Evidence that the Universe is Intelligent

Originally Posted by Xan

However, there is clear open space without an opposite. It's called pure awareness.

Xan

Exactly,

Here is another thought.

Chrysaetos you said you believe you are a part of the universe, but what is a part? What is the difference between being a part of the universe and just being the universe? The conceptual thinking mind, the differentiating mind that likes to chop the universe up into decipherable bits and measurements and says this is different from that.

What is a thing? A thing is a noun. There are no things in and of themselves anywhere to be found in the universe. I don't exist apart from the universe and neither does the universe exist apart from me.

Originally Posted by Chrysaetos

I don't quite understand why it's such a hard apple to swallow. The 'universe' is here and we observe it. That does not make it dependent upon the observer, even though it is us who observe it and give it a name. Perhaps there's no universe without the human being? Well humans haven't always been around. Animals haven't always been around. The universe requires no living beings to be there, we are trapped in our own conceptual thinking if we believe otherwise.

I'd say it's the other way around. The idea that the universe exists and life happens to be a part of it but just as well could have not been, is the immediately obvious idea and what most people probably start out believing. The hard apple to swallow is that the universe requires consciousness. The fact that there haven't always been animals means nothing; there are animals now and that means the universe, cosmically speaking, has always contained animals, even if it at one point only contained them in its "future".

[Chrysaetos]

Originally Posted by contentest

The fact that there haven't always been animals means nothing; there are animals now and that means the universe, cosmically speaking, has always contained animals, even if it at one point only contained them in its "future".

''Cosmically speaking''

Ehm no, you are contradictory here. It's also close to philosophical idealism..

Maybe there is a perfect, pure chair as well.. somewhere existing in the 'mind' of the universe.. And one can come up with many different Ideals..

Originally Posted by Winston

And you are not? Anything discussed here is a concept, so there is no escaping that. BUT we are playing with concepts here, and you seem to be stuck on the one that says the universe exists separately and independently from us.

There is only one concept you need to understand: there is no black without white, and no white without black. Believing that white or black exists independently is the mistake. Once you understand this you will at the same time understand that there can be no universe without YOU.

Nah..

Saying that the universe can't exist without me because I am observing it and without me there's no observer therefore the universe doesn't exist without me is very much a TRAP.

But yes, when I die the rest of you will all cease to exist. Spiritual Forums will also cease to exist. Why? Because all of you and this forums need me for its existence. You won't exist without me. In fact, every time a human being dies we all cease to exist. Yes, really. This is no different from saying the universe itself can't exist without animal life. It's the same line of thinking and it's nonsensical.

I disagree because I think YOUR consciousness is something that is always existent, regardless of whether your physical body is dead or alive. Your consciousness may have been in a star, rock, or single atom.

Consciousness is required for the universe to acknowledge itself. That consciousness has to be somewhere.

But as I've said before, theoretically the universe CAN still exist; it just won't be acknowledged. It's important to contemplate the difference between existence, and acknowledged existence.

[Chrysaetos]

Originally Posted by Saki

But as I've said before, theoretically the universe CAN still exist; it just won't be acknowledged. It's important to contemplate the difference between existence, and acknowledged existence.

Yes I can understand what you're saying here, and I don't think I disagree on this point.

Originally Posted by Saki

I disagree because I think YOUR consciousness is something that is always existent, regardless of whether your physical body is dead or alive. Your consciousness may have been in a star, rock, or single atom.

Consciousness is required for the universe to acknowledge itself. That consciousness has to be somewhere.

But as I've said before, theoretically the universe CAN still exist; it just won't be acknowledged. It's important to contemplate the difference between existence, and acknowledged existence.

I agree with this. Theoretically will the universe exist after you are dead? Sure it will, but ultimately a universe without any observer is meaningless to talk about. Even when we talk about the past, when there was no earth, by looking back at the past NOW we are observing it.

