 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Philosophy Forum » God and Consciousness.... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| socratus... |
 Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 3:47 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
God and Consciousness.
Mr. ‘FF ’ wrote:
‘ There is only one place where "God" has been
demonstrated, even proven to exist - in human brains.’
=== .
God and Consciousness.
It seems you are right saying: ‘There is only one place
where "God" has been demonstrated, even proven
to exist - in human brains.’
Why? Because if God exist, HE /SHE/ IT must be
in every place it means in human brains too.
Question: is it possible to prove this ?
I will try.
Our brain works on dualistic basis: usually consciousness
(logically) and rarely unconsciousness ( at first it seems
illogically but at last it shows as very wise act) .
In his book ‘ The Holographic Universe’ Michael Talbot
on the page 160 explained this situation in such way:
‘ Contrary to what everyone knows it is so, it may not be
the brain that produce consciousness, but rather consciousness
that creates the appearance of the brain - . . . .’
But as the ‘Bhagavad Gita’ says:
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form.
They do not know My transcendental nature and
My supreme dominion over all that be.
/ Chapter 9. Text 11./
========== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=23624&st=15
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2547&st=105
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548
================== . . |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Robert... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:34 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
If in your travels through a forest you find a complex technological
object, you naturally attribute it to intelligent design.
While this may not prove God, it does leave skeptics with a stark
problem that they cannot answer.
Nature obeys abstract natural principles. It has produced creatures
(us) who can elucidate (many of) those principles.
To say that this state of affairs has come about with no intelligent
design is far more absurd on the face of it than to assume the
opposite.
Again, not proof, but our overarching assumptions should be selected
from among the more reasonable, not the less.
--------------------------
On Nov 5, 8:47 am, socratus <isra... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]God and Consciousness.
Mr. ‘FF ’ wrote:
‘ There is only one place where "God" has been
demonstrated, even proven to exist - in human brains.’
=== .
God and Consciousness.
It seems you are right saying: ‘There is only one place
where "God" has been demonstrated, even proven
to exist - in human brains.’
Why? Because if God exist, HE /SHE/ IT must be
in every place it means in human brains too.
Question: is it possible to prove this ?
I will try.
Our brain works on dualistic basis: usually consciousness
(logically) and rarely unconsciousness ( at first it seems
illogically but at last it shows as very wise act) .
In his book ‘ The Holographic Universe’ Michael Talbot
on the page 160 explained this situation in such way:
‘ Contrary to what everyone knows it is so, it may not be
the brain that produce consciousness, but rather consciousness
that creates the appearance of the brain - . . . .’
But as the ‘Bhagavad Gita’ says:
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form.
They do not know My transcendental nature and
My supreme dominion over all that be.
/ Chapter 9. Text 11./
========== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=23624&st=15http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2547&st=105http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548
================== . .[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Giga... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:13 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
May I suggest you read this very nice book from David Hume on this subject:
http://eremita.di.uminho.pt/gutenberg/4/5/8/4583/4583.txt
"Robert" <RobertArvay at (no spam) msn.com> wrote in message
news:0b6f237a-ba4b-4911-93b4-0222e2ab6c3c at (no spam) s15g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
If in your travels through a forest you find a complex technological
object, you naturally attribute it to intelligent design.
While this may not prove God, it does leave skeptics with a stark
problem that they cannot answer.
Nature obeys abstract natural principles. It has produced creatures
(us) who can elucidate (many of) those principles.
To say that this state of affairs has come about with no intelligent
design is far more absurd on the face of it than to assume the
opposite.
Again, not proof, but our overarching assumptions should be selected
from among the more reasonable, not the less.
--------------------------
On Nov 5, 8:47 am, socratus <isra... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]God and Consciousness.
Mr. ‘FF ’ wrote:
‘ There is only one place where "God" has been
demonstrated, even proven to exist - in human brains.’
=== .
God and Consciousness.
It seems you are right saying: ‘There is only one place
where "God" has been demonstrated, even proven
to exist - in human brains.’
Why? Because if God exist, HE /SHE/ IT must be
in every place it means in human brains too.
Question: is it possible to prove this ?
I will try.
