2 of 2
2
What if humanity is divided between two types?
Posted: 13 March 2010 01:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  308
Joined  2009-11-30

So intuition gives rise to a sense of causality?

Contemplate that everything you experience is inside your nervous system, and that you (in reality) have no notion of the outside world.

 Signature 

“If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.” -Voltaire
“It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry.” - Thomas Paine
“It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” - Carl Sagan
“It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens.” - Baha’u'llah

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 March 2010 01:51 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5975
Joined  2009-02-26
WeeDie - 13 March 2010 01:28 AM

So intuition gives rise to a sense of causality?

Contemplate that everything you experience is inside your nervous system, and that you (in reality) have no notion of the outside world.

Intuition is a subconscious processing of stored memory and their various symbolisms. When we accept the scientific concept of causality (on which several universal laws are based), then it is no big leap to intuitively agree and accept the mental symbolism it presents. Even scientists like Einstein use(d) the words “intuitively” at one time or another. Of course it is no proof of any kind.

[ Edited: 13 March 2010 02:02 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 March 2010 03:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  308
Joined  2009-11-30

Do you mean there is no big leap to accept the mental symbolism that the subconscious presents via intution, based on the universal laws derived from the law of causality?

 Signature 

“If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.” -Voltaire
“It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry.” - Thomas Paine
“It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” - Carl Sagan
“It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens.” - Baha’u'llah

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 March 2010 03:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5975
Joined  2009-02-26
WeeDie - 13 March 2010 03:02 AM

Do you mean there is no big leap to accept the mental symbolism that the subconscious presents via intution, based on the universal laws derived from the law of causality?

You lost me somewhere, but the answer is still yes. I also qualified it that it was not proof of anything. Just a personal experience and emotion of harmony. Intuition does not even have to be true, and is perhaps the reason for the belief in the existence of god. Is that not an intuitive feeling or faith? It is a mental symbolism that may take many forms, yet have a common thread. “Causality”

[ Edited: 13 March 2010 04:00 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 March 2010 05:40 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  308
Joined  2009-11-30

The feeling body perceives truth. Intuition is a large and important part of the feeling body. You “feel” if something is true or false. The purely rational mind have no such power of validation. The rational mind is machine-like, it makes no difference between 0 and 1.

Speaking of proof. Proof validates experience. I do not see how it says how something is true or false. It simply confirms belief.

Is experience true?

Who knows?

As knowledge is part of experience it is impossible to say if truth derives from experience, or from what makes experience arise. Perhaps it is a twofold operation. False leads to truth, and truth creates false to confirm itself.

This is a subtle discussion of the topic of truth, but not all lost of reason.

It is more simple to say that God is the combined experience of all sentient beings (that have ever existed), and religious faith is belief in something higher than that - something impossible.

The way I see it, causality is a mental conception derived from a pattern of memory, putting the past onto the present and assuming that one leads to the other. I’ve seen no hard evidence that it is so.

[ Edited: 13 March 2010 05:50 AM by WeeDie ]
 Signature 

“If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.” -Voltaire
“It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry.” - Thomas Paine
“It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” - Carl Sagan
“It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens.” - Baha’u'llah

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 March 2010 07:03 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5975
Joined  2009-02-26
WeeDie - 13 March 2010 05:40 AM

The feeling body perceives truth. Intuition is a large and important part of the feeling body. You “feel” if something is true or false. The purely rational mind have no such power of validation. The rational mind is machine-like, it makes no difference between 0 and 1.

I disagree, you feel emotion or comfort. But this may well be caused by a falsehood. Just because it feels right it is not necessarily true. Optical illusions are renowned for being able to fool the symbolisms in our mind. On the other hand the rational mind, the machine, functions on data, proof, regardless of feelings. How many times have you heard the phrase counter-intuitive in science?

Speaking of proof. Proof validates experience. I do not see how it says how something is true or false. It simply confirms belief. Is experience true? Who knows? As knowledge is part of experience it is impossible to say if truth derives from experience, or from what makes experience arise. Perhaps it is a twofold operation. False leads to truth, and truth creates false to confirm itself.

Again, I disagree. Proof validates truth and may well prove a subjective experience wrong. The recognition of truth is arrived at by carefully examining the data and extrapolating that which must be true. This can never be arrived at by intuition or emotional experience. Even scientific theory must be based on scientifically acceptable data and even then it will be thoroughly vetted for error.

This is a subtle discussion of the topic of truth, but not all lost of reason.

You got me thinking about it . smirk

It is more simple to say that God is the combined experience of all sentient beings (that have ever existed), and religious faith is belief in something higher than that - something impossible.

