Does the universe need intelligence to order it?

[Robert.Evans]

"“‎In modern physics, there is no such thing as "nothing." Even in a perfect vacuum, pairs of virtual particles are constantly being created and destroyed. The existence of these particles is no mathematical fiction. Though they cannot be directly observed, the effects they create are quite real. The assumption that they exist leads to predictions that have been confirmed by experiment to a high degree of accuracy.”
― Richard Morris

Trying telling that to L Krauss... he says everything comes from nothing, as others do

 

[Robert.Evans]

They 'exist' against the background of Nothingness. You say they are constantly being created and destroyed, but perhaps it is more that they are constantly being manifested and then not-manifested as 'real'. If they are virtual, they are not actually real, but only behave, for all practical purposes, as real, so 'real', in fact, that their behavior can be so predicted, as you describe.

And if everything comes from sometihng ''virtual''' then everything must be virtual... nothing can be real in the sense that we see it

 

[Robert.Evans]

Your not getting signals beamed into your brain from somewhere else that allows consciousness

Are we sure of this?

 

[godnotgod]

First off we need to make some distinctions. First there is no "delusion itself". There are "delusions" and there is a state that can be described as "delusional" but there is no substance called "delusion". So either people have the wrong idea about reality or they don't.

Yes, and the question is, how we know the difference. If we can distinguish between delusion and non-delusion, there must exist some non-delusional condition by which delusion is determined as such.

As far as dreaming goes its because I can witness other people dreaming. We have an understanding of dreams.

Yes, but how do you yourself know you've been dreaming, since the dream is real to you while dreaming?

This higher conciousness has no such thing.

How so?

The nature of the mind is an open ended question. What exactly do you want to know?

My question about the mind was in response to your statement, which asks:

'How does one know that this "higher state" isn't just an illusion made by the mind?'

So I was asking what you mean by 'mind'?

 

[godnotgod]

Look at it this way like a computer analogy. The brain is the hardware and the workings of the brain is the software programs that creates consciousness and the computer is plugged into electricity. In the case of the brain is chemical and electrical signals and neurons communicating to each other.

If, as you say, ' the brain is the hardware and the workings of the brain is the software programs',
that must mean that the software is created by the hardware. Is that what you're saying?

A computer and a brain has consciousness via software? How so? In a computer, the software, or set of commands, are created by conscious humans.

'The computer is plugged into electricity': So according to this analogy, the brain is plugged into...what? Itself?

'chemical and electrical signals and neurons communicating to each other' is consciousness? That's a leap.

When you are an infant, your brain receives signals from the outside world, like from parents and others. The only 'software' I know of that the baby comes pre-equipped with, other than it's autonomic functions, is it's already built in knowledge of the game of Peek a Boo. The rest of its social indoctrination, or software, comes to it from its social interractions. But consciousness is already there, at birth.

 

[godnotgod]

And if everything comes from sometihng ''virtual''' then everything must be virtual... nothing can be real in the sense that we see it

And if everything is a virtual reality, it points to a consciousness that is creating it as such.

We have been asking: 'how does the material brain create non-material consciousness?', when perhaps we should be asking: 'how does virtual reality create the appearance of material reality, and why?' IOW, there seems to be a deliberate creation of illusion. We usually call such activity 'magic', or perhaps 'play' of some sort.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

With difficulty, they abandoned God. Now they latch on to 'higher consciousness'.

Yes, the neurotic clutching at metaphysical straws, and the missing of beautiful moments.

Better to watch waves breaking.

 

[Robert.Evans]

And if everything is a virtual reality, it points to a consciousness that is creating it as such.

We have been asking: 'how does the material brain create non-material consciousness?', when perhaps we should be asking: 'how does virtual reality create the appearance of material reality, and why?' IOW, there seems to be a deliberate creation of illusion. We usually call such activity 'magic', or perhaps 'play' of some sort.

Hmmm..... it's kinda interesting I think, considering so far science is speaking of the universe coming from particles that don't really exist, or don't exist the in the way we think of them. Which again, makes one wonder exactly what everything is. How can it be 'real' if it comes from something not real?

