• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How long did it take for intelligence to exist in the universe?

godnotgod

Thou art That
Intelligence in the universe existed the Exact Moment the Universe existed.
:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:....REALLY!!!?

Sure it wasn't full blown psychosis?

(The universe is an Idiot-Savant, folks, a Gyrating Stupidity with an attitude, going round and round.)
 
Last edited:

godnotgod

Thou art That
"Mind" is a concept, but it also refers to the capacity which is engaged while you are meditating; as I said, it is not a physical activity, but something you do with your mind or brain.

What? There are two of you? The do-er and the do-ee? Sounds like an echo in here. Hello?

You say you've meditated. During meditation, what do YOU do with your mind and/or brain, and what are you using to do it with?
 
Last edited:

idav

Being
Premium Member
The problem is that Reason approaches the phenomenal world with the assumption that it is real, when it is an illusion. It assumes that Time, Space, and Causation are real, when they are conceptual overlays.
Reality isn't the illusion, the self or the mind is the illusion. Just because what we see is deceptive doesn't mean that there is nothing there. I would describe reality as apathetic, it is us giving it significance. Reality would exist without any need for intelligence and reality doesn't need any recognition from us to exist.
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Reality isn't the illusion, the self or the mind is the illusion. Just because what we see is deceptive doesn't mean that there is nothing there. I would describe reality as apathetic, it is us giving it significance. Reality would exist without any need for intelligence and reality doesn't need any recognition from us to exist.

It seems you are using the word 'Reality' to signify the phenomenal world. What is it about the phenomenal world that makes you think it real?
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Intelligence in the universe existed the Exact Moment the Universe existed.

In fact, folks, the synchronicity is so great, we simply cannot find a distinction between Intelligence and the Universe itself, so we shall have to conclude that they are one and the same. In fact:

"The Universe IS the Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation"
Vivikenanda

That 'snake' you saw moving across the road at dusk? Turned out to be none other than a rope moving in the wind. Yup! One and the Same...One and the Same.
 
Last edited:

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
So that would suggest you stop spinning your wheels so you can tell. Otherwise, you make dizzy fah down go boom.
Well, human animals are welcome to concoct any ideas they wish on the subject. It's not like anyone can say for sure.

In the immortal words of Hillary Clinton...

"What difference does it make?"
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Because real is a word reality describes.

Oh? Does reality actually 'describe' anything, or is that just your mind working overtime? And by what means do you know what reality is? Is the phenomenal world 'real', and how so?
 
Last edited:

godnotgod

Thou art That
it took intelligence to come into the world
after such had created it to place himself in
a sum total of three seconds
no more
no less
love you
i am nothing0

That's not possible for two reasons: one, Time did not exist at that instance, and two, 'Before Abraham was, I Am'

You are no-thing, and therefore, you are Every-thing.

Intelligence did not come into the world; the world came out of intelligence. It is Intelligence that is No-Thing, and therefore, Every-Thing.
 
Last edited:

godnotgod

Thou art That
"Mind" is a concept, but it also refers to the capacity which is engaged while you are meditating; as I said, it is not a physical activity, but something you do with your mind or brain.

But in meditation, there is no agent of meditation; no 'doer' of any action, and therefore, no mind. Your description is one seen from outside of the experience and is inaccurate. The description is not the described.

Right, and as I said, you're obviously thinking of a more narrow definition of 'thought', i.e. as something with propositional content. I am using it more broadly to denote any mental activity whatsoever, whether propositional or not.

But if there is no agent of thought, where is 'mind'?

So one is temporarily brain-dead? In other words, if we performed neuroimaging on someone in such a state, they would not register as having any brain functioning for that period of time? I don't think so.

Actually, there is typically increased Alpha brain-wave activity during meditation, as this is associated with higher states of consciousness. But it is not a result of thought. Consciousness is using the brain, not vice-versa, and as a result, the brain is functioning as it should. Your attention is not on thought, but on, for example, the breath. So there is a distinction between consciousness and mind. You are leaving the discriminating, rational mind behind and allowing the intuitive 'mind' to come into play, which is just pure consciousness. Eventually, thoughts will subside and stop altogether. In Zen, for example, this state is referred to as 'no-mind'.

Remember, thinking is only a small part of what the brain does; the brain is responsible for control of all our organic processes, without having to think about it. That is how consciousness uses the brain, instead of having to constantly monitor these activities up front.


Sort of? Lol...

Yes, 'sort of' simply because the body is temporal.

Sure I can. I'm going to think about the upcoming NFL season, and then tell you when I'm done, and I want you to time how long it takes.

You're measuring thought, not consciousness. Show me where consciousness is located (Space) and how you go about measuring it as existing in Time.

What is the case, and what is true are the same thing ("what is the case" is simply a different way of saying "what is true", "what the fact of the matter is", etc.).

Yes, but that is not what I said: What I said is that what one thinks is the case and what the case actually is, are two completely different things. Time, Space, and Causation are conceptual overlays onto Reality; they are not Reality themselves.

And that time and space are illusory in the same sense that the metaphysical subject is illusory is, prima facie, simply false.

Prima facie, there is no such thing as Time or Space. Those ideas come after what you see, prima facie.

What does that even mean? Do you even know?

What it means is that what we call the 'material world' exhibits the same characteristics as an illusion. Hasn't Quantum Mechanics given you at least a glimpse into the truth of that?

Only if we're using the word "real" in a highly peculiar way.

But we are. What we ordinarily call 'real' is the result of a highly altered state of consciousness, one in which the average Joe does not even know he is operating under such a state.

This is non-sequitur; that the material world is in some sense "not real" has not been established and is far from self-evident, that "what projects an illusion is what is actually real" does not seem necessarily true and is ambiguous anyways, and that "pure consciousness" is "behind the material world" is also neither self-evident nor has been established.

