Richard Dawkins Facepalms at Deepak Chopra

[godnotgod]

I think it just shows that some scientists have religious beliefs.

Or are you confusing religious beliefs with the spiritual experience? Nothing Hagelin is saying points to any religious beliefs that I can see. Do you?

 

[Runewolf1973]

You just provided it. Do you have to constantly think about beating your heart, pumping your blood, regulating your breath, digesting your food, etc? No! You want to focus on what is up front, right now, and have those processes work in the background. Consciousness has taken care of all that for you. It's just that you have lost touch with the background of existence, and are focusing on what attracts your attention, like things interacting in the foreground. You're hypnotized.

That is not evidence for consciousness, it is evidence for interaction.

 

[godnotgod]

The notion of downward causation strikes me as being terribly redundant. If consciousness is universally fundamental, then why even bother with brains?

Why do we, as conscious beings, bother with (ie; 'create') computers?

 

[godnotgod]

That is not evidence for consciousness, it is evidence for interaction.

Intelligent interaction, and intelligence requires...ta da...consciousness! Uddervise, ve end up mit highly complex interacting blob.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Whatever is the basis for interaction is fundamental to interaction. What is that basis? C'mon now. Use your head!

I know the answer you want me to give is Pure Consciousness, but I do not accept that as an answer for lack of evidence.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Intelligent interaction, and intelligence requires...ta da...consciousness! Uddervise, ve end up mit highly complex interacting blob.

Complete nonsense. Consciousness requires interaction.

 

[godnotgod]

Yah, it is rather unnecessary for the entire universe to interact is as complex a manner (conscious) as evolved brains.

So perhaps the criteria has nothing to do with utility or purpose, and if that is the case, then it may suggest pure playfulness on the part of the universe, as in lila and maya. When we play, we need to be conscious for creativity to come into play, and the universe is certainly the outcome of creativity. Otherwise, how do you explain the great variety and multitude of forms, all for no apparent rhyme or reason?

 

[godnotgod]

Complete nonsense. Consciousness requires interaction.

...and the basis for interaction is...what? more interaction? complete and udder nonsense ad nauseum! a gyrating stupidity, it is.

 

[godnotgod]

I know the answer you want me to give is Pure Consciousness, but I do not accept that as an answer for lack of evidence.

You are conscious. That you are conscious is self-evident.

you see the hedge against the hills;
you see the hills against the sky;
but you see the sky against....CONSCIOUSNESS!

 

[Runewolf1973]

So perhaps the criteria has nothing to do with utility or purpose, and if that is the case, then it may suggest pure playfulness on the part of the universe, as in lila and maya. When we play, we need to be conscious for creativity to come into play, and the universe is certainly the outcome of creativity. Otherwise, how do you explain the great variety and multitude of forms, all for no apparent rhyme or reason?

The universe is the outcome of change.

 

[godnotgod]

I know the answer you want me to give is Pure Consciousness, but I do not accept that as an answer for lack of evidence.

No, I want you to use your OWN head: what is the basis for all interaction?

 

[Runewolf1973]

You are conscious. That you are conscious is self-evident.

you see the hedge against the hills;
you see the hills against the sky;
but you see the sky against....CONSCIOUSNESS!

I do not like the term consciousness. I consider myself to be interactive.

 

[godnotgod]

The universe is the outcome of change.

No, it is not. The Universe is not a static 'thing' as 'outcome' to something else; it is, in reality, That which does NOT change, acting as if it is changing, and you believe it! Again, an example of just how powerful a drug maya can be.

 

[Runewolf1973]

No, I want you to use your OWN head: what is the basis for all interaction?

Ever hear of the term Fundamental Interactions? There is a reason why they are considered fundamental. Anything beyond that is pure speculation.

 

[godnotgod]

I do not like the term consciousness. I consider myself to be interactive.

But who is it that is 'interacting'? Who, or what, is this 'agent' of interaction? You still see things as separate, interacting one with the other, when there are no such separate things that can interact.

 

[godnotgod]

Ever hear of the term Fundamental Interactions?

So what is the basis for those Fundamental Interactions? More Fundamental Interactions, and then more? and then more? Come now. your mind is working overtime.

 

[Runewolf1973]

But who is it that is 'interacting'? Who, or what, is this 'agent' of interaction? You still see things as separate, interacting one with the other, when there are no such separate things that can interact.

As I've said before, I do not consider interaction as a form of separation.

 

[Runewolf1973]

So what is the basis for those Fundamental Interactions? More Fundamental Interactions, and then more? and then more? Come now. your mind is working overtime.

I believe those interactions may go on eternally. The basis or background for change/interaction is more change and more interaction.

 

[Runewolf1973]

But who is it that is 'interacting'? Who, or what, is this 'agent' of interaction? You still see things as separate, interacting one with the other, when there are no such separate things that can interact.

The universe is interacting.

 

[Runewolf1973]

No, it is not. The Universe is not a static 'thing' as 'outcome' to something else; it is, in reality, That which does NOT change, acting as if it is changing, and you believe it! Again, an example of just how powerful a drug maya can be.

Yes, I believe it!!...because the evidence supports it. Your Pure Consciousness nonsense is supported by nothing! I never said the universe was static. The universe is dynamic and everchanging.