Thoughts on Imprudence and Laziness

On Inactivity: Analyzing the Source of Procrastination

Over the years, much like the rest of you, I have encountered countless trials and tribulations that have either delayed my ambitions, or negated them entirely. Despite the unforeseen obstacles that thwarted my initial efforts, much like the rest of us, I managed to progress in some way. When I use the term progress in its verbal form, I do not mean it in its colloquial sense. Rather than perseverance that translates to success, I am attempting to convey the skeletal essence of the word - active and intentional behavior to avoid immobility. After having abandoned the notion that progress is only made when someone continues to prosper, I began to recognize the key aspect in my life that was lacking - action. Being somewhat of a ruminator (euphemism at its finest), I often found myself stuck within the confines of my own exhaustible cranium, worrying repeatedly about insignificant ideas via syllogistic reasoning errors. Ironically, I attempted to make decisions and conclusions about things without adequate evidence (sometimes without any), often producing results that were the byproduct of emotional tirades and maudlin stupors. Somewhat anti-scientific, one may be inclined to say. Herein lies the second layer of irony - had I appealed to my own interests and meager knowledge, I would have been able to derive more meaning and wisdom in one analysis than in a year's worth of obsession. By this of course I refer to the literal meaning of the word progress, and its etymological origins. Fashioned from the beautiful Latin tongue, its constituents are pro- (a preposition which here means "forward" or "ahead") and gressum (the fourth principal part of the verb -gressi, which means to walk or move). In short, progressum directly translates to "something having gone/moved forward". As long as one is not stagnant and inactive, they are by definition progressing. This may be a bit reductionist and perhaps even laughable by virtue of its apparent pseudo-profound simplicity, but neglecting its transformative power can be equally as frivolous. 

One could argue quite justifiably that no one  can truly ever be stationary in life, because even willful indecision renders results and manifests consequences. In short, choosing to not act is in itself an action. Here is my best attempt at making a rebuttal to this obvious elephant in the room. Although that it is entirely valid, there remains a remarkable distinction between progression with intention, and accidental movement. It is reasonable to propose that someone would have a better chance of reaching their desired goals if they measure and tailor their behavior. It is highly unlikely that someone would achieve that with the same efficiency or satisfaction, if they resorted to desultory indifference. 

Here is a relevant and ubiquitous real-world application of this framework; procrastination in academics. It is my position that the proliferation of irresponsibility in institutions of higher learning is due to one rife misinterpretation- the reasoning that leads to procrastination. I used to make the same fundamental error, and made menacing noises of self-pity ad nauseam. The confusion results from conflating action with success. It is as simple as that. Students often feel that they cannot bear a workload and all its implications, so they are hapless and become unproductive. If there were even the smallest trace of reconsideration, I believe a huge burden could be lifted. Nobility resides within the effort to address the work and its demands - not necessarily to complete every ounce, let alone with haste and perfection. Now, I am certainly not advocating for fecklessness or carelessness with regards to one's academic duty, nor am I ignorant of the fact that some students' lives depend upon excellence due to external forces. My point addresses those who are so fortunate that they have the luxury to adjust their intensity, should their sanity require it. If you fall under this category, remember that excessive frustration drawn from workload stress is not necessarily a predicament to which everyone can be sympathetic. There is a hint of arrogance and over-inflated sense of self-purpose, seeing that a difference in arbitrarily assigned numbers on a personal screed does not have any directly influential repercussions on the rest of society. Yet another instance to check one's value on a larger scale. 

For a significant portion of my academic career, I drew much of my self-worth and motivation from academic prowess and feigning an omni-present intelligence. Although I still struggle with human pride and an innate desire for intellectual supremacy, I am earnestly and intentionally trying to rectify it. The sobriety and humility yielded from challenging one's personal beliefs about this matter is extraordinarily soothing. It forces one to question their priorities and principles at large, and almost inevitably decreases ego-centrism. So please, try re-evaluating your tasks and chores, and see if they truly are as cumbersome and worthy of public concern as you think they are. 

Who am I to adjudicate on this topic?

Just another primate, like you.