Of course not. Higher Consciousness is a state of being that is beyond the rational mind. But here is a question: by what means do you distinguish forms within what you call the 'material' world?

I'm afraid you'll have to be more specific, because I don't know what you have in mind by this.

This question has already been answered separately.

I'd say you're calling the game awfully prematurely here.

Science, on both micro and macro scales, has run into logistical difficulties.

Whatever that means...

Just what it says: an approach other than that which is rational is what is called for. The observer is part of that which is being observed, contrary to science's approach to maintain separation.

All this quote does is demonstrate that even the most brilliant minds are nevertheless prone to the most basic fallacies of reasoning.

Or perhaps it is more like they have already seen through the fallacies, and now come to another set of conclusions. Show me the fallacy in Planck's reasoning. Einstein has said much the same thing, BTW.

The only fallacy of Reasoning is that the Physical World, Time, Space, and Causation are real things.

Look again.
:D
 
Last edited:

godnotgod

Thou art That
The following is excerpted from:

Eastern Wisdom, by Alan Watts:

"How do you know that you are a higher order of being than a potato? What do you really know about potatoes anyway? You probably have never studied potatoes beyond knowing how to cook and eat them. That's probably about it. But have you ever thought about how a potato feels?

'Well,' you say, 'it doesn't feel, so it's only a potato, it has nothing to feel with.' But wait a minute. When you put a lie detector on a potato - some kind of skin response machine - it certainly registers, and its readings change when you do certain things. If you prick the potato, or shout at it, it will flinch. As a matter of fact, if you learn how to turn on your alpha waves and you sit beside a plant, you will find that it will pick up those alpha waves. So maybe plants are not so stupid after all.

'Well,' we might say, 'how can it be? It has no civilization. It has no house. It has no automobiles. It has no pianos, no art galleries, and no religion.'

But the potato might say, 'I don't need them. It's you poor uncivilized human beings who have to have all this crap around you to tell you who you are and what it's all about. You are messy and inefficient, and you are cluttering up the planet with your culture. But I, the potato, have it all built into me.'

'Well,' we might say, 'that's impossible, because you are stuck in one place all the time. How can you know anything about the world?'

But the potato doesn't need to go running around because its sensitivity extends all over the place. And so it might say, 'I want to introduce you to a few things. There is my neighbor over here, the thistle. Have you ever seen how my thistle neighbor gets around? It has tiny seeds with down sticking out all over them, and when the wind comes these seeds float off into the air. And my neighbor the maple tree has little helicopters it sends off, and they spin in the air and fly away. And then I have a friend the apple tree, and it has fruit that is so delicious that the birds like it. They eat the apple and swallow the seeds, then they fly away and when they drop the seed it is sown.

These are incredible devices. Others have burrs that stick in the hides of deer, and they carry these seeds around. 'This is one of the ways we get around and we spread our people so that we aren't all crowded together and don't strangle ourselves.'

The potato would go on to explain, 'But this is only the beginning of the extraordinary thins that we do. We have vibrations going on inside our fibers that are as good as anything invented by your Bach or Mozart. We enjoy this, and although you may think we are not doing anyting because we just sit here all the time, we are vibrating, and we are in ecstasy. We are humming to the great hum that is going on everywhere.' [ie; 'OM']....

....All of the vegetables understand this, and so from their point of view they are very highly evolved beings. Perhaps they don't consider us inferior beings, and just regard us as something different, but we are very unfair to vegetables. When at last a human being approaches the end of life and lapses into a coma, we say, 'Poor old so-and-so, he's just a vegetable.' Or when somebody is lazy, we say, 'They're just vegetating.' "
;)
 
Last edited:

godnotgod

Thou art That
The following excerpted from:

'Eastern Wisdom', by Alan Watts:

"There was once an Englishman and an Indian sitting in a garden together, and the Hindu was trying to explain basic Indian philosophy to the Englishman. So he said, 'Look now, there is a hedge at the end of the garden - against what do you see the hedge?"
The Englishman said, 'Against the hills.'
'And what do you see the hills against?'
He said, 'Against the sky.'
'And what do you see the sky against?' And the Englishman didn't know what to say.
So the Hindu said, 'You see it against consciousness.':)
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Is intelligence pre-universe, emergent or was the universe just born intelligent? What does the evidence suggest?

Intelligence is outside of Time, outside of Space; is neither caused, nor not-caused. It just IS. The universe is both unfolding from it, and returning to it, all within this singular, timeless, Present Moment.

When you see the universe this way, you see it as One and as the Absolute itself. YOU are the intelligent universe looking at itself through your eyes.

When you see it through the screen of Time, Space, and Causation, you see it as composed of separate 'things'; as being something other than oneself, either in purely auto-mechanistic terms, (ie; the 'Fully Automatic Universe'), or in terms of it being the artifact of a creator-god (ie; the 'Ceramic' model of the universe).


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uUeEAUFkS4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MdkkUwqtKo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8RZF7dLMs0
 
Last edited:

captainbryce

Active Member
Is intelligence pre-universe, emergent or was the universe just born intelligent? What does the evidence suggest?

Intelligence existed before the universe existed since the universe was intelligently designed. The fine tuning of dark energy (necessary for the universe to exist the way that it does) is evidence of intelligence.
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Intelligence existed before the universe existed since the universe was intelligently designed. The fine tuning of dark energy (necessary for the universe to exist the way that it does) is evidence of intelligence.

That may be, but it is not necessarily evidence of an intelligent design-er.

Intelligence cannot have existed 'before' the universe 'existed', since Time did not, and does not, exist.

Why do you see intelligence and the universe as separate things?
 
Last edited:
Top