DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
The opposite of intelligence is not stupidity.
The opposite of intelligence is non-sentience.
Conservation of souls?
- Thread starter James R
- Start date
The opposite of intelligence is non-sentience.
One could talk of those things higher than the five senses, namely the mind or even life itself (the legitimacy of post dated empirical cheques notwithstanding).
One could talk of venturing into the deep regions of history (or even projection to the future), including not only ancient history/future projection but also cosmogyny.
And one could also talk of empiricism as its own authority. Today's empirical conclusions are rendered redundant by tomorrow's empirical advancements. As one speaker put it, "50% of what we are teaching today is incorrect. The trouble is we don't know which 50%".
The Andaman Islanders exist within the pocket of a "greater reality". They may not be aware of it, but their isolation is a direct consequence of a superior force, not so much by quarantining them within (the islanders are limited in their capacity to migrate by their own culture) but by maintaining an exclusion zone from external influence . Given this state of affairs, change will only manifest through the agency that brokers the external exclusion zone, not through any individual or collective effort by the Islanders within it.
Not entirely, at least for the purposes of this discussion, since the Indian officials will be the one's who establish the "rules of engagement". The islanders can strive, speculate and inquire the full length and breadth of their empirical brains, but it will amount to nothing conclusive until the sovereign powers decide if, when, or to what degree they decide to reveal the actual position, not only of themselves as sovereign powers, but that of the islanders as subjects within such sovereignty.
IOW the path to progress would be one of approaching the sovereign power completely on their terms. The islanders may think they have a better ideas or means to expedite matters or analyze the "reality" according to popular trends, local customs, etc, but any bridging of the gap would occur soley and wholly by the means and at the pace implemented by the sovereign power.
If I answer yes, no or anything in between, what criteria would you use to judge it?
Or to go back to the islanders, suppose a military boat encountered one of them in an isolated part and they had some brief communication before they departed. By what standard would the islander evidence their claim to other inhabitants?
It seems to me it would just be accepted or rejected purely on the grounds of faith.
Perhaps a better question to ask, given how the crux of the problem rests "soley and wholly" on the sovereign power, is whether there is any analogous experience of God establishing a means and a way for reciprocation for the inhabitants of this world.
And THAT is why my answer to
was NO
He anthropomorphised the Universe by using the word stupid
Since that was not given as a answer he got a F for Fail
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Of course I agree with that, however......
Non-sentience would imply that there could not be something in between, a pseudo-intelligent non-sentience. We have identified certain Laws of Nature which of course are not sentient themselves, yet are instrumental in the formation of recurring patterns. I am using the term in the followig context;
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8203635/
What say you?
Last edited:
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
How many atoms in a soul? What defines their physical precence or can they only be imagined.
What would you see or touch if a soul was before you ..do we have a slight mist of something to inhabit some part of this space and time or indeed the space and time of the expected second place where the soul will exist.
If a soul was in a big jar what physical things could we observe such that it is part of some reality or world.
To answer that we may work out how many jars we need to conserve these souls.
What is a soul made out of which atoms?
Alex
What would you see or touch if a soul was before you ..do we have a slight mist of something to inhabit some part of this space and time or indeed the space and time of the expected second place where the soul will exist.
If a soul was in a big jar what physical things could we observe such that it is part of some reality or world.
To answer that we may work out how many jars we need to conserve these souls.
What is a soul made out of which atoms?
Alex
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
How about a handful of mathematical equations describing the nature of the universe?
The non-sentient mathematical souls of the universe....
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
It dawned on me for something to exist it must occupy a space and you can leave time out and to do so must expose something otherwise the existence is in imagination only...if there is no something there will be no soul... what is the something that I believe must place in space.How about a handful of mathematical equations describing the nature of the universe?
The non-sentient mathematical souls of the universe....
Its like I want to build a boat..ok whats it made of...what is this soul made of is believers homewor.
Alec
Impossible. You just as well expect a compass needle to point at its axis.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Except when you die the accumulation of a lifetime in your brain disappears. There is no spiritual hard drive, that floats in space just waiting to occupy another brain.
