Not to sound geocentric, but how does it follow that because we are surrounded by astronomical amounts of inanimate matter that who we are or what we do is unimportant? I've never actually heard an explanation of this. You could just as easily argue that because self-aware beings exists in only one location in all of existence, that they are incredible rare and thus, more important than most anything else.
"We are a way for the cosmos to know itself." - Carl Sagan
What if the elemental nature of the universe was data and not matter?
I've had the thought before that the human mind is like a universe on top of the universe. Same could be said for the programming that runs on computers. Both are capable of simulating other realities that are governed by their own rules.
You're an infinitesimal insect on an infinitesimal speck of dirt in an infinitesimal, insignificant galaxy.
Your woo-woo "spirituality" doesn't mean dickshit.
By this logic, nothing
we do or value matters. Reductionism makes the world meaningless again, wonderful.
I don't think romanticism or spirituality (the romanticizing of religion) was ever meant to exist on it's own. The point is to motivate one to pursue certain goals or values by making them seem more important than they are objectively. In an attempt to be objective and logical, everything we value becomes meaningless and everything we do becomes purposeless, since it has no meaning.
Tintinnabulation [one of his compositional methods] is an area I sometimes wander into when I am searching for answers - in my life, my music, my work. In my dark hours, I have the certain feeling that everything outside this one thing has no meaning.
I'm not a big Arvo Pärt fan, but this struck accord with me, because I do the same thing. When focusing on my work (in my profession or in my music), I imagine during that duration that it could be monumental in it's importance and it encourages me to reach beyond mediocrity in that field. If I thought in terms of the OP statement, what we do is irrelevant, even living. That mentality hardly fosters greatness.
Spirituality, in any form, comes into play with the realization that religions are philosophies. Even taking part in the rituals, it is supposed to impress the values of that philosophy into the adherent with the vast importance of the values and beliefs. Some matter more than others
But while we are talking about it anyway, a real religious man will not take your universe theory seriously. He will say that your science is another aethiest trick to damage one's faith and drag them down to the pits of Hell. He is not designed to listen to you. He is not designed to take it into consideration. He is not even designed to understand what "the cosmos" even are.
The current concept of god that most people have can neither be proven nor disproven. I still don't think belief or action based on that belief is legitimate, but you're not saving them by pointing that out. These people are going to be irrational either way. I really don't care what they believe so long as we can keep them from forming mobs and burning down museums. Pissing them off is only going to cause bigger problems. That's why I keep talking about letting the idea evolve so we can make a smooth transition. When you take away people's motivation, they become... well... unmotivated and aren't interested in doing anything or being good people.
It has always been clear to me that this isn't actually about god. Most athiest crusaders are out so show there is no god as a way of invalidating the believer's value system, just as the believers use pseudo-science and other half-conceived theories to show there is a god, thus validating their beliefs. But it doesn't matter if one proves anything to the other. It's the validity of the value systems that matter. We have two sides arguing over an exoteric symbol - whose actual existence is a moot point. Seems pretty stupid to me.