Thought and Action SoundCloud Podcast: An Intro

As of recently, a close friend and I have decided to embark upon a new journey in social media - pod-casting. The notion appeals to me simply because I get to prattle on, while others lend their time to my rantings on different subjects. The reason for our mutual excitement surrounding this idea stems back to a very deep-seeded characteristic expressed in both parties; the desire to speak freely about topics we enjoy, without having to pander to those of a larger crowd. Our methods may differ, but they are inextricably linked by the confines and demands of life and prosperity.

My friend's interests (whose material is available at his casually.formal Instagram page) pertain to men's style and conducting a formal lifestyle through a casual demeanor. His approach to life in general is much more hands-on and impetuous. More attracted to spontaneity and mobility, he tends to be intrigued by activities that call upon the use of the body, and concentrate on physical involvement. Thus, it is no surprise that he is enamored with fitness, exercise, and sport. With regards to employment and higher education, his early career trajectories focused on engineering and a subsequent change to construction management. However, much like the rest of us, his passions and skills are at the mercy of time, personal growth, and the vicissitudes of life. As such, change has rendered his previously supposed certainty and stagnancy moot, and begs personal introspection and reconsideration of his own motives. In short, this is very time when he requires a more elaborate and philosophically inclined analysis of his goals - cue me.

This does not mean that he lacks any sense of calculation, or that he is entirely devoid of thought. That would be a fantastic insult, and would also insinuate that I am smarter or wiser than reality demonstrates. If anyone is familiar with my work, they will realize that I operate on a different wavelength than my comrade. My focus is plagued with rumination and excessive analysis that unfortunately foster inactivity. At times I can be completely inert and unresponsive due to my ignorance of anything that resides outside the realm of academia. From my best efforts at self-reflection, I believe that I could benefit from being more resourceful and self-reliant. This is where the representative of the latter half of our brand shows up - promoting a more pro-active lifestyle to enhance the likelihood of reaping dividends. 

The beauty of this enterprise is derived from the nature of its participants - two proponents of diametrically opposed methods who unite for personal improvement and dialectic. There is a whole gamut of various topics to explore: from the potential existence of a God and questions about our own consciousness, to how to effectively date to suit your needs and desires. You are formally invited to help us casually investigate our universe and the contents within it. 

To the best ability that two mammals can, of course.

Stay tuned for updates on release dates and content!

Yours truly, half of T & A

A Generation of Quasi-literacy: How Excessive Coddling Relates to Censorship and Ignorance

To any other resident dissenters on political correctness, take heart! You are not alone. As someone who accepts the value of criticism and argument for their own sake, I cannot help but feel alienated from my fellow millennials. A fact of which I am quite proud, to say the least. The New Age nonsense that seems to be permeating and thriving in the West is incredibly nauseating. Charlatans like Deepak Chopra appeal to the credulous crowds with their salad of misappropriated letters and misused scientific jargon. Alleged authors muster up terrible romantic fiction at a cloying rate. The worst part of it is not the material in itself, rather how swathes of the young population ravenously inhale the drivel and regurgitate it as though it were literature worth conserving. The proclivity toward this pseudo-mysticism is baffling, and I believe it is a result of babying young adults. Political correctness directly contributes to the barricading of free speech, and as such precludes people from being able to analyze thoughts produced by everyday humans. Mere primates, one may be tempted to say. In an age and a society where the practice of religion is just beginning to dwindle and we are reaping the benefits, I am not inclined to surrender to a new supernatural swindle so soon. 

