
I've always wondered about the penchant of those who ascribe a totally material origin to the universe and yet insist that purpose is to be found in it. Somehow, it doesn't add up.
Making some of the same arguments that atheist philospher Thomas Nagel made in his 2012 Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False, physiologist and biologist J. Scott Turner, in Purpose and Desire, a book he published about ten years ago, wonders why, too. Why do we believe we have purpose if we live in what Darwinian evolution decrees to be a meaningless world?It's tough. Clearly, every living thing behaves as if it has purpose, be it a purpose to eat, to seek safety, to reproduce, even to consider the nature of existence. Yet why would wholly material beings come to think of such things? Can chemicals desire? Can chemicals think?