"The beauty of life though, is that we'll all eventually find out if there is or isn't a purpose"
Do we? How can you know that?
If, lets say hypothetically, you're right, where's the beauty in that?
why then hasn't the intelligence (if it's interested in the continuation of life) found the most efficient way to produce life?
there's no intelligence here, just evolution. there are so many other things wrong with humans, why would it get reproduction completely optimized too??
deciding that there's a god just on this basis is retarded
The beauty of life though, is that we'll all eventually find out if there is or isn't a purpose, no matter how smart you are, or good at life, or how long you'd rather sweep these ideas under the rug, we all die. And at the very least, there's a 50/50 shot. And to go all in on there not being something, seems like a pretty unintelligent bet.
The beauty is in truth. I've spent enough time bouncing back and forth between views and studying the idea of whether there is a God or isn't, that I've come to the conclusion that there is more likely something beyond this existence. And the beauty, at least in my eyes, is finding out if that's true or not.
I had a thought that gave me some kinda insight into life and it's potential underlying purpose. Why does sex feel good? Why is it that the one place that produces life feels best when touched (and combined with the opposite sex's best feeling spot)? This observation, that there's an area that feels great and that area happens to be the area that creates life, suggests that within life, there is an ingrained intelligence, and the intelligence is there to give humans (and animals) the desire and incentive to have sex. And what results from combining these good feeling areas? Offspring. So, this then suggests that the underlying intelligence that makes these particular areas feel good and the urges we have to indulge in sex, exists within life to promote the continuation of life. So, and this is the important part. IF the intelligence is interested in the continuation of life, which the one area on a man that produces life feels the best when put inside the one area on a woman that produces life and also feels the best, suggests- why then hasn't the intelligence (if it's interested in the continuation of life) found the most efficient way to produce life? And create something like a human that produces life asexually? I think that there seems to be an intelligence interested in continuing life, yet hasn't created this efficient way of doing so, suggests the possible underlying purpose of life, which is choice. The intelligence hasn't created this asexual being because it is programmed not to, because life is about choice. Meaning that it suggests potential of something that programmed this, call it God, higher power, etc... I'd like to hear your thoughts.
"Why is it that the one place that produces life feels best when touched"
Because those born without that trait likely found less reason to reproduce. Survival of the Fittest.
"(and combined with the opposite sex's best feeling spot)?"
Gay/Lesbian/Asexual/Bicurious/Experimental types might have a thing or two to say against that.
"This observation, that there's an area that feels great and that area happens to be the area that creates life, suggests that within life, there is an ingrained intelligence, and the intelligence is there to give humans (and animals) the desire and incentive to have sex."
How does this suggest that at all? If a species or variation within a species lacks the desire to procreate, their genetic line potential dies. That's not an intelligence, that's simple cause and effect. It's meaningless beyond continuing it's own collective existence.
Check the film Idiocracy sometime.
"why then hasn't the intelligence (if it's interested in the continuation of life) found the most efficient way to produce life? And create something like a human that produces life asexually?"
Asexual reproduction has a good deal of flaws. Through the co-mingling of genes, two parents can produce variations within the species that can allow for higher chances of adaptation for the species as a whole. Asexual reproduction meanwhile tends to only produce near-identical clones of the parent, meaning if the environment were to shift, through the lack of variability, the survival odds drop significantly.
This is just more science stuff, they teach all of this in school.
"I think that there seems to be an intelligence interested in continuing life, yet hasn't created this efficient way of doing so, suggests the possible underlying purpose of life, which is choice."
Choice is an illusion, and other species of animal lack (the belief of) it far more than we do, and plants lack even more yet still go on just fine. It's the result of us looking at ourselves and giving ourselves far too much credit over the actions we end up following through, when really what we have done, do, and will do, are the byproduct of every action that has transpired before us like a long series of dominoes. It's raw ego that serves to give us a reason to go on despite the burden of being aware of constructs such as perspective taking and time.
If "Choice" is the purpose of life, then why do so few species possess the means? What keeps life alive are the autopilots, the failsafes, the traits that carried over instead of dying out when reproductive priorities were put to the test as environmental challenges presented themselves. This isn't "choice", it's just existing.
"Meaning that it suggests potential of something that programmed this, call it God, higher power, etc... I'd like to hear your thoughts."
I see no suggestion of The Divine here.