I agree it is simpler to say that, but that does not make it true. 
example: During a monsoon the alpha male in a chimpanzee family may run around, scream, and beat the ground with a stick to warn this unseen enemy which throws water at him and makes him wet. This is the same behavior displayed when he is confronting a challenger for his primacy. Thus the feelings displayed are based on a false premise. The truth is the monsoon is simply matter of condensation. Our week days are named after Nordic gods, do you believe in them?
Now, if we go even beyond that and ascribe all natural phenomena to a still higher power, we are falling into the same trap as the chimp. I certainly agree that we have common experiences in everyday life of seemingly miraculous wonders, and we may even have similar emotions caused by the symbolisms of these experiences. This is undoubtedly the reason why there is such a great divergence in the interpretation of the concept of god (the Causal Oneness). But this divergence is proof that the subjective concept of god cannot be relied on as truth. If scientists came up with 50 different and/or conflicting interpretations as to the truth of a thing, there is no chance that any or all of them would be recognized as true.

To tell the truth, I also have an intuitive concept of a universal causality which I call Potential, but for it to be accepted as true it has to be able to satisfy all the known laws of the universe, which I cannot provide except in a philosophical way.

[ Edited: 13 March 2010 07:52 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 March 2010 09:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  308
Joined  2009-11-30
Write4U - 13 March 2010 07:03 AM
WeeDie - 13 March 2010 05:40 AM

The feeling body perceives truth. Intuition is a large and important part of the feeling body. You “feel” if something is true or false. The purely rational mind have no such power of validation. The rational mind is machine-like, it makes no difference between 0 and 1.

I disagree, you feel emotion or comfort. But this may well be caused by a falsehood. Just because it feels right it is not necessarily true. Optical illusions are renowned for being able to fool the symbolisms in our mind. On the other hand the rational mind, the machine, functions on data, proof, regardless of feelings. How many times have you heard the phrase counter-intuitive in science?

Your points are valid. But consider that focus of the eyes, is, in extension, an effect of the gravitation pull between matter of the known and unknown universe. This creates an optical illusion of things being separate, when they are in reality indivisible.
If it feels right, there is truth there to be gained.
If it feels wrong, there is probably a mistake in perception there to be found.

An example would be the physicality of light. It is said to be both a particle and a wave at the same time.

This should strike a sane mind as impossible, but rather then investigating the conditions of the primary instrument (our senses and subjective experience of the world), professionals write it off as just being so, without further explanation. We have been conditioned to a false notion of reality, where time in its cause-effect relationship are taken as absolutely separate, where they are one movement, and in and of itself, not movement at all.

Truly, it can be explained how light can appear as both particle and wave at the same “time”, but the story of it is so unbelievable and scary to most people, it has been disregarded.

Consider this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtE3cj8AeQ8

 Signature 

“If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.” -Voltaire
“It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry.” - Thomas Paine
“It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” - Carl Sagan
“It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens.” - Baha’u'llah

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 March 2010 01:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5975
Joined  2009-02-26
WeeDie - 13 March 2010 09:29 AM
Write4U - 13 March 2010 07:03 AM
WeeDie - 13 March 2010 05:40 AM

The feeling body perceives truth. Intuition is a large and important part of the feeling body. You “feel” if something is true or false. The purely rational mind have no such power of validation. The rational mind is machine-like, it makes no difference between 0 and 1.

I disagree, you feel emotion or comfort. But this may well be caused by a falsehood. Just because it feels right it is not necessarily true. Optical illusions are renowned for being able to fool the symbolisms in our mind. On the other hand the rational mind, the machine, functions on data, proof, regardless of feelings. How many times have you heard the phrase counter-intuitive in science?

An example would be the physicality of light. It is said to be both a particle and a wave at the same time.
This should strike a sane mind as impossible, but rather then investigating the conditions of the primary instrument (our senses and subjective experience of the world), professionals write it off as just being so, without further explanation. We have been conditioned to a false notion of reality, where time in its cause-effect relationship are taken as absolutely separate, where they are one movement, and in and of itself, not movement at all.
Truly, it can be explained how light can appear as both particle and wave at the same “time”, but the story of it is so unbelievable and scary to most people, it has been disregarded.

Actually there is an enormous body of work in science dealing with the properties of light. It is the foundation for Einstein’s GTR.
A photon is a particle but propagates as a wave, as proven by the double slit experiments. The experiments showed that while the photons are recorded as particles striking the target surface, the patterns in which they register on the target are clearly formed by wave action. This may sound contradictory, but at the speed of light things take on very different properties.
My own “feeling” is that Quantum plays a large part in all this and that Time is created as a result of quantum. But rather than relying on our senses (which always yield a relativistic experience and in general are woefully inadequate for recording data) for scientific observation, we are able to build much more sensitive instruments to perform the real measurements and produce real and accurate data.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 March 2010 07:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  308
Joined  2009-11-30

I’m more into the idea that the universe is a collection of habits.
and who, what and when that makes the measurement determines the outcome of the so called laws.

From the perspective that we live in a deterministic universe, there is no such thing as random event.
From the perspective that we don’t live in a deterministic universe, ANYTHING could happen at any point in time.

Are you able to hold those two thoughts in your mind simultaneously?

