Does the universe need intelligence to order it?

[godnotgod]

Not only isn't it really compelling, it really is nonsensical, and for at least two reasons:

1.there's no way one can in reality experience "cosmic consciousness" unless one traveled throughout the cosmos and saw everything, and...

That's quite a juvenile take on what cosmic consciousness is. Haven't you been paying attention, or should we now go by your personal myopic view of what CC is?

2.if such a "consciousness" were to supposedly exist, then why isn't it detectable within inorganic matter?

Because your conditioning is so hard wired in that you don't realize you are looking at everything via of that conditioning. You're in a bubble.

As you well know, it's simply a belief system that some elevate to a slam-dunk fact, and the "experiential" argument simply falls flat on its face.

If it could only be dismissed so readily; but the fact is that it has deeper roots than rational thought and science. 4000 years deeper.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

We're still waiting to hear about your personal experience of cosmic consciousness.

 

[godnotgod]

I know, really. *sigh* This is why, from my OWN experience of this state of consciousness, it only seems "cosmic" in contrast to the perspective of ordinary consciousness. In no other way is it actually "cosmic". It's just expanded awareness. Again, there is no reason to get all goofy over it and suggest it is more than it is. It is also my suggestion that anyone who is clinging to the idea of so-called "cosmic consciousness" hasn't actually experienced the state to much degree.

If they did, they would, quite naturally, move beyond it... back to consciousness - with a small "c".

See?

Nope. They would stay on that elevated level with their feet still planted squarely on terra firma. Realize at least that the Earth is a beautiful blue green celestial body floating effortlessly in the heavens. What does occur is the realization that the Ordinary is no different than the Miraculous.

 

[LuisDantas]

Too harsh I think. He is doing a good job, you just don't understnad it. It does not mean he doesn't.

I hope you are kidding.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

What does occur is the realization that the Ordinary is no different than the Miraculous.

We are still waiting to hear about your personal experience of cosmic consciousness. Please don't keep us waiting any longer!

 

[godnotgod]

Even after a good horse whipping, we go back to peeling the potatoes...or sweeping the floor....or washing the dishes.....

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Right. So you haven't really had an experience at all then. OK, so now we know.

Back to the topic then!

 

[godnotgod]

You really do have an abysmal view of the plight of the human condition for an enlightened being. Your contempt for your fellow human animals is almost palpable.

To a great degree, modern man has lost touch with the impulse of the natural world and of his own nature. Much of his attention is directed outwards, but not to nature and the universe directly, but to technology that can control nature to fit his own demands. Nature has become just so many chemical reactions and patterns that can be manipulated. This is true in both religion and science. The world is seen as either dead artifact or resource to be manipulated and exploited. More and more, the materialists even see man this way. Even consciousness doesn't exist except as a by product of the material brain. Science sees the universe as a mechanism. What is abysmal is this materialist view of life, not man's true nature. It is man's true nature that needs awakening to the fact that his ego is taking him in the direction of his own destruction.

But yes, man's current condition is quite abysmal, sugar coated though it be.

 

[YmirGF]

Nope. They would stay on that elevated level with their feet still planted squarely on terra firma. Realize at least that the Earth is a beautiful blue green celestial body floating effortlessly in the heavens. What does occur is the realization that the Ordinary is no different than the Miraculous.

So, what happened in your case?

 

[YmirGF]

Even after a good horse whipping, we go back to peeling the potatoes...or sweeping the floor....or washing the dishes.....

and asking godnotgod to let us enter his pristine experience of the sublime nature of Absolute Reality...

 

[YmirGF]

What is abysmal is this materialist view of life, not man's true nature. It is man's true nature that needs awakening to the fact that his ego is taking him in the direction of his own destruction.

Oddly, I don't sense an iota of compassion in your words. Not even enough to sustain the faith of a mustard seed.

 

[godnotgod]

This could be settled so easily if godnotgod simply wrote of his vast array of experiences that led him down the rabbit hold of understanding. At least we would have some kind of evidence that he actually knows what he is talking about. Having had enough inner experience to satisfy a small village of human animals, I take umbrage with his somewhat superficial views and call him on them. Likewise, his penchant for quoting questionable sources like Chopra, Goswami, Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh 2.0, and on and on really defeats his own assertions. To get around this he tries to warp the understanding of others to conform to his thinking. A fascinating case-study in denial, if anything else.

If some human animals think I am being too critical of their little hero, that I am mocking the finger pointing at the moon, while ignoring said celestial body, then perhaps godnotgod should offer his unblemished vision of said moon and drop the pretenses.

As I said before, I've written a significant amount about my own experiences on RF over that last 10 years and know that it is not hard to do so, though it does apparently take some courage and honesty. Equally apparently, as far as godnotgod is concerned, it IS too much to ask. He'd much rather prefer to be the pointing finger rather than dazzle us with his first hand accounts of what the moon was like.

The saltiness of the sea is the same everywhere. So when someone points to the moon, if you are attentive, you will see exactly what the person pointing is seeing as well. The moment you begin to question the pointing finger or think about the moon, you will have missed seeing.

 

[godnotgod]

and asking godnotgod to let us enter his pristine experience of the sublime nature of Absolute Reality...