Our brain works on dualistic basis: usually consciousness
(logically) and rarely unconsciousness ( at first it seems
illogically but at last it shows as very wise act) .
In his book ‘ The Holographic Universe’ Michael Talbot
on the page 160 explained this situation in such way:
‘ Contrary to what everyone knows it is so, it may not be
the brain that produce consciousness, but rather consciousness
that creates the appearance of the brain - . . . .’
But as the ‘Bhagavad Gita’ says:
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form.
They do not know My transcendental nature and
My supreme dominion over all that be.
/ Chapter 9. Text 11./
========== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=23624&st=15http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2547&st=105http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548
================== . .[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Immortalist... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 2:58 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 5, 7:13 am, "Giga" <"Giga" <just(removetheseandaddmatthe end)
ho... at (no spam) yahoo.co> wrote:
[quote]May I suggest you read this very nice book from David Hume on this subject:
http://eremita.di.uminho.pt/gutenberg/4/5/8/4583/4583.txt
[/quote]
Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion is a philosophical work written
by the Scottish philosopher David Hume. Through dialogue, three
fictional characters named Demea, Philo, and Cleanthes debate the
nature of God's existence. While all three agree that a god exists,
they differ sharply in opinion on God's nature or attributes and how,
or if, humankind can come to knowledge of a deity.
In the Dialogues, Hume's characters debate a number of arguments for
the existence of God, and arguments whose proponents believe through
which we may come to know the nature of God. Such topics debated
include the argument from design -- for which Hume uses a house -- and
whether there is more suffering or good in the world (argument from
evil).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogues_concerning_Natural_Religion
[quote]"Robert" <RobertAr... at (no spam) msn.com> wrote in message
news:0b6f237a-ba4b-4911-93b4-0222e2ab6c3c at (no spam) s15g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
If in your travels through a forest you find a complex technological
object, you naturally attribute it to intelligent design.
While this may not prove God, it does leave skeptics with a stark
problem that they cannot answer.
Nature obeys abstract natural principles. It has produced creatures
(us) who can elucidate (many of) those principles.
To say that this state of affairs has come about with no intelligent
design is far more absurd on the face of it than to assume the
opposite.
Again, not proof, but our overarching assumptions should be selected
from among the more reasonable, not the less.
--------------------------
On Nov 5, 8:47 am, socratus <isra... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
God and Consciousness.
Mr. ‘FF ’ wrote:
‘ There is only one place where "God" has been
demonstrated, even proven to exist - in human brains.’
=== .
God and Consciousness.
It seems you are right saying: ‘There is only one place
where "God" has been demonstrated, even proven
to exist - in human brains.’
Why? Because if God exist, HE /SHE/ IT must be
in every place it means in human brains too.
Question: is it possible to prove this ?
I will try.
Our brain works on dualistic basis: usually consciousness
(logically) and rarely unconsciousness ( at first it seems
illogically but at last it shows as very wise act) .
In his book ‘ The Holographic Universe’ Michael Talbot
on the page 160 explained this situation in such way:
‘ Contrary to what everyone knows it is so, it may not be
the brain that produce consciousness, but rather consciousness
that creates the appearance of the brain - . . . .’
But as the ‘Bhagavad Gita’ says:
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form.
They do not know My transcendental nature and
My supreme dominion over all that be.
/ Chapter 9. Text 11./
========== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=23624&st=15http://www.ph...
================== . .[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| tooly... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 3:14 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 5, 7:58 pm, Immortalist <reanimater_2... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 5, 7:13 am, "Giga" <"Giga" <just(removetheseandaddmatthe end)
ho... at (no spam) yahoo.co> wrote:
May I suggest you read this very nice book from David Hume on this subject:
http://eremita.di.uminho.pt/gutenberg/4/5/8/4583/4583.txt
Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion is a philosophical work written
by the Scottish philosopher David Hume. Through dialogue, three
fictional characters named Demea, Philo, and Cleanthes debate the
nature of God's existence. While all three agree that a god exists,
they differ sharply in opinion on God's nature or attributes and how,
or if, humankind can come to knowledge of a deity.
