The Window For Consciousness To Survive

Login or register to post comments Last Post 0 reads   79 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 51 through 60 (of 79 total)
  • Sun, Oct 06, 2019 - 11:04pm

    #51
    New_Life

    New_Life

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 18 2011

    Posts: 193

    count placeholder

    Mechanical universe

I don’t believe, I accept and understand the mechanical universe

I also do observe a universe of energy flows.

Clearly we are now connected with the relatively new invention of the internet and Chris and Adam hosting this. Without either it would never have been possible.

Is there another more natural mechanism of communication that I am not aware of where others can affect peoples life outcomes by merely focusing their collective thoughts ?  I seriously doubt it, but as its just one single study you have shared, I’m interested in more enquiry and research for evidence on how that energy can (or cannot) flow and the effects it has or doesnt.

  • This reply was modified 11 months, 2 weeks ago by New_LifeNew_Life.
  • Mon, Oct 07, 2019 - 12:21am

    #52
    New_Life

    New_Life

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 18 2011

    Posts: 193

    count placeholder

    Conscience – how we learn and how it evolves

OliveOilGuy

For most of the time we tend to think of ourselves as “Civilised”

History shows us that humans are at best, civilised savages, some more so than others and if put under enough stress or under the influence of a substance to lower inhibitions those chains of civilisation are quickly broken.  (Road Rage, Drunken fights, etc)

Evolution of our conscience is present in the teaching of moral codes that our parents and leaders passed on when we were younger.  And just because you may have learnt moral teachings from ancient scripts, it does not make the religions real or truthful, however the stories/fables can still be an analogue to today’s society, (The Good Samaritan for example)

Most of our behaviours are formed by what we have learnt are acceptable to ourselves and those around us in the environment we co-exist in.  Mainly because the majority of us have empathy and are able to see the world from other peoples perspectives.  ie If I were in your shoes on this forum, I’d expect my response to you to address the point your raised with thought and reasoned argument, hence if I elected to start swearing and giving directed abuse you would rightly think less of me.  So operating within acceptable bounds helps us both get along, we have established what I hope is a reasonable enough shared moral code to help us both communicate.

Some world leaders try to promote what they want to instil in the population as inherently good and right, often to control the masses.  ie Pay your taxes, work hard long hours, “debt” gets rebranded as “credit” so you spend your money on a constant consumerist treadmill.  Other public figures also indicate how they feel people should think, vote and make decisions that affect the harmony of the world we live in.  Think of Sir Richard Branson telling people to consider reducing Co2 emissions whilst being involved in an expanding airline and space tourism.

These moral codes form the Zeitgeist of our ages, they evolve.

Consider other hot topics that have become more acceptable as years go by.  Yes these are difficult for the less liberal minded, but they are gaining traction; Abortion, Homosexuality, TransGender and same sex marriage.  The most modern accepting societies conscience is evolving and accepting topics that people could barely mention 50 years previously.

Even in hard lined societies, we see things that were outlawed becoming “normal” or “okay” often to suit another agenda.

Here’s one such example of a society’s collective conscience evolving, hot off the presses…  KSA needs new money to help prop up its indebted country that’s over reliant on natural resources.  It needs to play a good PR game after recent events involving a murdered journalist.  It needs to appeal to westerners with different views of what makes good or bad moral decisions.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-49947515

So I reason conscience is embedded in us by our childhood and our continued interaction in the world around us.  We store that morality and recall it in times when needed.

Its also not black and white, ie it’s not digital, there’s degrees of greyness here too.

Consider a surgeon, running late for an important operation, she has a 50mile drive to get to the hospital, she overslept, its 6am the roads are currently quiet, by how much should she break the speed limit?  Whereabouts and for how long?

What if the patient was your life partner critically ill?

What if one of the towns the surgeon speeds through is where your grandchildren are crossing the road to catch the early bus for a school trip?

What if the surgeon had been going heavy on the red wine til midnight?

Knowingly or unknowingly we all make decisions on a daily basis that we are either comfortable or uncomfortable with.  We justify them to ourselves.  Conscience and morality for me is always changing based on new information and what society deems to agree to be currently acceptable.  Otherwise new laws would never get passed, they set the current benchmark of what we will tolerate.

Knowing the above, personally I certainly don’t need any other outside supernatural explanations.

New_Life-

I don’t believe, I accept and understand the mechanical universe

Haha no you don’t.  You don’t understand the universe any better than the rest of us.  No human does.  All the questions, the iffy parts, we all paper over with our various beliefs.  You just believe all the bits that none of us can explain will eventually be revealed to be mechanical in nature.  That’s a belief, not acceptance, or understanding.

Not to put too fine a point on it: papering over holes that you can’t explain in your theory of the universe but pretending you understand it and that you’ll end up being proven right eventually – that’s called an act of faith. 🙂

“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” — WJC

So I’ll write you down for: “I believe the universe to be strictly mechanical in nature.”

 

  • Mon, Oct 07, 2019 - 04:22am   (Reply to #51)

    #54
    New_Life

    New_Life

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 18 2011

    Posts: 193

    count placeholder

    re: re: Mechanical universe

Rather than me refute your claim, it might help the constructive nature of this conversation and eloborate what you understand by the term “mechanical universe”

 

I’m agnostic to how scientific understanding of the universe will grow as we continue to observe, measure and learn.

