Does the universe need intelligence to order it?

[godnotgod]

'The entire universe is a matter of transformation whereby something is available to be turned into perception. We’ve proposed that consciousness is that something—if there’s another candidate, we’re not aware of one that can pass the acid test: Make it turn into thoughts, feelings, images, and sensations. Science isn’t remotely close to turning the sugar in a sugar bowl into the music of Mozart or the plays of Shakespeare. Randomness will not give you any of that. Your brain converts blood sugar into words and music, not by some trick of the molecules in the brain, since they are in no way special or privileged. Rather, your consciousness is using the brain as a processing device, moving the molecules where they are needed in order to create the sight, sound, touch, taste, and smell of the world.'

What is Cosmic Consciousness? | The Chopra Center

 

[Monk Of Reason]

As I said, it's not a matter of belief or opinion. It's not that I 'believe' it and you don't; it's that your experience does not yet include it. All I am trying to do is to provide some information that can be used by the intuitive mind which point to cosmic consciousness. Of course, no one can describe the experience itself.

No one can, including those that have experienced it, provide evidence that it was not all in their head. As a subjective case it can't be supported by evidence which makes it tricky to argue for without sounding like a bag full of hot air.

 

[metis]

As I said, it's not a matter of belief or opinion. It's not that I 'believe' it and you don't; it's that your experience does not yet include it. All I am trying to do is to provide some information that can be used by the intuitive mind which point to cosmic consciousness. Of course, no one can describe the experience itself.

So, what you are in essence saying is that a belief in "cosmic consciousness" and $5 can get one a small coffee at Starbucks.

BTW, how exactly can one actually experience "cosmic consciousness" unless they've actually traveled everywhere throughout the entire cosmos?

 

[metis]

'The entire universe is a matter of transformation whereby something is available to be turned into perception. We’ve proposed that consciousness is that something—if there’s another candidate, we’re not aware of one that can pass the acid test: Make it turn into thoughts, feelings, images, and sensations. Science isn’t remotely close to turning the sugar in a sugar bowl into the music of Mozart or the plays of Shakespeare. Randomness will not give you any of that. Your brain converts blood sugar into words and music, not by some trick of the molecules in the brain, since they are in no way special or privileged. Rather, your consciousness is using the brain as a processing device, moving the molecules where they are needed in order to create the sight, sound, touch, taste, and smell of the world.'

What is Cosmic Consciousness? | The Chopra Center

That's fine as far as our consciousness is concerned, but it certainly doesn't at all deal with "cosmic consciousness" whereas some make the claim that it is just this that started our universe and supposedly permeates it.

 

[savagewind]

It should in the sense that science expects that someday it will. It only makes sense in that it is nothing but divine playfulness, a playfulness that is of the highest order of intelligence, unfathomable by the ordinary, rational mind seeking an 'explanation', when there is no explanation. IOW, there is nothing to figure out.

I don't understand why people expect the higher intelligence to be like our lower intelligence. I think it is like them saying a dog should understand how it's master thinks. I am sure lower won't meet higher until it becomes higher. We know for a fact lower resists becoming higher. It is only those who won't resist it that might, can or will join it.

My Lord, who is one who became higher intelligence, says "they took no note". People say he meant they took no note of the lower intelligence (that which causes God's war) but of course he meant they take no note of what is able to prevent God's war. They resist joining with the highest order of intelligence. The reasons are probably many. The fear of falling is one reason.

 

[savagewind]

Cosmic consciousness is not a matter of opinion or how you feel about it. You either see it or you don't.

It is not a belief, but an experience.

This is a good way of putting it. Belief is something that developes in the mind.
But cosmic consciousness just IS.

It's me knowing I live in a house. I don't "believe" I live in a house. I do!

 

[savagewind]

No one can, including those that have experienced it, provide evidence that it was not all in their head. As a subjective case it can't be supported by evidence which makes it tricky to argue for without sounding like a bag full of hot air.

Haven't we all agreed with you? I am glad they argue it. There are some of us that feel cozy by them. I am sure it is difficult to put words to it. I can't do it. But I understand them who can! It is wonderful!

