So what is this all about? Why might it be easily the most important resource on this site? Is this simply an attempt to delve into the cliché questions about the meaning of human existence, life's purpose or even some abstract notion about the "big" (and as yet unanswered) questions about the universe.

The easy option is to avoid the topic altogether. Too difficult. Too distant. Too speculative. Or maybe too many implications when it comes to behaviour, morality, lifestyle and accountability. Mmm - too uncomfortable.

Let's get back to some basic principles here and let me offer you some thoughts about this fascinating area. Some of the most interesting discussions I have held with friends and colleagues spring from the issues we should now consider.

My strong suspicion is this: what we make of the purpose and function of life is based on the philosophy we hold about where this life arose. It is inevitably true that there are conflicting views about the origin of life and therein is the key to understanding the source of purpose (if there is any) and fulfillment (if such can be truly achieved) in life. Depending on the conclusions drawn about how mankind came to be will lead to contrasting perceptions over this issue. In essence - it boils down to whether or not human life is the latest development from a series of chance events in biology - driven along by environmental and genetic circumstances or is the result of a carefully planned, tuned and balanced design. It seems to me that these are mutually exclusive. They certainly cannot both be the correct explanation for the origin of life. I will justify that position in due course.

Let me try to elaborate - please discuss! First the problem of the origin of complexity.

If you adopt the position that the complexity and diversity of life on earth is the ultimate result of an entirely natural process you need to be satisfied about the following. Virtually all the assumptions which underpin this idea are attractive (to a point) but are untested and untestable in any scientific sense. Even assuming we could have some kind of explanation for the existence of matter and energy (where did it all come from?) it is quite a jump to imagine the possible process whereby the correct recipe of sophisticated chemicals might come together in the critical relative concentrations and in the correct conditions to allow the production of the amazingly complex molecules which not only give living beings the ongoing existence which they need to be alive but also - amazingly enough these molecular machines were enveloped in some way such that the appropriate microenvironment might be maintained and even more amazing - they organism might actually make copies of itself, generate offspring and perpetuate a primitive species! The understanding we currently have of the wonders of molecular genetics fail to reassure me that such incredibly complex systems could have arisen as a result of some chance configuration of matter in some primeval organic soup!

Second - the information question. For more information why not follow an expanded set of arguments on my Molecules to Morality project. This provides a critique and analysis of the current thinking on some of the bigger questions of life. Follow the logic here.

Third - the intriguing fact that vast numbers of biological systems at molecular level are characterised by the feature which has been described as "irreducible complexity."

What then are the issues which remain. If the neoDarwinian position is so open to critical analysis with a defence which appears seriously flawed the notion that the source and origin of the complexity and diversity - the design - we see all around might actually be the influence of a designer. This kind of thinking is credible and common enough in our everyday interaction with the world. Things which are designed must have a designer - by definition. Extending this concept to universal proportions clearly raises another question which fits the data perfectly well but requires the introduction of a designer and a different mechanism. Some incredibly intelligent, powerful individual or force and and an act or acts of special creation would need, at least, to be considered.

Access Research Network