I think the pattern of what we know of creation as an expansion forming greater complexity and organization supports the premise of greater life as the measure of good.
I don't understand what you're getting at here -- can you please elaborate?
Roughly, it just supports my understanding of Objectivism that places man’s happiness (happiness defined as productive achievement) as a rational being as his highest moral value.
The question by theists is often then, “Why man?” or “Why life”. Rand (the fonder of Objectivist philosophy) handles the first question in "The Virtues of Selfishness”, describing his evolution from earlier life forms as a progression toward greatness through a variety of measures and dependent upon his unique abilities and needs. But AFAIK, the “why life” question isn’t addressed directly, leaving theists to claim that it’s arbitrary or borrowed from God and religion.
But I believe the pattern of universal development exemplifies (perhaps even dictates) the movement toward greater life, with man at its pinnacle, and supports any rational belief that promotion of life is at the foundation of any moral hierarchy defining what is “good”.
"I don't understand what you're getting at here -- can you please elaborate?"
Let me help you out.
A sentence is not necessarily a proposition and a run on sentence is never a coherent sentence.
A subject connected by a verb to a relevent object plus a few commas would have helped.