A Conscious Universe without a God ?

I’m always just so blown away by people’s unwavering belief in anything “faith” based.

It was god! It was always god! ~ There is no evidence for that to be the case. It is a nice thought but it is baseless.

I welcome and accept people religious believes but I have never seen one shred of proof that a creator god exists.

Because there is no evidence.

Belief and blind faith does not equal evidence.

It’s easier for me to believe that we are connected by space/time with the likes of something like dark matter connecting and spreading information like the roots of a growing tree. We have seen evidence of that on earth.

It is most likely possible however that we are so far removed from whatever is truly happening that we will never have the correct scope of vision due to the enormity of the problem.

The absence of scope unfortunately makes this the unsolvable question of all our lifetimes.

a reply to: Itisnowagain
Had forgotten about this show as it's been years since I watched tv. I love this guy's approach because he is, despite having his own beliefs, willing to look into other people's beliefs without any fear of losing his own. I tend to think that those who force their beliefs on others or can't even share a conversation with those with divergent beliefs are deep down unsure and don't want any alternate thought to creep in and upset the apple cart. Kind of like being in a personal relationship that isn't quite right where people tend to block the truth to not accept responsibility for the choice made and a painful decision to move on that is needed.

I've often wondered if consciousness is structural in the universe. Seems that way from my scientific perspective

a reply to: Itisnowagain

thanks for the video

the 6 or more intellectuals who were questioned … All had great answers on 'consciousness' the primal/Cosmic cause for the multi-verse to have sprung into existance in-the-beginning

the answers themselves presented to us viewers the act of 'cosmic consciousness' reason for 'seeding' many, independent, autonomous persons into the Earth Sphere (both in linear-time and the paradoxical 'time-line' loops we are part of)

the Quantum universe sometimes 'needs' an observation by an outsider to give that squiggle of energy the essence of existing and having spin/position/charge/presence or mass...
so does the 'cosmic consciousness' need the forces of various peoples' creative thought and will, to 'feed' and 'evolve' Itself...

the Human 'collective memory' combined with all the other physical & material manifestations of
consciousness (ie: mountains, oceans, plants, clouds. ginko's, stars, black-holes...et al...) all resonate
primal consciousness to remain 'Eternal' and 'Infinite' and existing in the Past-Present-Future at the same time
… we need to sustain our position on the Crest of the ever expanding Event-Horizon of the creation we are riding on … kow-a-bunga

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

The second to the last intelectual physcist in that excellent video, Frank Tipler[?], was gung ho on physics and its laws as being primal
- not consciouness which he says is derivative of the physics.

Here is the problem with that way of thinking, philosophically speaking.

Every word he said, every word, concept, mathematical formula, etc. that anyone has ever said, wtitten or expressed,
in any way, shape, size or form REQUIRED CONSCIOUSNESS in order to express, show, or depict the concept.

Without consciousness you can not demonstrate any existence whatsoever- Consciousness is the primal principal,
common denominator of all existence. And without it there is nothing - however nothing can not exist.

Again:

“I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.”
― Max Planck



And again by Max Planck:

“Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis,
we ourselves are a part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.”
― Max Planck, Where is Science Going?


Now is there anyone out here who really thinks we can attempt to solve, observe, or calculate,
the World around us without being conscious


Please tell us about your unconscious fantasy solutions - Might be a good topic for a new sceince fiction fantasy book

Are you sure that Plank wasn't merely talking about individual perception rather than and all encompassing "Primal Consciousness"?

That what a human perceives as "matter" is simply an emergent property of something more fundamental; and it is only our conscious mind that "creates" matter as an easyer explanation to something else it can not comprehend?

This discussion will show you directly what consciousness is.

originally posted by: AlienView

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

The second to the last intelectual physcist in that excellent video, Frank Tipler[?], was gung ho on physics and its laws as being primal
- not consciouness which he says is derivative of the physics.

Here is the problem with that way of thinking, philosophically speaking.

