I believe in Godel's Incompleteness Theorems. — Posty McPostface

What Godel's Incompleteness Theorems has to do with emergence?

There is not such a thing like emergence. Do you believe in magic?

What if the perfection is infinitum?

Suppose that cosmos is made of species which they have conflict of interest, what is the best for one is the worst for another and vice versa. So the state of perfection is not reachable unless all other species except one are annihilated.

Good to know. Looking forward to it. Is there an option package? — Bitter Crank

It is like of advance body, it takes different shapes. I know this from communication with deceased persons.

You're not paying attention. There is no heaven, as well as no media outlets or bookstores, fine restaurants, or sex organs. That's why you need to store up as many memories as you can now. Have you read Thackeray? Dostoyevsky? Are you having as much sex as possible so that you will have as many happy memories as possible? Are you eating up-market and better tasting hot dogs? — Bitter Crank

Why do you think that you will have a memory after death?

We are mind. — Rich

Isn't that right to say that we are minds? Why you use singulaur mind?

I believe that life is continuous so you will have a new body when you die.

You mean like dreams, ideas, possible actions? — Rich

Yes.

It's not nothing. It's Mind.

Try an experiment. Think about picking up something and then pick it up. That is what the Mind can do - waves of mind — Rich

So you believe that you have a mind? Why you are not dualist then?

No, it is exactly as we experience it. No illusions. — Rich

So we are different and there are minds as many as people?

One and the same. — Rich

So we are illusions created by the mind tricking ourselves.

What is inside mind? — Rich

Everything is outside to mind.

Take a look and tell Mr what you find. — Rich

I am talking about inside. You realm which your thoughts and feeling happen within. We can change reality. Therefore there is an essence inside too. Something which can affects reality. Nothing cannot affect reality.

Yes, it mind vibrating. — Rich

Good. What about inside? We can affect the reality. Is there an essence inside too?

What do you think is the essence of quantum waves? — Rich

It is essence of matter. It is something. Otherwise we are dealing with an illusion and what we experience is generate by the essence who is the sustainer. There is no other way around.

As an wave in an ocean. Differences and similarities. — Rich

Ocean is the matter and wave is forms. Matter has an essence. Things that we experience cannot comes from nothing, I mean the end of matter when you cannot focus more.

Matter is energy which is non-substantive but we still feel something. It is like steam that condenses to b water that condenses to ice. Insubstantiality moving toward substantially.

So you believe that matter is an illusion therefore there is a sustainer?
— bahman

Not at all. It is real and is exactly as we feel it. — Rich

So matter has an essence?

Yes we feel the demarcation though microscopically it dissipates. Whole mediating, this delineation may disappear. — Rich

Mater should have an essence otherwise we have to accept the fact that it is illusion, therefore it needs a sustainer, so called God.

It is essentially nothingness, but there is still an impulse that causes awakening from the sleep. — Rich

So you believe that matter is an illusion therefore there is a sustainer?

1) It is what is peering out through the eyes, learning, experimenting, creating and evolving. — Rich

I agree.

2) It is what we experience when we are awake. — Rich

We experience two things. Inside and outside.

3) Unconscious mind it's the experience of sleeping between dreams and awake. — Rich

I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

There remains an unused to awake. — Rich

I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

Subconscious is somewhere in between. — Rich

Yes, if you believe in unconscious mind.

4) The communication network center that transmits and receives between other minds and other things (sharing). — Rich

It is creative too. Sometimes solution to a problem pops up from subconscious mind into conscious mind.

5) Forms and qualia as vibrations. — Rich

That what I called matter state. The matter has a property to create it.

6) We act based upon a virtual goal. — Rich

Yes. You can affect reality. We create virtual goal and follow it. We create a causal chain when we decide.

I am not a dualist. Mind and matter are the same operating in different directions. — Rich

I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

Matter is decaying mind as opposed to organizing mind. — Rich

So we have two minds?

This is a good topic. I wanted to open the same topic here. I think the population will become a major issue when oil finishes.

If you are asking what they are doing, they are the transmission/receiving mechanism for the mind(s) that permeate the body. The nervous system is the mind's communication network. It too is living. — Rich

So that is mind which experience, decide and act? Which does thinking?

Some Brief Arguments for Dualism — Wayfarer

What are the physical processes in the brain for?

It's not even a question. — charleton

I know that creation is not a question. You said that you need to open the book of nature to understand what is going on. I asked what is going on?

More importantly, why would a perfect god even create to begin with? To be perfect would mean this god is complete, lacking in nothing. It would lack emotions, which would include any desire, and would be void of a personality, which would otherwise require a constant flux. I don't see any way a perfect god could even exist. If it does, it must be static. If there is a god, it would appear it is imperfect. — Crystanium

Yes.

