BBella\'s Universe (Introduction)
Lots of interesting material, so I hope BBella and Tony won't mind my slightly shifting the focus by starting a new thread.
BBella, if I’ve understood your “theology†correctly, it ties in with Abel’s belief in a race of alien “gods†who share many human characteristics. There are then two other levels of “godâ€: Gaia, the spirit of Mother Earth, and the “true Creator Godâ€, which you call ALL THAT IS. (I’m trying to break the argument down into its component parts, so please correct any misunderstandings.) It’s not clear to me whether you think the alien race created life on Earth, or were just superior beings whom our ancestors worshipped. The question naturally arises as to who or what created them. As I tried to discuss with Abel, if they arose spontaneously, you may as well argue that we did too, so we don’t need them to create us. They might provide a possible explanation for myths, certain unexplained features of ancient civilizations, and UFOs, but are not integral to our overall view of the universe.
You see Mother Earth as a conscious, sentient being, but more emotional than intellectual, while ALL THAT IS presumably constitutes the whole universe. Strictly speaking, then, we don’t need to distinguish between them, because ALL THAT IS = the macrocosm, and Mother Earth is a microcosm, while everything on Mother Earth is a kind of mini-microcosm. The emphasis on emotion as opposed to intellect suggests that this concept excludes deliberate creation of life, which requires knowledge still far beyond the intellectual capacity of even our greatest scientists. Therefore life presumably arose and evolved spontaneously (either ours, or that of the creative aliens).
If we jettison all concepts of God in favour of a creative force we call ALL THAT IS, I don’t see how anyone can object. It’s only if we ascribe particular attributes to this force that problems emerge. “Sentient†is one of them. That there are sentient beings on Mother Earth is clear, but even here, can we really believe that for instance a piece of rock is capable of conscious sensation and perception? If not, where do we draw lines: are the waters of the oceans, the clouds in the sky, the stars in the firmament capable of conscious feeling and perception?
This is a very literal approach to your “theologyâ€, but please take it as an attempt to understand, not to criticize. Similarly, when you say the ALL THAT IS “can have personality […] can be all or anything you ‘need’ it to be […] because it reacts/responds/creates in reaction to emotionâ€, in what way does it respond? I’m thinking here of your own astonishing experiences, in which you somehow came back from a living death into vibrant life, but what did you communicate with? Could you really identify a personality, or a specific reaction? Or was it contact with some unidentifiable but positive, strengthening form of energy? This I can understand, as Nature itself is living proof of a positive, creative force at work all around and in us; we’re part of it, and there are many cultures that emphasize our oneness with it. But there’s no evidence that all of Nature is sentient, or that there is even life beyond our planet. So is the unity that binds ALL THAT IS in fact only the common bond between all that lives? You say that your hope is not placed in “godsâ€, “but the power of LOVE itself.†Do you think that love has an existence independent of the creatures living on this Earth? Without life here, do you think ALL THAT IS would still be a sentient being?
I should add that at moments of deep sensitivity, I share the feeling of oneness with all living creatures, and even with the stars in the firmament. But I have no sense that the universe has a personality or is sentient, as my fellow creatures are to varying degrees. Nor do I expect a response to my needs. The feeling of unity does not entail anything personal at all – just that we’re part of one vast mass, and one day every living thing will be dead, and will be replaced by other living things. I find this rather sad but extremely beautiful. It may all boil down to personal experience, but I’m only reflecting on your post, and exchanging thoughts – not trying to pick holes.
There are other areas of discussion that I’ll deal with more briefly. You think the concept of morality has a shelf life. So long as there is human society, I think there will have to be moral codes to prevent social chaos. Tony equates sin with “mistakeâ€, but I take sin to mean violation of a moral code (in the sense of causing harm to others), and although codes are constantly changing, I still wouldn’t equate mistaking a potato for a tomato with, say, the cold-blooded rape and murder of a child.
Reincarnation: Perhaps we could discuss this on the Afterlife thread, which is a topic in itself.
Finally, Tony says: “One of the reasons DHW has a hard time pinning down my beliefs is that *I* have a hard time pinning them down.†This made me laugh, but at the same time kind of warmed my heart. When people’s beliefs are already pinned down, it means they’ve closed their minds. Such folk usually leave this website very quickly. I’d like to think the rest of us are keeping one another company on a fascinating quest.
BBella\'s Universe
by David Turell 
, Tuesday, November 29, 2011, 17:57 (4744 days ago) @ dhw
You see Mother Earth as a conscious, sentient being, but more emotional than intellectual, while ALL THAT IS presumably constitutes the whole universe.
If we jettison all concepts of God in favour of a creative force we call ALL THAT IS, I don’t see how anyone can object. It’s only if we ascribe particular attributes to this force that problems emerge. “Sentient†is one of them.
Baruch Spinoza is needed here. Like him I believe that the force or intellect of God is within everything, all that is. Sentient, and perhaps emotional. After all, emotions are part of consciousness. I don't think bbella and I are far apart.
BBella\'s Universe
by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Tuesday, November 29, 2011, 22:53 (4743 days ago) @ David Turell
Honestly, I don't think any of us are as far apart in this as it may seem on the surface of things, differing merely in degrees and background ideologies. The idea of the Judeo-Christian God, while powerful in my childhood, mellowed as I matured into a less polarized form. I have a really hard time expressing it, usually, and I graciously admit that David, DHW, and BBella are much more eloquent in their presentations.
Whether we talk about DHW's non-sentient positive creative force, David's UI of intellect and emotion, BBella's ALL THAT IS of Love, or my own mad inane ramblings and unrecognizable mash-up of various religions, philosophies, science, energies and oregano with a hint of garlic, the more I learn the less I can doubt that there is an underlying commonality, a unifying force, a connecting web that encompasses all of existence.