Every word he said, every word, concept, mathematical formula, etc. that anyone has ever said, wtitten or expressed,
in any way, shape, size or form REQUIRED CONSCIOUSNESS in order to express, show, or depict the concept.

Without consciousness you can not demonstrate any existence whatsoever- Consciousness is the primal principal,
common denominator of all existence. And without it there is nothing - however nothing can not exist.

Again:

“I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.”
― Max Planck



And again by Max Planck:

“Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis,
we ourselves are a part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.”
― Max Planck, Where is Science Going?


Now is there anyone out here who really thinks we can attempt to solve, observe, or calculate,
the World around us without being conscious

Please tell us about your unconscious fantasy solutions - Might be a good topic for a new sceince fiction fantasy book

Physics is the study of physical behavior. Philosophy is the study of thinking. So what philosophy should be concerned with is figuring out why we apparently need this creation myth so badly and how that plays with our psychology. That is the mystery Planck was referring to.

Some people have very tiny brains and litle comes out of the minds of such people, they often appear as trolls on forums.

- Others have an almost Godlike power of comprehension
- Almost like they are driving the Universe into the future ..........


“As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clearheaded science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about the atoms this much: There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. . . . We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.”
― Max Planck, The New Science

originally posted by: FingerMan
Not really new.

For a long time scientists and philosophers have made a deity out of “nature.” When speaking of it some use the feminine pronouns “she” and “her,” and some even call it “Mother Nature.” Thus they make a goddess out of “nature,” inasmuch as they claim that she is responsible for man and his environment ('nature did it'). The concept isn't all that different if you swap out “nature” with the “universe”, no matter how often you say “but not a deity”, as the OP did.

How much this resembles the way that the ancient pagans worshiped the various forces and operations of “nature” as gods and goddesses, even deifying the sun, the moon, the stars and the earth. However, the universal design and harmony and movements in so-called “nature” argue for, yes, call for, an intelligent, sight-possessing Creator, a lone Designer and Controller of the whole creation. This one Creator is God. Starting with the beginning of things, the opening words of The Holy Bible show a good sense of orderliness and say: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”—Gen. 1:1.

This 'the universe is conscious'-idea, or “primal consciousness that is universal”-philosophy, is just another cop-out to face and acknowledge this reality (including denying that the evidence briefly summarized above can be conclusive evidence for such a Creator, especially when one considers the details).

a reply to: whereislogic
What if consciousness is just another term for God?

God is all seeing and knowing ......God is simply seeing and knowing himself.

Peter Brown calls it Radiant Presence.....here is a page from his website:


Reality.

What you are actually is beyond words, but it would be not untrue to say you are nothing whatsoever other than pure, infinite, disembodied consciousness/intelligence; a field of miraculous infinite light; god dreaming itself; an infinite point of pure potential; or the infinite implications of nothing whatsoever.

The immediate presentation of this unspeakable actuality is the field of your experience, which is an instantaneously appearing virtual field of radiant presence as apparent qualities. this is the actuality of which every/ and any/ thing that you think exists consists. this is inclusive and complete; nothing whatever other than this field exists. in short, the entirety of reality is the "bubble" of your experience, the field of radiant presence, which alone exists.

This is the totality of reality. this is not theoretical, but is actually, immediately real; always the case right here right now.
THE OPEN DOORWAY
www.theopendoorway.org...

a reply to: Itisnowagain

What if mind is just another term for man?

Can't say I really care cause it isn't. And one being an attribute of the other doesn't make it so either.

The words we use still have to make sense if one wants to have rational communication.

originally posted by: AlienView
Some people have very tiny brains and litle comes out of the minds of such people, they often appear as trolls on forums.

- Others have an almost Godlike power of comprehension
- Almost like they are driving the Universe into the future ..........


