Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
O That the Atheist....
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="stevevw" data-source="post: 77619884" data-attributes="member: 342064"><p>But it changes what reality means for us. At one point we thought for example we thought that human behaviour was determined by external conditioning. This influenced all our models of human behaviour. Then we discovered that the root of behaviour came from within. So this completely changed reality in how we seen human behaviour. </p><p></p><p>I'm thinking of theories like BB, Inflation, String theory, evolutionary behaviour theories where they have added onto to to solve anomelies only to create even more anomelies and never really fitting the data. </p><p></p><p>But there are anomelies between Newtons and Eiensteins theoies such as the uniting problem between classical physics and QP which no one can overcome and which seems to lead to these complicated unscientific ideas like String theory. Whereas other ideas seem better suited and more simple but are rejected because they don't fit the material paradigm.</p><p></p><p>But thats just appealing to a different kind of God of the gaps in saying time and space and energy was always there. It also breaches the material paradigm that everything that exists has a beginning and a cause within the causal closure of the physical. But at some point there had to be something beyond the causal closure of the physical to begin the physical components that cause the material world.</p><p></p><p>What all religions are saying is the same thing that a god or entitity of force was beyond the material but created the material world. That they disagree on exactly which God is not the point. Its that they all have this innate belief that there is something beyond the material. We are born with this innate belief. It just gets hijacked by various cultures. </p><p></p><p>But the material scientific paradigm's own logic, own methodology says that energy cannot create itself and has to come from somewhere. So it may not point to a specific god or gods at all (at least evidence wise) but it does point to something beyond time, speace, matter and energy. </p><p></p><p>So what else could it be if not any of these things but something beyond them. What could be beyond this that can create the energy and conditions that would give birth to our universe or any universe. </p><p></p><p>Well obviously the same question about what thoughts or infomration are made of. They are not made of physical stuff yet they are real and exist in the universe and can change things or birth new ideas that change our reality. So what mechanism would you call that in which non physical thoughts can have an influence on the physical world. </p><p></p><p>Why cannot that some idea by the original. That there was always a mind that exxxisted which contained all knowledge and that this was somehow expressed into existence just like we do. It seems I am not the only one who thinks this way and its got nothing to do with religion. Many scientists are looking to this fundemental idea as a simple and elegant way to united physics such as with Intergrated Information Theory orr Panpsychism. </p><p></p><p>A multiverse just puts the inevitable problem of what caused the first state of conditions to create the multiverse. If spacetime is eternal wouldn't that breach our conceptions of time and entropy. </p><p></p><p>I am not sure, they say that the Universe is Math. A circle has some real representation in nature. Certain equations make reality and patterns exist in nature like with the Madlebrot equation which defies human conceptions. </p><p></p><p>The math has always been there and we are just dicovering it through our conceptions and models. A thought or conception can exist forever and it can change the world when dicovered and used. </p><p></p><p>Behind all physical things are information, maths or concepts. WE create those concepts and models but they are discovered concepts that already existed fundementally. All physical behaviour that brings about changes in the world originates from the mind. Without them we would not have the same world and would be just meat puppets subject to electrical impulses and for forces of nature. </p><p></p><p>You missed the point. The idea in the first place comes from the mind. There would be no light bulb but for the mind. We could have been zombies that just driven to survive through their physical reactions and instincts. </p><p></p><p>But we have a mind that differentiates us from the wires and material components. The ideas that we can then make the light build is from Mind as well as it takes the mind to understand and utilize the materials, measure and make the light bulb. </p><p></p><p>I don;t mean like that. But rather the observer may be through observations be collapsing the wave function. This may happen in an instant. The interface we see may be that collapse in real time always occuring as many oberverse are observing the same thing. </p><p></p><p>But still maintains a degree of subjectivity in that observers can have different perceptions of the same thing ie the famous dress or how from different positions we get different objective outcomes. Thus showing that there is no one fixed material reality but rather its a reflection that can vary from person to person to some degree. </p><p></p><p>Ifg Mind is behind all human conceptions of objective reality then why not the same logic apply for how objective reality came to be in the first place or at least that Mind is fundemental to objective reality. All we know is a direct experience of reality. Any conception about suff really existing outside our Mind cannot be directly verified. We could be a brain in a vat of in a simulation for all we know.