In the Dialogues, Hume's characters debate a number of arguments for
the existence of God, and arguments whose proponents believe through
which we may come to know the nature of God. Such topics debated
include the argument from design -- for which Hume uses a house -- and
whether there is more suffering or good in the world (argument from
evil).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogues_concerning_Natural_Religion
"Robert" <RobertAr... at (no spam) msn.com> wrote in message
news:0b6f237a-ba4b-4911-93b4-0222e2ab6c3c at (no spam) s15g2000yqs.googlegroups.com....
If in your travels through a forest you find a complex technological
object, you naturally attribute it to intelligent design.
While this may not prove God, it does leave skeptics with a stark
problem that they cannot answer.
Nature obeys abstract natural principles. It has produced creatures
(us) who can elucidate (many of) those principles.
To say that this state of affairs has come about with no intelligent
design is far more absurd on the face of it than to assume the
opposite.
Again, not proof, but our overarching assumptions should be selected
from among the more reasonable, not the less.
--------------------------
On Nov 5, 8:47 am, socratus <isra... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
God and Consciousness.
Mr. ‘FF ’ wrote:
‘ There is only one place where "God" has been
demonstrated, even proven to exist - in human brains.’
=== .
God and Consciousness.
It seems you are right saying: ‘There is only one place
where "God" has been demonstrated, even proven
to exist - in human brains.’
Why? Because if God exist, HE /SHE/ IT must be
in every place it means in human brains too.
Question: is it possible to prove this ?
I will try.
Our brain works on dualistic basis: usually consciousness
(logically) and rarely unconsciousness ( at first it seems
illogically but at last it shows as very wise act) .
In his book ‘ The Holographic Universe’ Michael Talbot
on the page 160 explained this situation in such way:
‘ Contrary to what everyone knows it is so, it may not be
the brain that produce consciousness, but rather consciousness
that creates the appearance of the brain - . . . .’
But as the ‘Bhagavad Gita’ says:
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form.
They do not know My transcendental nature and
My supreme dominion over all that be.
/ Chapter 9. Text 11./
========== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=23624&st=15http://www..ph...
================== . .- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
""Thus, sceptics in one age, dogmatists in another;
whichever system best suits the purpose of these reverend gentlemen,
in
giving them an ascendant over mankind, they are sure to make it their
favourite principle, and established tenet."" |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| socratus... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:36 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Science and religion in tandem can become a great force
to liberate the mind and help the humans to a fuller and better
understanding of reality.
/ Sikh Religion and Science
by G. S. Sidhu M.A; FIL (London) /
http://www.sikhroots.net/resources/Sikh_Religion%20&Science.pdf
=============================================== |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ZerkonXXXX... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:44 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:47:08 -0800, socratus wrote:
[quote]‘ There is only one place where "God" has been
demonstrated, even proven to exist - in human brains.’
[/quote]
There is a turnip over there, not in a brain. The turnip is God. God has
now been proved and demonstrated. Nothing more is needed. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| socratus... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 12:52 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
‘ The idea that the universe can be viewed as the compound
of two basic orders, the implicate and the explicate, can be
found in many other traditions.
The Tibetan Buddhists call these two aspects the void and
nonvoid. The nonvoid is the reality of visible objects. The
void, like the implicate order, is the birthplace of all things
in the universe, . . .
. . . only the void is real and all forms in the objective world
are illusory, . . . .
The Hindus call the implicate level of reality Brahman.
Brahman is formless but is the birthplace of all forms in
visible reality, which appear out of it and then enfold back
into it in endless flux.
. . . consciousness is not only a subtler form of matter,
but it is more fundamental than matter, and in the Hindu cosmology it
is matter that has emerged from consciousness,
and not the other way around. Or as the Vedas put it, the
physical world is brought into being through both the
‘ veiling’ and ‘ projecting’ powers of consciousness.
. . . the material universe is only a second- generation
reality, a creation of veiled consciousness, the Hindus
say that it is transitory and unreal, or ‘ maya’.
. . .
This same concept can be found in Judaic thought.
. . . . in shamanistic thinking . . . . . .
. . . . . .
Like Bohm, who says that consciousness always has its
source in the implicate, the aborigines believe that the
true source of the mind is in the transcendent reality of
the dreamtime. Normal people do not realize this and
believe that their consciousness is in their bodies.