Make no mistake, my contempt for this idea does not peat out at the religious. It also extends to those who want to replace works from Balzac, Proust, Dostoevsky, Eliot and Tolstoy with the tripe produced by Rowling or Meyers. This includes the heavenly auguries with which The 50 Shades series has been met - a screed whose literary content and quality can be easily superseded by anything written on the stall door found in a local tavern's facilities. This is not just an attempt at making jeers toward popular culture, it is rather a cry for action. Literacy is a concern far too often overlooked; especially in America. Imagine, if you dare, an entire generation of people who are simultaneously illiterate and hypersensitive. The thought tends to preoccupy even the slowest mind. Although there is an alarming number of individuals who can neither read nor write (or can only do one of the two, mostly with feeble accuracy in a marginal capacity) I am not asking them to heed my message (not that they could if they wanted to). My address of illiteracy is aimed at the majority who either cannot be bothered to read anything that does not simultaneously offer a service in which one can advertise their face and sexual preferences to the general public, or the odd time that their much resented education requires them to do so. I do not intend to portray myself as an elitist, but I weep for the day when championing literacy constitutes snobbery. Leisure reading is not only pleasant, it also illuminating and humbling. I am prepared to say that the more often one runs their eyes across a printed page, the less likely they are to feel so entitled that they think they have the capacity to mandate legislation on bathroom nomenclature - simply because they feel offended. An empty charge whose power and influence is far too strong in a supposed multi-cultural society. A place in which anyone should be allowed to broach and discuss whatever they like, whenever they choose.

Now recall what I just said about a zeitgeist founded upon unlettered ignorance and maudlin melodramatics. This is the very generation to which I so disgracefully belong, and the people who are eventually going to be responsible for dictating countrywide curriculum. In other words, the barbaric babies are already through the gates - and the barbarians only take a city if someone holds the doors open for them. This speaks to the glib parents who profess to be so self-righteously ashamed of their progeny, the very individuals whom they predominantly helped to sire. 

Their children hysterically and fearfully protest the implementation of the Trump/Pence era for our neighbors to the South. Grievances about the fate of the science class and its value have been expressed, and quite justifiably. Exchanging substantiated empirical data for bronze age superstition, or even equating the two as equivalent hypotheses, is cardinal sin. Of course I refer to the denigration and violation of evolution, and Darwin's theory of natural selection. Yet I propose that at the current rate, education and objective scholarship will experience the same type of backward censorship from a crowd other than the Messianic fanatics - those who are perpetually insulted. Although the process may be slower (yet just as pain-staking), we can already see it in the inept alteration of words in academia - lest we be accused of hurting someone's feelings. Fatuous words such as Global North and South, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, physically/mentally challenged and all their equally impotent forms, Intelligent Design, and insurgent are all examples of linguistic dilution. The ridiculous attempt to assuage people's nerves by bludgeoning words in already controversial topics. It is absurd to assume that someone needs to be previously ensconced in pillows, should they decide to jump from a high-rise building in an attempt to take their own life. 

The question remains - does anyone willfully want to contribute to a societal regression to infantilism? As Sam Harris so elegantly inquired "Are these the causes with which you want your generation to be identified?" I am hard pressed to believe that anyone responded affirmatively. If you did, and you enjoy the idea of capitulation to totalitarianism (in whatever smarmy new ingratiating form it takes), then you are and will most likely remain an enemy of civil progression and intellectual enlightenment. 

An enemy of mere mammals, though.

Yours truly, someone who sincerely does not care that you are insulted

On Wisdom and Method: A Question of Virtue

There is an overwhelming propensity for people to declare that wisdom is a byproduct of age - a concept not completely incorrect to avow, yet a little shortsighted. To my mind, sheer physical deterioration and wear and tear of the body do not arrogate the path. If one were to ask a group of people around them, it would be highly probable for participants to claim naivety as the antithesis of wisdom. Although this can be true, I feel as though one could be paying too much by way of compliment to the elderly if they attribute this noble quality to everyone. Wisdom is not an axiomatically obtained characteristic of aging; there are many individuals who exhibit this plain fact. One of the most salient reasons for this misfortune is the lack of familiarity with a concept that I believe is just as valuable a method to attaining the subject at hand - self reflection. 

Though this may seem to be a bit platitudinous upon reception, introspection is a necessary activity for personal growth. It may be cheap and overstated to say that intelligence does not equate to wisdom, yet one can approach this honorable quality by appealing to academia. One of the noblest traditions in my opinion is the philosophical - the method which sired humanity's most respectable and fruitful system - science. Philosophy encompasses and addresses a myriad of different considerations: ethics, epistemology, existentialism, cognitive science, personal maturity. These are but a few of the topics with which philosophical inquiry tangles. Maturity includes perseverance and modesty, thus it is mandatory to not only constantly question the world around you but also your own motives. This ties in with the running trope that I have previously asserted and established - the supremacy of how to think over what to think. In essence, mental acuity and enlightenment is better defined by doubt and humility than by regurgitation of rapidly memorized information. 