As for DHW's unfeeling non-sentient rock, I only can point to the fact that the same elements and energies that make up that non-sentient also make up your very sentient self, and that when we die, our elements and energies will in turn become non-sentient rocks, or part of non-sentient trees, or perhaps even part of a sentient ostrich who, much like humans, buries its head in the sand at the first sign of distress.
DHW, to your last comment I can only ask that, if we are journeying together, you pack light and leave the road maps at home. Oh, and don't forget the whiskey. You might need something to take the edge off by the time its all said and done. :P
--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.
BBella\'s Universe
by David Turell , Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 00:51 (4743 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained
the more I learn the less I can doubt that there is an underlying commonality, a unifying force, a connecting web that encompasses all of existence.
Exactly my thoughts and my unifying force is a UI.
BBella\'s Universe
by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 03:31 (4743 days ago) @ David Turell
You see Mother Earth as a conscious, sentient being, but more emotional than intellectual, while ALL THAT IS presumably constitutes the whole universe.
If we jettison all concepts of God in favour of a creative force we call ALL THAT IS, I don’t see how anyone can object. It’s only if we ascribe particular attributes to this force that problems emerge. “Sentient†is one of them.
Baruch Spinoza is needed here. Like him I believe that the force or intellect of God is within everything, all that is. Sentient, and perhaps emotional. After all, emotions are part of consciousness. I don't think bbella and I are far apart.
Or we resurrect Heraclitus and process theology from the dustbin of history... God as the constant state of becoming is much more fitting than the old man in a wide-brimmed hat...
--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"
\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"
BBella\'s Universe
by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 04:28 (4743 days ago) @ xeno6696
Xeno
Or we resurrect Heraclitus and process theology from the dustbin of history... God as the constant state of becoming is much more fitting than the old man in a wide-brimmed hat...
I think one of the things is that humans typically need some 'form' to fit the function. It really doesn't matter if that form is an old man with a wide-brimmed had an rocking beard, a voluptuous Goddess, or a world tree. The form is simply a manifestation of function that allows us to conceptualize ideas. Ironically, science uses these types of things all the time. Consider 'string' theory, or Schrodinger's Cat. I think the danger is in allowing the form to govern function, or in ascribing aspects of the form to the function. We typically manifest the idea of a UI with a manlike form because humans are the only creature we know of with higher intelligence that is capable of all of the attributes we associate with intelligence, emotion, and power. Some have taken it to an extreme though and have allowed the form to govern the function.
--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.
BBella\'s Universe
by BBella , Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 09:03 (4743 days ago) @ dhw
edited by unknown, Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 09:54
Part 1
Thanks, dhw! My own universe! Awesome!
BBella, if I’ve understood your “theology†correctly, it ties in with Abel’s belief in a race of alien “gods†who share many human characteristics.
Yes, and for that, I thank Abel for bringing a similar shared view to the table..even tho it was pretty far out...it was very interesting to me no less, as you can imagine, since it did share a similar belief.
There are then two other levels of “godâ€: Gaia, the spirit of Mother Earth, and the “true Creator Godâ€, which you call ALL THAT IS. (I’m trying to break the argument down into its component parts, so please correct any misunderstandings.) It’s not clear to me whether you think the alien race created life on Earth, or were just superior beings whom our ancestors worshipped.
No, I do not think they created life on earth...I believe it possible they created humans from life on earth by splicing their dna with the life on earth's dna.
The question naturally arises as to who or what created them.
Or, who or what created earth and life on earth before they got here? I believe all life [everything] is created within the ALL THAT IS.
As I tried to discuss with Abel, if they arose spontaneously, you may as well argue that we did too, so we don’t need them to create us.
I agree they probably did arise spontaneously as all things have...even those things we have created from other things, arises spontaneously on it's own as long as it's created with spontaneous matter that arises spontaneously. But, just because they may have arose spontaneously doesn't automatically mean we did as well. Given more time, life on earth may have created something like us or them...but I have no idea how life arose where they are from or how long it took.
They might provide a possible explanation for myths, certain unexplained features of ancient civilizations, and UFOs, but are not integral to our overall view of the universe.
That really is all I'm entertaining here...possibilities from the evidence we have here on earth before us.
You see Mother Earth as a conscious, sentient being, but more emotional than intellectual, while ALL THAT IS presumably constitutes the whole universe. Strictly speaking, then, we don’t need to distinguish between them, because ALL THAT IS = the macrocosm, and Mother Earth is a microcosm, while everything on Mother Earth is a kind of mini-microcosm. The emphasis on emotion as opposed to intellect suggests that this concept excludes deliberate creation of life, which requires knowledge still far beyond the intellectual capacity of even our greatest scientists. Therefore life presumably arose and evolved spontaneously (either ours, or that of the creative aliens).
I agree. Altho I don't care for the word "spontaneous." Nothing really happens spontaneously. Evolved is a better word without the word spontaneously attached to it.
If we jettison all concepts of God in favour of a creative force we call ALL THAT IS, I don’t see how anyone can object. It’s only if we ascribe particular attributes to this force that problems emerge. “Sentient†is one of them. That there are sentient beings on Mother Earth is clear, but even here, can we really believe that for instance a piece of rock is capable of conscious sensation and perception? If not, where do we draw lines: are the waters of the oceans, the clouds in the sky, the stars in the firmament capable of conscious feeling and perception?
I do believe in a conscious awareness of all things, but as I have mentioned quite a while back, this conscious awareness, I believe, is more based on vibration, which I didnt mention in my response to Tony. With my response, I was trying to bring in an idea that we both could possibly identify with. Gaia, is a known word and is very old and does hold a "similar" feel to how I think of the ALL THAT IS. The word sentient does as well. But, I do not mean to say that the ALL THAT IS is conscious in the way that we think of human consciousness, intellectually. More "like," as with everything, feeling the movement of all.
