Does the universe need intelligence to order it?

[Robert.Evans]

Yep. The rest is speculation and wishful thinking.

That is only your opinion.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Nope. Nice try though. Well, sort of. (This is like swatting gnats, lol.)
What I am saying is we do not have enough information to give an informed answer. There is a rather large difference.

Who is we? Science presumably. But there are scientists who say we do, even if it is not accepted by mainstream science.
But it is wrong to say we don't know. What you mean is 'you' don't know. Science has always been confirming scripture, even if it does not understand it nor wish to state it.

 

[YmirGF]

Who is we? Science presumably. But there are scientists who say we do, even if it is not accepted by mainstream science.
But it is wrong to say we don't know. What you mean is 'you' don't know. Science has always been confirming scripture, even if it does not understand it nor wish to state it.

Why do you feel a need to be dishonest?

 

[godnotgod]

If no evidence is available, you have nothing to base statements upon.

I see no reason to suppose that the woo-woo kind of knowledge you are promoting is valid in any way. It looks to me like a typical religious-type scam.

If no evidence can be shown for the Sun existing in Plato's Cave, you have to go topside to take a look for yourself. Not all things leave traces. We still have no factual evidence that consciousness even exists, and yet, all one need do is take note of its presence via consciousness itself to verify its existence.

 

[godnotgod]

Frankly, I've quickly lost interest in discussing this with you as you're simply just playing little games. I'm a scientist who has read a great many articles on the issue of consciousness even though that isn't really my field, and what you're trying to do makes so little sense in regards to the main theme. If you want to believe in a "cosmic consciousness", which you seemingly do, that's fine, but don't pollute science with fabricating all sort of stories to try and make a point that you cannot substantiate in any way.

The bottom line: there is no evidence for any "cosmic consciousness", and no amount of mental gymnastics will change that.

If you had made any progress in your meditation, you would have experienced a subject/object merge in which consciousness and the universe are one and the same. Until you do have such and experience, you will continue to deny a higher state of conscious awareness. The only clue you now have is that there is a shift from dream-sleep to wakefulness. If you don't know you are experiencing even that, then you are simply not present. If you do know that, then you can conceive that a similar shift from current wakefulness to higher states of wakefulness is possible.

Bottom line: higher consciousness is an experience, not something that there is direct factual evidence for, other than the fact that there are definite changes in brain wave activity, primarily a substantial output of alpha waves.

As for what this has to do with an intelligent universe, if consciousness and the universe can be experienced as seamless, then the rest is self-evident.

You seem to have avoided the primary question: how does the material brain contain non-material consciousness? Answer: it can't. Consciousness is non-local.

 

[godnotgod]

The reason it is called the Cosmos is because it has laws and principles which is what physicists and biologist study. The universe is self governed and self destined.

...and that is because it is intelligent. Your scenario is that you, an intelligent creature, emerged from a dead and dumb universe, while stating that it has laws and principles, can govern itself, and has a destiny. That is pretty narrow minded.

 

[godnotgod]

The question was for metis, but since he has bowed out of our discussion I will provide an answer:

You see the sky against the background of consciousness, obviously.

 

[godnotgod]

You're just playing games here as I never made any claim that brain waves are consciousness.


I've already explained this on previous posts.

There simply is no evidence for any kind of "cosmic consciousness"-- period.

You stated that consciousness is energy, like any other energy, and that it is measurable. What you're measuring is not consciousness, but brain wave activity.

Where is the consciousness that you can test and measure? You don't have any! Its just an assumption.

You have not explained how the brain can 'contain' consciousness. That's not possible. Thats like saying a cup can contain 'blueness'.

If you want to experience higher states of consciousness you will need to make more progress in your meditation. Apparently you've not made a breakthrough yet.

 

[godnotgod]

Haha! In the end we will find the answer is nothing...

It is precisely No-thing. There is no evidence for nothing. And yet, Everything comes out of it. Lawrence Krauss even says so.