Banal, I know. Yet ironically I can only speak from personal experience. Ever since I adopted skepticism, strove to accept uncertainty, and acknowledged the importance of intellectual honesty, I have witnessed incalculable improvements in the quality of my life. Like any another human being, I fence daily with my ego and the over-sized adrenaline glands in my brain that try to impede and misdirect my ambitions. Crosses we all must bear, and stamps of our lowly origins that cannot be so easily subdued, let alone eradicated. Herein lies a conclusion that I believe to be wise; there is more honor in accepting the existence of circumstances that reside out of our control, than to arrogantly combat their reality and profess integrity in doing so. Perhaps another trite statement, yet I leave my reputation in the safekeeping of the audience - because to foolishly attempt otherwise would violate reason and result in pure strife. The stoicism derived from that recognition is invaluable, yet my mammalian mind will always struggle to absorb its truth. This does not indicate the failure of the method, but rather the shortcomings of the agent. We should remain diligent and determined, surely an admirable quality will arise - maybe just the virtue we have been seeking.

Yours to consider, a fellow primate

On Islam and its Emergence in the West: The Compelling Figure of the Son of Mary

On Islam and its Emergence in the West: The Compelling Figure of the Son of Mary

As I have discovered through conversation and research, it would seem as though Islam is the fastest growing religion that this marble has to offer. To my mind, this is an alarming question for not only its societal and moral implications, but it also appeals to my curiosity intellectually. To many Christians and Westerners alike, the interests and beliefs held by Muslims are either impertinent or too frightening to investigate. Yet I feel as though it warrants some research and inspection, for one of the most salient and controversial figures in all of human history makes a guest appearance in this narrative as well. Jesus, the veritable son of god and the sacrificial lamb for the Christians, does not have his character monopolized by Paul's visions. Here I will attempt to briefly address some tenets of Islamic faith that I think are relevant to the discussion. Islam makes it an article of faith to believe in Jesus as a prophet of Allah, who was specifically designated to deliver a message to Ban' Israil (the people of Israel, or the Jews). Constantly referred to as Isa Ibn Maryam or Isa alayhi salaam (Jesus son of Mary or Jesus peace be upon him), he was said to have a carried a revelation known as Al Injil, or, the Gospel. The overwhelming consensus among Muslims is that this message was lost amidst history due to corruption and human interpolation to the unalterable word of god (a topic for another day). Thus, the only remaining authentic recording of Jesus' words in the Bible are those which agree with Koranic claims. A rather presumptuous and incoherent method of discerning the truth, nonetheless it is the way in which many Muslims espouse their beliefs. 

In the Islamic tradition, Jesus shares many similar characteristics and life experiences to that of the Christian Jesus - yet they are in no way identical. The Koran states that Jesus was born to the Virgin Mary in the middle of the desert (probably during the summer months) next to a date tree. Verses from Surah Al Maryam state that she endured such an intense pain, she wished herself dead. After much suffering and toil, the prophet was born and Allah replenished Mary's energy with fallen dates and by creating a stream of water adjacent to her from which she could drink. Contrary to the first miracle of Jesus in the Bible (The Wedding at Cana where Jesus purportedly turned water into wine for party consumption), Jesus' first miracle in the Quran involves him speaking as an infant and professing the veracity of his prophecy. This occurs after several Jewish clergymen accuse Mary of being impure for having a child out of wedlock. In addition, there are repeated injunctions against worshiping anyone other than Allah, and Jesus is mentioned in context several times. Different verses assert the blasphemy behind ascribing a son to almighty god, and how the squalor of this claim is so wretched that it causes various meteorological and natural anomalies to take place. Of course, there is also the promise of departing into ever-lasting fire for maintaining the Christian faith. 