OTOH, the 'trinity' of electrons and up-quarks and down-quarks (atoms) are indeed the building blocks of all matter in the universe.
They are assembled in "fields", so if you want to go metaphysical, we should ask if a field can have it's own sentience?
I actually agree with you. The soul is not those things that we observe, it is the observer. Memories are artifacts, observable. They do die with the body.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
At least a compass needle points to the magnetic north. Spooky stuff that makes up the magnetic field!
Musika:
As far as things like ancient history go, the past is the past. We had limited means to investigate it empirically. But I'm not aware of any other methods that are able to give greater or more reliable knowledge about the past (or about cosmogony, for that matter).
So would it be correct to say that it is your contention that God provides certain people with special, non-empirical methods for access to or communication with him? I agree with you that God, if he exists, is certainly in a position where he can dictate the terms of any interaction with human beings.
Do you think any such communications or interactions between God and his subjects have happened? Have you had any yourself?
In the case of God, of course, in thousands and years and with millions of believers, the available empirical evidence is still rather sparse.
Presumably, as a believer yourself, you think there is some way of communing with God, on God's terms. How does that work?
---
P.S. Thank you, by the way, for your responses to my impertinent questions. Conversation with you on these matters strikes me as much more productive and interesting than attempting to engage with Jan Ardena, in particular.
I'm inclined to think that empiricism will continue to provide further insights into the mind. It is, of course, conceivable that we might hit a wall with that, but there are no signs of that so far. Similarly with life.
It is interesting that you mention cosmogony. I assume you chose to use that word to encompass something other than cosmology. Again, it seems to me that virtually everything we know about the large-scale structure and evolution of our universe has come from empirical investigation, so far.
As far as things like ancient history go, the past is the past. We had limited means to investigate it empirically. But I'm not aware of any other methods that are able to give greater or more reliable knowledge about the past (or about cosmogony, for that matter).
And apparently, 75% of statistics are made up on the spot. (Joke.) That 50% thing makes a nice sound bite, but I doubt it is true.
I take your point, I think.
So would it be correct to say that it is your contention that God provides certain people with special, non-empirical methods for access to or communication with him? I agree with you that God, if he exists, is certainly in a position where he can dictate the terms of any interaction with human beings.
Do you think any such communications or interactions between God and his subjects have happened? Have you had any yourself?
That's probably right, but once 100 islanders have had similar experiences, it becomes more difficult to dismiss them out of hand, especially if there have been any exchanges of trinkets or there's some other physical (empirical) evidence.
In the case of God, of course, in thousands and years and with millions of believers, the available empirical evidence is still rather sparse.
What do you think about that?
Presumably, as a believer yourself, you think there is some way of communing with God, on God's terms. How does that work?
---
P.S. Thank you, by the way, for your responses to my impertinent questions. Conversation with you on these matters strikes me as much more productive and interesting than attempting to engage with Jan Ardena, in particular.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
But what is able to do the observing and memorizing? It is our brain, there is no brain in space to do any observing. If you agree that HDs cannot exist in space, then what is the recording mechanism? Let alone a sentient existence when the brain dies?
My point is you can slice and dice your person only so far until you reach the apex of your being, a place where you can look no further. It's hard to understand because you are That. It's a realization because there is no way to observe That. It is what you truly are
What is it that disappears in deep sleep and reappears upon waking? When the brain shuts down, does the observer disappear?
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Such as the inhabitants of Easter Island? Seems the pace by the sovereign power was a little slow.
Question, how did the inhabitants end up there in the first place some 2200 miles from the nearest large land mass (Chile). Seems a little unfair to me, was that punishment for some great sin?
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/14/climate/easter-island-erosion.html
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Hmmmm, you're getting close to the definition of Potential (That which may become reality).
But that is a identification of Probability. And here we're entering the world of mathematics.
Call it what you want. I have no definition other than assigned symbols as placeholders. We can give the soul the number 1 and build the universe, mathematically, from there.
How about a dumb universe? Unfortunately that would include everyone ever born since there's no escaping our role as universal beings.