The purpose is to create, observe, learn, and evolve. To have fun. — Rich
Could it be said that science's inability to explain the reason for the seemingly intelligent behavior of subatomic particles and the nature of consciousness supports the idea that there is some sort of ID at work, perhaps one that is still becoming aware of its own nature? The ever-increasing known complexity of the universe seems congruent with elements of biocentrism and quantum mechanics - where things only exist when observed. Did atoms exist before we were able to see them, or is that just the universe's attempt to explain all of the wondrous things it has unwittingly created in a vastly intelligent semi-aware state? — CasKev
I am a theist and I do have faith in a Heaven where all tears will be wiped away. However, I freely admit that I do not know what this would look like beyond the bare description - in other words, existence beyond this material world remains unimaginable to me.If the universe has been around for over 14 billion years, why wouldn't it be more than likely that some civilization now has the ability to create realities for us to experience; and that we are also part of that creation process. Moreover, it may be that they even have the ability to move from universe to universe. We couldn't even conceive of how advanced such a civilization could be. To say that there is nothing beyond the physical is just too dogmatic for me. It's similar to religious belief.
For me, consciousness is much more than what goes on in the brain, which is what I attempted to explain in my thread on NDEs. — Sam26
I read your NDEs thread. The issue with that argument is that it has little purchasing power with those who did not have such experiences. Literarily, we don't have the sensations those people had, the raw data, to be able to make those judgements. The NDEs show that this is a possibility, perhaps even a likely possibility, but it remains meaningless to us because we cannot begin to imagine it - we lack the necessary sense data.
So to say that consciousness is beyond what goes on in the brain, fine, I agree. But what does that mean, practically? Where was consciousness before birth? Where will it be after death? What is the relationship between consciousness and memory? Etc. We have an extremely blurry image. — Agustino
Sure, but the reality of that would be meaningless to the person lacking the experience. What does sight mean to someone who has never seen in their life? Sure, they hear from this and that that there is this thing called sight - so what? It means nothing to them.We can know that an experience is real if there is enough evidence to support it. I don't need to have the experience myself. — Sam26
I don’t think that it’s necessary to invoke Intelligent Design (which amounts to Theism) at the metaphysical level, to explain how there could be a metaphysical world, including living beings like ourselves. It seems to me that the “existence” of the metaphysical world can be explained, within itself, without outside or higher invocation. — Michael Ossipoff
Michael, I don't see how intelligent design is Theistic ("or amounts to Theism"), even at the metaphysical level. I know that Theists use the argument to support their belief that the universe was created by God, but all the intelligent design argument concludes is that there was a designer or designers. The argument says nothing about the nature of the designer, or even the character of the designer.
— Sam26
My own view is that the universe does show evidence of design
...consciousness survives bodily existence.
Sure, but the reality of that would be meaningless to the person lacking the experience. What does sight mean to someone who has never seen in their life? Sure, they hear from this and that that there is this thing called sight - so what? It means nothing to them. — Agustino
False analogy. I have seen buildings, I have seen France on TV, etc. Easy for me to imagine.So if I haven't had the experience of going to France, as say, you have, then the reality of your experience would be meaningless to me? That makes no sense to me. If that was the case, then why explain to people what it's like. Your friend explains their experience of going to France, but you say to him, it's meaningless to me, so don't bother. That seems a bit strange to me. Now some experiences are more difficult to explain than others, but I don't see how they're meaningless. — Sam26
But, if it isn't Theism, then what are the alternative proposals for who the designer is (or who the designers are)? — Michael Ossipoff
If it's a nonphysical designer and creator, then how is that different from what many people mean by God? ...or by the gods? — Michael Ossipoff
As for myself, I say that the notion of "creation" is anthropomorphic. Very few things can be said about Reality beyond what's describable and discussable--In fact, that's a truism. Metaphysics is the limit of what's describable and discussable. — Michael Ossipoff
It goes without saying that, when physicists investigate and examine the physical world, what they find is going to be consistent with our being here. — Michael Ossipoff
I've been telling an alternative explanation: There are infinitely-many abstract if-then facts, and infinitely-many complex systems of inter-referring abstract if-then facts. Of course, among that infinity of systems, there must be one whose events and relations are those of your experience.
There's no reason to believe that your experience is other than that.
That's your life-experience possibility-story. It goes without saying that it would be consistent with there being you. So that that consistent-ness needn't be explained by design. — Michael Ossipoff
Of course, And that's so whether or not there's reincarnation. A person never experiences a time without experience.
