tvodrd
*Flashaholic* ,
Somebody mentioned entropy. (Entropy= beer cans prefer to be on their sides! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif ) I side with Charles above. The Universe is an amazing place and we're veeery young.
Larry
Larry
Creation and intelligence: beyond man
- Thread starter McGizmo
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
Icebreak
Flashlight Enthusiast
McGizmo -
I'm pleased to see this thread.
[ QUOTE ]
McGizmo said:
...perhaps we can discuss...any advances in science or explorations where there seems to be something more than just the laws of physics at play.
... can we discuss the possabilities and indications that there is intelligence or intent, beyond man, at work in our universe?
[/ QUOTE ]
After way too many meetings today I found myself outside the office complex looking southwest. A group of people had gathered to enjoy a short break but I only nodded to them as I found a kind place in the sun. I cannot deny my usual attention to birds and critters so I'll just say they were there too. Nice. Wheeeew. Tension release.
Within my gaze came blustering toward me slap-happy waves of what I've always called "helicopter leaves". They are so efficient. Just the lightest waft of air sends them sailing and soaring.
I've seen on the Discovery channel etc. where scientist have studied them and explained in detail why their flight dynamics are so good. Further, it was presented that these scientific discoveries had contributed to the R&D of some prototype aircraft propellers.
One member of the swarm of "helicopter leaves" landed at my feet. I picked it up, stuck it in my shirt pocket, and took it to the resident botany expert. "What is this leaf?" I asked, with no introduction. "Why, that is a maple seed." he informed me.
So good at flight, the are. Yet, so random in their landing zones. Exquisite design. Intelligent design. Maybe these helicopter seeds indicate something greater than just vegetation propagation?
I think so. I sure like watching squadrons of them spin, flutter and fly.
I'm pleased to see this thread.
[ QUOTE ]
McGizmo said:
...perhaps we can discuss...any advances in science or explorations where there seems to be something more than just the laws of physics at play.
... can we discuss the possabilities and indications that there is intelligence or intent, beyond man, at work in our universe?
[/ QUOTE ]
After way too many meetings today I found myself outside the office complex looking southwest. A group of people had gathered to enjoy a short break but I only nodded to them as I found a kind place in the sun. I cannot deny my usual attention to birds and critters so I'll just say they were there too. Nice. Wheeeew. Tension release.
Within my gaze came blustering toward me slap-happy waves of what I've always called "helicopter leaves". They are so efficient. Just the lightest waft of air sends them sailing and soaring.
I've seen on the Discovery channel etc. where scientist have studied them and explained in detail why their flight dynamics are so good. Further, it was presented that these scientific discoveries had contributed to the R&D of some prototype aircraft propellers.
One member of the swarm of "helicopter leaves" landed at my feet. I picked it up, stuck it in my shirt pocket, and took it to the resident botany expert. "What is this leaf?" I asked, with no introduction. "Why, that is a maple seed." he informed me.
So good at flight, the are. Yet, so random in their landing zones. Exquisite design. Intelligent design. Maybe these helicopter seeds indicate something greater than just vegetation propagation?
I think so. I sure like watching squadrons of them spin, flutter and fly.
Icebreak,
Good post! So these maple seeds. Did they always have this design or was there one mutant tree that had them and with its superior range, did it take over? I think your example is a great one! Have maple trees always been around with such seeds or did they evolve to this?
What about those tube worms that were found living around the thermal vents on the ocean floor? I don't recall all of the distinctions but this life form uses chemicals and compounds toxic to all other life as I recall as well as getting its energy from heat, I think? Isn't there speculation that this life form might point to possible life on other planets based on compounds and energy sources completly alien to what was once considered necessary for life?
Even if one could show that there has been creation, there may still be questions as to "why" was there creation. To what nobel task do these worms at the bottom of the sea avail themselves?
Good post! So these maple seeds. Did they always have this design or was there one mutant tree that had them and with its superior range, did it take over? I think your example is a great one! Have maple trees always been around with such seeds or did they evolve to this?
