Comment by Lerc

>Does the full universe need to be causal?

I don't think so for any particular universe.

>otherwise the universe would collapse or be completely different

I'm actually fairly ok with the notion that all things might happen but people are only there to see in in particular configurations.

I still think there can be a why in the sense of relationships between things. That's like the why do fields interact, or why a position in one field is relevant to a position to another. Why is there any form of alignment at all? Why is the relationship persistent or consistent?

Some of those could be "They could have any relationship, but this one make a working universe" I'm not sure how you could show that.

It's actually much easier to accept these things in the simulation hypothesis because then the existence of things having properties is dictated by the simulator, but it just punts the problem to "how does the simulator exist?" and you quickly get to "turtles all the way up"