</p><p></p><p>Why we cannot verify what conscious actually is, what its nature is or even measure it and never will and yet scientist hold onto an impossible to verify idea like its fact. Especially in the like that at least some of the ideas of consciousness beyond brain have good arguements and some evidence. </p><p></p><p>We cannot directly verify matter outside the Mind yet we don't throw it in the trash bin. </p><p></p><p>The very idea of Mind and consciousness being fundemental comes from science itself. It comes from rational thinking about alternative ideas and what the data is saying. There are many good scientific ideas and arguements for MInd, Information and consciousness being fundemental. Here are just a few</p><p></p><p><strong>John Wheeler’s Participatory Universe</strong></p><p><strong>[URL unfurl="true"]https://futurism.com/john-wheelers-participatory-universe[/URL]</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Interpreting Quantum Mechanics Is All About Observers</strong> </p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(84, 172, 210)">Whether you favor a Wheeler-ish universe where the act of observation creates reality by triggering a collapse from outside, or a Many-Worlds approach where individual perceptions subdivide a complex reality from within, observers are central to both the Copenhagen and Many-Worlds interpretations.</span></em></p><p><a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/chadorzel/2018/05/05/interpreting-quantum-mechanics-is-all-about-observers/?sh=2c90ca9d6f21" target="_blank">Interpreting Quantum Mechanics Is All About Observers</a></p><p></p><p><strong>Integrated information theory: from consciousness to its physical substrate</strong></p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.nature.com/articles/nrn.2016.44[/URL]</p><p></p><p><strong>Is the Universe Made of Math?</strong></p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-the-universe-made-of-math-excerpt/[/URL]</p><p> </p><p><strong>A quantum physical argument for panpsychism</strong> </p><p><a href="http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/9572/1/Shan_Gao_-_A_quantum_argument_for_panpsychism_2013.pdf" target="_blank"><u>http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/9572/1/Shan_Gao_-_A_quantum_argument_for_panpsychism_2013.pdf</u></a></p><p></p><p><strong>Quantum and Electromagnetic Fields in Our Universe and Brain: A New Perspective to Comprehend Brain Function</strong> </p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(84, 172, 210)">According to our new perspective on brain function, infinite waveless energy is an infinite frequency (energy) that is not related to time or space. </span></em></p><p><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8146693/" target="_blank">Quantum and Electromagnetic Fields in Our Universe and Brain: A New Perspective to Comprehend Brain Function</a></p><p></p><p><strong>An Ontological Solution to the Mind-Body Problem </strong></p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(84, 172, 210)">I have argued for a coherent idealist ontology that explains reality in a more parsimonious and</span></em><span style="color: rgb(84, 172, 210)"><em> empirically rigorous manner than mainstream physicalism and bottom-up panpsychism. This idealist ontology also offers more explanatory power than both physicalism and bottom-up panpsychism, in that it does not fall prey to either the ‘hard problem of consciousness’ or the ‘subject combination</em></span></p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(84, 172, 210)">problem’, respectively. It can be summarized as follows: there is only universal consciousness.</span></em> </p><p><a href="https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/philosophies/philosophies-02-00010/article_deploy/philosophies-02-00010.pdf?version=1492682089" target="_blank">https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/philosophies/philosophies-02-</a><a href="https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/philosophies/philosophies-02-00010/article_deploy/philosophies-02-00010.pdf?version=1492682089" target="_blank">00010/article_deploy/philosophies-02-00010.pdf?version=1492682089</a></p><p></p><p><strong>The mind-blowing science behind how our brains shape reality</strong> </p><p><strong><em><span style="color: rgb(84, 172, 210)">Social reality can even shape physical reality.</span></em></strong> </p><p><a href="https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/the-mind-blowing-science-behind-how-our-brains-shape-reality/" target="_blank">https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/the-mind-blowing-science-behind-how-our-</a><a href="https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/the-mind-blowing-science-behind-how-our-brains-shape-reality/" target="_blank">brains-shape-reality/</a></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0)">So as you can see there is a variety of well supported ideas that are based on Mind and Consciousness being fundemental. </span></p><p></p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0)">So obviouslt if the universe and everything is created by knowledge and information itself from a mind then we should expect to find that knowledge and information embedded in nature. We see this in ideas in how the universe fits so well with math (the Math Universe), or