What about those tube worms that were found living around the thermal vents on the ocean floor? I don't recall all of the distinctions but this life form uses chemicals and compounds toxic to all other life as I recall as well as getting its energy from heat, I think? Isn't there speculation that this life form might point to possible life on other planets based on compounds and energy sources completly alien to what was once considered necessary for life?
Even if one could show that there has been creation, there may still be questions as to "why" was there creation. To what nobel task do these worms at the bottom of the sea avail themselves?
While we've concerned ourselves with what we call "life", as amino acid and carbon based organisms, we've taken close note of the development of the biological development into the more complex forms. We've watched the development of "life" through carbon based life forms, and perhaps tried to imagine future forms of biological evolution. Something that goes right along with all that "evolving" biology that seems to have escaped notice to a great degree is that also evolving is intelligence, and consciousness of self and/or the universe.
By modern scientific theory, the present state of evolution indicates that biological life and the advancement to higher life forms is entirely natural. It seems to have gone unnoticed while we concentrate on that biological advancement, that the present state of intelligence and consciousness indicates that advancement in consciousness is also entirely natural.
It has not been a strain for man to imagine that biological life may exist beyond our planet, even without definite evidence. Some have even considered that life may not have to be a carbon based organism. Some might even imagine an intelligent member of such extra-terrestrial life. However, some do have difficulty imagining that the consciousness can evolve in other ways than biologically. Being an organic life form, it's difficult to envision the other means that consciousness could come about. That doesn't preclude other means though.
Einstein is credited with saying something interesting. That he said it doesn't make it any more valid that if someone else said it, but it's still interesting. He said, "the universe doesn't play to an empty stadium". Actually, I'm not comfortable, with the concept of the universe having ever been without a conscious observer. By saying I'm not comfortable is actually just a way of saying it's not an intellectual consideration, but is a consideration from a different level.
If Schrodinger's cat can be neither dead nor alive until observed, I guess the universe could either be or not be until observed.
By modern scientific theory, the present state of evolution indicates that biological life and the advancement to higher life forms is entirely natural. It seems to have gone unnoticed while we concentrate on that biological advancement, that the present state of intelligence and consciousness indicates that advancement in consciousness is also entirely natural.
It has not been a strain for man to imagine that biological life may exist beyond our planet, even without definite evidence. Some have even considered that life may not have to be a carbon based organism. Some might even imagine an intelligent member of such extra-terrestrial life. However, some do have difficulty imagining that the consciousness can evolve in other ways than biologically. Being an organic life form, it's difficult to envision the other means that consciousness could come about. That doesn't preclude other means though.
Einstein is credited with saying something interesting. That he said it doesn't make it any more valid that if someone else said it, but it's still interesting. He said, "the universe doesn't play to an empty stadium". Actually, I'm not comfortable, with the concept of the universe having ever been without a conscious observer. By saying I'm not comfortable is actually just a way of saying it's not an intellectual consideration, but is a consideration from a different level.
If Schrodinger's cat can be neither dead nor alive until observed, I guess the universe could either be or not be until observed.
[ QUOTE ]
Empath said:
By modern scientific theory, the present state of evolution indicates that biological life and the advancement to higher life forms is entirely natural. It seems to have gone unnoticed while we concentrate on that biological advancement, that the present state of intelligence and consciousness indicates that advancement in consciousness is also entirely natural.
[/ QUOTE ]
Empath-
I would question the part about biological life evolving naturally to higher life forms is natural. The present thinking of evolutionary science is that the organism adapts to the demands of the physical environment- but this can mean that a complex organism could evolve into a simpler organism as well as vice-versa.
What is meant by higher conciousness? As I look at the bodies hanging from the bridge at Falluja and the warlike posturing of US politicians, I truly wonder if humans are advancing in conciousness. Technologically savvy, yes, but in what other way?
Some people would remark that the pre-technological people would notice much much more about the world around them- sights, sounds, natural rhythms, and habits of wild animals. According to Carl Sagan, primitive tribesmen could really be viewed as early scientists in the respect of their accumulated knowledge of the cycles & habits of the life around them. All of the major grain groups that now feed the world were discovered by ancient people thousands of years ago.
