An ideal ultimate truth? (Origins)

by dhw, Monday, May 10, 2010, 13:14 (5309 days ago) @ David Turell

This thread has arisen out of BBella's question concerning what we would regard as the ideal ultimate truth. My own response, after a few refinements, is that the bodiless self would survive death, and maintain its personal identity in a world filled with the spiritual pleasures of life ... without any suffering and without a God ... and free to choose at any time to sacrifice its identity, perhaps by taking on a new form. I don't know to what extent others would regard this as an ideal, but I have suggested that we should consider what evidence there is, if any, for at least part of this dream scenario.-Clearly a key element is once again the nature of consciousness. I'll have to leave David and Matt to do battle over quantum theory, and I can do no more than comment on their possible conclusions. David has argued that "we can only see the surface of the 'wall of uncertainty'. If we could get to the other side we wouldn't be so confused." Matt says that the uncertainty principle isn't a wall, but I'm happy for the sake of discussion to accept the metaphor and to ask: what evidence is there that on the other side we have disembodied consciousness? -Matt has offered a very helpful comparison between ice as a solid form of water and matter as a solid form of energy. We know that when ice melts, it reverts to water. But when my brain matter is rotting in the ground, what evidence is there that it will turn into the same energy that forms my present consciousness and, by extension, my present identity? David argues that the 'Zeno effect' MAY keep our consciousness in existence after we pass on. The tentativeness of the auxiliary seems appropriate to me, particularly in the light of a quote I found in a Wikipedia article on the 'Zeno effect': "The case for quantum biology remains one of 'not proven'. [...] as yet no clear-cut example has been presented of non-trivial quantum effects at work in a key biological process." This suggests to me that quantum theory is a long way from resolving our confusion. -As science unravels the ever increasing complexities of life's mechanisms, its findings may well be interpreted as providing evidence for design, but I can't see it doing the same for the ideal of a disembodied human intelligence. However, as we've stressed over and over again on this forum, what constitutes evidence need not be confined to the realm of science. I would have thought that any positive evidence is far more likely to be found in the realm of personal experiences. I'm talking here of mysticism, the so-called "paranormal", the unfathomable intricacies of our emotions, thoughts and ideas, the equally unfathomable impact of the arts, and especially music. Like David and Matt, I remain sceptical about the different claims of the many religions, but that doesn't mean they aren't based on a common truth. In all of these human activities, there appears to be an intuitive link to some kind of spiritual dimension that can't be explained by matter or solidified energy or whatever other description you want to give to the physical cells of the brain. It may be (only "MAY") that intersubjective ... as opposed to purely subjective ... experiences provide a more reliable guide to the UT than the objective findings of science.