This is a very literal approach to your “theologyâ€, but please take it as an attempt to understand, not to criticize. Similarly, when you say the ALL THAT IS “can have personality […] can be all or anything you ‘need’ it to be […] because it reacts/responds/creates in reaction to emotionâ€, in what way does it respond?
Just as everything that has been created thus far (and is being created even now) by/from/within matter, as is, so matter is a continuous changing fabric. The ALL THAT IS, full of potential possibilities always. So when we "need" or "want" we tend to create movement in the fabric of matter..and many times we get just what we want, or need. As is said, watch what you wish for, because you may get it. There is a potential always in the fabric of the ALL THAT IS that we, or anything or everything really, is having a hand in creating. I'm sure that could be expressed in a much better way...but it's whats on the menu for now.
continued...sorry, I don't have time to proof read...hope it's understandable!
BBella\'s Universe
by BBella , Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 09:29 (4743 days ago) @ dhw
edited by unknown, Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 10:03
Part 2
I’m thinking here of your own astonishing experiences, in which you somehow came back from a living death into vibrant life, but what did you communicate with? Could you really identify a personality, or a specific reaction? Or was it contact with some unidentifiable but positive, strengthening form of energy?
I didn't really communicate with anything..it was just the opposite - I quit communicating with anything other than what I could see, feel or here directly. In other words, matter. I quit trusting the unknown god of the scriptures and said forget it..that's not working for me. As I said before, I had never explored the inner world of the mind before my illness. I just relied on the teachings of my church and my own discoveries in study. But when all had failed to give me even a bit of peace as to what was going on with me...I just quit. I figured if the god of the scriptures and that which I believed in couldnt give me even a bit of peace, then it wasnt worth my time. After the incident with the inner journey I made to go ahead and die and then inadvertently found some peace and less pain, I embarked on a different path of observation, the inner and outer workings of myself and all that I observe. So still haven't communicated with anything to report, but did get a very odd set of numbers rolling by on a continuous basis as well as noticing synchronous movements I still see. But I think both have more to do with the quality of matter we are all working with. The always potential matter of possibility of the ALL THAT IS.
This I can understand, as Nature itself is living proof of a positive, creative force at work all around and in us; we’re part of it, and there are many cultures that emphasize our oneness with it. But there’s no evidence that all of Nature is sentient, or that there is even life beyond our planet. So is the unity that binds ALL THAT IS in fact only the common bond between all that lives?
I think ALL THAT IS, not just all that lives, is sentient, in the way that everything responds or reacts to it's surroundings. Even a rock does respond to its surroundings, altho time prevents us from observing it.
You say that your hope is not placed in “godsâ€, “but the power of LOVE itself.†Do you think that love has an existence independent of the creatures living on this Earth?
No [I dont]. I do believe love is dependent on beings to create or manifest it from the potential fabric of the ALL THAT IS within themselves. But I do believe their may possibly be benevolent beings beyond the earth that may have and do manifest the power of love as well. There could even be actual beings that watch over us. I don't know. Because with the ALL THAT IS...anything is possible!
Without life here, do you think ALL THAT IS would still be a sentient being?
[Yes.] [But] When I say sentient...I do not mean like a person..or one massive being that is like a very large person. I mean a reactive, responding, changing, matter that is so full of potential it seems alive and aware of all things THAT IS, as we think of the idea of Gaia but in a larger frame of reference as mentioned before.
Yes, I think everything responds to everything, so all is sentient in that sense.
I agree.
I should add that at moments of deep sensitivity, I share the feeling of oneness with all living creatures, and even with the stars in the firmament. But I have no sense that the universe has a personality or is sentient, as my fellow creatures are to varying degrees. Nor do I expect a response to my needs. The feeling of unity does not entail anything personal at all – just that we’re part of one vast mass, and one day every living thing will be dead, and will be replaced by other living things. I find this rather sad but extremely beautiful.
I, as well, do not see the universe as a personality or a being with a personality...I see as it as matter full of potential. I can feel the oneness of all things if I choose to imagine it. But I dont sense a sentient being parse, unless I choose to feel it that way.
It may all boil down to personal experience, but I’m only reflecting on your post, and exchanging thoughts – not trying to pick holes.
I definitely agree that it all boils down to our own personal experience. I also do not think you are trying to pick holes at all and appreciate your questions. As with Tony, I can't always really know how I see things, for the most part, unless I'm asked. Again, as with Tony, what I think is not set in stone either, but as malleable as matter itself...even if some ideas take longer to change. When the view changes, I can change how I view with it.
continued...sorry for no proof reading!
BBella\'s Universe
by BBella , Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 09:36 (4743 days ago) @ dhw
Part 3
There are other areas of discussion that I’ll deal with more briefly. You think the concept of morality has a shelf life.
No, not the concept. The word.
So long as there is human society, I think there will have to be moral codes to prevent social chaos.
I don't think the same way as you do here. I do believe within the matter that we are made up of, is the potential for a reactionary society that does not require laws to be imposed upon it but, is so aware of how their choices impact WHAT IS, that they learn to choose to live in peace with everything that IS. I believe in the survival of humankind, the survival of the fittest. We will evolve within us what is best for the continuation of our species. That just seems like a combo of a natural selective process and adaptation to me.
I'm not saying it will happen in anyone's life time or in a few centuries, etc...just that within our makeup is the potential for peace and harmony within and with humankind. Humankind is made up of the same matter as everything else that IS...and so, we too, can find a balance and harmony within ourselves that will eventually extend to everything else. We are a fairly new species...just give us some time please before you write us off!!!
Finally, Tony says: “One of the reasons DHW has a hard time pinning down my beliefs is that *I* have a hard time pinning them down.†This made me laugh, but at the same time kind of warmed my heart. When people’s beliefs are already pinned down, it means they’ve closed their minds. Such folk usually leave this website very quickly. I’d like to think the rest of us are keeping one another company on a fascinating quest.
I am right there with you!!!