If you are asking is there a god, then ask that!
Otherwise you seem to have your question backwards. You cannot understand the universe by imposing a predefined view of god upon it; You have to understand god through your understanding of god's creation.
The argument goes; The universe is...... therefore the creator is .....
You are taking a view of god through the BOOK "of god"; but this is a human creation.
You need to open the book of nature to really see what is going on. — charleton

What is going on? Why we are here?

No law imposes rationality, especially in matters that touch theology; so go in peace. For us who care about rationality it leaves the question, why are you posting here if your mind is set? It's apparently not for the fruits of discussion - were you looking for approval and applause? — tim wood

It is about fruit of discussion, learning.

What is "God?" I mean... do we really have an answer to this? The creative force? — Jon

No, creative person.

If "God" brought everything into being maybe the reason for creation was akin to "separating the wheat from the chaff?" So creation, in and of itself, is an evolutionary act. — Jon

Evolution is directed toward perfection, becoming Godly, which is logically impossible. So the act of creation is imperfect.

One thing that seems apparent to me is that creation affords me the ability to see. — Jon

The main question is where we are heading?

The problem of evil is what you're asking after. And anyone who says they've figured it out is wrong. — Buxtebuddha

You are correct if you define evil as absence of good.

After some thought, and subject to correction, I do not (even) think you can say anything about the status of the perfection - even that it was perfect. The problem lies in the fact of judgment, and the qualifications of the judge. Perfect-for-me is certainly not the same thing as simply perfect. — tim wood

That is true. We cannot judge perfection by which I mean we cannot say that something is perfect or not. But the subject of this thread is not that whether we could not judge perfection or not.

I buy this. Everything is in motion, at some level and in some sense, even if just the vibrations of the atoms in a bar of iron. But what does this say about perfection? If perfection is an end, "no further or lower allowed..., no motion" then perfection in the thing itself is fleeting, to the point of non-existence. All that's left is the idea of a thing, and the person who holds the idea. And it would seem that ideas must be approximations. The idea of this here bar of iron remains static, even as the thing itself is continuously changing. — tim wood

Reaching to state of perfection, if possible, is not equal to state of non-existence.

Well, if God is the creator, and is the one who is perfect, then do you see any problems with the rest of our topic? — tim wood

No.

In particular, you posit imperfection, which is inconsistent with your idea of God. — tim wood

I don't understand you here. I didn't say that God is imperfect.

What are you going to give up? — tim wood

I think my argument sounds and I am not going to give up anything.

It is perceived and sensed as such. Under analysis, as well peer deeper, it gradually becomes more-and more non-physical, quantitized. — Rich

Quantized things are physical and have forms.

There is no separation our solidity. — Rich

What do you mean?

A journal article I once read concerning the same topics as this thread--physicalism and epiphenomenalism--pointed out that we do not observe causation, we only observe relationships. — WISDOMfromPO-MO

Could you please provide the reference?

I have brought up before here the strong case made by even other sources against the existence of causes, causation, etc.

We separate two events in our minds and we use induction to conclude that one caused the other. But, it is my understanding, nobody has ever observed any such "causing" happening.

Again, if causes, causation do not exist, why does materialism matter? — WISDOMfromPO-MO

Yes, that is true. We can never observe causation. The only thing that we can observe is correlation between events. I am however not sure that we can prove that causation does not exist therefore materialism might be relevant.

Me either. The same goes for "physical" processes. I asked what does it mean to be physical or non-physical. — Harry Hindu

To me physical is made of stuff and has form, such as chair. I cannot comprehend non-physical thing such as mind.

No, I meant what I said. Imperfection is lack of perfection, hence it cannot be created. — Lone Wolf

Why? I cannot understand.

An indeterminable (note that in our exchange you changed this to "indeterminate" so let's stick to the original term for the sake of clarity) state is a state that cannot be determined. — Janus

An indeterminable state could be anything and it could lead to anything. An indeterminable state could be X, Y, Z etc and in that sense is indifferent.

Moreover, even if we accept that there is no problem in defining the state of C then we face with the question that how could we reach from C to B, through another indeterminable state and this is problematic.

Why does the lack of something need to be created? — Lone Wolf

The main questions are why something imperfect should be created or how something imperfect could be created? Is that what you want to ask?

Imperfection means lack of perfection. If an artist creates a sketch, and then another person comes and erases part of it, did the artist create an imperfect sketch? — Lone Wolf

Probably. You need a perfect artist to judge this situation.

Is indeterminate state an indifferent state? You understood that the former statement is contradictory therefore its negate should be correct.