. . . . .
The Dogan people of the Sudan also believe that the
physical world is the product of a deeper and more
fundamental level of reality . . . . . .’
=== .
Book / The Holographic Universe.
Part 3 / 9. Pages 287 – 289.
By Michael Talbot. /
==================== . . .
My questions after reading this book.
Is it possible that Physics confirmed and proved the
Religion philosophy of life ?
How is it possible to understand the Religion philosophy
of life from modern Physics view?
#
My opinion.
Fact.
The detected material mass of the matter in the
Universe is so small (the average density of all
substance in the Universe is approximately
p=10^-30 g/sm^3) that it cannot ‘close’ the
Universe into sphere and therefore our Universe
as whole is ‘open’, Endless Void / Nothingness /
Vacuum : T=0K.
Quantum Physics says the Vacuum is the birthplace
of all ‘ virtual’ particles . Nobody knows what there are,
but ‘the virtual particles’ change the Vacuum in a
local places and create Nonvoid / Material / Gravity
World with stars, planets and all another objects and
subjects in the Universe.
=== .
Without Eternal/ Infinite Void / Vacuum physics makes no sense.
But . . . . . . .
" The problem of the exact description of vacuum,
in my opinion, is the basic problem now before physics.
Really, if you can’t correctly describe the vacuum,
how it is possible to expect a correct description
of something more complex? "
/ Paul Dirac ./
==========.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=23624&st=15
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2547&st=105
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548
================== . . |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| art... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:41 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 02:52:24 -0800, socratus wrote:
+AD4 +IBg The idea that the universe can be viewed as the compound
+AD4 of two basic orders, the implicate and the explicate, can be found in
+AD4 many other traditions.
+AD4 The Tibetan Buddhists call these two aspects the void and
+AD4 nonvoid. The nonvoid is the reality of visible objects. The void, like
+AD4 the implicate order, is the birthplace of all things in the universe, .
I'm going to expand a bit on what you've written based on my understanding
of metaphysics gained via +ACI-channels+ACI such Jane Robert's Seth.
+AD4 . .
+AD4 . . . only the void is real and all forms in the objective world are
+AD4 illusory, . . . .
Seth uses the term +ACI-camouflage+ACI rather than +ACI-illusion+ACI. Our experiences
in physical reality are meant to be (and are) quite real, so the term
+ACI-illusion+ACI is unfortunate when you think about it.
+AD4 The Hindus call the implicate level of reality Brahman. Brahman is
+AD4 formless but is the birthplace of all forms in visible reality, which
+AD4 appear out of it and then enfold back
+AD4 into it in endless flux.
+AD4 . . . consciousness is not only a subtler form of matter,
That's incorrect. Consciousness is not matter in any form.
+AD4 but it is more fundamental than matter, and in the Hindu cosmology it is
+AD4 matter that has emerged from consciousness,
+AD4 and not the other way around. Or as the Vedas put it, the physical
+AD4 world is brought into being through both the
+AD4 +IBg veiling+IBk and +IBg projecting+IBk powers of consciousness.
Conscious energy creates matter continually. It can be thought of as
+ACI-in matter+ACI or +ACI-wedded to matter+ACI, but it's very misleading to
think of consciousness as a form of matter.
+AD4 . . . the material universe is only a second- generation
+AD4 reality, a creation of veiled consciousness, the Hindus say that it is
+AD4 transitory and unreal, or +IBg maya+IBk. . . .
Again, the term +ACI-camouflage reality+ACI seems far more appropriate. Our
material system is just one of many kinds of material systems. Some
explicate orders aren't material at all.
+AD4 This same concept can be found in Judaic thought.
+AD4 . . . . in shamanistic thinking . . . . . . . . . . . .
+AD4 Like Bohm, who says that consciousness always has its source in the
+AD4 implicate, the aborigines believe that the
+AD4 true source of the mind is in the transcendent reality of
+AD4 the dreamtime. Normal people do not realize this and believe that their
+AD4 consciousness is in their bodies.
+AD4 . . . . .
+AD4 The Dogan people of the Sudan also believe that the
+AD4 physical world is the product of a deeper and more fundamental level
+AD4 of reality . . . . . .+IBk
+AD4 +AD0APQA9 .