BBella\'s Universe
by David Turell , Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 15:12 (4743 days ago) @ BBella
When people’s beliefs are already pinned down, it means they’ve closed their minds. Such folk usually leave this website very quickly. I’d like to think the rest of us are keeping one another company on a fascinating quest.
I am right there with you!!!
Me too. My views keep changing as I keep studying and reading you guys.
BBella\'s Universe
BBella does not think an alien race created life on Earth, but they might possibly have created humans by splicing their dna with earthly dna. As regards who created them and who created life on Earth before they got here, “I believe all life is created within the ALL THAT IS.â€
I have no trouble understanding your last statement, since life could hardly be created outside the ALL THAT IS! But I do have a problem with the rest of it. Why posit the idea of an alien race in the first place? If life was already here on Earth, why couldn’t humans have evolved without the interference of aliens, who presumably also evolved spontaneously? Are myths, ancient civilizations and UFOs the only reason for this speculation?
You don’t like the word “spontaneouslyâ€, so I should explain that I’m using it as a contrast to deliberate design. David, for instance, believes that life was created by a conscious designer and did not arise by a process of abiogenesis, or “spontaneous generationâ€. You use “created†in a manner that also needs clarification: “Just as everything that has been created thus far [...] by/from/within matter, as is, so matter is a continuous changing fabric.†I suspect that David likes the term, but I don’t think you mean “created†in the sense of consciously designed, do you?
You say we often get what we want by creating movement in the fabric of matter. I certainly agree that matter is constantly changing, and there’s no doubt that some people have a gift for getting what they want. “Mind over matter†is the phrase that occurs to me. But the opposite often applies as well – the more you want something, the harder you may try and the less likely you may be to get it. That seems to fit in with your own experience when you were ill: you quit, and only then did you find “some peace and less painâ€. Earlier you said the ALL THAT IS creates what we need “as long as our subconscious or other surrounding factors are not interfering with that creation.†I wonder if it isn’t the other way round – that the conscious mind is what puts up the barriers, whereas the subconscious has a more direct path to what we require. That is certainly true of creative work, in which the subconscious nearly always knows far more than the conscious – although the conscious does need to exert a degree of control.
You say that even a rock is sentient, as it responds to its surroundings. Again, we may have a problem of definition here. For me, sentience is impossible without the capability of feeling and perceiving. It’s a form of awareness that stops short of intellectuality. I don’t associate it with erosion by wind and water, or cracking under a hammer. That’s why I find it difficult to imagine rocks, clouds, oceans, stars, the ALL THAT IS as being sentient, and maybe you do too, because you talk of “matter that is so full of potential it seems alive and aware of all things.†The operative word here is obviously “seemsâ€. And since you believe that love depends on living beings like ourselves, and you don’t see the universe as a being with personality, the inference might perhaps be that apart from ourselves and possible aliens, sentience really is confined to living beings, while the rest of the universe remains senseless and impersonal, though ceaselessly changing and “creating†AS IF it were a sentient being. I say “might perhaps beâ€, because I feel David and Tony breathing down my neck, but if the above interpretation is correct, your ALL THAT IS appears closer to atheism than to David’s Universal Intelligence and to Tony’s God of Love (sorry, guys). You may see it differently, though.
As regards morality, you are hopeful that humanity will one day “find a balance and harmony†that will make moral codes unnecessary. We can agree to disagree on this, but I would add that I can’t conceive of a world in which humans could be happy without problems to solve, and the mixture of good and bad which I like to project onto Tony’s God seems to me also to be essential to our human existence: no light without dark, no beauty without ugliness, no joy without sadness. And so, no harmony without discord. Methinks morality is here to stay!
******
P.S for Tony: I agree that there is a connecting web, but the question as always is its nature. And so I don’t agree that your posts are an unrecognizable mash-up – though I enjoyed the oregano with a hint of garlic! All of us struggle to express the inexpressible, and as I said before, it’s only those with fixed ideas who are able to ignore the vast array of unanswerable questions. Once you take them into account, there is NO fixable pattern, so we all end up with some sort of mishmash. As for the journey, I’m not sure if I travel lightest or heaviest, as I hang onto everything but none of it is mine. Road maps are no use to me even literally, as I’m hopeless at reading them; and I don’t drink whisky, as I dislike alcohol. I shall take a few bars of chocolate instead.
BBella\'s Universe
by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 19:54 (4742 days ago) @ dhw
I don't have time to go into your main post at the moment, but I will come back to it later.
P.S for Tony: I agree that there is a connecting web, but the question as always is its nature. And so I don’t agree that your posts are an unrecognizable mash-up – though I enjoyed the oregano with a hint of garlic! All of us struggle to express the inexpressible, and as I said before, it’s only those with fixed ideas who are able to ignore the vast array of unanswerable questions. Once you take them into account, there is NO fixable pattern, so we all end up with some sort of mishmash. As for the journey, I’m not sure if I travel lightest or heaviest, as I hang onto everything but none of it is mine. Road maps are no use to me even literally, as I’m hopeless at reading them; and I don’t drink whisky, as I dislike alcohol. I shall take a few bars of chocolate instead.
Got to have garlic. I think garlic should be its own food group.:P As far as alcohol, or any other mind altering substance for that matter, you mentioned in you post that the conscious mind might be what is 'blocking' things. Maybe there is a reason other than hallucinations that things like this were being used for religious and shamanistic practices as a way of dropping the shields. Just a thought. LOL Keep the chocolate away from me though. I love it and I would probably gobble up all of yours and end up in a sugar coma hehe.
P.S.
Oh.. and there is ALWAYS a pattern. Always. We may not recognize it as such, but it is most certainly there.
--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.
BBella\'s Universe
by David Turell , Thursday, December 01, 2011, 00:32 (4742 days ago) @ dhw
Road maps are no use to me even literally, as I’m hopeless at reading them; and I don’t drink whisky, as I dislike alcohol. I shall take a few bars of chocolate instead.
