Let's Present Some Evidence ...

[Runewolf1973]

Energy doesn`t express itself.
It`s not conscious.

As humans, we express ourselves in many different ways, we are made of energy. Energy expresses itself by taking many different forms. Even down to it's finest structure, the atom, every thing we know is an expression that was formed out of that structure. Perhaps matter itself is an expression of energy, and then matter and energy an expression of consciousness.

 

[linwood]

As humans, we express ourselves in many different ways. Energy expresses itself by taking many different forms. Even down to it's finest structure, the atom, every thing we know is an expression that was formed out of that structure. Perhaps matter itself is an expression of energy.

The term "expression" implies conscious intent.

I don`t see energy as having conscious intent.

 

[CarlinKnew]

Our brains and bodies are ultimately no more than collection of atoms and molecules moving together, that have consciousness. We are not much different than rocks which are also a collection of atoms and molecules. How can one form have consciousness and not the other?

Different arrangements of different atoms have different properties. That's how.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Different arrangements of different atoms have different properties. That's how.

Yes, but that is still basically saying that atoms, depending on how they are arranged can have different levels of awareness. Atoms have awareness. That is exactly what I believe. I do not believe that an atom has the same awareness as a human, but rather, it has only enough awareness to give a simple action/reaction. Put enough of those "aware" atoms together in a specific way, you get the property we know as life.

 

[linwood]

Put enough of those "aware" atoms together in a specific way, you get the property we know as life.

I can agree with that but they have to be put together in that certain way before we can pin the label "conscious" on them.

Not all energy/matter is conscious because they aren`t all interacting the same way.

 

[Runewolf1973]

The term "expression" implies conscious intent.

I don`t see energy as having conscious intent.

This Universe appeared somehow, atoms vibrate for some reason, energy changes form. No one made it do that, it happened on it's own. To me, that is conscious intent.

 

[linwood]

This Universe appeared somehow, atoms vibrate for some reason, energy changes form. No one made it do that, it happened on it's own. To me, that is conscious intent.

The wind blows the leaves off the oak tree in my yard.
Are you claiming the wind does this with conscious intent?
The wind doesn`t like the oak leaves?

You also will have to supply some evidence that the universe "appeared".
I claim it`s always existed and never had to "appear".

 

[Runewolf1973]

I can agree with that but they have to be put together in that certain way before we can pin the label "conscious" on them.

Not all energy/matter is conscious because they aren`t all interacting the same way.

I believe they have to be put together a specific way before they can be called, according to our standards "Life". But it is all the same energy ultimately. Energy that has awareness.

 

[Runewolf1973]

The wind blows the leaves off the oak tree in my yard.
Are you claiming the wind does this with conscious intent?
The wind doesn`t like the oak leaves?

You also will have to supply some evidence that the universe "appeared".
I claim it`s always existed and never had to "appear".

I'll get back to you on that. The wife's calling.

 

[Runewolf1973]

The wind blows the leaves off the oak tree in my yard.
Are you claiming the wind does this with conscious intent?
The wind doesn`t like the oak leaves?

You also will have to supply some evidence that the universe "appeared".
I claim it`s always existed and never had to "appear".

Okay, so what I am suggesting is not that the wind is aware of being wind, or that it's even aware of blowing leaves off of trees, but rather this...The atoms or energy that makes up the wind has enough awareness that it can perform a simple action/reaction effect. Some force (gravity or Earth rotation I guess) initially acted on the atoms and those atoms then being "aware" of something happening to them, gave a response (a reaction) thereby generating what we perceive with our senses (another reaction) as wind. Why would an atom react or interact with other atoms it if it was not in some way aware of that other atom's presence? I believe that in order for energy to have an action and reaction, the atoms themselves must somehow communicate or have some form of awareness or consciousness about them.

As to the Universe just appearing versus always existing I'll try to answer that as best I can. I believe that the Universe always existed as well, in some form, but that form was not always energy as we know it. I believe it is much like Marx Planck's quote..."All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force..."

 

[linwood]

Why would an atom react or interact with other atoms it if it was not in some way aware of that other atom's presence? I believe that in order for energy to have an action and reaction, the atoms themselves must somehow communicate or have some form of awareness or consciousness about them.

This is the root of our disagreement I believe Wolf.

You believe things happen for a reason it seems.
To me those atoms need no reason or "why" to do what they do.

I believe they do what they do because they can do nothing else.

 

[Runewolf1973]

To me those atoms need no reason or "why" to do what they do.

I believe they do what they do because they can do nothing else.

But that's like someone saying God made the Universe because He can, He's all-powerful and can do anything. Like saying things appear and come into being and move or vibrate because they just magically or mysteriously can somehow do it themselves. I do not believe in that. I believe that for everything that happens there is a logical reason behind it. Is it not scientific to believe that everything happens for a reason?