in how nature exibits certain patters for example that align with the Madelbrot set. </span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0)"></span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0)">Tomas Edison was asked where he gets his ideas for his inventions and he said they come to him from the universe out there somewhere as I could not have imagined such things on my own, This is a common them in art and other areas. The idea of laws governing the universe speaks of information and knowledge behind what we see. </span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="stevevw, post: 77619884, member: 342064"] But it changes what reality means for us. At one point we thought for example we thought that human behaviour was determined by external conditioning. This influenced all our models of human behaviour. Then we discovered that the root of behaviour came from within. So this completely changed reality in how we seen human behaviour. I'm thinking of theories like BB, Inflation, String theory, evolutionary behaviour theories where they have added onto to to solve anomelies only to create even more anomelies and never really fitting the data. But there are anomelies between Newtons and Eiensteins theoies such as the uniting problem between classical physics and QP which no one can overcome and which seems to lead to these complicated unscientific ideas like String theory. Whereas other ideas seem better suited and more simple but are rejected because they don't fit the material paradigm. But thats just appealing to a different kind of God of the gaps in saying time and space and energy was always there. It also breaches the material paradigm that everything that exists has a beginning and a cause within the causal closure of the physical. But at some point there had to be something beyond the causal closure of the physical to begin the physical components that cause the material world. What all religions are saying is the same thing that a god or entitity of force was beyond the material but created the material world. That they disagree on exactly which God is not the point. Its that they all have this innate belief that there is something beyond the material. We are born with this innate belief. It just gets hijacked by various cultures. But the material scientific paradigm's own logic, own methodology says that energy cannot create itself and has to come from somewhere. So it may not point to a specific god or gods at all (at least evidence wise) but it does point to something beyond time, speace, matter and energy. So what else could it be if not any of these things but something beyond them. What could be beyond this that can create the energy and conditions that would give birth to our universe or any universe. Well obviously the same question about what thoughts or infomration are made of. They are not made of physical stuff yet they are real and exist in the universe and can change things or birth new ideas that change our reality. So what mechanism would you call that in which non physical thoughts can have an influence on the physical world. Why cannot that some idea by the original. That there was always a mind that exxxisted which contained all knowledge and that this was somehow expressed into existence just like we do. It seems I am not the only one who thinks this way and its got nothing to do with religion. Many scientists are looking to this fundemental idea as a simple and elegant way to united physics such as with Intergrated Information Theory orr Panpsychism. A multiverse just puts the inevitable problem of what caused the first state of conditions to create the multiverse. If spacetime is eternal wouldn't that breach our conceptions of time and entropy. I am not sure, they say that the Universe is Math. A circle has some real representation in nature. Certain equations make reality and patterns exist in nature like with the Madlebrot equation which defies human conceptions. The math has always been there and we are just dicovering it through our conceptions and models. A thought or conception can exist forever and it can change the world when dicovered and used. Behind all physical things are information, maths or concepts. WE create those concepts and models but they are discovered concepts that already existed fundementally. All physical behaviour that brings about changes in the world originates from the mind. Without them we would not have the same world and would be just meat puppets subject to electrical impulses and for forces of nature. You missed the point. The idea in the first place comes from the mind. There would be no light bulb but for the mind. We could have been zombies that just driven to survive through their physical reactions and instincts. But we have a mind that differentiates us from the wires and material components. The ideas that we can then make the light build is from Mind as well as it takes the mind to understand and utilize the materials, measure and make the light bulb. I don;t mean like that. But rather the observer may be through observations be collapsing the wave function. This may happen in an instant. The interface we see may be that collapse in real time always occuring as many oberverse are observing the same thing. But still maintains a degree of subjectivity in that observers can have different perceptions of the same thing ie the famous dress or how from different positions we get different objective outcomes. Thus showing that there is no one fixed material reality but rather its a reflection that can vary from person to person