Another major distinction between the faiths includes the alleged crucifixion and resurrection of the Nazarene. There are discrepancies and schisms here among Muslims as to what exactly occurred during the latter stages of Jesus' life, but the majority believe that Allah saved him from the ignoble and naked death of the cross by raising him to the second heaven where he currently resides with his cousin, John the baptist (Prophet Yaya alayhi salaam). This was feasible by extracting Jesus through a window in his home and (in some narrations) likening the countenance of Jesus onto Judas Iscariot, and having him killed in Jesus' place. Some schools of Islam (like the Ahmadiyya) state that Jesus was crucified, but did not die and was nursed back to health by a doctor while he was in the sepulcher. The whole point behind the rejection of this narrative is to state that Jesus is in no way divine, the vicarious redemption of humanity through a blood pagan sacrifice is immoral, that there is no such thing as original sin, and that a god should not need an intermediary through which one can pray and to whom one can appeal for guidance/salvation. All of these repudiations are more than accurate in my view. Of course I am not and will never be a Muslim, but these are essential and worthwhile meditations for Christians of any stripe to consider. 

Finally, there are a few distinctions made between miracles and the nature of their power. Muslims believe Jesus blew into a clay bird and caused it to fly, cured the sick, and plays a special role in Qiyamma (judgment day) all by god's permission. In essence, Jesus was an instrument and conduit through which Allah demonstrated his might - the Nazarene can of his own self do nothing (John 5:30). The last of these three claims is not blatantly stated in the Quran, but is drawn from the equally respected tradition of the Hadith (the supposed sayings of the prophet Muhammad). One of which addresses Sayyidina Isa returning on the final day, as he descends from the clouds on the arms of two angels onto the hill of Damascus. Here, it is said that Jesus (adorned will golden and wet hair) will join the remaining and scanty number of Muslims left behind the gates and will join the throng in prayer behind the twelfth Imam -Al Mahdi. Following tales describe Jesus opening the gates to invite the vast army of Al Masih Al Dajjal (the Anti-Christ) in for a battle. It is alleged that upon sight of the Son of Mary, the Anti-Christ will attempt to flee but will instead disintegrate. Ensuing battles will involve those against the vast swathes and hordes of the armies of Gog and Magog, in which even Jesus will be helpless. Upon the final day of judgment, Allah will ask Jesus if he told the people to worship him and his mother (a tenet that as far as I know is not a belief among Christians) and Jesus will reply in denial and assert his doctrine of one god and submission to his will. Herein the Nazarene will kill the swine, break the cross and impose the Jizya (taxation of non-Muslims in Muslim lands). It is claimed that he will live for 40 years as a just ruler under Sharia and die, then to be buried next to Muhammad in Medina.

I make mention of all this scripture to make my final point - that I think the alluring character of Jesus of Nazareth is persuading Westerners to convert to Islam. Islam offers new tales about Jesus and in a way solves the omnipresent trinity problem. Islam's fanatic certainty and militancy placates and appeals to those who want to be governed over, and who think that Christianity has become too lenient in its political influence. A sentiment with which I do not completely agree, but I will always be thankful for any semblance of the dissipation and disintegration of religion from civilized society. Islam's apparent confidence pleases the credulous, and in the process provides Christians with some new editions of their favorite graphic novel hero. Ironically, many of the myths are simply semi-literate plagiarisms and hokey rehashes, but the watered-down sequels get the job done. 

Anything to keep the ascetically immoral rabbi and eccentric hippy in the mix.

As always, check your purpose, and in this case - Jesus'

Yours truly, another mammal

  

On the Superiority of the Naturally Transcendent

On the Superiority of the Naturally Transcendent: How Religious Spirituality Ineffably Limits the Infinite

The false and meretricious offerings of the supernatural are plain when referred to the pursuit of knowledge. The idea that faith and invocations of spirituality retain a monopoly on the euphoric is absurd, and embarrassingly easy to discredit. The false solace of faith renders its adherents ecstatic - at the notion of not being able to question and/or remotely decipher the nature of the Godhead. This admission is obscene, and advocates to not only accept irresistible ignorance, but to revel in it and champion its cause. 