 Signature 

“If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.” -Voltaire
“It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry.” - Thomas Paine
“It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” - Carl Sagan
“It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens.” - Baha’u'llah

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 March 2010 12:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5975
Joined  2009-02-26
WeeDie - 13 March 2010 07:59 PM

I’m more into the idea that the universe is a collection of habits.
and who, what and when that makes the measurement determines the outcome of the so called laws.

From the perspective that we live in a deterministic universe, there is no such thing as random event.
From the perspective that we don’t live in a deterministic universe, ANYTHING could happen at any point in time.

Are you able to hold those two thoughts in your mind simultaneously?

It depends on our experience of “random” events. Something may seem random from our frame of reference, but still have a deterministic cause. Our experience of reality falls in a very narrow band in the greater universal spectrum of reality. Humans cannot see (with the naked eye) infrared or ultraviolet light. Yet there are many insects which can see these wavelengths. Humans cannot hear supersonic or subsonic sounds, but again many animals can, to name a few.
There is an entire reality which is outside our range of experience, but occasionally we can see the results of such extra human reality spilling over in a way which we can experience and those results show up as “miraculous” to our mind because we have no personal knowledge or experience of their causality.
This is the arena where science can provide the data to examine the possibles causes of a “miracle”.

[ Edited: 14 March 2010 01:10 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 March 2010 01:10 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  308
Joined  2009-11-30

I agree,

so if we cannot determine the causality of consciousness it appears miraculous (like the process by which the stomach and intestine know what composition of acids, bile and enzymes to secrete), but in reality, what we call consciousness is a misrepresentation (via attention of identity) of a coalescence of energy that’s been transforming since the Big Bang.

I’m suggesting that the source of what brings the content of consciousness into light, is the same source for everyone: man, animal - even the being and/or existence of plants and minerals.

This have become fairly obvious to me through yogic practise.
Check out this site if you’re interested.

 Signature 

“If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.” -Voltaire
“It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry.” - Thomas Paine
“It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” - Carl Sagan
“It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens.” - Baha’u'llah

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 March 2010 01:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5975
Joined  2009-02-26
WeeDie - 14 March 2010 01:10 AM

I agree,

so if we cannot determine the causality of consciousness it appears miraculous (like the process by which the stomach and intestine know what composition of acids, bile and enzymes to secrete), but in reality, what we call consciousness is a misrepresentation (via attention of identity) of a coalescence of energy that’s been transforming since the Big Bang.

I’m suggesting that the source of what brings the content of consciousness into light, is the same source for everyone: man, animal - even the being and/or existence of plants and minerals.

This have become fairly obvious to me through yogic practise.
Check out this site if you’re interested.

Thank you, I shall.
  grin  we have strayed far afield in this thread.

A final thought on the question of a greater metaphysical mind, I have an intuitive problem with the word “consciousness”. It assumes a personal identity. I question the need for such an assumption. I can conceive of a universal mathematical structure or condition (mind) that works in the same way, without the necessity for a personal awareness. I call it Potential (That which may become reality).
I used to muse over the consciousness of a rock. Does it “know” it is a rock? In a physical (laws of physics)sense it does know its a rock, but not in a “personal awareness” sense.

[ Edited: 14 March 2010 01:43 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 March 2010 03:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  308
Joined  2009-11-30

I believe knowledge is a distinctly human (and perhaps godly) attribute. I mineral does not know what or that it is, but comes into being from the reaction away from it (like the growth of a plant). Further down the road comes the central nervous system which gives rise to movement (through feeling) as a reaction against growth, and finally comes human beings, with its reaction against movement through contemplation of the absolute, or gods and God.

Consciousness for me then, IS identity, or Self. Self is all that is experienced in consciousness. If you experience the assumption of another sentience in a form ( the root of real social interaction) away from your center of consciousness (as if “you” had been the center of a circle), more simply put: if you meet somebody - your true Self is also in this Other body (because you experience it as so in consciousness, and ALL of consciousness is what you are - empirically speaking), albeit in a much lesser concentration in Other bodies (depending on your degree of empathy and compassion).
However, what people usually take to be their identity is an unexamined reaction of one part of consciousness against another part, or environment. In truth, everything experienced in consciousness is what you are. This can easily be confirmed by imagining that you were a new born baby and knew nothing about the senses.
The baby is later imprinted with a fixed sense of identity, which can also be seen as the cause of all our misery. The baby is fearless, and must be imprinted with fear in order to behave according to our prevailing reality model.

Funny thing is, that humanity have recently begun to treat babies as little gods, giving them many years to play, within certain parameters of fear boundaries. We read them stories and fairytales, and give them presents for free. We grow them up to become perfect narcissists with compliments of how good they are being this and that.
Not until they become older are they imprinted to take responsibility and show social concern. This becomes like a burden for them, and they grow apathetic and alienated from the society they meet as they become older. Surely this is the doom of the established social order. Only the emergence of new traditions (gathering what is true from the old ones), can save us from the impending collapse of civilization.

 Signature 

“If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.” -Voltaire
“It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry.” - Thomas Paine
“It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” - Carl Sagan
“It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens.” - Baha’u'llah

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2