Philosophy Now Forum

One of them did, said Everett.

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:23 pm

Dubious wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:07 pmSometimes it seems that something are simply variations on the theme of nothing creating the fundamentals which allow it to emerge into everything else.

Do you mean something like this? "What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space." Erwin Schrödinger

Yes, something very similar but as mentioned in the unquoted part, denoted as particles from which quarks and strings may themselves derive and ultimately emerge into what we observe in classical physics which as you know includes GR. There exists, I imagine, what resembles a kind of biological process which operates between the micro and macro worlds, the former creating the latter; that part isn't new. Nothing, in its classical meaning, is not the same as that in the Quantum world being very different domains...conflations resulting in misunderstanding.

As mentioned, these are simply crazy mind distortions. Another one is why would the Big Bang be necessary if the universe as a whole is expanding at an accelerated rate. The Big Bang is only a GR conclusion ending in a singularity which the theory is no-longer able to reference. This would cause the BB to have preceding processes whose upshot is that incipient moment which classical theory affirms as the beginning...by why would acceleration be necessary!

I'll figure it out...in my mind! but it's just useless speculation on my part, hardly worth talking about. Its only purpose is to maintain communication between the synapses...while communication is still possible.

Impenitent wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 1:47 am did the cat know when the box was opened?

-Imp

Did it relieve itself or re-live?

uwot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 6:44 am One of them did, said Everett.

lol

Dubious wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 1:27 am

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:23 pmDo you mean something like this? "What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space." Erwin Schrödinger

Yes, something very similar but as mentioned in the unquoted part, denoted as particles from which quarks and strings may themselves derive and ultimately emerge into what we observe in classical physics which as you know includes GR.

In the context of the article, I think Anaximander was on to something: if the universe is made of some stuff, then it is stuff that has the same properties as the universe. It's still a work in progress, but here's my take on it with cartoon motorbikes and fornicating unicorns: https://popgunsbubblesandmotorbikes.blo ... -post.html

Dubious wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 1:27 amThere exists, I imagine, what resembles a kind of biological process which operates between the micro and macro worlds, the former creating the latter...

Well, biological processes are part of the universe. Quite when they kick in and take over from physics or chemistry is a moot point. According to pantheists, everything is effectively biology. Who knows? Maybe they're right.

uwot wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 7:48 am

Dubious wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 1:27 am

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:23 pmDo you mean something like this? "What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space." Erwin Schrödinger

Yes, something very similar but as mentioned in the unquoted part, denoted as particles from which quarks and strings may themselves derive and ultimately emerge into what we observe in classical physics which as you know includes GR.

In the context of the article, I think Anaximander was on to something: if the universe is made of some stuff, then it is stuff that has the same properties as the universe. It's still a work in progress, but here's my take on it with cartoon motorbikes and fornicating unicorns: https://popgunsbubblesandmotorbikes.blo ... -post.html

Dubious wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 1:27 amThere exists, I imagine, what resembles a kind of biological process which operates between the micro and macro worlds, the former creating the latter...

Well, biological processes are part of the universe. Quite when they kick in and take over from physics or chemistry is a moot point. According to pantheists, everything is effectively biology. Who knows? Maybe they're right.

Thanks for the link. By a biological process I meant one the universe itself adheres to, that being the growth and multiplication from something almost infinitesimally small to an unimagined augmentation of specialized building blocks forming brains and universes. It's the primordial process preceding both physics and chemistry, both of which precede biology in any form.

Dubious wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 1:10 amBy a biological process I meant one the universe itself adheres to, that being the growth and multiplication from something almost infinitesimally small to an unimagined augmentation of specialized building blocks forming brains and universes. It's the primordial process preceding both physics and chemistry, both of which precede biology in any form.

There is a lot we know about how clouds of hydrogen and helium created in the aftermath of some version of a big bang collapsed to form stars. We know how stars fuse these light elements to create heavier ones, and how elements bond to create inorganic and organic molecules. By convention that is the point where biology kicks in. I've nothing against any hypothetical primordial biological process, but I can't grasp how it can precede physics and chemistry, both of which "precede biology in any form".

uwot wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 1:22 pm

Dubious wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 1:10 amBy a biological process I meant one the universe itself adheres to, that being the growth and multiplication from something almost infinitesimally small to an unimagined augmentation of specialized building blocks forming brains and universes. It's the primordial process preceding both physics and chemistry, both of which precede biology in any form.

There is a lot we know about how clouds of hydrogen and helium created in the aftermath of some version of a big bang collapsed to form stars. We know how stars fuse these light elements to create heavier ones, and how elements bond to create inorganic and organic molecules. By convention that is the point where biology kicks in. I've nothing against any hypothetical primordial biological process, but I can't grasp how it can precede physics and chemistry, both of which "precede biology in any form".

Yes.