Can we really rank conciousness as higher or lower? Humans have always been anthopomorphic- meaning that we see the world through a filter of human characteristics. The religious have always believed in a universe defined by a very human-like "god" with human-beings just a step below the creator. Early Darwinism pictured a hierarchy of creatures which evolved to ultimately produce the superior animal- man. Now we know that this is largely human ego.
Man has some interesting capabilities ie what other creature could build a Hubble Telescope or a cathedral? But what other creature is so chained down by our own propensity toward the most violent warfare between different groups of our own species? Or a seemingly unstoppable drive to destroy our own environment with little regard for the rich matrix of other life that inhabits our planet?
Empath said:
By modern scientific theory, the present state of evolution indicates that biological life and the advancement to higher life forms is entirely natural. It seems to have gone unnoticed while we concentrate on that biological advancement, that the present state of intelligence and consciousness indicates that advancement in consciousness is also entirely natural.
[/ QUOTE ]
Empath-
I would question the part about biological life evolving naturally to higher life forms is natural. The present thinking of evolutionary science is that the organism adapts to the demands of the physical environment- but this can mean that a complex organism could evolve into a simpler organism as well as vice-versa.
What is meant by higher conciousness? As I look at the bodies hanging from the bridge at Falluja and the warlike posturing of US politicians, I truly wonder if humans are advancing in conciousness. Technologically savvy, yes, but in what other way?
Some people would remark that the pre-technological people would notice much much more about the world around them- sights, sounds, natural rhythms, and habits of wild animals. According to Carl Sagan, primitive tribesmen could really be viewed as early scientists in the respect of their accumulated knowledge of the cycles & habits of the life around them. All of the major grain groups that now feed the world were discovered by ancient people thousands of years ago.
Can we really rank conciousness as higher or lower? Humans have always been anthopomorphic- meaning that we see the world through a filter of human characteristics. The religious have always believed in a universe defined by a very human-like "god" with human-beings just a step below the creator. Early Darwinism pictured a hierarchy of creatures which evolved to ultimately produce the superior animal- man. Now we know that this is largely human ego.
Man has some interesting capabilities ie what other creature could build a Hubble Telescope or a cathedral? But what other creature is so chained down by our own propensity toward the most violent warfare between different groups of our own species? Or a seemingly unstoppable drive to destroy our own environment with little regard for the rich matrix of other life that inhabits our planet?
Don't we now have some glands and organs that are no longer as important or necessary as they perhaps once were? Will we ultimately see them disappear?
Certainly our ancesters were better in tune with nature at levels that we now filter out as noise while we focus on other areas of interest or development. I would guess this is an evolution of man as a group and not as an individual. Whether this has been a progression or regression is up to debate depending on a value system I would expect. It does seem that man has the luxury of considering himself at the center of the universe and importance and aside from trying to kill eachother off there is less and less in terms of nature to keep us in check. Doesn't it seem that as we have "conquered" that which would keep our population in check that other new sources of threat and population reducers have come into being? New viruses for instance? None the less, it does seem that man can do to the planet what a red tide can do to a small body of water.
Whether natural or other by design, I have a feeling that there are pressures at play that would keep the population of man to a sustainable level if we don't overcome these pressures by the force of our own will.
I had an old college friend express concern when I told him that I didn't plan on fathering any children. He was concerned that too many of the babies being born were from the lower social-economical levels and to some extent from parents and within environments which were not condusive to higher levels of education and dare I say that he felt that many of these children were of a genetic background which would likely be of lower IQ potential. I told him that perhaps if this were the case, it might be part of natures way of putting on the brakes of man's evolution or advancement. I suggested that as man became more capable of accomplishing just about anything, the chances of man doing the "wrong" thing were that much greater. The Manhatten project brought in a new level of potential "oops"! We are now even more effectivly armed to do ourselves and our surrounds serious harm! I'll leave it to someone else to find a point in this. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif
Certainly our ancesters were better in tune with nature at levels that we now filter out as noise while we focus on other areas of interest or development. I would guess this is an evolution of man as a group and not as an individual. Whether this has been a progression or regression is up to debate depending on a value system I would expect. It does seem that man has the luxury of considering himself at the center of the universe and importance and aside from trying to kill eachother off there is less and less in terms of nature to keep us in check. Doesn't it seem that as we have "conquered" that which would keep our population in check that other new sources of threat and population reducers have come into being? New viruses for instance? None the less, it does seem that man can do to the planet what a red tide can do to a small body of water.
