Does the universe care?

[Cato]

Please elaborate, the reason I posted this is to sort of ponder on the thought and get some other opinions and ideas and open a line of discussion. Thank you for the response.

The fallacy of composition is when someone infers something of the whole when it is only true of some part. In this case you are trying to imbue the entire universe with a consciousness and ability to care because a part of the universe possesses consciousness. There is absolutely no reason to accept the proposition 'the universe is conscious'.

[Logisch]

Yes, we are made of atoms, like the universe, and yes we can think.
Don't read anymore into it.
There is no universal master plan.
We only exist because of the random combination of atoms scattered which become our planet.

That's how it starts, we start to explain the universe around us, and before you know it, you're a deluded "christian".
Hehe

I am not trying to think of any master plan, nor am I attempting to insert one. I see no intrinsic purpose or intrinsic value as far as that is concerned. I would agree with you that we exist because our existence is possible. However, it no less changes that I'm part of the universe and I am conscious. So this tiny sliver of the universe is a conscious part of the universe capable of answering or asking the question

Please elaborate, the reason I posted this is to sort of ponder on the thought and get some other opinions and ideas and open a line of discussion. Thank you for the response.

The fallacy of composition is when someone infers something of the whole when it is only true of some part. In this case you are trying to imbue the entire universe with a consciousness and ability to care because a part of the universe possesses consciousness. There is absolutely no reason to accept the proposition 'the universe is conscious'.

My point was not to call the entire universe conscious, but that we are and we are a part of the universe.

Q: Is the universe conscious?
A: We're part of the universe, so by technically, sure, but only the part that we're aware of, which is us.

Q: Does the universe care?
A: We're part of the universe, and this part of the universe cares about itself and others, so technically yes.

If that clarifies by simplicity.

(edit) - Thanks for clarifying on the fallacy of composition. That's a new point of discussion for me and I appreciate you pointing it out. That gives me something to think about.

[Ravenshire]

I think we care more about the universe as a whole than the universe as a whole cares about us.

[Angrboda]

"And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you."

~ Nietzsche

[Magilla]

...
My point was not to call the entire universe conscious, but that we are and we are a part of the universe...

Q: Does the universe contain a sub-element that is conscious?
A: We're part of the universe, so by technically, sure, but only the part that we're aware of, which is us.
C: But that's a tautology.

Q: Does the universe contain a sub-element that cares?
A: We're part of the universe, and this part of the universe cares about itself and others, so technically yes.
C: That's tautological too.

Does the UNIVERSE care or have consciousness? NO. As a huge, mostly empty place, the UNIVERSE does not care about anything. As a whole, it does not have the apparatus to be conscious. AT least some small part of the universe has those characteristics.

To avoid the fallacy of composition, don't employ the fallacy in any discussion or argument. In usual contexts, to say that the universe does not care, means that if all life on earth was wiped out of existence, the UNIVERSE would not care. In our experience, only living things care. If we accept that, then your point, (the point) is trivially obviously true, Logisch. Aren't we part of the universe, no matter how you look at it? So kudos for being trivially correct, when you tease out what you really meant, even if your thread title contains fallacy of wrongful use of composition.

[Logisch]

...
My point was not to call the entire universe conscious, but that we are and we are a part of the universe...

Q: Does the universe contain a sub-element that is conscious?
A: We're part of the universe, so by technically, sure, but only the part that we're aware of, which is us.
C: But that's a tautology.

Q: Does the universe contain a sub-element that cares?
A: We're part of the universe, and this part of the universe cares about itself and others, so technically yes.
C: That's tautological too.

Does the UNIVERSE care or have consciousness? NO. As a huge, mostly empty place, the UNIVERSE does not care about anything. As a whole, it does not have the apparatus to be conscious. AT least some small part of the universe has those characteristics.

To avoid the fallacy of composition, don't employ the fallacy in any discussion or argument. In usual contexts, to say that the universe does not care, means that if all life on earth was wiped out of existence, the UNIVERSE would not care. In our experience, only living things care. If we accept that, then your point, (the point) is trivially obviously true, Logisch. Aren't we part of the universe, no matter how you look at it? So kudos for being trivially correct, when you tease out what you really meant, even if your thread title contains fallacy of wrongful use of composition.

Fair enough breakdown and thank you for the post. (and welcome to the forum, judging by the first post)

[Jenny A]

Something I thought about a while ago:

- If we are comprised of the same atoms and energy from the stars, we are technically part of the universe

We are part of the universe by definition.

- If all matter in the know universe came from the point of singularity, then all matter and energy in the universe is part of the known universe
- If we too are comprised of that same atoms and energy, we are part of the known universe

Still with you

- Is it then safe to say that we can arrive at the conclusion that in a funny way we are the universe capable of understanding itself?/[quote]

No, we are an extremely tiny fraction of the universe capable of trying to make sense of the universe. We have made some progress, but we sure don't understand everything yet.

[quote]Sometimes I hear people say, "the universe doesn't care about whether or not we exist." but if we technically are the only part of the known universe that is capable of viewing and understanding itself, then couldn't we technically say that the universe does care whether or not we exist as we are the only conscious and intelligent part of the universe (that we are aware of) capable of understanding that? Perhaps the only part to ever be (that we are aware of)?

We could. But it would be highly misleading.

Odd random pondering I was having the other night while out having a cigar and checking out the stars. I've considered it before, but it pops up from time to time. One of those, "Dude, you ARE the universe." moments.

But Dude, you are only the tiniest fraction of a fraction of the universe. And a highly exotic portion of it at that.

[Logisch]

Thanks for the replies everyone. Keep them coming if you wish to do so. I rarely get to enjoy discussing a pondering like this with other people. I simply do not have anyone local to me who enjoys these types of discussion. Means a lot. Thanks. Jenny A, very good point, yes, we are a very small portion of it. I suppose thinking of the bigger picture of the entire scale of the universe, we're still an infinitesimally small portion of it, so I suppose indeed I did not realize the logical fallacy I was committing. I appreciate everyone who has chimed in and corrected me there. As they say, ideas and thoughts are like a hat that you can wear and entertain, but it doesn't mean you have to adopt them. Hence bothering to make the thread and discuss it.

[The Grand Nudger]

Rarely seen around these parts, right there. I bet you find another way to express the idea though. Looking forward to it.

[bennyboy]

I am made up of many things, including fat cells. They have their fatty properties, but it doesn't make sense to say I have those same properties. You wouldn't, for example, mix me with lye to make soap.