You're in the same Reality as I. Why are you looking over my shoulder?

You're still hung up on the pointing finger.

 

[godnotgod]

Oddly, I don't sense an iota of compassion in your words. Not even enough to sustain the faith of a mustard seed.

Do you want some candy?

 

[godnotgod]

But Buddhist dharma is not exempt from jumping to conclusions, but what I do admire about it is that one is to test dharma "by fire", according to the Buddha, and not just automatically accept a teaching. Matter of fact, HHDL has on many occasions stated that if a teaching conflicts with science, go with science as many things are better understood today than they were 2000+ years ago.

I agree with HHDL. The factual knowledge derived via modern science is far superior to how man thought of the world long ago. But what men who went beyond factual knowledge saw then compared to today is the same. Why should the nature of Reality change just because situations change and evolve?

 

[godnotgod]

I think I can safely say that I'm not making things up as you've been on a "cosmic consciousness" sell job for quite a while.

As I said many times before, it is like a bubbling mountain spring: stop and partake of its refreshing waters or simply move on. The bubbling spring doesn't care; it just keeps on bubbling forth.

All I have been trying to do is to show a connection between man's consciousness and that of the universe as per the topic.

 

[godnotgod]

So, what happened in your case?

The Ordinary and the Miraculous are one and the same.

 

[Midnight Rain]

I guess you missed this previous post, esp what it says of the Higgs boson:

It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

• New Scientist November 2008 by Stephen Battersby

Matter is built on flaky foundations. Physicists have now confirmed that the apparently substantial stuff is actually no more than fluctuations in the quantum vacuum.

The researchers simulated the frantic activity that goes on inside protons and neutrons. These particles provide almost all the mass of ordinary matter.

Each proton (or neutron) is made of three quarks - but the individual masses of these quarks only add up to about 1% of the proton's mass. So what accounts for the rest of it?

Theory says it is created by the force that binds quarks together, called the strong nuclear force. In quantum terms, the strong force is carried by a field of virtual particles called gluons, randomly popping into existence and disappearing again. The energy of these vacuum fluctuations has to be included in the total mass of the proton and neutron.,,,,

,,,,The Higgs field is also thought to make a small contribution, giving mass to individual quarks as well as to electrons and some other particles. The Higgs field creates mass out of the quantum vacuum too, in the form of virtual Higgs bosons. So if the LHC confirms that the Higgs exists, it will mean all reality is virtual.

It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations - physics-math - 20 November 2008 - New Scientist

'physical-ness' is in your head.

This isn't new. Mass is made from energy. This has been known since E=MC^2. We now just understand in what form.

The higgs itself is absolutely required for mass to happen however. You can have plenty of energy and no mass but to specifically have mass you need the higgs field.

And the way we know this is in the standard model there has been developed a number of different theoretical equations (many confirmed. In fact with the higgs boson it is almost all confirmed) but there was a fundamental problem. Without the higgs there was no way to assign mass to any of the objects except with adding in the higgs portion to the equation. Then suddenly the math works out.

The Higgs field is what really would be the functional term for what it is that allows for this to happen. The Higgs Boson would be a particle derived from it under experimental collisions. However the standard model still doesn't explain a number of things. One of the chiefest would be gravity for example and strange as it sounds as it is very much connected in every level we experience it, gravity and mass are not the same.

In that article from 2008 (wow seven years ago I can't believe its been that long) it was one of the first steps to understanding "how" matter is energy rather than discovering that it is.

Now I used the term "physical-ness" because I thought it would be the easiest to understand. Matter for example is more or less simply the ability for particles to be "still" or hold defined positions for extended periods of time. That is what gives us velocity and all these great physical properties found in Newton and Einstein's work. Without this "physical-ness" we would all be moving the speed of light with little interaction at all times. So at least in the way that I used the term it is very much "not" in my head.

Please see this post: Does the universe need intelligence to order it? | Page 101 | ReligiousForums.com

The specific properties and qualities are not universal, but the consciousness behind all properties and qualities is. The mistake we make is to assign consciousness to ourselves as a distinct "I" or self, ie 'my' consciousness. This is known as Identification. It is an illusion. You only think yourself to be an isolated pocket, but that is your delusion. If you think otherwise, then show me where this pocket called "I" exists, and while you are doing that, pay attention to who it is that is trying to do so. You see? 'I' is trying to find 'I', both of which are being observed by yet a third 'I'. It gets worse.

I exist as a defined portion of the universe. It doesn't mean that I am not part of a whole. It also doesn't mean the fact that "I" am conscious would translate to universal consciousness. No more than the temperature of my body is a universal quality of some universal temperature.

So I still don't get what you mean here about saying "I" do not exist. "I" in the larger sense am one with the universe but I still understand that I am distinctly different than something else. I am a system of energy following guidelines that has sentience. Sort of like a slinky falling down the steps.

 

[Thief]

Agreed. It's really shameless self-promotion of a very superficial "members only" vision of reality and one that is not terribly compelling either.

Much like standing at the Door and the sign says.....Members Only....
gotta have a card to get inside?

 

[Thief]

You're in the same Reality as I. Why are you looking over my shoulder?

You're still hung up on the pointing finger.

a statement dealt in hypocrisy