Does the universe need intelligence to order it?

[godnotgod]

I don't find the "God" paradigm useful - too much baggage in too many peoples' minds. Dualism is perhaps more useful, but I think these questions are best approached with an open mind as far as possible. So often people start with a position or belief and then try to justify it, rather than just looking carefully.

Well, you're still in the realm of conceptual mind. Not saying that I maintain a belief in a creator-God, but am saying there is, without question, an experience in consciousness/spirituality beyond the conceptual mind.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Well, you're still in the realm of conceptual mind. Not saying that I maintain a belief in a creator-God, but am saying there is, without question, an experience in consciousness/spirituality beyond the conceptual mind.

Of course, I know that from long experience of Buddhist meditation.

 

[godnotgod]

Of course, I know that from long experience of Buddhist meditation.

Does that experience include an intelligent universe, or just an intelligent observer?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Does that experience include an intelligent universe, or just an intelligent observer?

I'm reluctant to start conceptualising a non-conceptual experience, but no, I haven't thought about such experiences in terms of "intelligence".

 

[Revoltingest]

The universe only requires enthalpy and entropy to explain 99.9 % of all that exists, religious argument does not have even the weakest evidence to compete, let alone understand what these terms actualy mean.

As they say.....it's not right; it's not even wrong.

 

[godnotgod]

I'm reluctant to start conceptualising a non-conceptual experience, but no, I haven't thought about such experiences in terms of "intelligence".

If you had the experience, you would know. Concept has nothing to do with it.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

If you had the experience, you would know. Concept has nothing to do with it.

Yes, that's what I said.

 

[godnotgod]

Yes, that's what I said.

So if you understand that concept has nothing to do with the direct experience of Reality, what does that experience tell you about the universe?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So if you understand that concept has nothing to do with the direct experience of Reality, what does that experience tell you about the universe?

Infinite space. How about you?

 

[godnotgod]

Infinite space.

Besides saying that about the universe, is that also your experience?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Besides saying that about the universe, is that also your experience?

As a meditative state - it's a Buddhist thing. So what's your experience? Have you experienced the universe as intelligent?

 

[ginaleanne]

Unfortunately we humans use our intelligence for personal gain not for the greater good. Intelligence is probably going to be our demise.

 

[rrosskopf]

It is like we are living in a world covered with water, and wondering if there was once a flood. What is intelligence? Can it be created, or is it something eternal? That, to me, is the real core of the issue. I define intelligence loosely as the ability to detect patterns, but that seems to oversimplify it. Some patterns are obvious to mankind, but there is no good theory as to why they are obvious. Since we live in a universe where intelligence does exist, it is pointless to ask if the universe needs it. If all the intelligence in the universe came about in an entirely accidental manner, then it should be easy enough to create intelligence purposefully, giving it the best possible environment. But what environment would that be? I no more see a volcanic flue at the bottom of the ocean creating intelligence, than I envision a desert of blowing dust creating intelligence. It does not seem likely that any combination of protons and neutrons would ever create intelligence.

 

[metis]

It is pretty much impossible to know exactly which combination of things produced consciousness and intelligence, therefore any attempt to recreate at this time would definitely be premature. Nor is there any objective evidence that consciousness or intelligence comes from a deity or deities, so I guess we're stuck with many question-marks over our heads. Therefore, to me, "I don't know" is the best option.

 

[Boris56]

Computers can write their own programs now, so you're way behind the times my fellow Tribesman.

 

[Robert.Evans]

It is like we are living in a world covered with water, and wondering if there was once a flood. What is intelligence? Can it be created, or is it something eternal? That, to me, is the real core of the issue. I define intelligence loosely as the ability to detect patterns, but that seems to oversimplify it. Some patterns are obvious to mankind, but there is no good theory as to why they are obvious. Since we live in a universe where intelligence does exist, it is pointless to ask if the universe needs it. If all the intelligence in the universe came about in an entirely accidental manner, then it should be easy enough to create intelligence purposefully, giving it the best possible environment. But what environment would that be? I no more see a volcanic flue at the bottom of the ocean creating intelligence, than I envision a desert of blowing dust creating intelligence. It does not seem likely that any combination of protons and neutrons would ever create intelligence.

Your last line is the best I feel!

 

[Ouroboros]

It does not seem likely that any combination of protons and neutrons would ever create intelligence.

But your body is purely made out of protons, neutrons, and electrons. Carbon is an atom that contains 6 protons and 6 electron (I think it was, and some neutrons too, but I'm not sure how many). And every other atom is made of the same things but different numbers. All these atoms can combine and become molecules. The really complex molecules become things like triglyceride, amino acids, water, etc. All these things together, those are the physical things you have in your body. When a baby is born, he or she is made out of particles and components like these. At first, they're not intelligent at all. Intelligence grows and is also taught (not just automatically given). Kids that are not taught or brought up being challenged mentally, will not be as intelligent as the kids that are. If you bring all these things together, even though the particles don't "create" intelligence alone, they're a fundamental and necessary part of intelligence as we know it. You can't remove the protons and neutrons and retain intelligence without them.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Therefore, to me, "I don't know" is the best option.

It's often the most honest option.

 

[rrosskopf]

Computers can write their own programs now, so you're way behind the times my fellow Tribesman.

They can imitate humans, as long as they have be programmed to imitate humans, but computers don't have genuine intelligence despite my over simplified definition. They are limited to espousing the ideas of their creators, and will never do more than they are programmed to do.

 

[Robert.Evans]

It's often the most honest option.

If you don't know, yes! haha