 

Edit: I do accept the current scientific findings describing our current understanding of the universe

  • This reply was modified 11 months, 2 weeks ago by New_LifeNew_Life.
  • Mon, Oct 07, 2019 - 06:02am

    #55
    New_Life

    New_Life

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 18 2011

    Posts: 193

    count placeholder

    Examples please

Dave, grateful for evidence for you making this statement..

“papering over holes that you can’t explain in your theory of the universe but pretending you understand it “

New_Life-

Dave, grateful for evidence for you making this statement..

“papering over holes that you can’t explain in your theory of the universe but pretending you understand it “

Well now.  I was making an assumption.  Namely, that, along with the rest of us, you  agree that you don’t know how everything in the universe works.  🙂   I certainly wasn’t singling you out for ignorance – we are all ignorant together – but we all paper over our respective ignorance through our belief systems.

As for “mechanical universe”, its also defined as “clockwork universe”:

In the history of science, the clockwork universe compares the universe to a mechanical clock. It continues ticking along, as a perfect machine, with its gears governed by the laws of physics, making every aspect of the machine predictable.

To me that means that consciousness can have no effect on the universe unless the consciousness directly moves the molecules it inhabits, thus interacting directly with the ‘gears’ of said universe.

So the prayer thing – “mechanical universe” believer would say “that must just be a statistical anomaly” because in the “mechanical universe belief system”, the only forces that can act on the elements of the universe are atoms, molecules, and the usual set of particles and waves we learn about in physics class.

I’m not sure this definition is complete, but you get the general idea.

 

  • Mon, Oct 07, 2019 - 08:09am

    #57
    New_Life

    New_Life

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 18 2011

    Posts: 193

    count placeholder

    Acceptance

But as far as I’m aware I was not claiming that I understand the whole universe, just the board thrust of the scientific explanation of the mechanical universe theory.  I do so because I accept evidence based data that is (admittedly in my own interpretation) beyond reasonable doubt.

I’d also like to move away from the hints of a tribal nature here. Just because I accept the above findings does not mean that what you propose is not possible.

So IMHO “the prayer thing” needs more data points to convince qualified scientific consensus for that to be accepted as correlation well before causation can be considered.

Also (taking myself out of the equation here) in general this is a false statement…

“You don’t understand the universe any better than the rest of us.  No human does”

eg Chris’es understanding of MicroBiology is way better than the majority of PP readership

I would like to offer the consideration that someone that is a critical thinker, understands scientific evidence based theory, has a thirst for knowledge and is not limited by religious indoctrination has the ability to understand more about the universe than ignorant or blinkered people.

  • Mon, Oct 07, 2019 - 08:22am

    #58
    New_Life

    New_Life

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 18 2011

    Posts: 193

    count placeholder

    Dawkins has a new book

Currently watching this interview…

  • Mon, Oct 07, 2019 - 11:50am

    #59
    Kathy

    Kathy

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 28 2017

    Posts: 16

    count placeholder

    The Dense Physical Earth will evolve as we do

Theosophists and others believe that human evolution will continue but in a less and less dense physical body or environment.  What we are now is so much less than what we will evolve into, spiritually and physically.  The cosmos, the earth and we came out of much more “etheric” existences and will all return to that.  Cycling and cycling. Eventually, we will not need the kind of earth we have now.  But, we have a very long time before we will reach that state.  We’ll be doing good to hang on in this physical state, with a livable earth, until we are really ready to transcend it.  The survival of “human” consciousness requires that we can keep our planet livable and thriving for many thousands of years.  Musk is taking the physical approach  of leaving earth, which cannot succeed in any sustainable and longterm way.  Just saying.

  • Mon, Oct 07, 2019 - 12:28pm   (Reply to #57)

    #60

    Mark_BC

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 30 2010

    Posts: 396

    count placeholder2+

    re: Acceptance

But as far as I’m aware I was not claiming that I understand the whole universe, just the board thrust of the scientific explanation of the mechanical universe theory.  I do so because I accept evidence based data that is (admittedly in my own interpretation) beyond reasonable doubt.

If so you shouldn’t have any problem providing just one specific mechanism by which a random genetic mutation can create a new gene, protein, and inheritable trait. You have millions to choose from!

Clearly you haven’t spent much time studying quantum physics which throws  the idea of a mechanical universe out the window. Cause and effect, and subject / object duality no longer apply when you get into the realm of atoms and smaller. From this it becomes apparent that the traditional “mechanical” newtonian laws of physics which you seem to think describe the universe simply boil down to statistical averages of trillions of quantum events happening to atomic particles.

At the scale of machines and what we can see and feel, yes, the universe is mechanical. But our genes and our conscious thoughts have origins in the single atom and single cell scale of size, at which quantum effects come into the picture. They are NOT mechanical and deterministic.

Relativity is on the opposite end and bends our conventional beliefs about “mechanical” laws of physics at the large scale.

I do agree with you, however, that our morality is largely a result of our evolutionary adaptation and all the moral dilemmas that religion tries to provide answers for are merely the consequence of conflicting motivations between a selfish organism which needs to support itself, versus the more altruistic actions required of said organism when living together with others.

If a polar bear (solitary, aggressive predator) were to write its own bible it would have a much different code if conduct to what our ancient scripts have determined. This is our “conscience”, or morality, which is a totally separate thing from “consciousness” despite the similarity of the word.

Viewing 10 posts - 51 through 60 (of 79 total)

Login or Register to post comments