Reply to comment

Something that came up when researching paper topics was the problem of constantly asking "why" about the world. While there is a certain reductive method that can be used, and we can reduce the world to more basic motivations, the anthropic principle eventually comes into effect. Why is the world a certain way? Because if it wasn't, if gravity was slightly different or there had been a different combination of gases in the air, we probably wouldn't be asking that question.

Of course, this doesn't mean that we should stop asking "why". But we must recognise the fact that we are coming from a unique situation. We are the exception. This does not necessitate divine intention.

We are blinded by the fact that we exist in a fairly successful outcome, one which is improbable in a grander sense. If the existence of life is so unique, we want to attribute a reason to it. A God or creator. But unless we decide to give divine meaning to pulling out a red marble out of a bag of multicoloured marbles, we shouldn't assign a creator to human life as well.

I'll concede that this argument isn't tight. There are many valid counter arguements. However, dealing in what ifs seems useless unless we acknowledge that in a what if situation in regards to evolution, this discourse would likely not happen.