Try a Garmin. Really works, and you don't have to think. They come in civilized voices, redneck, cowboy and probably Cockney.
BBella\'s Universe
by BBella , Thursday, December 01, 2011, 07:02 (4742 days ago) @ dhw
Why posit the idea of an alien race in the first place? If life was already here on Earth, why couldn’t humans have evolved without the interference of aliens, who presumably also evolved spontaneously?
I definitely think some kind of human like beings could have evolved, given enough time.
Are myths, ancient civilizations and UFOs the only reason for this speculation?
Not the only reason. Most, if not all sacred books tell of beings not of this world that "came down" and spoke to the people. Add that to the myths, ancient civilization and UFO's and the evidence builds from speculative to possible, and maybe someday, to probable. I remain open to the possibility until then.
You don’t like the word “spontaneouslyâ€, so I should explain that I’m using it as a contrast to deliberate design.
Ah, ok...got it.
David, for instance, believes that life was created by a conscious designer and did not arise by a process of abiogenesis, or “spontaneous generationâ€. You use “created†in a manner that also needs clarification: “Just as everything that has been created thus far [...] by/from/within matter, as is, so matter is a continuous changing fabric.†I suspect that David likes the term, but I don’t think you mean “created†in the sense of consciously designed, do you?
Not in the manner of a large conscious being decided to create...no.
Earlier you said the ALL THAT IS creates what we need “as long as our subconscious or other surrounding factors are not interfering with that creation.†I wonder if it isn’t the other way round – that the conscious mind is what puts up the barriers, whereas the subconscious has a more direct path to what we require. That is certainly true of creative work, in which the subconscious nearly always knows far more than the conscious – although the conscious does need to exert a degree of control.
Either way, I didn't mean to imply we want something and lo and behold, there it is. The universe is in continuous creation mode, and emotion, because it can energetically effect the fabric of matter, it can cause a ripple effect away or toward us. I'm not an expert in creation, I'm speculating how things appear to me by observing. I've heard something similar expressed in a movie that came out a while back called "The Secret." It explains something similar in Quantum Physics terms as what I had began to observe.
For me, sentience is impossible without the capability of feeling and perceiving. It’s a form of awareness that stops short of intellectuality. ...since you believe that love depends on living beings like ourselves, and you don’t see the universe as a being with personality, the inference might perhaps be that apart from ourselves and possible aliens, sentience really is confined to living beings, while the rest of the universe remains senseless and impersonal, though ceaselessly changing and “creating†AS IF it were a sentient being.
I'm not going to go as far as to say humans and possible alien beings are the only things that are sentient beings in the universe. I can imagine how sentience can evolve just as everything else does. For instance: A dog can be brought up in the wild and be much less a sentient being than say a dog brought up within a family that projects human emotion onto it. Maybe earth was not as sentient as it is now. Maybe the universe wasn't as sentient as it is now. To me, it's not black or white, or yes or no...it's more like a tiny bit and a lot.
I say “might perhaps beâ€, because I feel David and Tony breathing down my neck, but if the above interpretation is correct, your ALL THAT IS appears closer to atheism than to David’s Universal Intelligence and to Tony’s God of Love (sorry, guys). You may see it differently, though.
I am probably somewhere between atheism and David's UI...for now.
continued...
BBella\'s Universe
by BBella , Thursday, December 01, 2011, 07:03 (4742 days ago) @ dhw
As regards morality, you are hopeful that humanity will one day “find a balance and harmony†that will make moral codes unnecessary. We can agree to disagree on this, but....
Just to, again, make it clear, I didn't say we would not have moral codes, those can be built into our very being. I was saying we would not need laws, or a government to enforce laws, as we do now. I said there will come a time when the word "morality" would no longer be used, just as the word "sin" is fading from view even as we speak. When a word becomes so filled with different people's ideas of what it means, it begins to lose it's purpose and impact and other words take their place.
I would add that I can’t conceive of a world in which humans could be happy without problems to solve, and the mixture of good and bad which I like to project onto Tony’s God seems to me also to be essential to our human existence: no light without dark, no beauty without ugliness, no joy without sadness. And so, no harmony without discord. Methinks morality is here to stay!
I agree. I can't see a society like that either. But, I can see a society that has found more balance and harmony than we have now, even tho they still have problems to solve, good and bad things happening, light and dark and beauty and ugliness as well. I believe it's possible to have both..as we evolve. It would not be Utopia...it would just be a more balanced way of being than we are now. We are a more balanced society now than we were in the dark ages...because we have evolved, as a society. Yes, there are a lot of kinks to still work out...but that's what we are all about doing as we evolve...working on our kinks...individually, and as a society.
I shall take a few bars of chocolate instead.
And so shall I.
BBella\'s Universe
My thanks to BBella for responding to my various questions.
I think you’ve summed everything up when you say “I am probably somewhere between atheism and David’s UI...for now.†The concept of a constantly changing ALL THAT IS can be made to fit in with any –ism, which is actually a great advantage. Your ATI (hope it won’t mind my getting so familiar) is clearly a creative force here on Earth, in so far as it has produced life, reproduction and evolution, and perhaps it’s also produced other forms of life elsewhere. Neither theists nor atheists can quarrel with that. So “all†that remains is the question of the degree of its sentience and consciousness. And whoosh, that’s where the rockets go off in different directions. Well, I don’t want to cause any friction in your household or mine, or jealousy inside our little agnostic web, but if you’re somewhere between David and George, I think you’re actually sitting with me on my picket fence!
As regards morality, you can imagine “a society that has found more balance and harmony than we have now†– and I agree that in many respects we’re more balanced than we were in the dark ages. But I suspect it will need a major cataclysm before laws and governments become unnecessary – with most of the human race wiped out. And even then, we’ll start all over again along the same path. It seems to be integral to human nature that we form a group, and groups always seem to need rules and leaders.
