Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!gargoyle!stuart From: stuart@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP (Stuart Kurtz) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: What are the members of the set of possibilities? Message-ID: <205@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> Date: Thu, 20-Sep-84 16:57:58 EDT Article-I.D.: gargoyle.205 Posted: Thu Sep 20 16:57:58 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 25-Sep-84 20:16:25 EDT References: <1343@cvl.UUCP> <308@uwmacc.UUCP> Organization: U. Chicago - Computer Science Lines: 37 OK Paul, if you'd like a theory of origins which is neither evolutionary nor creative, how about a devolutionary theory. In such a theory, our ancestors were Gods & Heros, and through the passage of time we become a degenerate, weak, immoral race of near animals. This is a remarkably common cosmology, and frequently is combined with creationism. A more ancient theory would be to deny that there was a creation of any sort. What is, has been before. What has been, will be again. There is no beginning, nor is there an end. [Yes, Ecclesiates is one of my favorite books. It has much more food for thought than Genesis, but most fundamentalists don't read well enough to get that far... ;-) Yes, that's a gratuitous insult, but not to worry, if you've read this far, it doesn't apply to you.] Such a cosmology is also frequent -- although seldom stated -- in our culture. There are many non-trivial variations on this theme: in one, the world is completely monotonous -- every age is exactly like every other age [Ecclesiates]; another variant allows substantial change from age to age -- species rise and fall, only to rise again. [This latter cosmology prevails in the "Conan" books.] To a large extent, evolutionary, creationist, devolutionary and cyclic cosmologies are Western. If you admit Eastern/mystic cosmologies, there are more options -- all of which I am admittedly almost totally ignorant. As I recall the Hindu explaination, our current existance is but one of many lifetimes our higher essence must undergo before reaching Nirvana. The various lifetimes are at higher (cow) or lower (ant) levels. Our spiritual maturity at the end of each life determines whether our next lifetime will be at a higher or lower level. I don't know enough about their beliefs to know whether or not they admit a specific act of creation, or whether they view such a question as even being relevant. This cosmology gained a significant place in Western culture through "Johnathan Livingston Seagull." I haven't tried to be exhaustive here, just to point out a range of possibilities. Stu ihnp4!gargoyle!stuart