“As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clearheaded science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about the atoms this much: There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. . . . We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.”
― Max Planck, The New Science

That's a terrible summary of subatomic physics and how to rationally process its behavior. It's actually very funny that he got so caught up with matter on a literal level when it's obvious he was exploring the psychology of his mission and its sociological fallout.

originally posted by: TheAlleghenyGentleman
I’m always just so blown away by people’s unwavering belief in anything “faith” based.

It was god! It was always god! ~ There is no evidence for that to be the case. It is a nice thought but it is baseless.

I welcome and accept people religious believes but I have never seen one shred of proof that a creator god exists.

Because there is no evidence. ...

Your desire to go 'nuh-uh, that's not evidence', in your mind any time you are confronted with the evidence for the existence of a Creator, does not equal 'there is no evidence'. Besides, the last claim does not follow from not having 'seen it', as you describe your denial of common sense and all valid evidence (in favor of trying to fit what you hear into a straw man argument concerning the phrase 'God did it', the so-called “God-of-the-gaps.”).

In all fairness, fans and adherents of evolutionary philosophies (evolutionists) who rely on unsupported assertions effectively make the Darwinian theory their “God-of-the-gaps.” Or “nature” or the “universe” as explained in my first comment here and further elaborared under the link 'nature did it'.

The Creator presented in the Bible is no “God-of-the-gaps.”

We must rely on the available evidence to draw conclusions about things like the origin of life. And we need to let the evidence speak for itself rather than force it to say what we want it to say.

Many atheists, however, view science through the lens of materialism​—a philosophy that assumes purely material causes for the origin of life. “We have a prior commitment . . . to materialism,” wrote evolutionist Richard C. Lewontin. “That materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.” Hence, materialists embrace the only alternative they have​—evolution.

Religious people too may have preconceptions that distort their attitude toward science. For instance, some creationists cling to the erroneous notion that God formed the world in six literal days a few thousand years ago. Having made that prior commitment, they try to force the evidence to fit their extremely literal interpretation of the Bible. People who have such extreme interpretations of both the Bible and science are left without satisfying answers when they try to seek evidence for their faith.

Which view fits all the facts?

With regard to the origin of the complex molecules that make up living organisms, some evolutionists believe the following:

1. Key elements somehow combined to form basic molecules.

2. Those molecules then linked together in the exact sequences required to form DNA, RNA, or protein with the capacity to store the information needed to carry out tasks essential to life.

3. The molecules somehow formed the specific sequences required to replicate themselves. Without replication, there can be neither evolutionary development nor, indeed, life itself.

How did the molecules of life form and acquire their amazing abilities without an intelligent designer? Evolutionary research fails to provide adequate explanations or satisfying answers to questions about the origin of life. In effect, those who deny the purposeful intervention of a Creator attribute godlike powers to mindless molecules and natural forces.

What, though, do the facts indicate? The available evidence shows that instead of molecules developing into complex life-forms, the opposite is true: Physical laws dictate that complex things​—machines, houses, and even living cells—​in time break down.* Yet, evolutionists say the opposite can happen. For example, the book Evolution for Dummies says that evolution occurred because the earth “gets loads of energy from the sun, and that energy is what powers the increase in complexity.” [*: Such decay is a result of what scientists call the second law of thermodynamics. Put simply, this law states that the natural tendency is for order to degenerate into disorder.]

To be sure, energy is needed to turn disorder into order​—for example, to assemble bricks, wood, and nails into a house. That energy, however, has to be carefully controlled and precisely directed because uncontrolled energy is more likely to speed up decay, just as the energy from the sun and the weather can hasten the deterioration of a building.* Those who believe in evolution cannot satisfactorily explain how energy is creatively directed.

On the other hand, when we view life and the universe as the work of a wise Creator who possesses an “abundance of dynamic energy,” we can explain not only the complexity of life’s information systems but also the finely tuned forces that govern matter itself, from vast galaxies to tiny atoms.​—Isaiah 40:26. [*: DNA can be altered by mutations, which can be caused by such things as radiation and certain chemicals. But these do not lead to new species.​—See the article “Is Evolution a Fact?” or Dr. Lönnig's commentary on the law of recurrent variation as can be found in my commentary on the Origins & Creationism subforum.]

