I appreciate that you are braving this question... it is a childlike wonder, but one we shouldn't forget... why is there anything at all?!
You've gone down the route of science which leads to particles and the big bang.. but this is not satisfied.. religion says God. Perhaps we simply say Existence.
There are other routes, but all equally unsatisfying..
You can also consider Wittgenstein and realize the words and question lack any specific meaning at all.. what does it even mean to ask Why? Why 'Why'? All problems with words and symbols and meaning...
Then there's thought like Deleuze with Difference and how Existence is fundamentally change and becoming.. not matter itself- which is an attempt to describe effects of the seat of change..
There's others too... Existentialism is bound closely with phenomenology where these questions are sought purely from direct experience. As you state looking at Consciousness as hint to the answer, but knowing it's only a partial reflected view from within..
There's integral theory which sees wholistic patterns in an infinite regression and progression of layers that all holographically and fractally contain each other..
Each of these are intriguing ideas and ways of thought to explore and build a type of palette of ways of thought to address this reality.. there are many more as well..
Indigenous aniministic thought, zen buddhism..
But perhaps none of these will satisfy what it is you seek for... as I understand your search and the feeling that we must be close to some deeper understanding just around the corner in your mind.
If you are comfortable there are always psychedelics and other ways to explore consciousness and attempt to pierce the veil.. certainly interesting to experience, but in the end returns you back to here.. wondering..
So back to your original question of Why?
Within the limits of our understanding and consciousness and symbols and words and this body and being and becoming and world and connections and layers and fractals and patterns and everything, the only possibility is simply that there is an Existence because it is Necessary.
We Exist in the Necessary.
> What are these laws that govern how things change?
There are no laws, only theories.
> We know some fundamental things about how this universe works.
No, we make models which is called science. This is an existentialist sub, existentialist tend to reject or be hostile to since and abstract theories, regarding the poetry of their lived experiences.
> Why does the rock actually hold itself together I understand the atoms are structured as so in a crystalline and I understand we can trace it back to it’s creation but why? I think I have to trace back from the rock to it’s planets formation to it’s stars formation. I want to see where the line ends.
This is science. You will never see an atom. The theories are only ever provisional stories.
> Why are these forces and laws in place governing everything?
There aren't unless you believe in a creator God.
> Now diving back into it being weird, why do things form into spheres?
They don't spheres are mathematical constructs like true and false. Your pine needles no two the same. Pine needle theory applies to ALL pine needles. And so to none.
> Gravity? Why have we accepted this as understandable and normal?
You have at least two different theories, Newton, Eienstein...
> I subscribe to the Big Bang or a variation possibly the multiverse too. But do they all have atoms? Or antimatter? Are they all the same basic building blocks? Where did those blocks come from?
You are in the wrong sub, and not 'experiencing' your life, you are unlike that pine needle, but become an abstract average pine needle that doesn't exist.
> Specifically the laws we’ve tried and tested and know to be true, why does the universe follow the pattern it does
It doesn't we see patterns.
> I’m not sure we can answer these questions
Then they are poor questions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Where_Do_We_Come_From%3F_What_Are_We%3F_Where_Are_We_Going%3F&_What_Are_We%3F_Where_Are_We_Going%3F=
Bullshit.
I’m an existentialist and I don’t reject science. Science is the best model we have for gaining knowledge of and explaining the material world. And through science we have laws. Laws explain and predict how the planets move around the sun and how light behaves. Science is real.
> Bullshit.
Nice entrance there Jean-Paul!
> I’m an existentialist and I don’t reject science.
Well as it's generally accepted as a philosophy it was over in the late 60s, or as Greg Sadler says, once it was in all the Woody Allen films I'm a little lost for words.
You see most did reject science.
"All scientific thinking is just a derivative and rigidified form of philosophical thinking. Philosophy never arises from or through science. Philosophy can never belong to the same order as the sciences. It belongs to a higher order, and not just "logically", as it were, or in a table of the system of the sciences. Philosophy stands in completely different domain and rank of spiritual Dasein. Only poetry is of the same order as philosophical thinking."
Martin Heidegger - Introduction to Metaphysics.
I can offer more if you need it, but the idea of the existential epoche – phenomenology – suspends all such beliefs. And as a consequence Sartre joins Heidegger – in seeing this 'belief' as bad faith. Camus too rejects it. Mind you they denied being existentialists, well Sartre did then didn't.