And likewise (as per my usual approach to this issue), some of us cannot grasp how all of this random collapsing and fusing of primordial substances not only managed to produce (by sheer chance) the perfect source of light, heat, and bio-driving energy,...



...but also the perfect physiological setting for awakening multifarious lifeforms into existence.

I just don't understand (cannot grasp) how anyone could look at that scene (especially in person) and imagine it to be the result of the blind and mindless processes of chance.

However, that being said (and just for funsies), I challenge anyone and everyone to come up with a better method of lighting and powering a dimension of reality than that of a sun.

In other words, can you imagine an illuminated setting that would look and feel more natural to its inhabitants than that of our earth/sun system?

If so, then describe it.
_______

seeds wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 6:18 pm...some of us cannot grasp how all of this random collapsing and fusing of primordial substances not only managed to produce (by sheer chance) the perfect source of light, heat, and bio-driving energy, but also the perfect physiological setting for awakening multifarious lifeforms into existence.

Seeds me old china, no one can; it doesn't follow that it can't.

seeds wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 6:18 pmI just don't understand (cannot grasp) how anyone could look at that scene (especially in person) and imagine it to be the result of the blind and mindless processes of chance.

On what grounds could you rule it out?

seeds wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 6:18 pmHowever, that being said (and just for funsies), I challenge anyone and everyone to come up with a better method of lighting and powering a dimension of reality than that of a sun.

In other words, can you imagine an illuminated setting that would look and feel more natural to its inhabitants than that of our earth/sun system?

If so, then describe it.

Any planet/star combo they evolved in. In the article that is the subject of this thread I discuss Ancient Greek philosophy, starting with Thales of Miletus. He was the first person we know of to systematically attribute phenomena to 'natural' causes. Science is still trying to do that but existence, life and consciousness remain indistinguishable from miracles.

seeds wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 6:18 pm I just don't understand (cannot grasp) how anyone could look at that scene (especially in person) and imagine it to be the result of the blind and mindless processes of chance.

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 8:12 am On what grounds could you rule it out?

On the grounds that...

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 8:12 am ...existence, life and consciousness remain indistinguishable from miracles.

On the grounds that the order implicit in just this one little scene alone...



...is just too much to expect as simply being the result of the random and unguided "collapsings and fusings" of blind and mindless quantum phenomena (sans any teleological impetus or goal).

On the grounds that humans should stop assuming that life, mind, and consciousness have only existed for the paltry few moments that this one universe has been in existence (as per the alleged BB theory), and that it is more likely that life and mind have had a literal eternity to evolve to a point where the task of creating a universe (out of the fabric of mind itself) is...

(as the late comedic actor Jackie Gleason use to say)

..."a mere bag of shells".

seeds wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 6:18 pm However, that being said (and just for funsies), I challenge anyone and everyone to come up with a better method of lighting and powering a dimension of reality than that of a sun.

In other words, can you imagine an illuminated setting that would look and feel more natural to its inhabitants than that of our earth/sun system?

If so, then describe it.

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 8:12 am Any planet/star combo they evolved in.

uwot, me old bean, you completely missed the point of the challenge.

And the point is to try and imagine a dimension of reality that doesn't use suns and planets as a setting for awakening us humans into existence.

Furthermore, an important element of the challenge is that it needs to be a setting that looks and feels as "natural" to us as this one does, so as not to cause us to be constantly thinking that there is something fishy or illogical about its configuration.

Again, just for speculative funsies, can you think of anything?

I guess the intent of my little challenge is to point out that if it can be logically deduced that suns and planets are the absolute best method for creating a dimension of reality wherein its inhabitants are least likely to think it is a product of mind,...

(which, to me, is essential in helping to conceal the fact that the universe is actually a "dream-like" illusion, and that there exists a higher level of wakefulness - above and outside of the dream - in a transcendent context of reality)

...then it can therefore be understood that it is by design that the universe (in tandem with our attenuated level of consciousness) is made to seem like a product of chance to us.

And that's because there literally is no better way to achieve the intended goals of not only awakening us into existence initially, but also of hiding the truth of our ultimate and eternal destiny, so that we are not compelled to seek it out prematurely.
_______

seeds wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 11:10 pmI guess the intent of my little challenge is to point out that if it can be logically deduced that suns and planets are the absolute best method for creating a dimension of reality wherein its inhabitants are least likely to think it is a product of mind,...

As I never tire of saying, with the right premises you can logically deduce anything. The trick is not to assume that a valid argument is a sound one.

seeds wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 11:10 pm(which, to me, is essential in helping to conceal the fact that the universe is actually a "dream-like" illusion, and that there exists a higher level of wakefulness - above and outside of the dream - in a transcendent context of reality)

That's quite a premise.

seeds wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 11:10 pm...then it can therefore be understood that it is by design that the universe (in tandem with our attenuated level of consciousness) is made to seem like a product of chance to us.