*******
TONY: There is ALWAYS a pattern. Always. We may not recognize it as such, but it is most certainly there.
I wrote that once you take into account the unanswerable questions, “there is NO fixable pattern.†Perhaps I should have written “no FIXABLE patternâ€. There are lots of patterns, and no-one knows which is the right one. The closer you look at the points to be joined, the more flexible the patterns become.
And keep your hands off my chocolate.
*******
DAVID: Try a Garmin. Really works, and you don’t have to think. They come in civilized voices, redneck, cowboy and probably Cockney.
I’ve got a Garmin. It really works – when it really works. Once it took me miles off target, so I tried a lorry driver in a layby instead, and he directed me miles back, the way I’d just come. There have been lorries squashed in narrow lanes, and cars in canals…If you think you don’t have to think, think again.
BBella\'s Universe
by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Thursday, December 01, 2011, 18:57 (4741 days ago) @ dhw
TONY: There is ALWAYS a pattern. Always. We may not recognize it as such, but it is most certainly there.
DHW
I wrote that once you take into account the unanswerable questions, “there is NO fixable pattern.†Perhaps I should have written “no FIXABLE patternâ€. There are lots of patterns, and no-one knows which is the right one. The closer you look at the points to be joined, the more flexible the patterns become.
And keep your hands off my chocolate.
Not sure what you mean by fixable in this context, honestly. I don't honestly think that there is more than one pattern to any given thing. I think we SEE different patterns because we can not separate the subsequent influences from the root.
To give it a rather lame mathematical expression(Xeno could probably do better):
y=X^2+Z^3
X^2 + Z^3 will ALWAYS produce Y.. always. And if you knew Y & Z You could always figure out X precisely. The problem is that Y is what we SEE, and the other side of the equal sign has countless variables. It doesn't change the fact that there is 1 and only 1 correct value for Y given any set of variables. Even when we KNOW some of the variables, we do not know them all. The major downfall of science is that it takes a piece of a system and tries to make rules and laws to govern it without understand the system as a whole. In that respect, it is no different than the medical field. You can diagnose a patient with diabetes. You can even diagnose that they are producing not enough(or too much) insulin. But unless you can diagnose WHY they are not producing the correct amount of insulin, and continuously ask why until you have identified ever variable and gotten to the root of the issue, you will never be able to treat the disease, only the symptoms. Sometimes I wonder if Science is just asking the wrong questions...
(Sorry.. I know I got off track with my musings there... could you pass the chocolate :P)
--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.
BBella\'s Universe
by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Friday, December 02, 2011, 03:11 (4741 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained
TONY: There is ALWAYS a pattern. Always. We may not recognize it as such, but it is most certainly there.
DHW
I wrote that once you take into account the unanswerable questions, “there is NO fixable pattern.†Perhaps I should have written “no FIXABLE patternâ€. There are lots of patterns, and no-one knows which is the right one. The closer you look at the points to be joined, the more flexible the patterns become.
And keep your hands off my chocolate.
Not sure what you mean by fixable in this context, honestly. I don't honestly think that there is more than one pattern to any given thing. I think we SEE different patterns because we can not separate the subsequent influences from the root.
I both agree and disagree with your words here. Firstly: If you know Calculus, you know that differentation and integration are really the SAME operation done in two different directions. In this sense, it agrees with your idea of only one pattern.
I get what you're driving at here. You're really talking about a kind of Nietzschean Perspectivism... the truth is revealed through looks at many different angles. This is both a symptom and a cause of our humanity and our ego. (We only see the things that make sense to us.)
Where I diverge is the idea that there is ONLY one pattern. A cloud can exhibit multiple patterns:
1. Weather--tells you about the state of the upper atmosphere.
2. Shape--might look like a rabbit.
3. It's direction, if visible, might indicate future weather.
4. How we should make our next cosmic decisions.
Clearly, the issue is WHICH pattern is really valid or pertinent...
To give it a rather lame mathematical expression(Xeno could probably do better):
y=X^2+Z^3
Don't give me too much credit. Einstein failing math in high school was a myth, but I retook algebra 4x before passing...
And then I end up working on mathematical problems for a researcher in Graph theory... FML...
X^2 + Z^3 will ALWAYS produce Y.. always. And if you knew Y & Z You could always figure out X precisely. The problem is that Y is what we SEE, and the other side of the equal sign has countless variables. It doesn't change the fact that there is 1 and only 1 correct value for Y given any set of variables. Even when we KNOW some of the variables, we do not know them all. The major downfall of science is that it takes a piece of a system and tries to make rules and laws to govern it without understand the system as a whole. In that respect, it is no different than the medical field. You can diagnose a patient with diabetes. You can even diagnose that they are producing not enough(or too much) insulin. But unless you can diagnose WHY they are not producing the correct amount of insulin, and continuously ask why until you have identified ever variable and gotten to the root of the issue, you will never be able to treat the disease, only the symptoms. Sometimes I wonder if Science is just asking the wrong questions...
You need to be a little more specific here... I get your overall meaning. I ask you the question, how do you know when you've reached an answer to your question? Medically speaking, you can just administer insulin without ever knowing that a faulty pancreas is the cause... you do raise a question I have asked constantly: At what point does a scientific question end?
I challenge: Never. Newton's equations work, but they don't explain gravity.
Just because you have a working model, NEVER means you've reached... "reality..."
"The thing in itself" as Kant would say.
(Sorry.. I know I got off track with my musings there... could you pass the chocolate :P)
--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"
\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"
BBella\'s Universe
by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Friday, December 02, 2011, 04:07 (4741 days ago) @ xeno6696
When I say there is only one pattern, I mean one pattern for a distinct thing. For example, when we ever manage to find it, there will only be one pattern for gravity. That pattern, when we know all the variables that can influence it, will fit any application of gravity, anywhere, without fail. i.e., there will only be one value of G(gravity) for any set of X,Y,Z(anything that influences gravity).
