The Mind of God (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by dhw, Monday, October 11, 2010, 15:05 (5156 days ago) @ dhw

BBELLA: [...] The exchange / play between what IS; light matter (that which we can see) and dark matter (that which we cannot). Both hold the keys to all our unanswered questions. As long as science focus only on the light they will always get only half the story. [...] Perchance one day they will stumble in the darkness and name what they stumbled upon with their own language, calling something already named long ago something else.-Dark matter and dark energy are just expressions for the 95% of the universe that science knows nothing about, but scientists are still thinking of them in material terms, in which case they may not hold the key. Your "something already named long ago" is of course connected with what you refer to as "spirit/chi", and these by definition are not material, so science, as you say, can't cope with them. Scientists need to have a kind of split personality if they are to embrace non-material concepts (but I don't mean that pejoratively).-I'm putting this response on the "Mind of God" thread, because I would like ... tentatively ... to develop your thought in a slightly different direction. The only consciousness we know of for sure is our own, although other animals have a less developed form. You have consistently maintained that there is a kind of universal life force (chi) to which humans can tune in, and that life was not deliberately created as such, but has always been present through this life force. (I hope I've got that right.) Bearing in mind the astonishing creative powers of human consciousness, is it not equally conceivable that we ourselves are making the force we "tune into"? Just as a writer can conjure up a whole world of characters that are not himself, anyone can conjure up a kind of energy that appears to be outside himself. If our particular world was not deliberately created (i.e. by the conventional God figure), it came about by chance, as did our consciousness, and so we don't need any other explanation for the origin of life. The life force is then relevant only in so far as it affects us in the here and now, so why should it not be our consciousness that creates both it and the supposed links between it and ourselves? That doesn't make it unreal, because our consciousness can create all kinds of realities, non-fictional as well as fictional ... for instance love, aesthetic appreciation, the placebo effect ... but these are individual (or at best intersubjective) realities that do not exist outside of ourselves as humans. If this were so, the mind of God we "tune into" would be our mind.