Think of what it was like for you before you were born. Its just void. There's no memory of non-existence, its just a total blank slate. You can't describe it, there is nothing to describe. In all likelihood I believe it will be the same when we die. For you it won't be as though all this came to an end, rather it will as though it had never existed at all. But then all of a sudden you find yourself in some body somewhere just as you do now, feeling as though this is the only time you have ever been alive ;)

Originally Posted by Chrysaetos

''Cosmically speaking''

Ehm no, you are contradictory here. It's also close to philosophical idealism..

Maybe there is a perfect, pure chair as well.. somewhere existing in the 'mind' of the universe.. And one can come up with many different Ideals..

You missed my point, I'm saying that the universe that contains life now is the same universe that at some point didn't contain life, i.e. this universe is a universe containing life. Like there are elephants on Earth even though there are no elephants anywhere near my apartment building, except in that case it's a matter of spatial location, not temporal. (Which is an irrelevant distinction since time and space are, fundamentally, the same.)

Originally Posted by Winston

Think of what it was like for you before you were born. Its just void. There's no memory of non-existence, its just a total blank slate. You can't describe it, there is nothing to describe. In all likelihood I believe it will be the same when we die. For you it won't be as though all this came to an end, rather it will as though it had never existed at all. But then all of a sudden you find yourself in some body somewhere just as you do now, feeling as though this is the only time you have ever been alive ;)

I believe this is the process for those who reincarnate. If you have a high level of self-awareness however, and perhaps reach enlightenment, you will make it to the afterlife. Until then, you will keep reincarnating over and over.

And if there is no afterlife altogether, it seems that reincarnation is all that is left, and the only realistic alternative.

The observers are humans. The universe doesn't require living beings for its existence, let alone self aware living beings.

Interesting story. Here is my case for an extended idea of intelligence.

First, to clarify the problem of the duality between Self and Universe.

Whether I and the universe are one, I must account for the sensation of governance. The scope of this governance can be expanded or retracted, but as the duality arises, so too I and the universe are two. Until the duality is undone, I and the universe are two by virtue of the sensation of governance. The duality can be undone. How? First, ask yourself: from where does the sensation of governance arise? Here is a hint to consider: when you dream, you retain the sensation. Should the duality be undone? First, ask yourself: why does it exist? In other words: why do *you* exist?

Next, to liberate death.

I have never died. There is nothing to suggest that I will. I forget, and I remember. You're out there, and I'm in here. If you repeat these words as though they were your own, you will understand.

Simply, I cannot support the idea of a first-person death based upon my experience with third-person death. That would be a false equivocation. When I'm playing the game of scientific inquiry, such an equivocation proves quite fruitful. However, when I'm playing the game of existential metaphysics, that's a hand I will fold immediately.

Finally, here's my case for universal intelligence.

I understand that, where I can be said to express governance, and wherever my scope of governance can be said to dictate the world of my components, if the universe can be said to dictate the world of its components, the universe can also be said to have governance. More convincly, if *you* can be said to express governance, and if this governance is supposed to be evidence of intelligence, then so too can the universe be said to have the same. In other words, if an object can be said to dictate broadly the components within, so can the universe be said to dictate similarly. And accordingly, if a cell can be said to act intelligently, I might as well have the same understanding of the universe as one of my cells has of me. What convinces me more than this story, however, is witnessing first-hand similar phenomena occuring in both the outer and inner ungoverned realms: that is, the sensation of orchestration. As for my size relative to the universe (that is, the comprehensible), I am both humblingly tiny and gloriously large. The universe without is as undefinably vast and incomprehensible as the universe within.

to summarize: I have as much evidence for you being intelligent as I have for the universe being intelligent.

if I have died before, I have forgotten what it was like
if I was indeed born, I have forgotten what it was like
if time existed before I was born, I cannot confirm or deny
everything I've been told about the past is a story
everything I've been told about the future is a story
everything I've been told is a story
everything I tell myself is a story

:)

[Xan]

romistrub... Who is telling the story, and who is listening to and believing it?


Xan