Whether natural or other by design, I have a feeling that there are pressures at play that would keep the population of man to a sustainable level if we don't overcome these pressures by the force of our own will.
I had an old college friend express concern when I told him that I didn't plan on fathering any children. He was concerned that too many of the babies being born were from the lower social-economical levels and to some extent from parents and within environments which were not condusive to higher levels of education and dare I say that he felt that many of these children were of a genetic background which would likely be of lower IQ potential. I told him that perhaps if this were the case, it might be part of natures way of putting on the brakes of man's evolution or advancement. I suggested that as man became more capable of accomplishing just about anything, the chances of man doing the "wrong" thing were that much greater. The Manhatten project brought in a new level of potential "oops"! We are now even more effectivly armed to do ourselves and our surrounds serious harm! I'll leave it to someone else to find a point in this. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif
Wylie
Enlightened
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink2.gif
I'm not sure how it fits into this but have any of you folks ever seen that spark plug looking thing cut out of a rock that was radio carbon dated to something like before some would say man would have been up on two feet. Anybody figure man is in his second or third evolution here on this little speck of dust?
I think we have far more history of man to cover before we will ever get close to learning anything of any creator or evolution from a single celled parasite that eventually became human.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink2.gif
I'm not sure how it fits into this but have any of you folks ever seen that spark plug looking thing cut out of a rock that was radio carbon dated to something like before some would say man would have been up on two feet. Anybody figure man is in his second or third evolution here on this little speck of dust?
I think we have far more history of man to cover before we will ever get close to learning anything of any creator or evolution from a single celled parasite that eventually became human.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink2.gif
Rothrandir
Flashaholic
there are certain organs or glands that aren't necessary, but can still prove useful.
you don't need your arms, but they sure come in handy /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
you don't need your arms, but they sure come in handy /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
JonSidneyB
Flashlight Enthusiast
Roth>ummm, you need a nap
[ QUOTE ]
chiaroscuro said:
I'm not jesting,NoShadow. You have no idea how arrogant I can be. Please spare me your lack of imagination. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin07.gif
Imagine this when you have the time. Imagine you spending an eternity without God never having the answers to all the questions you have while those who believed and received eternal life are being given the answers by the One who created it all. I can imagine the destiny of those who believed God will be wonderful beyond description while the darkness of those who chose to reject His offer of everlasting life with Him will be unspeakably horrible. I imagine it is far better to know the One who has all the answers than to have the answers without Him. I imagine no matter how hard you try you will not be able to begin to imagine 'eternity' separated from God. Finally, I imagine you will refer to all of this as a lack of imagination. Imagine that!!
chiaroscuro said:
I'm not jesting,NoShadow. You have no idea how arrogant I can be. Please spare me your lack of imagination. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin07.gif
Imagine this when you have the time. Imagine you spending an eternity without God never having the answers to all the questions you have while those who believed and received eternal life are being given the answers by the One who created it all. I can imagine the destiny of those who believed God will be wonderful beyond description while the darkness of those who chose to reject His offer of everlasting life with Him will be unspeakably horrible. I imagine it is far better to know the One who has all the answers than to have the answers without Him. I imagine no matter how hard you try you will not be able to begin to imagine 'eternity' separated from God. Finally, I imagine you will refer to all of this as a lack of imagination. Imagine that!!
Ok... just to make things even more interesting, let me throw this out.
I think it was Don who mentioned that perhaps we pass on our "learning" to our offspring... his example of the worms eating the worms that knew the maze might suggest that intelligence is somehow consumed and passed on. Well how about this? Reincarnation.