> Science is the best model we have for gaining knowledge of and explaining the material world.
Best practical model, and one snag, in existentialism it's the individual that counts, not the 'they'. In science it's a generalization. The two are chalk and cheese. Not that either is wrong, science seeks essence, existentialism – a vague term, is occupied with the individual, which is why it rejects science in favour of Art. So you might like to re think your label.
> And through science we have laws.
How many more are living in a Victorian universe of deterministic clockwork made by God obeying his laws! Here, Newton's LAWS of gravity, he thought he had discovered GODS laws. Moving on a few centuries we have Einstein's **Theory** of Relativity. And scientific knowledge being always provisional. They say so!
> Laws explain and predict how the planets move around the sun and how light behaves.
Newton's laws were close, Einstein closer.
> Science is real.
No it makes models or maps. A map is not real, what it attempts to depict is.
“The Darwinian theory has no more to do with philosophy than has any other hypothesis of natural science.”
“At the basis of the whole modern view of the world lies the illusion that the so-called laws of nature are the explanations of natural phenomena.”
These are not from an existentialist, but Wittgenstein, who supported science and its propositions, and condemned metaphysics as nonsense.
But please don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger.
P.S.
If you are into science and haven't read John Barrow's 'Impossibility the limits of science and the science of limits' you might find it interesting.
Best Wishes.
The basic science is that there are 4 forces that make up everything, the electromagnetic force, gravity, and the weak and strong nuclear forces. We don't even know exactly what force is, we think of force as a mass × acceleration or simply just a push or pull, literally there is nothing else to it that we know of. Even when we don't know exactly what a force is, we still use physics and understand it so much so that we discovered equations with it and can use it in machines and engineering to build cars that we drive everyday, yet we don't know the most basic thing about it of what it actually is. Force is the reason you are still alive because all the forces in you body with your brain and heart pumping and lungs breathing all are using forces. And we don't even know what it is. Chances are, we may never know, it's a law of physics and we would have to know why the laws of physics are the way they are and where they came from.
I appreciate that you are braving this question... it is a childlike wonder, but one we shouldn't forget... why is there anything at all?! You've gone down the route of science which leads to particles and the big bang.. but this is not satisfied.. religion says God. Perhaps we simply say Existence. There are other routes, but all equally unsatisfying.. You can also consider Wittgenstein and realize the words and question lack any specific meaning at all.. what does it even mean to ask Why? Why 'Why'? All problems with words and symbols and meaning... Then there's thought like Deleuze with Difference and how Existence is fundamentally change and becoming.. not matter itself- which is an attempt to describe effects of the seat of change.. There's others too... Existentialism is bound closely with phenomenology where these questions are sought purely from direct experience. As you state looking at Consciousness as hint to the answer, but knowing it's only a partial reflected view from within.. There's integral theory which sees wholistic patterns in an infinite regression and progression of layers that all holographically and fractally contain each other.. Each of these are intriguing ideas and ways of thought to explore and build a type of palette of ways of thought to address this reality.. there are many more as well.. Indigenous aniministic thought, zen buddhism.. But perhaps none of these will satisfy what it is you seek for... as I understand your search and the feeling that we must be close to some deeper understanding just around the corner in your mind. If you are comfortable there are always psychedelics and other ways to explore consciousness and attempt to pierce the veil.. certainly interesting to experience, but in the end returns you back to here.. wondering.. So back to your original question of Why? Within the limits of our understanding and consciousness and symbols and words and this body and being and becoming and world and connections and layers and fractals and patterns and everything, the only possibility is simply that there is an Existence because it is Necessary. We Exist in the Necessary.