Hang on seeds, your argument is based on the fact that you

seeds wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 6:18 pm...just don't understand (cannot grasp) how anyone could look at that scene (especially in person) and imagine it to be the result of the blind and mindless processes of chance.

Where did the designer go wrong?

seeds wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 11:10 pm I guess the intent of my little challenge is to point out that if it can be logically deduced that suns and planets are the absolute best method for creating a dimension of reality wherein its inhabitants are least likely to think it is a product of mind,...

uwot wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 3:34 pm As I never tire of saying, with the right premises you can logically deduce anything. The trick is not to assume that a valid argument is a sound one.

By "sound argument," do you mean something that is provable or irrefutable?

If so, then how can one produce a "sound argument" for the existence of a designer of the universe if, for the sake of maintaining the integrity and viability of the design, the designer...

(as in the one who is in control of the parameters of the design)

...wants (needs) his existence to remain hidden and unprovable?

Now although I don't see a huge difference between "sound" and "valid," is that at least a "valid" argument?

seeds wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 11:10 pm (which, to me, is essential in helping to conceal the fact that the universe is actually a "dream-like" illusion, and that there exists a higher level of wakefulness - above and outside of the dream - in a transcendent context of reality)

uwot wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 3:34 pm That's quite a premise.

How is the pretty much "standard" metaphysical notion of there being a transcendent context of reality that exists above and outside of this one - "...quite a premise..."? - (as if shocking and unheard of)?

Seems quite perennial to me.

seeds wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 11:10 pm ...then it can therefore be understood that it is by design that the universe (in tandem with our attenuated level of consciousness) is made to seem like a product of chance to us.

uwot wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 3:34 pm Hang on seeds, your argument is based on the fact that you

seeds wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 6:18 pm ...just don't understand (cannot grasp) how anyone could look at that scene (especially in person) and imagine it to be the result of the blind and mindless processes of chance.

Where did the designer go wrong?

Yeah, you got me there.

Based on my own theory, I do indeed understand that the reason why humans can look at this scene...



...and presume it to be a product of chance, is due to the absolute perfection of the "illusion," and how the "artist" (designer) has managed to hide his brushstrokes so well,

That being said, perhaps you can think of it as being more of a rhetorical statement.

But isn't that the nature of the game that humans have been playing for millennia? - where those who cannot recognize the illusory nature of reality are convinced that those who say they can are lunatics?

Now how about using that extremely intelligent and creative mind of yours to meet that "challenge" I offered up earlier and try to come up with something better than suns and planets when it comes to producing a setting for the awakening of new human souls into existence.
_______

Seeds, that pretty scene leaves out much that is not so pretty. The farm labourers who once ploughed the pretty pasture were made homeless when they were no longer employed by the farmer who owned their tied cottages.

In that very field a magpie killed and ate a newly fledged blackbird.

The crops that preceded the pasture were dusted with chemicals that killed bees and other pollinating insects.

Nature is very cruel, and men are part of nature.

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 9:37 pm Seeds, that pretty scene leaves out much that is not so pretty. The farm labourers who once ploughed the pretty pasture were made homeless when they were no longer employed by the farmer who owned their tied cottages.

In that very field a magpie killed and ate a newly fledged blackbird.

The crops that preceded the pasture were dusted with chemicals that killed bees and other pollinating insects.

Nature is very cruel, and men are part of nature.

Good point. How come you are so intelligent, rational and wise in this case?

It is vary natural of the majority that humans are driven by some existential crisis within where they stripped off from reality as much details as possible, and therefrom extrapolate based on that bareness [nakedness] to dress it up as some great being. [Kantian]

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 9:37 pm Seeds, that pretty scene leaves out much that is not so pretty. The farm labourers who once ploughed the pretty pasture were made homeless when they were no longer employed by the farmer who owned their tied cottages.

Silly greedy men. The field would provide plenty for all to share.

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 9:37 pmIn that very field a magpie killed and ate a newly fledged blackbird.

The amazing thing about the 'designer' is that what appears to be suffering from our POV, is likely an illusion at the point beyond a 'suffering' threshold.

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 9:37 pmThe crops that preceded the pasture were dusted with chemicals that killed bees and other pollinating insects.

Silly men, need to learn better methods.

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 9:37 pmNature is very cruel, and men are part of nature.

From what I have witnessed of the omnipotence of this 'designer' entity (to our observable reality), I trust nothing beyond my own consciousness anymore, all MAJOR suffering is an illusion.

In fact, some years ago I was going to state on the forum that a plane will crash after flying over the Mediterranean within a week carrying 66 people...it happened. Screwed with my head all the reports on the news etc.. Ya this 'God' entity is weird as ****.

(those who foretell the future lie even if they tell the truth)..apologies to some weathermen