Hypothesis for an Intelligent and Conscious Universe

Originally posted by jiggerj

You call the universe intelligent and conscious. To many this inference means a god. If you want to knit-pick on this, fine. I will edit my words without changing the context.

I'm not knit-picking. You're making improper accusations that I'm attempting to correct. If people infer god and get all upset about it, then that's their and YOUR problem. Not mine. If I meant it to have a religious undertone I would've clearly stated that and posted in the religious conspiracy forum.

You're only way to deal with ideas like these is to inject god into it so you can proceed to tear it apart as an idea based religious fanaticism. Makes you feel good right.

But I clearly stated in the OP that I do not align myself with the god view. So get over it. You belong in the religious forums not the philosophical ones it seems.

No, our existence does not prove that the universe is intelligent and conscious. Our existence only proves our existence. Only the universe can prove its intelligence and consciousness by writing "Hi, I am the universe," across our sky.

Our existence proves there's a universe.

Originally posted by jiggerj

Just because we can think in no way proves that the universe can think. You take the human animal's best attribute (intelligence) and claim it as proof that the universe is intelligent.

As a matter of being self aware, yes. Which is a way to define both consciousness and intelligence. Of course both terms also have other meanings related more to cognition.

The best attribute of a fish is that it can swim. Is this proof that the universe can swim? The best attribute of a skunk is that it can spray an awful stink. Is this proof that the universe can spray an awful stink?

Yes, very good observations. Fishes do in fact swim and skunks do in fact spray. They are part of the same tree of life as we are, derived from the same source. So I would argue that all living things possess characteristics of consciousness and intelligence. However, we as humans, are the pinnacle (at least on earth)

reply to post by PhotonEffect

Our existence proves there's a universe.

No. Just no. We came very close to extinction at an early point in our evolution. You're saying that if we had died out it would prove there is no universe. See? You can't have it one way without the other. If our existence proves there's a universe, then our non-existence would prove there is no universe. You make a false connection. But don't worry, there's a lot of that going around here lately.

Originally posted by jiggerj

Logical? You take ONE attribute from ONE species of animal and offer that as proof of something as grand as a universal consciousness.

I'm taking the one attribute inherent in all living things, not just humans. I happen to think that we as humans have a deeper connection to the field consciousness than other living things.

The universe produces the human animal with an opposable thumb. Is this proof that the universe has an opposable thumb? The universe produces giraffes with a really long neck. Is this proof that the universe has a really long neck?

You're quite an analogy machine. And I see the points you are trying to make. The opposable thumb and long neck are results of the evolutionary process. Why an evolutionary process to begin with? What guides it? Why did the genetic codes that gave way to millions and millions of different species of life even come to exist in the first place.
In a universe that we're constantly being told was a totally random event that has no business giving way to life; life burst on to the scene in pretty dramatic fashion wouldn't you say? ( and I use the term "burst" loosely)

I'm not even saying that the universe ISN'T conscious and intelligent. I'm saying that what you offer as evidence for it is totally wrong, humanly self-centered and arrogant.

reply to post by PhotonEffect

However, we as humans, are the pinnacle (at least on earth)

Pinnacle? Are you serious? What are we doing that is so good for the earth, for the air, for the space beyond our atmosphere that is loaded with our debris? What are we doing that at the very least doesn't do harm to the environment? How many animals are there that don't pollute? How many animals are there that don't hate?

Hey, I love having the ability to sit here and debate with you, but it doesn't change the fact that we (thinking) humans are total s__t! We are an abomination to nature and everything we touch, and there's no way to debate that.

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by PhotonEffect

 

Pinnacle? Are you serious?

Yes, I meant in terms of the context of what we're discussing in that post -consciousness and intelligence, as it relates to living things on earth.

What are we doing that is so good for the earth, for the air, for the space beyond our atmosphere that is loaded with our debris? What are we doing that at the very least doesn't do harm to the environment? How many animals are there that don't pollute? How many animals are there that don't hate?

This isn't a debate about good vs evil, or morality. Although I would say that when we are brought into this existence we are not evil or possess mal intent. These are by-products of our environment- socially and culturally. Evil is acquired, but not inherent in us. Evil is also subjective in some ways. What one views as evil in one culture, may be viewed differently in others.

Animals don't have evil intents. They do what they have to to survive. Which is the law of nature isn't it.

Hey, I love having the ability to sit here and debate with you, but it doesn't change the fact that we (thinking) humans are total s__t! We are an abomination to nature and everything we touch, and there's no way to debate that.

Well that's your opinion on the matter, not a fact. Humans are guilty of a lot of bad things, yes. But there is also a lot of good out there too. I would say much more so. The problem is we're conditioned to focus on the bad things.

Yes, I meant in terms of the context of what we're discussing in that post -consciousness and intelligence, as it relates to living things on earth. What are we doing that is so good for the earth, for the air, for the space beyond our atmosphere that is loaded with our debris? What are we doing that at the very least doesn't do harm to the environment? How many animals are there that don't pollute? How many animals are there that don't hate?