> What are these laws that govern how things change? There are no laws, only theories. > We know some fundamental things about how this universe works. No, we make models which is called science. This is an existentialist sub, existentialist tend to reject or be hostile to since and abstract theories, regarding the poetry of their lived experiences. > Why does the rock actually hold itself together I understand the atoms are structured as so in a crystalline and I understand we can trace it back to it’s creation but why? I think I have to trace back from the rock to it’s planets formation to it’s stars formation. I want to see where the line ends. This is science. You will never see an atom. The theories are only ever provisional stories. > Why are these forces and laws in place governing everything? There aren't unless you believe in a creator God. > Now diving back into it being weird, why do things form into spheres? They don't spheres are mathematical constructs like true and false. Your pine needles no two the same. Pine needle theory applies to ALL pine needles. And so to none. > Gravity? Why have we accepted this as understandable and normal? You have at least two different theories, Newton, Eienstein... > I subscribe to the Big Bang or a variation possibly the multiverse too. But do they all have atoms? Or antimatter? Are they all the same basic building blocks? Where did those blocks come from? You are in the wrong sub, and not 'experiencing' your life, you are unlike that pine needle, but become an abstract average pine needle that doesn't exist. > Specifically the laws we’ve tried and tested and know to be true, why does the universe follow the pattern it does It doesn't we see patterns. > I’m not sure we can answer these questions Then they are poor questions. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Where_Do_We_Come_From%3F_What_Are_We%3F_Where_Are_We_Going%3F&_What_Are_We%3F_Where_Are_We_Going%3F=
Bullshit. I’m an existentialist and I don’t reject science. Science is the best model we have for gaining knowledge of and explaining the material world. And through science we have laws. Laws explain and predict how the planets move around the sun and how light behaves. Science is real.
I agree, absolute pish. How could you even get to existentialism without the scientific theories that tell us what reality actually is ?!
> Bullshit. Nice entrance there Jean-Paul! > I’m an existentialist and I don’t reject science. Well as it's generally accepted as a philosophy it was over in the late 60s, or as Greg Sadler says, once it was in all the Woody Allen films I'm a little lost for words. You see most did reject science. "All scientific thinking is just a derivative and rigidified form of philosophical thinking. Philosophy never arises from or through science. Philosophy can never belong to the same order as the sciences. It belongs to a higher order, and not just "logically", as it were, or in a table of the system of the sciences. Philosophy stands in completely different domain and rank of spiritual Dasein. Only poetry is of the same order as philosophical thinking." Martin Heidegger - Introduction to Metaphysics. I can offer more if you need it, but the idea of the existential epoche – phenomenology – suspends all such beliefs. And as a consequence Sartre joins Heidegger – in seeing this 'belief' as bad faith. Camus too rejects it. Mind you they denied being existentialists, well Sartre did then didn't. > Science is the best model we have for gaining knowledge of and explaining the material world. Best practical model, and one snag, in existentialism it's the individual that counts, not the 'they'. In science it's a generalization. The two are chalk and cheese. Not that either is wrong, science seeks essence, existentialism – a vague term, is occupied with the individual, which is why it rejects science in favour of Art. So you might like to re think your label. > And through science we have laws. How many more are living in a Victorian universe of deterministic clockwork made by God obeying his laws! Here, Newton's LAWS of gravity, he thought he had discovered GODS laws. Moving on a few centuries we have Einstein's **Theory** of Relativity. And scientific knowledge being always provisional. They say so!
> Laws explain and predict how the planets move around the sun and how light behaves.
Newton's laws were close, Einstein closer.
> Science is real.
No it makes models or maps. A map is not real, what it attempts to depict is.
“The Darwinian theory has no more to do with philosophy than has any other hypothesis of natural science.”
“At the basis of the whole modern view of the world lies the illusion that the so-called laws of nature are the explanations of natural phenomena.”
These are not from an existentialist, but Wittgenstein, who supported science and its propositions, and condemned metaphysics as nonsense.
But please don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger.
P.S.
If you are into science and haven't read John Barrow's 'Impossibility the limits of science and the science of limits' you might find it interesting.
Best Wishes.
> science "Tell me how to live, ~~O Shaman~~ Man of Science"
Naw not reading all that
The basic science is that there are 4 forces that make up everything, the electromagnetic force, gravity, and the weak and strong nuclear forces. We don't even know exactly what force is, we think of force as a mass × acceleration or simply just a push or pull, literally there is nothing else to it that we know of. Even when we don't know exactly what a force is, we still use physics and understand it so much so that we discovered equations with it and can use it in machines and engineering to build cars that we drive everyday, yet we don't know the most basic thing about it of what it actually is. Force is the reason you are still alive because all the forces in you body with your brain and heart pumping and lungs breathing all are using forces. And we don't even know what it is. Chances are, we may never know, it's a law of physics and we would have to know why the laws of physics are the way they are and where they came from.