Belief in a Creator also harmonizes with the now generally accepted view that the physical universe had a beginning. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” says Genesis 1:1.

Invariably, new discoveries tend to make the philosophy of materialism increasingly hard to defend, a fact that has moved some atheists to revise their views.* Yes, some former atheists have come to the conclusion that the wonders of the universe are visible evidence of the “invisible qualities” and “eternal power” of our Creator, Jehovah God. (Romans 1:20) [*: See the article “I Was Raised an Atheist”.]

originally posted by: whereislogic

originally posted by: TheAlleghenyGentleman
I’m always just so blown away by people’s unwavering belief in anything “faith” based.

It was god! It was always god! ~ There is no evidence for that to be the case. It is a nice thought but it is baseless.

I welcome and accept people religious believes but I have never seen one shred of proof that a creator god exists.

Because there is no evidence. ...

Your desire to go 'nuh-uh, that's not evidence', in your mind any time you are confronted with the evidence for the existence of a Creator, does not equal 'there is no evidence'. Besides, the last claim does not follow from not having 'seen it', as you describe your denial of common sense and all valid evidence (in favor of trying to fit what you hear into a straw men argument concerning the phrase 'God did it', the so-called “God-of-the-gaps.”).

In all fairness, fans and adherents of evolutionary philosophies (evolutionists) who rely on unsupported assertions effectively make the Darwinian theory their “God-of-the-gaps.” Or “nature” or the “universe” as explained in my first comment here and further elaborared under the link 'nature did it'.

Evolution isn't a philosophy anymore than gravity is.

a reply to: TzarChasm
Naming is the origin of all particular things. Tao The Ching.

The field is the sole governing agency of the particle. Albert Einstein.

originally posted by: AlienView

Without consciousness you can not demonstrate any existence whatsoever- Consciousness is the primal principal,
common denominator of all existence. And without it there is nothing - however nothing can not exist.

www.andrewcohen.com...

To attain direct knowledge of what enlightenment is, it’s important to understand that everything that exists — the entire universe, time and space and all of life including each and every one of us – is a manifest or material expression of that which does not exist. From nothing came something. The unmanifest became the manifest. From the empty void, this whole material universe, which eventually gave rise to energy and matter, life and the capacity for self knowing awareness, dramatically emerged. Everything that exists came from this absolute nothingness. That means nothing is the source of everything that is. This fundamental mystical insight is basically this: that the ultimate essence of everything that exists is this no-thing-ness. Traditionally, this is the revelation that enlightens — that frees the self from attachment to the world, the process of creation, and everything in it.

In essence I kind of imagine it like this. Imagine a singularity, like a black hole. Apparently in a black hole space and therefore time work differently there. Now imagine there is no space there. Then imagine that all of the space that can ever exist does in fact exist and take up all the space available to it. All of space therefore exists in a place where there is no space. All of time exists and takes up all the time it can in a place where there is no space for time. etc.

There is nothingness, and all of everything that could possibly exist; exists there. Including consciousness. Consciousness has awareness.

I think consciousness exists in a place with no space, and no time, and permeates all of space and all of time. Alpha and Omega.

"In the beginning there was God and God said let there be light and there was light."

So let me rephrase that.

In the beginning there was God and God was conscious and aware and God being consciousness doing the only thing it can do... God 'thought' and shined the 'light' of awareness onto everything that exists and could ever exist, which is God's consciousness, creating everything from nothingness existing as nothing but a thought or imagination in God's awareness.

God did not create photons or material objects.... They only exist as ideas in God's (aka Consciousnesses) thoughts/awareness...

