The misleading size of the cosmos, our place in it, the origin of existence, etc
Arguing against the intuition that life's centrality should somehow result in the cosmos being spatially arranged so as to reflect that.
When we talk of the material world being much larger than us, this usually involves conceptual confusion. When talking about size, we are talking about differentiated loci—quantised segments of existence—being added together into a lump sum. These differentiated loci summed together do not become a unified entity unless cohered together in a genuinely unified format, e.g. in a consciousness or indeed as consciousness, or e.g. in an observational frame whose extent and boundaries are arbitrarily determined.
From the first-person (i.e. in-itself) perspective, any given location in the universe is the centre of the universe (that is, in a literal geometric sense), and its own existence is the largest conceivable domain. In what way could my consciousness be spatially larger than someone else’s? It’s a maximally large circle of experience no matter who or what it is. The globe of experience itself is without spatial dimension.
From the first-person perspective, we are always the centre of the universe (hence any measurement of cosmic background radiation in the universe shows the observer at the centre of the observable universe). Every other location experiences it this way too. There is a radical principle of equivalence in terms of locatedness, similar in spirit Galilean invariance and Einstein’s equivalence principle.