I had heard many years ago (I don't remember who said it... perhaps it was the infamous "they") that our "souls" have certain things that they must accomplish in order to move on to the next level... (heaven, hell, limbo). So in essence, souls keep returning to this world in order to fulfill those requirements. Obviously, we are unaware that our souls have been here before and we aren't quite sure what stage they are in as far as their learning journey. But think about this... why do some people instinctively "know" things and others don't? What about deja vu? Could reincarnation be a way for man to "evolve"?
This theory also somewhat supports the idea of a Well of Souls. I think I mentioned it in the other thread that souls are returned to the guff when a person dies and then is "recycled" to a new person when it comes into the world. Are there only so many souls and no more will ever be created? Kinda like fat cells in the body... you're born with all of them that you'll ever have. What determines whether or not you will be "fat" is the size that you allow the cells to grow to. The only way to get rid of fat in the body is to have them removed. Otherwise, all you're doing is shrinking them. (WOW! Talk about drift!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif )
Anyway... so my theory is this... new souls ARE created as needed... yes, by a higher power or "creator", if you will. However, intelligence is determined by what stage the soul is in... how many times it has been "recycled" or reincarnated. Obviously we run into people every day who surely must be on their first go-round... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon6.gif Perhaps I am using the wrong word by using "soul". Perhaps the right word would be "being". Beings do evolve... physically, mentally, spiritually. Could it be because of reincarnation? What a clever design... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I think it was Don who mentioned that perhaps we pass on our "learning" to our offspring... his example of the worms eating the worms that knew the maze might suggest that intelligence is somehow consumed and passed on. Well how about this? Reincarnation.
I had heard many years ago (I don't remember who said it... perhaps it was the infamous "they") that our "souls" have certain things that they must accomplish in order to move on to the next level... (heaven, hell, limbo). So in essence, souls keep returning to this world in order to fulfill those requirements. Obviously, we are unaware that our souls have been here before and we aren't quite sure what stage they are in as far as their learning journey. But think about this... why do some people instinctively "know" things and others don't? What about deja vu? Could reincarnation be a way for man to "evolve"?
This theory also somewhat supports the idea of a Well of Souls. I think I mentioned it in the other thread that souls are returned to the guff when a person dies and then is "recycled" to a new person when it comes into the world. Are there only so many souls and no more will ever be created? Kinda like fat cells in the body... you're born with all of them that you'll ever have. What determines whether or not you will be "fat" is the size that you allow the cells to grow to. The only way to get rid of fat in the body is to have them removed. Otherwise, all you're doing is shrinking them. (WOW! Talk about drift!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif )
Anyway... so my theory is this... new souls ARE created as needed... yes, by a higher power or "creator", if you will. However, intelligence is determined by what stage the soul is in... how many times it has been "recycled" or reincarnated. Obviously we run into people every day who surely must be on their first go-round... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon6.gif Perhaps I am using the wrong word by using "soul". Perhaps the right word would be "being". Beings do evolve... physically, mentally, spiritually. Could it be because of reincarnation? What a clever design... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I think we have to seperate intelligence which can be treated as a measurable and rather objective feature from wisdom or reason which are truly subjective and follow some kind of moral codex.
It is thus an invalid argument to state that the evolution of man is a negative one because man still lacks wisdom.
Further more, when I think that even the greatest human minds (Einstein, Hawking, ...) did not find the appropriate answers, I very much doubt that we will solve the riddle here /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin07.gif.
Although this thread is a very good one indeed.
bernhard
P.S.: NoShadow ... well ... every atheist knows how it is to be without god. we do not need a man-made construct to face eternity. we face the horrors of life alone. of course we are afraid. but we do not hide behind some god.
My trust lies in objective methods to find out what's really going on.
It is thus an invalid argument to state that the evolution of man is a negative one because man still lacks wisdom.
Further more, when I think that even the greatest human minds (Einstein, Hawking, ...) did not find the appropriate answers, I very much doubt that we will solve the riddle here /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin07.gif.
