The Information (Viewer) Universe

Aadee

Each/any 4 dimensional universe is self defining and self contained. Rather like a constantly progressing simulation has been noted. All the information about the universe and its process are available to any consciousness that has the ability to detect, identify and use it.

Life, all life's, primary purpose is to identify, use, and transmit this information. Transmission methods are not required to be conscious, for example...DNA. Even the stimuli response in its most basic form is simply a way to detect information available in the universe and use it.

It could even appear that the gathering of information in the universe is the only purpose for life:
To identify this information and (in increasingly and always more complex ways) to record and transmit it.

Ever increasing complexity in life forms in order to better identify and manage information is the result. If allowed to develop- consciousness of some type will always emerge. There does not seem to be a limit on what kind of consciousness that can emerge, only that it is more effective than not conscious or purely reactive at identifying and using information.

In order to use information it has to be detected/identified. To become knowledge it must recorded and moved through time.

tim wood

It could even appear that the gathering of information in the universe is the only purpose for life — Aadee

Life, all life's, primary purpose is to identify, use, and transmit this information. — Aadee

With even just the example of life on earth it would seem the only purpose of life is to be alive. But in these airy regions of thought, if any contact at all is to be kept with the ground, then about the only way to do it is through a careful consideration of meaning, especially of the terms used. Not so much definition, but on the one hand what is intended, and on the other what is got out. For example when you write "purpose" what do you mean? In using a word like purpose you risk importing into your argument just what is in question in your argument, which if it be the case, destroys the argument.

Aadee

↪tim wood

Thankyou for your feedback. I see your point. the overall idea that I am just beginning flesh out is already difficult. I do not wish drag in arguments that are about issue's, (such as existence of God), that are not central to what I am building. The word purpose does that.

With even just the example of life on earth it would seem the only purpose of life is to be alive.

So would it seem.
Is it what life does or what life is?

One central tenet of life is change, the way change is accomplished is with information. Either imposed or realized.

It is possible to have life that is unchanging and very nearly immortal or capable of extreme stasis.
Why then is not all life like this. It is alive and it survives.

tim wood

So would it seem.
Is it what life does or what life is?

One central tenet of life is change, the way change is accomplished is with information. Either imposed or realized.

It is possible to have life that is unchanging and very nearly immortal or capable of extreme stasis.
Why then is not all life like this. It is alive and it survives. — Aadee

This kind of thinking naturally pushes language to the limit. Language in itself just a toolbox for dealing with simple things. When thinking self-consciously digs into the simple, then in order to keep the thinking from collapsing on itself, it needs to shore up its walls. "Change" is such a weak point. What do you intend as the meaning of "change"? What if anything does change presuppose? I'm thinking there is no change in the moment. And that change is accomplished with information requires some - more than some - elaboration. Not all change - once we understand what change, here, is - requires information. If it does, then we require some explication of "information."

No doubt I am missing the relatively simple point of your argument. Can you dumb it down a bit for me into a sentence or two?

Echarmion

↪Aadee

How do we know all this apparent focus on observation is not just our human pattern-matching software imagining things? It's easy to get carried away by apparent patterns in our observed reality, thinking they represent a deep truth while they really are just a cloud that kind of looks like a dragon.

Aadee

↪tim wood

Is all on me. I am trying to scratch out some parts of a bigger idea. And not doing a very good job of it i'm afraid. This is where I'm staking a claim, so to speak. below with more declaratory statements:

1. Everything in any universe exists independent of humanity or even a mind to create or appreciate it.

2. There is no unavailable knowledge, only the ability to detect or use it.

3. Given the opportunity, life exists and is a result of both external, environmental and quantum influences.

4. Life exists to detect and gather information about the universe it inhabits and in some way use and transmit it.

5. If given the opportunity life will always develop towards increasing complexity. With better and more effective ways of accessing and/or using information.

6. If given the opportunity increasing complexity will always result in consciousness of some sort.

Aadee

↪Echarmion

And I am not a fan of the "simulation universe". Patterns can indeed be deceiving especially when perspective changes. I understand the original posting was choppy. Sorry for that, perhaps my reply to Tim in the thread helps?

The Information (Viewer) Universe

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions