The second dimension of cosmic reality for consideration is Nature, meaning the environment of Earth and the living things which inhabit it. Geologists tell us the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old and has sustained immense transformations from an initial fiery ball through alternating periods of cooling and warming, the appearance of bodies of mostly liquid water, and varying formations of land floating on mobile tectonic plates. 
Paleontologists tell us the earliest forms of life appeared perhaps 3.9 billion years ago in the oceans, migrated to land at least 500 million years ago and have undergone nearly continuous alteration throughout their history. In the 19th century Charles Darwin and Arthur Russell Wallace made convincing cases for evolution via natural selection as the underlying mechanism of variation of species, a theory strongly supported by the later science of genetics.
Meanwhile astronomers have been searching for evidence of extraterrestrial life for several decades without success. Many of us hope that is a temporary situation, but until we can confirm life elsewhere, we must entertain the possibility that life is restricted to the Earth. We must also recognize that for now, Homo sapiens is the only species that can intelligently impact the environment of the Earth and its biology. Thus we come to the crux of our analysis – through the slow process of emergence and evolution, the universe has brought into existence the most complex entities known (life) on a single fortuitous planet with an accommodating sun. We must remember that every species of life on Earth is not only the product of billions of years of this process, but also entirely dependent on the unlikely environment Earth provides. Thus we should act as if this is the ‘purpose’ of the universe operative at our level.
The third dimension of cosmic reality is extraterrestrial space and celestial bodies. We come upon that dimension of cosmic reality where human limitations apply. For our immediate future, given the limits of our science and technology, we can only consider the purpose intrinsic to our solar system. 
Only the Sun and the Moon have clear purpose while Jupiter may have one as well. The Sun’s energy radiation is obviously essential to maintain the habitable environment of the Earth. The Moon has effects on the tides in our oceans and perhaps other critical influences. Jupiter may serve as a clearing mechanism for stray objects (asteroids, comets, and the like) which might otherwise impact the earth with catastrophic consequences. Additional ‘purpose’ can be assigned by the human imagination for other planets and moons in the solar system mainly as potential places for colonization and the spreading of Earth life – Mars being the most obvious.
In summary, cosmic reality can be seen to have ‘purpose’ as the movement towards increased complexity and compartmentalized order. At our level of existence, science has purpose as those laws and explanation that reveal and underpin the order intrinsic to reality and permit understanding and potential manipulation, Nature is the fulfillment of the universe’s seeking of complexity and variety, and the solar system provides the contextual support for Earth’s environment and perhaps offers future destinations for its life.
—————————————–
Having trouble leaving a question or comment? E-mail me at gregoryciliberti@gmail.com
“Man’s most sacred duty…is to promote the maximal fulfillment of the evolutionary process in his earth.” – Julian Huxley.
Let’s start with pure science (rather than its practical applications) which seems a creation of humankind, but is more likely instantiated in the universe itself, particularly as descriptive laws and statistical predictability. It seems odd to ask about the purpose of ‘science’ in this sense when its essence is interwoven into material reality itself. Nonetheless the short answer is that the laws and explanations contained in mathematics and scientific disciplines reveal and underpin the order intrinsic to reality. In turn this demonstrable consistency sustaining the universe serves to permit understanding and potential manipulation by a being of sufficient capability, such as a human being. The study and advance of science by us then is a pursuit aligned with purpose of the cosmos appropriate to our meager stature in the universe.
One of the three great unanswerable questions about reality for humanity is: “Why is there a universe (or anything at all)?”1 This question is distinct from the similar: “How did the universe come into existence (if it is not in fact eternal)?” The former question is perhaps more precisely rephrased as: “What is the purpose of the universe?” While asking this question may appear presumptuous or even irrational, the answer, should one be found, will inform cosmic purpose for us.
The science of cosmology demonstrates that the universe is ordered, lawful, and progressive. Its history is revealed not as random but as directional with simple, small particles transforming into larger and more varied elements, and of amorphous gas clouds condensing into stars, planets, and black holes, which then may spontaneously organize into galaxies. Under favorable conditions inorganic evolution provides an environment where life may and perhaps predictably appears allowing organic evolution of the most complex entities known including some capable of consciousness and intelligence. Notwithstanding accusations of subjectivity, it remains entirely rational for one to see the self-determined ‘purpose’ of the universe as the movement towards increased complexity and compartmentalized order.