Although this thread is a very good one indeed.
bernhard
P.S.: NoShadow ... well ... every atheist knows how it is to be without god. we do not need a man-made construct to face eternity. we face the horrors of life alone. of course we are afraid. but we do not hide behind some god.
My trust lies in objective methods to find out what's really going on.
Sasha.......you concluded saying, "What a clever design..."
Men (Men = Mankind / Male and Female) have created many elaborate systems of thought to ward of the sting of death.
The one you suggest is neither original or exclusive.
I would add that most of us recoil at the prospect of dying for any number of legitimate reasons. It brings an end to everything we are are involved with during our lives...family, careers, hobbies, recreation, etc.
And it's interesting you suggest that the differences among individuals as to what they know or sense or have the ability to understand is the result of the number of times they have been 'recycled'.
However, the fundamental problem with your suggestion is that men are clearly divided into two basic catagories:
The one has accepted the Bible as God's word to mankind and have accepted the Bibles Author as the One true God. Experiencially they have found God true through the new birth and believe the entire Bible is God's blueprint for their lives.
The other either through ignorance of or choice does not believe in the Bible or the God of the Bible.
To the second group your notion of repeat lifetimes might appear a clever one. For one thing it allows them to think that, perhaps,they can pick up where they left off. So only briefly are they leaving everything behind.
For the first group the idea falls flat on it's face.
In Hebrews Chapter 9 Verse 27 we read, "And it is appointed unto men once to die,but after this the judgement."
Once to die......For the Christian, there are no returns to see if one can do better the second-or third or forth,etc. -times. "One life...'twill soon be past...Only what's done for Christ will last." No deposit,no return sort of thing.
I will add here that one of the things I believe about the statement "The truth will set you free" is that it does just that. In the case of the topic you mention.....the truth frees me from having to wonder and speculate and guess and revise, etc. concerning the matter of death.
Those without this belief has nothing left but to imagine and create alternatives to the idea of dying...anything to avoid what they know is inevitable.
An example, when I was in the military I had a friend who had convinced himself that death was the end. Nothing on the other side of death's door. Only nothingness. No amount of discussion could change his mind. I haven't seen him in many years. Don't know if he yet inflexible in his position.
So then here we have two imagined methods of avoiding dying and facing the living god who created us. 1.Recycling and 2. Nothingness.
For me....I prefer the true to the false and/or imagined.
For me....God is true. Yesterday, today and forever.
If I am not mistaken, this still leaves us on both sides of the fence. But as long as you don't mind,and as long as we are on the living side of our existence,we can talk over the fence.
Have a good day.
Men (Men = Mankind / Male and Female) have created many elaborate systems of thought to ward of the sting of death.
The one you suggest is neither original or exclusive.
I would add that most of us recoil at the prospect of dying for any number of legitimate reasons. It brings an end to everything we are are involved with during our lives...family, careers, hobbies, recreation, etc.
And it's interesting you suggest that the differences among individuals as to what they know or sense or have the ability to understand is the result of the number of times they have been 'recycled'.
However, the fundamental problem with your suggestion is that men are clearly divided into two basic catagories:
The one has accepted the Bible as God's word to mankind and have accepted the Bibles Author as the One true God. Experiencially they have found God true through the new birth and believe the entire Bible is God's blueprint for their lives.
The other either through ignorance of or choice does not believe in the Bible or the God of the Bible.
To the second group your notion of repeat lifetimes might appear a clever one. For one thing it allows them to think that, perhaps,they can pick up where they left off. So only briefly are they leaving everything behind.
For the first group the idea falls flat on it's face.
In Hebrews Chapter 9 Verse 27 we read, "And it is appointed unto men once to die,but after this the judgement."
Once to die......For the Christian, there are no returns to see if one can do better the second-or third or forth,etc. -times. "One life...'twill soon be past...Only what's done for Christ will last." No deposit,no return sort of thing.
I will add here that one of the things I believe about the statement "The truth will set you free" is that it does just that. In the case of the topic you mention.....the truth frees me from having to wonder and speculate and guess and revise, etc. concerning the matter of death.