The sleep at the end of lives (or the end of this life, if there isn't reincarnation) is timeless. Before actual complete shutdown (which of course is never expesrienced by the dying person), there's a time when there remains no memory or knowledge that there was or could be such things as life, world, body, identity, time, or events. That person has reached timelessness, and the impending complete shutdown has then become completely irrelevant and meaningless for him/her. S/he neither knows nor cares about it.
It's just sleep.
Because it's our final outcome, and is timeless, I claim that it's our natural, normal and usual state of affairs. — Michael Ossipoff
How could these quarks assemble and organize without some sort of outside guidance? A computer could never have been created - never mind programmed - without some sort of intelligent designer. — CasKev
I would ask, though, for believers in an intelligent designer: What does something which is not designed look like? — Moliere
I would ask, though, for believers in an intelligent designer: What does something which is not designed look like? — Moliere
It happens all the time. When one is asleep or unconscious there is no sense of duration (real time). Duration only exists in the awake state. — Rich
Having no sense of time, and existing outside of time are two different things — Sam26
I don't find that a difficult question. Look at the shape of the sand in the dessert caused by eddies, or the random placement of rocks on the ground. There are too many examples to list. — Sam26
On the other hand, if those who don't believe in intelligent design aren't committing the fallacy of the self-sealing argument, answer the following: What would count as evidence of intelligent design? When we say that something is intelligently designed what does that mean other than, a structure having parts so arranged that the whole can accomplish or be used to accomplish activities of a higher order. Isn't this the hallmark of any intelligently designed object. Is there anything that you know of that has been intelligently designed that doesn't fit this description, assuming someone isn't aiming at randomness?
even the eddies in the sand could be thought of as intelligently designed — Moliere
. Look at the shape of the sand in the dessert caused by eddies, or the random placement of rocks on the ground. — Sam26
The tree seems more complicated to me than the chair, for instance. But the chair is certainly a product of intelligent design. — Moliere
"But, if it isn't Theism, then what are the alternative proposals for who the designer is (or who the designers are)?" — Michael Ossipoff
Why does there have to be alternative proposals? — Sam26
I've been telling an alternative explanation: There are infinitely-many abstract if-then facts, and infinitely-many complex systems of inter-referring abstract if-then facts. Of course, among that infinity of systems, there must be one whose events and relations are those of your experience.
There's no reason to believe that your experience is other than that.
That's your life-experience possibility-story. It goes without saying that it would be consistent with there being you. So that that consistent-ness needn't be explained by design.
That's certainly a possibility, but if the evidence of NDEs are as strong as I think, then it's probably much different than just my existence fits within the realm of what's possible. Anything that exists fits within the logic of what's metaphysically possible, if it's true that all facts obtain, but I don't know that that is true.
Everyday within a particular universe new facts obtain, it's not static.
Although maybe one could argue that every possibility at some point will obtain, especially if you believe in multiple universes.
For me, consciousness lies at the bottom of everything (it's what unites everything), even this reality is a result of a mind or consciousness, and we are just a part of that, with our own individuality.
Some might ask, well isn't that a god of sorts? I don't know, maybe, maybe not. I'm agnostic about that.
Of course, And that's so whether or not there's reincarnation. A person never experiences a time without experience.
The sleep at the end of lives (or the end of this life, if there isn't reincarnation) is timeless. Before actual complete shutdown (which of course is never expesrienced by the dying person), there's a time when there remains no memory or knowledge that there was or could be such things as life, world, body, identity, time, or events. That person has reached timelessness, and the impending complete shutdown has then become completely irrelevant and meaningless for him/her. S/he neither knows nor cares about it.
It's just sleep.
Because it's our final outcome, and is timeless, I claim that it's our natural, normal and usual state of affairs.
I don't know what evidence there would be for your second paragraph, that is, "The sleep at the end of lives...," etc. I can't make any sense of a person having existence in timelessness, I'm not sure what that would mean. Unless you're talking about ceasing to exist, then of course there would be no experiences for you to have.
My take is based on what I've discovered after studying NDEs for over 12 years. The evidence suggests something quite different. I think we go on as temporal individuals, and that we experience many different lives in many different universes. This is more of an educated guess though, based on the studies.
S/he neither knows nor cares about it.
It's just sleep.
Because it's our final outcome, and is timeless, I claim that it's our natural, normal and usual state of affairs. — Michael Ossipoff
The chair is an artefact, so obviously it is designed, as that is the meaning of 'artefact'. — Wayfarer
What perfect variables? Reality is just some way and we create models of it. What paradox? The universe just exists.Because nothingness wouldn't require all of the perfect variables that make our existence possible. Because there would be no paradoxes to explain away. — CasKev
Absolutely. I believe that there's probably reincarnation, because, as i was saying, it's metaphysically implied and supported. — Michael Ossipoff
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.