A Universe from Nothing?

[ChristineM]

Yes, I find your attraction to it to be quite fascinating.

So how long have you suffered from sexual repression?

The content of the information must be identified in order to 'make sense' out of it prior to processing. But even before that, the existence of any information is present because it is slated to fulfill some function down the road. 'Something' must know that beforehand. DNA is a good example. Consciousness codes and stores such information for readily available processing. Consciousness creates brain matter as a means for storage of certain autonomic functions that can go on in the background automatically, so consciousness can focus on what is immediate and up front, such as a tiger about to spring from the bushes. If consciousness had to deal with heart beat, breath control, digestion, etc up front, it would lose its focus on what is immediately at hand.

So you are still masturbating and pointing schoolyard fingers

And masturbating to irrelevant waffle by the looks of your post once again you are jumping for faith without actually giving an explanation other than "something"

 

[ChristineM]

mmmmm.....no....I never mentioned it at all. T'was thee and Poly that tossed out the first ball of dung, which became bigger and bigger as it rolled downhill. All I ever said was that the universe was prolific. Poly could not resist his childish tendencies and now you and he are wallowing in the quagmire, while I sit up here on the hill LMAO.

I have provided the posts that show you childishness so don't be untruthful, it reflects badly on your faith it maskers you look silly

 

[ChristineM]

Are you deaf?

Last time:

THE ANALOGY IS NOT...I REPEAT...NOT..BETWEEN TWO THINGS CALLED BRAIN AND TV; IT IS BETWEEN THE WAY THEY RECEIVE INFORMATION, THAT BEING AN EXTERNAL NON-LOCAL SOURCE.

Look at the graph I posted. What do you see that is obvious beyond any doubt?

And i will repeat for the shouty christian who cant stand to be shown his errors

Wtf did you post a vid and link and claiming otherwise?

 

[gnostic]

Consciousness has form? Where?

Consciousness and intelligence applied to the universe does not mean to apply a human form to the universe. You are assuming/extrapolating way too much. Anthropomorphic simply means to project human form and characteristics onto something non-human.

an·thro·po·mor·phic
ˌanTHrəpəˈmôrfik/
adjective

1. relating to or characterized by anthropomorphism.
   • having human characteristics.
     "anthropomorphic bears and monkeys"

I said the universe was conscious and intelligent; not that it was an antrhopomorphic intelligence. You are the one projecting something onto what I am saying that is simply not there.

Actually, you don't even understand the definition you have quoted.

It state having "human characteristics", but that doesn't necessarily mean physical characteristics.

The characteristics can be personality, like having human emotion or trait or qualities (eg anger, love, jealousy) or human intelligence.

Also it is not necessarily given characteristics to animals; it could be given to any object, like the sun, moon, trees, crops, rivers, sea, etc.

Endowing the universe with intelligence or consciousness, is putting those human qualities to the universe. The universe is non-human, just as the stars and moon are.

 

[godnotgod]

Irrelevant to saying where the process is located.

Human input is part of the process, without which there is no process. But my question is not about the process, but about the condition within which the process occurs. That condition for a computer would be electrical current, which, like the program the computer runs, is from an external source.

 

[godnotgod]

Only minds are conscious.

But, you see, consciousness precedes mind, and it is consciousness I am asking about. Where does it leave off and the unconscious external world begin? The only thing that makes consciousness a local phenomenon is the self-created idea of self, or 'I'. Without 'I', there is nothing to confine it to the skull.

 

[godnotgod]

In that interpretation, all matter, energy, and space are in the universe. I often extend that to time also. So, no, in that case, the universe is NOT a vessel.

Uh, excuse me, but to say that all things are IN the universe tells us that the universe contains them, as in container, as in 'vessel'.

 

[godnotgod]

Huh? Yes, almost everyone masturbates. I'm not ashamed of doing so. I also have sex with my wife.

You described the universe as a deity playing games with itself. That's why I described it as masturbatory. You seemed to think that was a discredit.

Now, I do think the scenario is rather silly, but not because of the masturbation aspect.




Wrong. Here, the information produced concerns at last the size of the ball and potentially how fast it was going.

If the window was then shattered, but in such a way that it could be reconstructed, then the information was changed (processed).

This gets back to the tree falling in the forest riddle.

There is no information without consciousness that understands it as the information that it is.

No, I did not describe the universe as any such deity. I described it as Pure Abstract Intelligence, playing itself as 'The Universe' in all its myriad forms. You have it backwards, with unconscious materiality playing itself as conscious form, but only in a few cases, a hypothesis you cannot explain.