to some degree. Ifg Mind is behind all human conceptions of objective reality then why not the same logic apply for how objective reality came to be in the first place or at least that Mind is fundemental to objective reality. All we know is a direct experience of reality. Any conception about suff really existing outside our Mind cannot be directly verified. We could be a brain in a vat of in a simulation for all we know. Why we cannot verify what conscious actually is, what its nature is or even measure it and never will and yet scientist hold onto an impossible to verify idea like its fact. Especially in the like that at least some of the ideas of consciousness beyond brain have good arguements and some evidence. We cannot directly verify matter outside the Mind yet we don't throw it in the trash bin. The very idea of Mind and consciousness being fundemental comes from science itself. It comes from rational thinking about alternative ideas and what the data is saying. There are many good scientific ideas and arguements for MInd, Information and consciousness being fundemental. Here are just a few [B]John Wheeler’s Participatory Universe [URL unfurl="true"]https://futurism.com/john-wheelers-participatory-universe[/URL] Interpreting Quantum Mechanics Is All About Observers[/B] [I][COLOR=rgb(84, 172, 210)]Whether you favor a Wheeler-ish universe where the act of observation creates reality by triggering a collapse from outside, or a Many-Worlds approach where individual perceptions subdivide a complex reality from within, observers are central to both the Copenhagen and Many-Worlds interpretations.[/COLOR][/I] [URL="https://www.forbes.com/sites/chadorzel/2018/05/05/interpreting-quantum-mechanics-is-all-about-observers/?sh=2c90ca9d6f21"]Interpreting Quantum Mechanics Is All About Observers[/URL] [B]Integrated information theory: from consciousness to its physical substrate[/B] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.nature.com/articles/nrn.2016.44[/URL] [B]Is the Universe Made of Math?[/B] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-the-universe-made-of-math-excerpt/[/URL] [B]A quantum physical argument for panpsychism[/B] [URL='http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/9572/1/Shan_Gao_-_A_quantum_argument_for_panpsychism_2013.pdf'][U]http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/9572/1/Shan_Gao_-_A_quantum_argument_for_panpsychism_2013.pdf[/U][/URL] [B]Quantum and Electromagnetic Fields in Our Universe and Brain: A New Perspective to Comprehend Brain Function[/B] [I][COLOR=rgb(84, 172, 210)]According to our new perspective on brain function, infinite waveless energy is an infinite frequency (energy) that is not related to time or space. [/COLOR][/I] [URL="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8146693/"]Quantum and Electromagnetic Fields in Our Universe and Brain: A New Perspective to Comprehend Brain Function[/URL] [B]An Ontological Solution to the Mind-Body Problem [/B] [I][COLOR=rgb(84, 172, 210)]I have argued for a coherent idealist ontology that explains reality in a more parsimonious and[/COLOR][/I][COLOR=rgb(84, 172, 210)][I] empirically rigorous manner than mainstream physicalism and bottom-up panpsychism. This idealist ontology also offers more explanatory power than both physicalism and bottom-up panpsychism, in that it does not fall prey to either the ‘hard problem of consciousness’ or the ‘subject combination[/I][/COLOR] [I][COLOR=rgb(84, 172, 210)]problem’, respectively. It can be summarized as follows: there is only universal consciousness.[/COLOR][/I] [URL='https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/philosophies/philosophies-02-00010/article_deploy/philosophies-02-00010.pdf?version=1492682089']https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/philosophies/philosophies-02-[/URL][URL='https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/philosophies/philosophies-02-00010/article_deploy/philosophies-02-00010.pdf?version=1492682089']00010/article_deploy/philosophies-02-00010.pdf?version=1492682089[/URL] [B]The mind-blowing science behind how our brains shape reality[/B] [B][I][COLOR=rgb(84, 172, 210)]Social reality can even shape physical reality.[/COLOR][/I][/B][I][COLOR=rgb(84, 172, 210)] [/COLOR][/I] [URL='https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/the-mind-blowing-science-behind-how-our-brains-shape-reality/']https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/the-mind-blowing-science-behind-how-our-[/URL][URL='https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/the-mind-blowing-science-behind-how-our-brains-shape-reality/']brains-shape-reality/[/URL] [COLOR=rgb(0, 0, 0)]So as you can see there is a variety of well supported ideas that are based on Mind and Consciousness being fundemental. [/COLOR] [COLOR=rgb(0, 0, 0)]So obviouslt if the universe and everything is created by knowledge and information itself from a mind then we should expect to find that knowledge and information embedded in nature. We see this in ideas in how the universe fits so well with math (the Math Universe), or in how nature exibits certain patters for example that align with the Madelbrot set. Tomas Edison was asked where he gets his ideas for his inventions and he said they come to him from the universe out there somewhere as I could not have imagined such things on my own, This is a common them in art and other areas. The idea of laws governing the universe speaks of information and knowledge behind what we see. [/COLOR] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
O That the Atheist....
Top
Bottom