Those without this belief has nothing left but to imagine and create alternatives to the idea of dying...anything to avoid what they know is inevitable.
An example, when I was in the military I had a friend who had convinced himself that death was the end. Nothing on the other side of death's door. Only nothingness. No amount of discussion could change his mind. I haven't seen him in many years. Don't know if he yet inflexible in his position.
So then here we have two imagined methods of avoiding dying and facing the living god who created us. 1.Recycling and 2. Nothingness.
For me....I prefer the true to the false and/or imagined.
For me....God is true. Yesterday, today and forever.
If I am not mistaken, this still leaves us on both sides of the fence. But as long as you don't mind,and as long as we are on the living side of our existence,we can talk over the fence.
Have a good day.
Sasha,
I have a belief system or perhaps I should call it a suspicion system based upon a soul which is independent of the physical body and indeed can "come" back for additional lives. I haven't bothered to get into it in any of these threads because beyond it "feeling right" as well as "working" with some of my life experiences, I can offer no demonstrable proof nor do I feel compelled to. With this "system", not only is there no need to "save" anyone but further, we have all assumed certain tasks to accomplish and experience in this life and it varies to the extent that there are no great comonalities nor is there pressing need for everyone to be looking at or working from the same page. In fact doing so would be contrary to many of our "reasons" to being (this time around). The above statements are not really on topic here but from what I have gathered, mostly from hersay (no better or worse than a printed book of much import to certain folks) there has been exploration via regressive hypnosis where subjects have described persons, places and things which on the surface seem to be from a different timeline as well as life experience from their current set. Further, possible explainations for some peoples strong aversions and fears of certain situations, animals or conditions, might easily be explained away if one was to grant that trama had been experienced in a previous life.
If we do have some type of inherited memory or knowledge, either from a genetic basis passed on or from our own previous experiences, or both, scientific methods might be able to explore this and even provide evidence supporting this. Ironically, even if reincarnation can be substantiated to some level acceptable to some, this still does not preclude this system as being created at the hand of God. Of course a couple CPF members come to mind who will no doubt call BS on any such preposterous and blasphemous notions and back their position with the "fact" of the bible and how they interpret it. I agree with a statement made earlier that God has been created (beter to say defined) in man's image and as a result, our notion of him is likely a gross simplification as well as full of ethnocentric bias and error.
Yeah, I know, I wouldn't recognize "it" if I tripped over "it". Give it a break please. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
I have a belief system or perhaps I should call it a suspicion system based upon a soul which is independent of the physical body and indeed can "come" back for additional lives. I haven't bothered to get into it in any of these threads because beyond it "feeling right" as well as "working" with some of my life experiences, I can offer no demonstrable proof nor do I feel compelled to. With this "system", not only is there no need to "save" anyone but further, we have all assumed certain tasks to accomplish and experience in this life and it varies to the extent that there are no great comonalities nor is there pressing need for everyone to be looking at or working from the same page. In fact doing so would be contrary to many of our "reasons" to being (this time around). The above statements are not really on topic here but from what I have gathered, mostly from hersay (no better or worse than a printed book of much import to certain folks) there has been exploration via regressive hypnosis where subjects have described persons, places and things which on the surface seem to be from a different timeline as well as life experience from their current set. Further, possible explainations for some peoples strong aversions and fears of certain situations, animals or conditions, might easily be explained away if one was to grant that trama had been experienced in a previous life.
If we do have some type of inherited memory or knowledge, either from a genetic basis passed on or from our own previous experiences, or both, scientific methods might be able to explore this and even provide evidence supporting this. Ironically, even if reincarnation can be substantiated to some level acceptable to some, this still does not preclude this system as being created at the hand of God. Of course a couple CPF members come to mind who will no doubt call BS on any such preposterous and blasphemous notions and back their position with the "fact" of the bible and how they interpret it. I agree with a statement made earlier that God has been created (beter to say defined) in man's image and as a result, our notion of him is likely a gross simplification as well as full of ethnocentric bias and error.