+AD4 Book / The Holographic Universe.
+AD4 Part 3 / 9. Pages 287 +IBM 289.
+AD4 By Michael Talbot. /
+AD4 +AD0APQA9AD0APQA9AD0APQA9AD0APQA9AD0APQA9AD0APQA9AD0APQ . . .
The same basic metaphysics have arisen so often in widely separated
regions and times that the term +ACI-perennial philosophy+ACI applies.
+AD4 My questions after reading this book.
+AD4
+AD4 Is it possible that Physics confirmed and proved the
+AD4 Religion philosophy of life ?
No way :)
+AD4 How is it possible to understand the Religion philosophy
+AD4 of life from modern Physics view?
You can't.
+AD4 +ACM
+AD4 My opinion.
+AD4 Fact.
+AD4 The detected material mass of the matter in the
+AD4 Universe is so small (the average density of all substance in the
+AD4 Universe is approximately
+AD4 p+AD0-10+AF4--30 g/sm+AF4-3) that it cannot +IBg-close+IBk the
+AD4 Universe into sphere and therefore our Universe
+AD4 as whole is +IBg-open+IBk, Endless Void / Nothingness /
+AD4 Vacuum : T+AD0-0K.
+AD4 Quantum Physics says the Vacuum is the birthplace of all +IBg virtual+IBk
+AD4 particles . Nobody knows what there are, but +IBg-the virtual particles+IBk
+AD4 change the Vacuum in a local places and create Nonvoid / Material /
+AD4 Gravity World with stars, planets and all another objects and
+AD4 subjects in the Universe.
+AD4 +AD0APQA9 .
+AD4 Without Eternal/ Infinite Void / Vacuum physics makes no sense. But . .
+AD4 . . . . .
+AD4 +ACI The problem of the exact description of vacuum,
+AD4 in my opinion, is the basic problem now before physics.
+AD4 Really, if you can+IBk-t correctly describe the vacuum,
+AD4 how it is possible to expect a correct description
+AD4 of something more complex? +ACI
I'd say understanding how time arises is of equal interest.
There is no time in the implicate order. It's tricky since time
and matter both are continually created. You can't start off with
vibrating strings since any periodic variation of anything is a clock ...
and the existence of clocks means the existence of time. Much creation
occurs before electromagnetic energy and +ACI-pre-matter+ACI are formed
+ACI-outside of time+ACI and then made somehow to appear in time (whatever
that may actually mean or involve). Our universe literally +ACI-blinks on and
off+ACI. But physicists have no means of detecting this or dealing with
creation from their perspective +ACI-inside the box+ACI, so to speak. I think
things need to be understood from a perspective outside our material
camouflage system.
Art
http://home.ptd.net/+AH4-artnpeg |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| socratus... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 2:39 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Different points of view.
1.
In Physics we trust. / Tarun Biswas /
and plus millions of other believers .
2.
Science is not always as objective as we would like to believe.
/ Michael Talbot. / and plus few others.
3.
Religion or Physics ? Faith or Knowledge ?
/ some doubtful people. /
4.
Science and religion in tandem can become a great force
to liberate the mind and help the humans to a fuller and better
understanding of reality.
/ G. S. Sidhu / and plus some individuals .
===== .
P.S.
In Physics we trust. Is it correct ?
Yes, it is logically correct. Why ?
Because only Physics can logically explain us
the Ultimate Nature of Reality.
Israel Socratus.
www.socratus.com
======================== |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| bigfletch8 at (no spam) gmail.com... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 5:46 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 12, 8:39 pm, socratus <isra... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
snip
[quote]===== .
P.S.
In Physics we trust. Is it correct ?
Yes, it is logically correct. Why ?
Because only Physics can logically explain us
the Ultimate Nature of Reality.
Israel Socratus.www.socratus.com
=======================
There is a good accumulation of oxymorons. [/quote]
Logic is a mental construct.Du-ality not re-ality. Reality doesnt have
a nature, but nature (within a common definition)has a reality, built
within the creative mind.
That doesnt mean physics cannot be trusted, particularly quantum
physics.
BOfL |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:31 pm
|
|