There is a strong tendency for many people to concede the human imagination is limitless - although invigorating and partially true, it is in direct contrast with the preachment of religion. The consolations offered and happiness derived from skepticism are valid and honorable contributions to inquiry. Musing at the fortune and convenience of our presence in the erratic behavior of nature is indescribably more valuable than presupposing one's place as the object of a predetermined divine itinerary. In addition, the simultaneous experience of sobering humility along with the paradoxical corollary of the recognition of the supremacy of human reason and inquiry is nothing short of sublime. This prideful nobility will always supersede the servile ignorance and false modesty attributable to the faithful. There can be no discovery of one's happenstance existence and ancillary invocation of intellectual curiosity, if one adopts a mentality that promotes sufficiency of knowledge and condemns further speculation. 

Their metaphysical claims and backward teachings are dishonest and will forever be the enemy of truth, beauty and wisdom. Rather presumptuously yet indirectly, they discourage appreciation and harmony drawn from the natural realm, lest one be accused of idolatry or paganism. Worship, submission, and credulity fulminate and nurture fear, while demonizing reason and dialectical honesty. The provisions of the supernatural are concocted and false; they will forever be the subordinate offspring of arrogant insularity. The beauty and substance of nature and its indifference to our vitality will always create elegance in thought and written word. To reject this turgid gift is not only a grave error, but inadvertently disrespects the donor. In a cruel irony, the indifference of nature will deprive someone of their growth both physically and intellectually - if you too heavily dispute reality and substitute it with monolithic tales of the spiritual. 

Value nature for what it is and do not take your place in it for granted - as mammals, of course.

Impotent Arguments Against Non-Belief, and Cultural Misconceptions Held by the Faithful: Part 2- A Short Inquiry on Intellectual Honesty

Impotent Arguments Against Non-Belief, and Cultural Misconceptions Held by the Faithful: Part 2- A Short Inquiry on Intellectual Honesty

When I hear theists make remarks about there knowledge of god/s, the fanatic certainty with which they convey their statements makes my gorge rise. On its face, a person would typically consider the arrogation of morality by the faithful to be a more dangerous proposition. However I would argue that their claims (prior to addressing morality) about their justified belief in said figures is equally if not more perilous. In essence, I would submit that the maintenance of intellectual honesty and its affections in reality (as Spinoza would say) may presuppose and supersede any of the ethical qualms in terms of concern. This is simply because people are claiming to know or have justified belief in something that is fundamentally unknowable and undetectable by humans, and then championing the idea as an axiomatic truth that necessitates inclusion in a school science curriculum.There has never been any adequate evidence supplied to warrant the belief in a god, and many of the rationalizations used are full of logical fallacies, contradictions, and superfluous assertions.