We cannot prove, via factual evidence, that we are conscious, but only via direct experience. Consciousness is not only intangible and non[material, it is also empty. Out of this absolute emptiness, which is nothing, comes everything. The Big Bang is an event in consciousness. In consciousness, there is no time or space. The BB cannot have occurred in time and space. It can only have occurred in timeless, spaceless consciousness. The universe is a manifestation of pure intelligence. Space-Time is merely a concept.

'The Universe is The Absolute, as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation'
Vivekenda

 

[metis]

The Big Bang is an event in consciousness. In consciousness, there is no time or space. The BB cannot have occurred in time and space. It can only have occurred in timeless, spaceless consciousness. The universe is a manifestation of pure intelligence. Space-Time is merely a concept.

This is what makes so many of your posts so absurd, namely that you take something that is really a belief that you have and then elevate it to the level of a proven fact. How can one discuss much of anything when you make such a ridiculous leap of faith? "Belief" is not the same as "evidence" nor "fact".

 

[savagewind]

Nobody commented on the Royal Flush hand. It is said that extraodinary things happen because certain aspects of the natural world come together just right and cause something new. The odds of a royal flush hand in poker are very high. What are the odds of that in the same 48 hours or so someone related found a card with a question on it what is the highest hand in poker possible? Aren't the odds of that happening astronomical? There was no force causing it except chance. How did it happen? Please explain it and then I think we should be humbled by your greatness.

 

[savagewind]

Nobody commented on the question (except of course commenting with an insult) if you one day discovered you were also pretentious and unintelligible would you cut off the new thing? I'm asking. There is a point to the question. The answer would reveal maybe you have cut it off.

I should redeem myself. Imagine you speak only one language and you end up in a place where nobody speaks it but you. Hearing them communicate would you think "pretentious and unintelligible"?

 

[Looncall]

It is precisely No-thing. There is no evidence for nothing. And yet, Everything comes out of it. Lawrence Krauss even says so.

We cannot prove, via factual evidence, that we are conscious, but only via direct experience. Consciousness is not only intangible and non[material, it is also empty. Out of this absolute emptiness, which is nothing, comes everything. The Big Bang is an event in consciousness. In consciousness, there is no time or space. The BB cannot have occurred in time and space. It can only have occurred in timeless, spaceless consciousness. The universe is a manifestation of pure intelligence. Space-Time is merely a concept.

'The Universe is The Absolute, as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation'
Vivekenda

Word salad. Obfuscatory bafflegab.

I notice you have not yet told us what you think consciousness is, yet you continue to prate about it.

 

[savagewind]

I understand godnotgod and I realize I am on ignore by the loon. Oh fun!

 

[metis]

And what would be the odds 100 years ago that a guy with a screen-name of "metis" would be reading someone's "post" at "Religious Forums" found on the "internet", and that this would be done a little after "7 p.m. e.s.t." on "December 29"?

With trillions upon trillions of sub-particle events happening probably about every second in our universe, lot's can happen.

 

[savagewind]

And what would be the odds 100 years ago that a guy with a screen-name of "metis" would be reading someone's "post" at "Religious Forums" found on the "internet", and that this would be done a little after "7 p.m. e.s.t." on "December 29"?

With trillions upon trillions of sub-particle events happening probably about every second in our universe, lot's can happen.

Yawn. Huh? What is the connection? I need a pattern for it to make sense. I can't see it.

 

[metis]

Yawn. Huh? What is the connection? I need a pattern for it to make sense. I can't see it.

If you can't see a rather logical connection, then I guess there's nothing more that we can discuss on this matter as it should be rather obvious.

 

[savagewind]

If you can't see a rather logical connection, then I guess there's nothing more that we can discuss on this matter as it should be rather obvious.

You didn't post a pair like I did so it is not the same.

 

[savagewind]

If this was the wild west I could shoot you (for cheating) That there in these ( ) is for understandability. OK?

 

[savagewind]

TV just added to the odds. While I am pondering what the hell is going on here on TV comes a commercial advertising The Gambler. Maybe I should buy a lottery ticket?