 

[savagewind]

I hear another reason why they won't join the higher intelligence is they seek great things for themselves. I am sure the person who would be able to provide convincing evidence of The Spirit would be great. It is written "humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God that God may exalt you in due time". So another reason why some people can't reach it is because they would pick it up and run with it. Like football? It is not a football.

 

[savagewind]

Football might be a good example of the playfullness of the cosmos. Haha Most people do not imagine "picking up" the football to run with it. But of course being in the USA like I am there is not another quick way to imagine it. In the United Kingdom it is against the law to handle the ball if handle means hands. OK? Knees and heads are OK.

 

[Looncall]

Gazing at one's navel, no. But penetrative introspection, yes. No input, no. Why? Because what is inside is what the true nature of reality is. It does not need input, as it is already complete. Understand I am referring to the true nature of reality, and not the details about it we call facts and data.

If mind is not self created, then what is its origin? Mind is active where thinking is active. But when thinking is turned off as in during meditation, consciousness is still very much present. I have experienced many occasions when I have actually witnessed mind in the process of self creation, but it took years for me to reach the point where I was able to observe it doing so. It happens very, very quickly, so the ordinary view does not readily detect it. One must practice to be very attentive, and then, one day, you will see it as it happens.

Those ancient gurus were busy trying to save their people from harm. We have writings about this from both the Buddha and Lao tzu.

As for the distinctions mentioned, they don't exist except when the mind is active. Show me where they exist without the mind creating them.

No, I don't see why mysticism is a red flag in light of your picky discrimination. Your pickiness is necessary for a different reason. Mystics are even more picky about what is reality and what is delusional. They can spend years honing and perfecting their inner laser like vision. That's why they've arrived at the point where they see the world as illusion, when the ordinary man cannot yet see this fact. I think you have the wrong idea about what mystics are. A mystic is simply someone who seeks divine union within.

I don't agree that the distinctions do not exist without minds. That is just trees falling in the forest claptrap. A pebble can be inside a cave regardless of whether any mind knows about it. Isn't your position solipsism?

"inner vision", This is where I get antsy. How do you know that the experience is not just internal? That several people experience the same thing is likely just shared human psychology. Especially since the same experiences can be triggered by drugs and even by electric fields.

This is really what mystics must demonstrate to show that their woo can be taken seriously.

 

[savagewind]

I think the only thing which is shared by all the people who experience it is the unselfish desire to know it.

I don't agree that the distinctions do not exist without minds. That is just trees falling in the forest claptrap. A pebble can be inside a cave regardless of whether any mind knows about it. Isn't your position solipsism?

"inner vision", This is where I get antsy. How do you know that the experience is not just internal? That several people experience the same thing is likely just shared human psychology. Especially since the same experiences can be triggered by drugs and even by electric fields.

This is really what mystics must demonstrate to show that their woo can be taken seriously.

How can you say serendipity happens inside the mind? It is outside phenomenon. Godnotgod says it comes in threes and I tend to agree with that.

Have you ever heard of the game theory experiment? I forgot the details and what I heard is hearsay so I shouldn't try to share what I think I know about it. Simply put it demonstarted a link between mind and spirit as far as I know. Shrugs.

 

[YmirGF]

Does it? The very delight you experience is because that beautiful intelligence which animates the universe is performing a dance from within. A very intelligent and ecstatic dance that is not governed by a dancer. The universe itself is the dancing. Not just that, but you and I are part of the dance. Now how does it appear to you?

The intelligent universe is inviting us to join in the ecstatic dance all the time, but because we choose instead to analyze it, to systematize it, to categorize it, to put it into a jar of formaldehyde, to mathemetize it, we become dull and boring. The universe just goes on its sparkling way. All that is needed is to tune in. Nothing Special. Come as you are, warts and all.

Is it evident to you that you are not observing the stars at night as objects, but as an experience that is being actualized in your consciousness?

I get all that, godnotgod. I simply do not let my imagination run off with my thinking. I keep my feet planted firmly on the ground.
In some respects, yes, this is a cosmic dance. I see that, I feel that. Sometimes it is more like a jousting match, but that is just flavoring really. What I was attempting to show was the conscious realization of the enormity of what I am seeing. To think that light has travelled for years - at the speed of light - dwarfs even notions of so-called "cosmic" consciousness. The "cosmic" aspect is a preliminary state, that is adjacent the normative state of being. It only seems "cosmic"... at first... In truth, there is very little "cosmic" about it. It just is... it's just another state of being and not much to get worked up over.