 As I am sure many of the non-believers are familiar with, there are arguments made with appeals to cosmology, ontology, and teleology. I will try to address some of the claims that have been made in each of these categories, and in doing so attempt to discredit them. Primarily, there is the 'First Cause" argument that suggests the need for an initiator who set everything into motion. Many believers will make appeals to ideas such as the watchmaker fallacy or ill-considered arguments such as the law of cause and effect. The irony being that in the First Cause argument there is much special pleading, arrogance, and ignorance fallacies occurring. Evidently, one risks being subjected to the infinite regression problem; in which, if one implements the law of cause and effect, one must then demand the origin of a god and his/her creator. Much of the time, the response to said issue is the assertion that a god is immaterial, does not have a creator, and as such terminates need for any further inquiry. Since the scientific method and the balance of empiricism and rationalism is the best pathway to truth that humanity currently has, it follows that this is a necessary tool to examine extraordinary claims. The idea of human beings possessing tangible evidence for an entity that is supposedly "immaterial" (a concept that is at best incoherent) is self-contradictory and absurd. The only evidence we have ever had of anything tangible and testable in the history of reality has been material. We as a species have never encountered anything immaterial, and such an event would violate its own premise. Any time someone demonstrates an item, it by definition is manifested in existence. it is no longer undetectable or supernatural. Many believers will deflect questions regarding the special pleading of infinite regression not applying to a deity by saying that it is ridiculous and incomprehensible for material/the universe/reality to arise from non-existence. In essence, the "Something from nothing" trope. My position along with many other non-believers does not include espousing such an idea, and for good reason. Philosophically, as the Pre-Socratic Parmenides addressed quite well, any efforts to test such a hypothesis are impossible. For if someone were to invoke and label something as nothing to constitute the source from which the test would begin, one would necessarily be introducing something. Nothing and non-existence are abstract concepts and as such are not entities that can be manifested or called upon in reality. In short, there is no way to try to substantiate or evaluate this idea. Therefore, the rational position is to assume that we cannot know or ascribe belief to the position that something can or cannot arise from nothing, and as such it is superfluous and fruitless. In addition, this retort by believers is nothing more than an attempt to jeer non-believers and say that our position is just as absurd as their own. As such, they assume that we are on equal footing, which they do not realize is a grave insult to themselves. The non-believer's position on this matter usually involves the following (most of the time): we do not know the origins of our cosmos for certain. The Big Bang model has proven to be a substantiated and credible theory about the inception of our universe and its expansion thenceforth. As far as I am aware, everything since the occurrence of the Big Bang has been widely considered to be the beginning of the natural realm. This is a sufficient and consistent account, and scientists have yet to derive a hypothesis about any further questions of abiogenesis that qualify as a theory. Ensuing questions include inquiries about what occurred before the Big Bang, or what caused this anomaly to occur. The first concern is definitely better answered by a scientist, and I would assume they would answer with an assertion of non-knowledge. I would attempt to answer this philosophically as best as my meager efforts could muster. The idea of asking what preceded the Big Bang may in fact be an ill-formed and unintelligible question. Seeing as the Big Bang brought about the existence of the natural realm, the implementation of the concept of time to measure reality occurred contemporaneously. It may be nonsensical to include a concept in your question that is necessarily imbued with an aspect of time, when the notion of time only began with the Big Bang. Words such as before, preceding, earlier and others all convey aspects of how we measure time - these may not be so easily applicable or sufficient to press further than their limits. Nonetheless, I do not claim that is an adequate or even consistent response to the question; merely the result of ruminating and some research on the topic. 

The complimentary question to this previous example invokes an entity or force that propelled the Big Bang to take place. This hypothesis has never shown any adequate evidence to be considered testable, and is completely unnecessary. Seeing as the infinite regression motif would inevitably recur here, it does not provide any more insight into the origins of existence. This hypothesis holds no explanatory power and is essentially the attempt to explain a mystery by appealing to a bigger mystery. In addition, it violates Occam's Razor in the notion that the Big Bang is already a sufficient theory to explain existence. Of course we will continue to inquire and seek out answers to satisfy our curiosity and thirst for knowledge, but they will need to be adequate and corroborated ideas that can be measured and can actually provide new information. Finally, with regards to the cause and effect argument, it is paramount to state that it is inconsequential and inconsistent to compare artificially made products with the natural world. In essence, poor attempts at trying to draw comparisons between a building necessarily having a builder, or a car necessarily having someone there to assemble its components, cannot be intelligibly contrasted with nature. It once again incites more insoluble questions than answers, and is not required. 

Other arguments that suggest the fine-tuning of reality are inept and ill-considered. Our universe is not here to work perfectly just to satisfy our desires and needs, and that is demonstrable through the chaotic characteristics of the cosmos. We inhabit a planet that can support life some of the time on some portions of its surface. It is a blatant display of arrogance to suggest that everything is here bearing us in mind, or to suit our necessities. Everyday explosion, implosion, collision and entropy govern the universe. This is demonstrable by means of our technology and surveillance of small pockets of reality. An example of such an instrument would be the results provided from Edwin Hubble's telescope. We happened to have been fortunate enough to not be struck with any astronomical calamity in recent history, but that in no way guarantees or suggests our invincibility or even protection by some magical supervisor and conductor. In paraphrasing Neil De Grasse Tyson, this type of thinking is a result of a species whose lifespan is foolishly glorified and really does not even denote a speck of time on the universal calendar. Pattern seeking in this regard has duped a large number of our brothers and sisters into thinking that everything is designed with us as a central and integral component. Egocentric behavior, entitlement, and special privilege are just a few of the incorrect and harmful conclusions that can be drawn from such a mentality. If religious history is any indicator, there is more than enough proof to validate such an assertion. Something that I fortunately cannot say for anything supernatural proposed by the faithful.

Maintenance of intellectual honesty is a must. So as always, check your purpose - mammals.