That is not to say that there will only be on pattern that governs all of life and existence, though, it stands to reason that if you had perfect knowledge of all of the variables at every given instant you might indeed be able to find an underlying governing patter to everything.
You used weather as an example to argue against my idea, but I think that is a bad example to use against me. We COULD predict the weather if we had perfect knowledge of the system, which we obviously don't. Whether is also a funny one because it is a feedback loop that has multiple inputs, including itself. However, as I said, if we had all of the variables we would be able to detect the pattern even there.
Yes, perspective is the kick in the pants to all of humanity. It is a blessing and a curse. I strive to see things from as many different angles as possible, trying to home in on the patterns that I see, which is one of the reasons you will often find me arguing antithetical sides of the same debate.
--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.
BBella\'s Universe
by David Turell , Friday, December 02, 2011, 05:16 (4741 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained
You can diagnose a patient with diabetes. You can even diagnose that they are producing not enough(or too much) insulin. But unless you can diagnose WHY they are not producing the correct amount of insulin, and continuously ask why until you have identified ever variable and gotten to the root of the issue, you will never be able to treat the disease, only the symptoms. Sometimes I wonder if Science is just asking the wrong questions...
Diabetes is a bad example to use: low supply or no insulin, islet cells are gone or going. Transplants are being studied. What you need for your point is removing the causes of the loss of the islet cells and how to prevent that. Reasons are poor genetics, possibly viral illnesses and autoimmine activity. Possible preventions would then include abortion of all babies with diabetic morthers or fathers (not allowed by society); find the viruses and kill them and block autoimmine activity selectively. These have been under study.
For too much insulin, make the diabetics lose weight. this is well-known.
But you are exactly right about medical science. Looking for cures and prevenetions is a relatively new approach.
BBella\'s Universe
by BBella , Sunday, December 04, 2011, 08:43 (4739 days ago) @ dhw
I've been thinking about the subject below and just wanted to touch back a bit on it:
You say we often get what we want by creating movement in the fabric of matter. I certainly agree that matter is constantly changing, and there’s no doubt that some people have a gift for getting what they want. “Mind over matter†is the phrase that occurs to me. But the opposite often applies as well – the more you want something, the harder you may try and the less likely you may be to get it. That seems to fit in with your own experience when you were ill: you quit, and only then did you find “some peace and less painâ€. Earlier you said the ALL THAT IS creates what we need “as long as our subconscious or other surrounding factors are not interfering with that creation.†I wonder if it isn’t the other way round – that the conscious mind is what puts up the barriers, whereas the subconscious has a more direct path to what we require. That is certainly true of creative work, in which the subconscious nearly always knows far more than the conscious – although the conscious does need to exert a degree of control.
I don't think it was my quitting that brought about what I desired...it was the culmination of everything that happened from the first time I knew what I wanted ,including the quitting, that brought about it and other changes I desired. In the end (altho the process is still on going), I not only created the one desire, I ended up bringing about many desires I had wanted in my life. Before I became ill, I was a very much a staunch Christian. The last thing before my illness I was working and praying about daily was wanting more joy and self-control in my personal life. But, going even further back, before I became a religious person, I was a wild bohemian, hedonist pot smoking child (still have a bit of each in me still..uh, not the pot smoker), and I use to always quote a line from the song, Peace of Mind, by Boston..."All I want is to have my peace of mind." Also, among many other internal problems I wanted relief from, I had developed a fear of "spirits" from an very early age. I had a deep fear of loss that seemed to always bring me into depression annually, even tho I've never really experienced loss...among other types of parts of myself I saw as "defects"(not physical) I wanted changed.
After the illness slowed me down to a crawl, and more or less, taught me to recreate myself from scratch, I ended up with the many changes I had desired most of my life. What I had to grow thru to get those changes - a lot of pain, the disconnect with/loss of my chosen guidance system in life (Christianity), the complete loss of self, etc., was well worth the outcome (I only can say now that I'm on the other side of the pain).
I'm not going to discount coincidence in all this (I'm not saying you think it is), but there are volumes written about the belief of creating ones own destiny, out there (which I know you know). Creation is, well...creation...and it never stops creating. We are part of creation and we have the ability to create within us, to desire something new not yet created, and create it for ourselves from the elements of creation that is provided us within and without. The only limitation to our creating is the lack of imagination and knowledge on our part. The more we know, the more we can imagine and then, the more we can create with the creative matter we have been given and are a part of. As is said, if you can imagine it you can make it happen (altho it will take time).
One more thing: I believe everything depends on the will of the all. Let me try and explain briefly. Just because I wanted peace of mind way back then, it didn't happen way back then right when I wanted it...because creation is not about magic, it is about creating. My desire, which remained consistent most my life, pretty much took most my life to create the building blocks that made it finally happen. The reason being, I believe, is creation happens "within" the will of the all. Everything takes time. All the elements are at work bring about creation, always depending on all factors involved. It's not just my desire that is at work...it is everything that brings it about to make it happen that is involved as well.
Like desiring to build a house. Everything has to be created to bring about my desire. And, what if, secretly, I really want to move to an island and live in a hut and really just wanted the house built because everyone else has one. Suddenly, a lot of things can begin to get in the way of building the house...or it finally gets built and a flood comes and I take the money and move to the island, achieving my true desire. This is what I mean by the will of the all.
Long ago, I imagined what I thought I wanted, but at the time, I had no idea what it was going to take to bring my desires to fruition. The same goes for the subsequent desires after that. I never realized the tall order I was making desiring all those changes within myself...thankfully so, or I would have probably just desired a really far out swimming pool or a hut on an island. As I said, we really should watch what we wish for.
bb
BBella\'s Universe
by David Turell , Sunday, December 04, 2011, 15:55 (4739 days ago) @ BBella
I wonder if it isn’t the other way round – that the conscious mind is what puts up the barriers, whereas the subconscious has a more direct path to what we require. That is certainly true of creative work, in which the subconscious nearly always knows far more than the conscious – although the conscious does need to exert a degree of control.