Delight in a universe filled with infinite variety and color is not masturbation. Get over it already.

 

[Polymath257]

But, you see, consciousness precedes mind, and it is consciousness I am asking about. Where does it leave off and the unconscious external world begin? The only thing that makes consciousness a local phenomenon is the self-created idea of self, or 'I'. Without 'I', there is nothing to confine it to the skull.

I disagree that consciousness precedes mind. In fact, it is clear to me that consciousness could not happen without a mind.

 

[Polymath257]

Uh, excuse me, but to say that all things are IN the universe tells us that the universe contains them, as in container, as in 'vessel'.

Nope. Being part of is another way to be in.

 

[godnotgod]

Actually, you don't even understand the definition you have quoted.

It state having "human characteristics", but that doesn't necessarily mean physical characteristics.

The characteristics can be personality, like having human emotion or trait or qualities (eg anger, love, jealousy) or human intelligence.

Also it is not necessarily given characteristics to animals; it could be given to any object, like the sun, moon, trees, crops, rivers, sea, etc.

Endowing the universe with intelligence or consciousness, is putting those human qualities to the universe. The universe is non-human, just as the stars and moon are.

...and yet, intelligent humans grow out of the universe, in exactly the same way that oranges grow out of orange trees. One might say that the universe is peopling people. In fact, that is exactly what it is doing. You are a total action of the universe, and not the other way around, just as the wave is a total action of the ocean.

You have it backwards. It is not that the universe is being endowed with human intelligence, but that human intelligence is a direct reflection of the intelligence of the universe. The universe came first, and out of an intelligent universe came intelligent life.

An ocean wave is none other than the ocean itself, just as you are none other than the universe itself. There is nothing, except your own mind, which makes a distinction between yourself and the universe from which you emerged. The mind is in error.

 

[godnotgod]

I disagree that consciousness precedes mind. In fact, it is clear to me that consciousness could not happen without a mind.

So are you saying that mind creates consciousness?

 

[Polymath257]

Human input is part of the process, without which there is no process. But my question is not about the process, but about the condition within which the process occurs. That condition for a computer would be electrical current, which, like the program the computer runs, is from an external source.

And the condition for life is the intake of food or some other source of energy (like light for photosynthesis).

 

[Polymath257]

This gets back to the tree falling in the forest riddle.

There is no information without consciousness that understands it as the information that it is.

I disagree. For example, a fossil contains information about the organism that it is derived from. It tells about the skeletal structure, often about diseases, etc. But the fossil existed and contained that information long before there were humans to interpret it.

No, I did not describe the universe as any such deity. I described it as Pure Abstract Intelligence, playing itself as 'The Universe' in all its myriad forms. You have it backwards, with unconscious materiality playing itself as conscious form, but only in a few cases, a hypothesis you cannot explain.

Delight in a universe filled with infinite variety and color is not masturbation. Get over it already.

That abstract intelligence is thereby playing with itself. I see no relevant difference.

 

[godnotgod]

Nope. Being part of is another way to be in.

Except that when we look, we see that we are not part of the universe at all. There are no such parts. We are seamless outgrowths of the universe, like a wave is seamlessly the ocean itself. The universe is not a machine with separate parts that can be removed. So we are not something IN the universe; we are the universe itself. Only the mind wants to create a separation called 'part'. It is an illusion.

 

[Polymath257]

So are you saying that mind creates consciousness?

Not all minds. But some do.

 

[Polymath257]

Except that when we look, we see that we are not part of the universe at all. There are no such parts. We are seamless outgrowths of the universe, like a wave is seamlessly the ocean itself. The universe is not a machine with separate parts that can be removed. So we are not something IN the universe; we are the universe itself. Only the mind wants to create a separation called 'part'. It is an illusion.

Yes, we are part of the universe, subject to the physical laws and a product of the physics and chemistry of the universe.

Yes, the universe has parts. It isn't 'seamless' in the sense you are wanting.

 

[godnotgod]

And the condition for life is the intake of food or some other source of energy (like light for photosynthesis).

...along with information and consciousness. In fact, food is information, isn't it?

 

[godnotgod]

Not all minds. But some do.

But musn't minds first be conscious in order to function as minds?

 

[Polymath257]

...along with information and consciousness. In fact, food is information, isn't it?

Well, it is causally connected to its origin. But it isn't the information that we consume with food.

/E: Consciousness isn't required of our food.