 

[PureX]

The ancient Greeks believed in "logos". It's a difficult term to define in todays language, but it basically referred to a kind of divine blueprint, or logic, that governed the behavior of all matter. Incidentally, they also came up with the idea of a basic bit of matter and called it the "atom". Anyway, from their perspective, this "logos" existed first. It was a kind of idea without material expression. Like the idea of a flat surface upon which we could rest things so as to use them more easily. As the logos came in contact with a human mind, it generated the concept of a table, and from that concept the human could then build one.

Likewise, the ideal blueprint or "logos" for a tree comes into contact with the right worldly conditions, and a real tree grows there. The believed that the idea had to precede the object, because something had to govern the way matter and energy expressed itself. Otherwise they could only express randomness, or chaos.

As we study the nature of energy, trying to figure out what it is and why it behaves as it does, one thing is apparent. That is that something is governing the behavior of energy, causing it to express itself in some ways, but not in other ways. And this control, whatever it is, is responsible for the character and nature of all that exists. The ancient Greeks would surely call this mysterious control, the "logos". The divine ideal that's being expressed throughout all material existence.

I don't know that I could call that "logos" a form of universal consciousness, though. But once expressed, it certainly attains consciousness through us.

 

[Runewolf1973]

The ancient Greeks believed in "logos". It's a difficult term to define in todays language, but it basically referred to a kind of divine blueprint, or logic, that governed the behavior of all matter. Incidentally, they also came up with the idea of a basic bit of matter and called it the "atom". Anyway, from their perspective, this "logos" existed first. It was a kind of idea without material expression. Like the idea of a flat surface upon which we could rest things so as to use them more easily. As the logos came in contact with a human mind, it generated the concept of a table, and from that concept the human could then build one.

Likewise, the ideal blueprint or "logos" for a tree comes into contact with the right worldly conditions, and a real tree grows there. The believed that the idea had to precede the object, because something had to govern the way matter and energy expressed itself. Otherwise they could only express randomness, or chaos.

As we study the nature of energy, trying to figure out what it is and why it behaves as it does, one thing is apparent. That is that something is governing the behavior of energy, causing it to express itself in some ways, but not in other ways. And this control, whatever it is, is responsible for the character and nature of all that exists. The ancient Greeks would surely call this mysterious control, the "logos". The divine ideal that's being expressed throughout all material existence.

I don't know that I could call that "logos" a form of universal consciousness, though. But once expressed, it certainly attains consciousness through us.

Yes, for anything to come into form, the idea or blueprint or conscious intent always comes first, then the form. Not much different than evolution it would seem.

 

[linwood]

But that's like someone saying God made the Universe because He can, He's all-powerful and can do anything. Like saying things appear and come into being and move or vibrate because they just magically or mysteriously can somehow do it themselves. I do not believe in that. I believe that for everything that happens there is a logical reason behind it. Is it not scientific to believe that everything happens for a reason?

I didn`t say matter is active for no reason.
Indeed there is always a reason.

I see those reasons being natural manipulations happening at random.

You posit a conscious force as motivating reason.
I don`t see any evidence of the existence of this conscious force.

 

[linwood]

Yes, for anything to come into form, the idea or blueprint or conscious intent always comes first, then the form. Not much different than evolution it would seem.

It`s entirely different than evolution because evolution has no conscious force driving it.

Evolutionary mutations happen at random and are usually not beneficial.

If there were a conscious force driving these mutations it would be a very foolish one to make so many mistakes.

 

[Runewolf1973]

It`s entirely different than evolution because evolution has no conscious force driving it.

Evolutionary mutations happen at random and are usually not beneficial.

If there were a conscious force driving these mutations it would be a very foolish one to make so many mistakes.

There was no conscious force that drove the first creatures on earth to want to crawl out of the water onto land? I find that hard to believe. I believe evolution happens for a reason, not just out of some random chance. Mistakes will be made, but it is the conscious drive of evolution to better things or make life easier that eventually corrects those mistakes.

 

[linwood]

There was no conscious force that drove the first creatures on earth to want to crawl out of the water onto land? I find that hard to believe. I believe evolution happens for a reason, not just out of some random chance. Mistakes will be made, but it is the conscious drive of evolution to better things that eventually corrects those mistakes.

That`s well and good Wolf but the concept can`t be evidenced.

I can give reams of evidence pointing to evolutionary mutation being random.

 

[MSizer]

This is not offering us any sort of counterpoint. Nor is it offering us any evidence for god's non-existence. And it's a bit insulting, like: "If you knew what I know you'd be smarter than you are now".

It was not intended to be insulting, honestly, and in retrospect, the wording was poor. I sincerely was only stating it becuase I believe that you would find the topic of interest. I was not in any way trying to say that I am smarter than you. I apologize for the poor choice of words.

 

[Runewolf1973]

That`s well and good Wolf but the concept can`t be evidenced.

I can give reams of evidence pointing to evolutionary mutation being random.

I don't think apes choosing to come down from trees, eventually walking upright and humans evolving with thumbs to be a completely random event. Perhaps there is conscious force that drives the survival of a species. A consciousness that gives it reason for it to want to survive. But I guess that's where we differ. I respect your opinions nonetheless.