Your question makes no sense as I've pointed out. My — 180 Proof
No I don't see it that way at all. Each of us has his own truths which consider them as undeniable. I don't see any harm at sharing them with others. — dimosthenis9
Sorry I don't understand what you wanna say. — dimosthenis9
I don't understand what this means, it needs context, Bret. Can you demonstrate what you mean by this is a couple of sentences. What is a potent force? And how is human consciousness an example of such? And can you show us how this potent force is more potent (what does potent mean in this context?) compared to, say, nature?
exceptional about human consciousness. — Jerry
Life forms (microbes) appeared in the Universe a billion of years ago. And from that primitive life animals and humans have been developed. In that sense, life may be said to be part of the Universe.But humans are of the universe, we are an aspect of the universe made manifest, what we think, invent, debate, kill, save, disassemble, assemble is all in and of the universe. — universeness
Don't know how that relates to be honest. — Jerry
Yes, I see this. And you did well. It is very interesting and something valuable to know!That's why I ask for each person's individual truths cause of the exact uncertain nature of the search for absolute truths. — dimosthenis9
Yes, it does.But still except for humans it must represent something from the bigger picture also, no? Even a tiny percentage of it if you want. — dimosthenis9
Yes, unfortunately I have this habit, sticking to words! :grin:But don't stick so much to the word itself. Just wanted to emphasize things that someone thinks that are undeniable facts about the function of universe. — dimosthenis9
Are you insinuating that this is a self-contradiction? Because it you do, you are right! :grin:1. There are no Absolute Truths
2. There are no Absolute Truths
— Alkis Piskas
So you're saying these are absolute truths? — Tom Storm
Try harder! Either you're lazy or I'm a fool! :snicker: — Agent Smith
Exactly. :ok:Interesting. I personally don't see how the word 'absolute' placed in front of some words does anything useful. It's often a way of rhetorically exaggerating or reinforcing something. — Tom Storm
Yet, "certain" implies "absolutely". Otherwise, we would say "almost certain", which lies somewhere on the continuum that you mention. But that continuum has "certain" at one end. We can't go past it.I think I can say I am not 'absolutely certain' about something because in this context absolute is a way of describing a continuum of certainty and doubt. — Tom Storm
No, there certainly isn't. Although, zero can be considered an "absolute" only if we take into consideration the conditions under which temperature is measured and only under these circumstances. E.g. the precision of and therefore the indications on the thermometer with which we measure a temperature may differ from those of another thermometer. Or the themometer itself might not function well. And so on.But there is no continuum of zero. — Tom Storm
In the box example you mentioned, I consider the word "empty" as an absolute. "Mostly empty", which you mention, is relative, and certainly different from just "empty". Besides, what does "emptiness" mean, other than a state of containing nothing?But there may be a continuum of 'empty'. E.g., the box was mostly empty vs the box was absolutely/completely empty. — Tom Storm
Life forms (microbes) appeared in the Universe a billion of years ago. And from that primitive life animals and humans have been developed. In that sense, life may be said to be part of the Universe.
At the same time, however, we are separate units, independent of the Universe. And the Universe is independent of us. (It existed before us and if we never existed, it would still exist. And it will most probably continue to exist, even if the human race or even all the life in it is extinct.) — Alkis Piskas
No I don't see it that way at all. Each of us has his own truths which consider them as undeniable. I don't see any harm at sharing them with others. — dimosthenis9
So, according to this viewpoint, and if I undestood well, since humans belong to the Universe, or better, since humans and the Universe are One, human concepts belong to the Universe and the Universe contains only absolute truths, right? OK. — Alkis Piskas
It is also my view that every thought that has ever formed in the brain of any lifeform which has ever existed or ever will exist is a consequence of the ways in which quanta can combine or interact and all such quanta is of and exists within the universe. In accordance with the OP, I would be prepared to label such a statement as one of my personal absolute truths. — universeness
The only absolute truth is there are no absolute truths' is just a propositional logic statement it is no evidence at all, than absolute truths don't exist. — universeness
I would like to hear more about that. So you think mind function is a quantum procedure like Penrose suggests? — dimosthenis9
Not as 'fundamental quanta' but yes, when fundamental quanta is combined/processes into information.you mean that they could carry some kind of information also? — dimosthenis9
Yes, I understood this to be the entire point of your OP. For me, what you are describing as absolute truths translates to "fundamental beliefs". — Pantagruel
Whatever the name, those things which are essential to one's being. — Pantagruel
we stake our existence on the veracity of what we choose to believe — Pantagruel
And when you say that such quanta is of and exist within the universe, you mean that they could carry some kind of information also? — dimosthenis9
Well, I am intrigued by his hypothesis and that of his partner Stuart Hameroff. Did you view my thread on the topic? Consciousness, microtubules and the physics of the brain. — universeness
. I do think phenomena such as superposition, entanglement and quntum tunneling are likely to be employed within human consciousness despite the current unpopularity of Penrose and Hameroff's hypothesis. — universeness
But if QM is a fundamental part of the universe then it seems intuitive that it would be part of human consciousness. I have to temper this however as cosmologists are forever warning of the dangers of using intuitive thinking when trying to understand the workings of the universe. — universeness
I do raise a small eyebrow of interest towards those who posit a universe in which humans may be components of a future 'universal mind,' a kind of panpsychist style emerging existence — universeness
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.