Yeah, I know, I wouldn't recognize "it" if I tripped over "it". Give it a break please. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
chiaroscuro
Enlightened
well put,Kiessling, on both counts--the quantification and qualification of intelligence,and the existentialist/athiest attitude towards life and death.
Unfortunately, noshadow, you seem to have problems with anyone questioning assumptions of the role of G** (if any) in the universe (now or ever). I am not an athiest,but neither am I a believer in blind submission to
a concept.I grew up in a tradition which values confrontation and engagement
with G** and life and everything else.One of our ancestral stories,is of a man who wrestles with a manifestation of G**. His name was changed to "one who wrestles with G**"--- Israel.
Happy Passover
Unfortunately, noshadow, you seem to have problems with anyone questioning assumptions of the role of G** (if any) in the universe (now or ever). I am not an athiest,but neither am I a believer in blind submission to
a concept.I grew up in a tradition which values confrontation and engagement
with G** and life and everything else.One of our ancestral stories,is of a man who wrestles with a manifestation of G**. His name was changed to "one who wrestles with G**"--- Israel.
Happy Passover
RE: unnecessary organs-- all our organs are more or less necessary, the "useless" ones actually turned out to be useful, even if it wasn't readily appearently at the time (the early 1900s?)
Is there proof of a higher power? No, not really, but consider this:
-- all evidence points towards a singular creation point for the entire universe. While not proof, it is evidence the universe had a definate beginning.
-- near-death experiences; there is no explanation for how a consistent phenomena happens when there is little brain activity and the brain is "unconcious", yet it is well-documented and proven. By definition, it is not possible to store memory while unconcious... yet it is done here.
-- free will; if we are governed by the physical laws of nature, there can be no free will. It would mean we are nothing more than analog computers, producing an output for every input that would be 100% predictable if you knew the exact layout and properties of our brains.
-- sentience: why does a brain that shuts down every night and changes every day preserve your sentience? Why is there a concept of "you"?
I don't have any answers. I don't know if a God, Gods, etc, exist or not. Just questions.
Is there proof of a higher power? No, not really, but consider this:
-- all evidence points towards a singular creation point for the entire universe. While not proof, it is evidence the universe had a definate beginning.
-- near-death experiences; there is no explanation for how a consistent phenomena happens when there is little brain activity and the brain is "unconcious", yet it is well-documented and proven. By definition, it is not possible to store memory while unconcious... yet it is done here.
-- free will; if we are governed by the physical laws of nature, there can be no free will. It would mean we are nothing more than analog computers, producing an output for every input that would be 100% predictable if you knew the exact layout and properties of our brains.
-- sentience: why does a brain that shuts down every night and changes every day preserve your sentience? Why is there a concept of "you"?
I don't have any answers. I don't know if a God, Gods, etc, exist or not. Just questions.
jayflash
Flashlight Enthusiast
Could our universe and its "empty" space actually be filled with the energy of an all encompassing intelligence? Are we all receivers "tuned in" to various "frequencies" and thereby glean different truths or bits of information from this field of knowledge?
Might this be how our "gut" feelings and paranormal insights come to us? Could those who've died have the ability to send bits of this universal intelligence our way. Could God actually be this field of energy and knowledge?
More questions than answers here too. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif
Might this be how our "gut" feelings and paranormal insights come to us? Could those who've died have the ability to send bits of this universal intelligence our way. Could God actually be this field of energy and knowledge?
More questions than answers here too. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif
chiaroscuro
Enlightened
And any answers will lead to more questions. This is a good thing. This is how knowledge unfolds. I love the curiosity and imagination exhibited on this thread.
Nitro
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,347
Our bodies are on fire and electrified.
So, what if the "soul" is really energy? What if by dying we're really running out of energy, like a battery discharging, or fire burning out?
However, energy can not be created nor destroyed.
So, what if the "soul" is really energy? What if by dying we're really running out of energy, like a battery discharging, or fire burning out?
However, energy can not be created nor destroyed.
jayflash
Flashlight Enthusiast
Nitro, your last sentence explains why I have a hunch that we might have an existence after death. I remembered that law from H.S. physics.