 

[Straw Dog]

I can't help but suspect sometimes that claims of cosmic consciousness are just a way of feeling special or a subtle form of egojitsu in that those who realize it have a higher awareness than those who do not realize it, so we should respect them as enlightened masters. It's just another manifestation of the common delusion of superiority. Consciousness is just another state of being.

 

[savagewind]

I can't help but suspect sometimes that claims of cosmic consciousness are just a way of feeling special or a subtle form of egojitsu in that those who realize it have a higher awareness than those who do not realize it, so we should respect them as enlightened masters. It's just another manifestation of the common delusion of superiority. Consciousness is just another state of being.

I see it the opposite. Those who won't see it have the delusion of superiority. It is my belief a person must humble himself or herself to see it. Everyone who I am aware of that knows it seems humble in my estimation. How is "to be humble" superior do you think? One must give up control to know it. Controlling people are they who are superior. That is a fact. What is superiority but that it is for controlling others?

 

[YmirGF]

I see it the opposite. Those who won't see it have the delusion of superiority. It is my belief a person must humble himself or herself to see it. Everyone who I am aware of that knows it seems humble in my estimation. How is "to be humble" superior do you think? One must give up control to know it. Controlling people are they who are superior. That is a fact. What is superiority but that it is for controlling others?

Aside from the part that people like me did not have to humble ourselves to experience this type of consciousness. From the ego's stance, it can be a humbling experience, but it's proportional. Once you have your feet wet, its all just another part of being and the ego is no longer threatened because it knows it position in the overall scheme of things in what I like to call the "civilization of the psyche".

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Look, if you want to have a valid discussion, address something in the provided text, which proves that you are incorrect re: consciousness merging with the universe. It's there in plain view. So now what, and don't get coy.

No, if you want to have a proper discussion then provide some properly referenced quotes which show the Buddha describing enlightenment as "cosmic consciousness". It's not something I've ever come across, but maybe there's a reference somewhere in one of the suttas - if there is then please produce it and we can discuss it.
Actually I think the Buddhist references are a red herring here, what you're describing sounds much more like Advaita Vedanta.

Again I ask you, can you please describe your personal experience of non-local consciousness or "cosmic consciousness" or whatever. I keep asking you to talk about your personal experience but you keep sidestepping the question.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Of course, no one can describe the experience itself.

You really should try. Otherwise it just sounds like you're making it up to sound cool.

 

[YmirGF]

No one can, including those that have experienced it, provide evidence that it was not all in their head. As a subjective case it can't be supported by evidence which makes it tricky to argue for without sounding like a bag full of hot air.

And this is something I try to never lose sight of. I am fairly good at rendering difficult concepts into simple terms, understandable by a large part of the population, but even I can't make this dog hunt. In many regards, it helps to keep my hat size down.

 

[savagewind]

Aside from the part that people like me did not have to humble ourselves to experience this type of consciousness. From the ego's stance, it can be a humbling experience, but it's proportional. Once you have your feet wet, its all just another part of being and the ego is no longer threatened because it knows it position in the overall scheme of things in what I like to call the "civilization of the psyche".

SO... what did you wish to know then?

For example, "Does the universe need intelligence to order it?"
The real answer is, "We do not have enough information to say, one way or the other." We don't know yet and may never know.

I hear you say you have seen it but you don 't believe it. Is this correct?

 

[Straw Dog]

I see it the opposite. Those who won't see it have the delusion of superiority. It is my belief a person must humble himself or herself to see it. Everyone who I am aware of that knows it seems humble in my estimation. How is "to be humble" superior do you think? One must give up control to know it. Controlling people are they who are superior. That is a fact. What is superiority but that it is for controlling others?

I've had experiences of expanded awareness and feelings of cosmic connectedness. It just seems to be a jump to claim consciousness is absolute or universal based on subjective experiences alone. Plus, there's all these issues with semantics, etc. What exactly is consciousness? What are we talking about? I don't know that and I don't pretend to know. I'm suspicious of those who claim to know without a shadow of a doubt. I don't believe there is an antidote for uncertainty. It's like zen masters arguing over who is more humble and more enlightened.