I don't think it was my quitting that brought about what I desired...it was the culmination of everything that happened from the first time I knew what I wanted ,including the quitting, that brought about it and other changes I desired. In the end (altho the process is still on going), I not only created the one desire, I ended up bringing about many desires I had wanted in my life.
The article below supports dhw's statement above. (I can say that when I wrote my second book, it seemed to pour out of me. I only had a rough outline in my head, an overall concept for each chapter, but when I was done everything seemed very logical.)
BBella\'s Universe
BBELLA: After the illness slowed me down to a crawl, and more or less, taught me to recreate myself from scratch, I ended up with the many changes I had desired most of my life. […] creation happens “within†the will of the all. […] Just because I wanted peace of mind way back then, it didn’t happen way back then right when I wanted it…because creation is not about magic.
I’ve just picked these three quotes, as they seem to me to tie in with a lot of the things we’ve been discussing, including and perhaps especially Buddhism (see my response to Matt under "Afterlife"), but also the nature of consciousness and subconsciousness. For me as an agnostic, it’s also interesting that you had to jettison Christianity, which had formerly been your guidance system. “Peace of mind†can only come, I think, if you’re at ease with yourself and with the world around you. A lot of people do get that peace from religion, and maybe their God is just another name for your “will of the allâ€. No attributes needed, no stories, but just a universal energy to which we can relate. I vaguely remember a saying along the lines: “If you go with the flow, the flow will go with you.†David has mentioned how his second book poured out of him, although initially he only had a rough outline in his head. The rough outline was in the conscious mind, but the book was in the subconscious, and the act of writing provided the contact between the two. That is certainly my own experience, and maybe it offers a parallel to your situation. Your real self may have been deep in your subconscious, but it took a terrible illness for you to gain access to it. The subconscious may be the part of us that is linked to the “will of the allâ€, and when we create – in your case your personality, in David’s case his book – we actually become aware of things inside ourselves of which we hadn’t been aware before. I’m not sure where this actually takes us, but I have a feeling that we’re establishing a lot of common ground!
BBella\'s Universe
by BBella , Tuesday, December 06, 2011, 08:39 (4737 days ago) @ dhw
“Peace of mind†can only come, I think, if you’re at ease with yourself and with the world around you.
This is true, which is why, until after my illness, I never really had peace. I only thought I did at times during my Christian life because peace is what you have with your God when your soul has been diverted from hell.
A lot of people do get that peace from religion, and maybe their God is just another name for your “will of the allâ€.
Well, I've looked at life from both sides now (yes, I do know that's a song line) and my personal opinion gained from my experience with both Christianity's God and the will of the all, is I can say for sure they are as far apart as the east is from the west. The only thing they may possibly have in common is a name, God. In my personal life I hesitate to call, ATI, God, for this very reason. But when I am speaking with those who believe in Christianity's God, I will use the term God. I don't like to offend anyone or argue so I try and stay low key and go with the flow of the conversation.
No attributes needed, no stories, but just a universal energy to which we can relate. I vaguely remember a saying along the lines: “If you go with the flow, the flow will go with you.â€
Don't know where that saying comes from but I do use it at times as well.
David has mentioned how his second book poured out of him, although initially he only had a rough outline in his head. The rough outline was in the conscious mind, but the book was in the subconscious, and the act of writing provided the contact between the two.
I've written poetry since my illness as well as fiction stories and I rarely start with anything but a word or one scene in my mind and it flows from there. I also paint paintings and create with different kinds of metals and wire, and it all, many times, just starts out with an intention to create. Most any creative undertaking seems to take on a life of it's own. Which, brings me back to the discussion, we are creative matter. We are all a part of a constant motion that never ends. All we need is a tiny seed of thought and the next thing we know we have a new creation. We, as a species, are just beginning to glimpse our own creative nature that is no different than the ATI.
That is certainly my own experience, and maybe it offers a parallel to your situation. Your real self may have been deep in your subconscious, but it took a terrible illness for you to gain access to it. The subconscious may be the part of us that is linked to the “will of the allâ€, and when we create – in your case your personality, in David’s case his book – we actually become aware of things inside ourselves of which we hadn’t been aware before.
I agree. And many times it does take some kind of catastrophic situation to cause us to stop (thinking and believing) and quietly observe ourselves and ATI from a place of the unknown (which is where most agnostics live). From this "SLOW MOTION" perspective it's easier to "catch" the creative force of the ATI in the act, and recognize that "it" is ourselves. We, too, are the ATI.
I’m not sure where this actually takes us, but I have a feeling that we’re establishing a lot of common ground!
My first intention by my reply to Tony was to clarify and distinguish the difference between the God of the sacred books and the ATI (from my perspective). Because for me, they get mixed up as the same thing in any discussion that brings in the Bible or sacred books. So my first intention was to give my thoughts on how they are not alike but completely different in kind. On that matter, thinking or believing that they are the same takes a person down a long and winding path of more knowledge but less Truth. Not saying it won't eventually end at the same watering hole though (at some point, now or later).
Then my second intention was to express how I view the ATI as a creative force that we humans are just beginning to, not only get a glimpse of, but on the brink of understanding our own abilities as creators. Not for personal gain or benefits (that revelation has been known by many for a long time), but for the evolution of our species. We are, from my view, hurtling that way and nothing can stop us. We, as the ATI, consciously or subconsciously, desire it to be so, altho we have no idea how to get there. And just as with my illness, the price we have to pay may not seem worth it as society lives the pain of what it will take. But in the end (not an actual end since there is no end), it will be worth it all. For many, we can already choose to relish in this truth already, that life and pain is worth it. Just looking into the eyes of our loved ones always makes it worth being here.