Since some of you want to turn my post into a religious debate - And since it was supposed to be a philosophical post
based upon my fascination with the thinking of the very famous physicist Max Planck - Consider these 3 Planck quotes:


“[I do not believe] in a personal God, let alone a Christian God.”
― Max Planck, The Dilemmas of an Upright Man: Max Planck and the Fortunes of German Science, with a New Afterword


“We have no right to assume that any physical laws exist, or if they have existed up until now, that they will continue to exist in a similar manner in the future.”
― Max Planck


“Religion and natural science are fighting a joint battle in an incessant, never relaxing crusade against skepticism and against dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition... [and therefore] 'On to God!”
― Max Planck



The Quantum Universe: Everything That Can Happen Does Happen is a 2011 book by the theoretical physicists Brian Cox and Jeff Forshaw.



So you see both Atheists and Theists are correct - To what effect the belief systems affect reality is hard to measure.

But make no doubt about it, and it has been proven, that Observation effects reality - "The Observer Effect"




Welcome to the Quantum Universe of 'Many Worlds"

a reply to: AlienView

I’m not trying to create a religious debate or anything of the such.

I think that the only thing that exists is consciousness. That’s it. That consciousness creates all of what we call reality or existence. Consciousness is not a material thing.

Just like matter appears to be.

I truly don’t know how that consciousness came into being. Maybe that consciousness that creates this reality we are experiencing stems from some advanced aliens or people existing in a material world and the consciousness that created everything of what we experience is merely an intelligent AI working on a super computer or whatever.

I don’t know. All I know is that Data is not information without something to understand the data, therefore making it information which can become knowledge.

originally posted by: AlienView
Atheism denies the existence of a supreme being, a God.

No, not really. It’s a denial to the claim that there is a God due to lack of evidence. I still find it silly that we have to label what people don’t believe in...

So what is this primal consciousness he was postulating?
Can we have a primal consciousness backing all that exists without a creator god

What do you think

Well, without trying to sound trite, why do people attribute mysticism or divine-like qualities to consciousness? As we still don’t actually know what it is, it’s hard to locate its origin or source.

But given that upon death, there is no evidence for the soul or afterlife, it’s reasonable to assume that it (consciousness) terminates with brain activity. Which, logically follows, consciousness is a result of the neural activity of the brain and nothing more.

Another but....BUT... in my opinion, that in no way devalues its importance or fascination. Just because consciousness may only be the result of a biological/chemical/electrical configuration in our heads, why is it any less important to amazing?

I believe (my opinion) that in the future we WILL get a grasp on exactly how human consciousness works and might emulate what our sci-fi predicts: methods to transfer or move consciousness to a digital system. How? No idea.

a reply to: noonebutme

I believe (my opinion) that in the future we WILL get a grasp on exactly how human consciousness works and might emulate what our sci-fi predicts: methods to transfer or move consciousness to a digital system. How? No idea.

Of course the devil is in the details so to speak - Why I believe it is important to accept Planck's view that consciousness,
no matter how you see it or define it, is the bottom line, the matrix of all that is.

Therefor the most important first, in my opinion, is to stop drawing lines between what is and what is not, conscious.

That com;puter screen or smart phone, you are looking at right now is in a sort of semi-conscious state.

When the processing power gets high enough, possibly with a little help of some digital magic, such as the
'Positronic Brain' seen in Data, the lifelike android in Star Trek, it will happen.

The computer science question is how do you make a Positronic Brain - Figure out how to do it and you can retire
young.



"When a child is taught, it's programmed with simple instructions, and at some point, if its mind develops properly, it exceeds the sum of what it was taught, thinks independently." Dr. Daystrom, "The Ultimate Computer"


"Change is the essential process of all existence." Mr. Spock, "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield"


"Sometimes a feeling is all we humans have to go on." James T. Kirk, "A Taste of Armageddon"


"You know the greatest danger facing us is ourselves, and irrational fear of the unknown. There is no such thing as the unknown. Only things temporarily hidden, temporarily not understood." James T. Kirk, "The Corbomite Maneuver"