I agree with you that it is strange to think that matter, the material mind makes consciousness. I think everything is explained far better by saying it comes from consciousness. Of course, perhaps if we could take it back far enough, we might find it does not come from consciousness as an ultimate, but certainly from where we stand in the grand scale of things, it seems to make more sense that consciousness is first. It appears though that consciousness needs something to reside in though, such as a brain. So how does it reside outside of a brain? Any ideas?

 

[Aupmanyav]

And if everything comes from sometihng ''virtual''' then everything must be virtual... nothing can be real in the sense that we see it

Yes, that is one option (and perhaps the better option). Because if we say that something is eternal, we are confronted with the question - how did it arise? Let us see what future tells us.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The only 'software' I know of that the baby comes pre-equipped with, other than it's autonomic functions, is it's already built in knowledge of the game of Peek a Boo. The rest of its social indoctrination, or software, comes to it from its social interractions. But consciousness is already there, at birth.

Consciousness, the feeling of 'me', is created in the womb by position of the fetus; light, sound that filters through the flesh. Some sensations are pleasant, some are not. Some is reflex action, the rest is learned through experiences.

 

[Aupmanyav]

'how does virtual reality create the appearance of material reality, and why?' IOW, there seems to be a deliberate creation of illusion. We usually call such activity 'magic', or perhaps 'play' of some sort.

IMHO, the best answer is provided by 'Samkhya' Darshana (philosophy) of Hinduism. It says 'the result is inherent in the cause'. If there is 'nothing', then there will be virtual particles. If there are virtual particles, then mass will appear. If there is mass, various elements will be produced. If there are various elements, then molecules will arise. If there are molecules, then the universe (as we perceive it) will be there.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Consciousness, the feeling of 'me', is created in the womb by position of the fetus; light, sound that filters through the flesh. Some sensations are pleasant, some are not. Some is reflex action, the rest is learned through experiences.

Yes, consciousness appears very much tied to an individual life, and while we can speculate that consciousness is non-local there is really no evidence to support this idea.

 

[godnotgod]

IMHO, the best answer is provided by 'Samkhya' Darshana (philosophy) of Hinduism. It says 'the result is inherent in the cause'. If there is 'nothing', then there will be virtual particles. If there are virtual particles, then mass will appear. If there is mass, various elements will be produced. If there are various elements, then molecules will arise. If there are molecules, then the universe (as we perceive it) will be there.

This is very linear, and ignores that everything arises interdependently and simultaneously. Why not just cut to the chase and say: 'Because there is Nothing, there is Everything' ?, the potential for Everything already being inherently complete in Nothing, just as light potential is already inherently complete in the light bulb, the switch, and a source of power.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

If there are virtual particles, then mass will appear. If there is mass, various elements will be produced. If there are various elements, then molecules will arise. If there are molecules, then the universe (as we perceive it) will be there.

Clearly there is mass, and I think that the introduction of quantum mechanics into this discussion is a major red herring.

 

[psychoslice]

Every man for himself!

As long as its for himself, and not some belief system.

 

[Thief]

As long as its for himself, and not some belief system.

but.....your ARE your beliefs.....or lack thereof....

 

[psychoslice]

The universe is its own intelligence, of course, just look at the way it expresses itself, its a marvel, its all consciousness in its own making.

 

[psychoslice]

but.....your ARE your beliefs.....or lack thereof....

I myself don't have beliefs, I don't need them, I live each day as it is, why have beliefs, they only hold you back fro your own, inner being, and that is what you are, not a belief.

 

[Thief]

The universe is its own intelligence, of course, just look at the way it expresses itself, its a marvel, its all consciousness in its own making.

so you see yourself AS part of the ...'one word'....?

 

[Thief]

I myself don't have beliefs, I don't need them, I live each day as it is, why have beliefs, they only hold you back fro your own, inner being, and that is what you are, not a belief.

now you sound like GNG....