“Nature’s not a temple, but a workshop, and man’s the workman in it.” – Turgenev, Fathers and Sons.
As a result there are many public roles available for consideration which can be roughly placed into categories instructive to our choice. These include occupations with tangible outputs, callings with more limited measurability, entertainment with the added potential of fame, missionary work with the possibility inclusive of supererogatory duty, politics and positions of influence with their larger impact, and practical scientists and creators with hope of a more enduring legacy. Nonetheless the sense and magnitude of purpose of any given role is ultimately subjective and thus any category can be highly meaningful or seemingly futile to the actor.
Perseverance in an authentic role in the world is a source of ultimate satisfaction, a defining characteristic of our species, and the source of all human progress. And we need not despair of imagined insignificance as long as we remember the sagacious words of Lucian: “The life of the ordinary man is the best and most prudent choice. Cease from the folly of metaphysical speculation into origins and ends; count all this clever logic as idle talk and pursue one end alone – how you may do what your hands find to do, go your way with never a passion and always a smile.” Good advice in antiquity and today.
“Culture arises only when the individual fulfills his cycle of obligations.” – Käthe Kollwitz
Unlike in the case of individual purpose, societal purpose is chosen not integral to rational existence itself. Thus it is variegated not uniform; such purposes range from manual labor or basic service for others to musical composition or philosophical inquiry. Societal purpose can be multiple and can entail degrees of magnitude not seen with purpose at the level of the self. One may even choose to bypass societal purpose altogether and pursue cosmic purpose (the subject of the next section).
example is Benjamin Franklin whose noble purpose in 1784 was to represent the United States in the French court. There he found he could understand French better if he could see the expressions of the speakers but also needed to record notes, so in a moment of genius sawed his eyeglass lenses in half and combined them to invent bifocals.1 Many common examples apply in our more mundane work lives such as with problem solving, project management, team building activities, customer service, etc. And of course those who choose an artistic field experience the full force of their creativity.
Ordered work, particularly for a worthy goal, is an outlet where calm is attained by suppression of our defects. Professionalism then offers a kind of serenity which can be experienced on a day to day basis, and intense focus on work allows us to stay in the present moment which is a critical feature of contentment.
“Without a vocation, man’s existence would be meaningless.” – Anwar al-Sadat, 1978 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
Two comments worth noting here: financial compensation alone is a poor criterion for the type of work we choose, and higher salary or profit, when virtuously obtained, serves as a quantifiable, if inexact, measure of the value of one’s exertions for society. This latter point illuminates the lower compensation of the college professor compared to the university football coach.
After a lifetime of study Durant concludes the only consistent idea of beauty in nature and for humans is the opposite sex. He also admits to a bias in favor of art prior to the twentieth century. His distaste of modern art is its revolt against beauty where his criticism is severe, “Any art that has no ruling form is the empty vanity of an undisciplined mind “31 He believes “the essence of art, as of beauty, lies not in content or elements but in structure and form.”32 He does however appreciates modern architecture where he agrees with Louis Sullivan that “form must follow function.” As for the place of art versus science in civilization he adds “Art without science is poverty and science without art is barbarity. Let every science strive to fulfill itself in beauty or wisdom, and let us rejoice when a science becomes an art.”33
Durant appears to have a great respect for science and its accomplishments, its commitment to the advancement of human knowledge. However, he has some concerns. As a lay person, he sees scientists, whose specialized knowledge is seemingly inscrutable for most of us, as the new priesthood. We must accept their pronouncements on faith, and like religion in the past, science is used as such by government. He honors their discipline in truth-seeking, but expresses skepticism as to its uses citing the examples of the machines of war and the pollution of industrialization. He argues for the need of wisdom in addition to knowledge.
While On Death is the fifth of the 22 chapters, thoughts on death are logically the ultimate ones so I end here. What does a man whose life was devoted to the understanding of human existence and civilization think of his own death? I allow him to speak for himself:
