
David Tow postulates a similar outcome, albeit by an alternate hypothesis; arguing the development of knowledge structures is a cumulative process, which occurs throughout the universe at both the organic and inorganic level. Therefore it is inevitable that this process will produce an Omega type entity, not just at the end of time but throughout time- an infinite chain of Omegas each evolving from the previous ancestor.
An Omega point is therefore postulated as an inevitable outcome of a Multiverse capable of sustaining life. This has enormous philosophical ramifications for present life.