This isn't a debate about good vs evil, or morality.

reply to post by PhotonEffect


Right. My intent here is to reduce the high regard we have for our intelligence. We consider this intelligence to be the most supreme attribute, and by this consideration we extend it to the universe. So far, our intelligence has been nothing but a destructive force, yet we want to claim that the universe is full of it. That's a bit scary.

Originally posted by jiggerj

Right. My intent here is to reduce the high regard we have for our intelligence. We consider this intelligence to be the most supreme attribute, and by this consideration we extend it to the universe. So far, our intelligence has been nothing but a destructive force, yet we want to claim that the universe is full of it. That's a bit scary.

More specifically, that the universe is filled with consciousness and that we are designed.

I think you're confusing intelligence for behavior.

reply to post by jiggerj


Something new cannot appear without something disappearing. Can change be called destruction?

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by jiggerj

 

Something new cannot appear without something disappearing. Can change be called destruction?

If you go with the adage, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," then yes, change is destructive. We humans might need to rape the land in order to lay down miles and miles of highway, build museums and universities and hospitals and apartment buildings, but nature sure doesn't need it.

We had food that was all naturally grown. We didn't have to knock down forests to plant seeds for our food. We lived a certain amount of years that was consistent with what nature offered us without putting any work into at all. We don't need to live to be 100 (we WANT TO, but we don't need to).

Long story short, we had it all, and we blew it.

Originally posted by winofiend

Originally posted by symptomoftheuniverse
There are as many atoms in our bodies as stars in the universe. We are exactly half way,but so is everything else in a infinate universe.

Well that depends on whether you agree the universe is infinite or not.

If it is infinite, then no. There are an infinite number of stars in the universe. Unending. An impossible concept to put into a container and compare to the finite number of atoms in our body.

Perhaps there are as many atoms in our body as there are stars in the visible universe.

But then, what we see is a limit of what we are. Not what is.

It is the threading called time that permits the infinite number of stars to exist, and they do. It requires infinite time AND infinite space to fit them all in. Time is the "breaking out" of everything all at the ONE now instant. It is not that there ever was a big bang. It is that there was the infinite divide called time and space.

After all, the reason why the ONE Singularity exists is because omniscience employs all of omnipotence to become true to the definition of omnipresent as the definition insists omniscience must exist even inside of absolute non-existence. It failed for It made one so It could go into it and be omnipresent. Finites, such as you and I, are the tools to serve as proxies as nothingness absorption sinks so omniscience can absorb it.

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by jiggerj

 

Something new cannot appear without something disappearing. Can change be called destruction?

If you go with the adage, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," then yes, change is destructive. We humans might need to rape the land in order to lay down miles and miles of highway, build museums and universities and hospitals and apartment buildings, but nature sure doesn't need it.

We had food that was all naturally grown. We didn't have to knock down forests to plant seeds for our food. We lived a certain amount of years that was consistent with what nature offered us without putting any work into at all. We don't need to live to be 100 (we WANT TO, but we don't need to).

Long story short, we had it all, and we blew it.

What is appearing presently is always changing. It is strange how the human mind thinks of it as destruction - who can tell what it should be like? The mind will tell you it is wrong - the mind will tell you that 'we have blown it'!
How could it know for sure that it is not exactly as it should be?

reply to post by Itisnowagain

What is appearing presently is always changing. It is strange how the human mind thinks of it as destruction - who can tell what it should be like? The mind will tell you it is wrong - the mind will tell you that 'we have blown it'! How could it know for sure that it is not exactly as it should be?

It's quite odd how the perspective on mankind is viewed at such extremes. Some will tell us that a perfect god created such a wonderful creature as man. Others can plainly see how imperfect nature can royally screw up by creating such horrors as two-headed snakes, kittens, and cows, and humans.

A naked ape? What's up with that?

We kill, and then call ourselves a peaceful species. We are the only species to pollute the earth, sea, and sky, and we consider ourselves intelligent - the caretakers of this planet. We grow more and more technologically advanced, yet still have no clue on how to conduct ourselves in intimate relationships, how to treat each other with respect, or how to feed the starving throughout the world.

Mankind - what an abomination to nature!

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

What is appearing presently is always changing. It is strange how the human mind thinks of it as destruction - who can tell what it should be like? The mind will tell you it is wrong - the mind will tell you that 'we have blown it'! How could it know for sure that it is not exactly as it should be?

It's quite odd how the perspective on mankind is viewed at such extremes. Some will tell us that a perfect god created such a wonderful creature as man. Others can plainly see how imperfect nature can royally screw up by creating such horrors as two-headed snakes, kittens, and cows, and humans.

A naked ape? What's up with that?

We kill, and then call ourselves a peaceful species. We are the only species to pollute the earth, sea, and sky, and we consider ourselves intelligent - the caretakers of this planet. We grow more and more technologically advanced, yet still have no clue on how to conduct ourselves in intimate relationships, how to treat each other with respect, or how to feed the starving throughout the world.

Mankind - what an abomination to nature!

It is because man is divided - the duality of man.
It is not wrong though and neither is it right.
However, the idea that it is wrong; is your suffering. Always wanting what isn't is eternal hell.