life Options

[Flex]

What is the evidence for a belief in a supernatural being?

A better explanation of life is evolution by natural selection.

Evolution does not explain how anything came to be. Evolution and creation are completely different.

[Rick]

What evidence is there for the involvement of a supernatural being in creation?

[Flex]

What evidence is there for the involvement of a supernatural being in creation?

I have no more evidence for than I do against, thus is it only proper to assume that both possabilities are valid. I will however say that it would not be a supernatural being, but the ultimate natural being if anything. Who knows, maybe that singularity which scientists know nothing about is the Godhead--the ultimate natural force, the Tao maybe.

[Rick]

... I will however say that it would not be a supernatural being, but the ultimate natural being if anything.

I won't argue with that. It implies that the universe is self-created.

[Flex]

For all I know the Universe is no more than a thought--I don't understand how consciousness works, so I really don't think I will be able to understand how the Universe works. It seems like an atom trying to understand how life works; the atom can be a part of a living being, but in and of itself, it has no characteristics of life.

[Rick]

Maybe it's no less than a thought. Certainly it contains many thoughts.

[maximus242]

For all I know the Universe is no more than a thought--I don't understand how consciousness works, so I really don't think I will be able to understand how the Universe works. It seems like an atom trying to understand how life works; the atom can be a part of a living being, but in and of itself, it has no characteristics of life.

Thats a good point. If your talking in scientific terms, life is a chemical composition that randomly formed billions of years ago. Living beings are in themselves a chemical equation.

So if you want to define "life" it is a chemical equation made up of atoms, which have a certain number of protons and electrons which when formed together in a very complex equation - make up a human being. Its like making artificial intelligence with a computer, the silicone in itself could be used for anything, but when it has a certain combination of variable transistors - it can make up an intelligent computational being.

Your right, atoms in themselves are not what we define life - but personally I find the very concept of life and death a bit cavemanish. For me, it gets more and more difficult to define the line between what is living and what is dead. We eat things, which are not alive - such as iron (although in micro amounts) and somehow this causes us to stay alive.. which seems perplexing to think a metal - is making an organic being.

My understanding is right now, its about the whole - not the pieces. You can use paint to make any sort of painting, just as you can use chemicals (see organic chemistry) to make any sort of being.

This certainly isnt a perfect explanation, but it is a good starting point. The truth is, nobody "understands" consciousness. All we have are theories right now, the thing is, there is so much we dont know about our minds and about our reality. I think the best way to start getting an idea of consciousness theory, is to ask a single question.

What if this world is just a dream?

For me, this leads to about 10 more questions, such as.

If its just a dream, what is beyond this dream? How do I know its a dream? Can I change the dream if it is one? Why do the laws of physics apply if this is a dream, or is that a figment of my imagination? Maybe this is a computer simulation? What if im already in a consciousness singularity but am unaware of it?

Consciousness and Reality are joined at the hips, you cannot separate them from each other.

[Joesus]

Consciousness and Reality are joined at the hips, you cannot separate them from each other.

But it doesn't keep people from thinking they are separate. How can something so inseparable be so gracious as to allow itself to be perceived as separate?
Consciousness has a hip?

Have you ever read the Urantia book?
Personally I can't agree with everything that is in it but there is a great deal of useful information about this subject.

[maximus242]

It's because people perceive consciousness as how the human mind perceives reality. People view reality as a objective existential world in which others interact and our perception is simply an interpretation of reality.

The problem with that theory is that one has not, to this day, been able to get outside ones own little box of consciousness. What I mean is that, while its nice to believe that there is something to reality beyond our perceptions - there is no proof of it because we have yet to get beyond our own perceptions of reality.

The expression consciousness and reality are joined at the hips - is a metaphor, consciousness is the interpretation of reality. Therefore, reality does not exist without consciousness - consciousness does not exist without reality.

[Rick]

I tried to read the Urantia book, once. It didn't seem useful to me. What did you find useful in it? It's pretty big. Maybe I just didn't look in the right place.

[Joesus]

What I liked was certain comparatives in religious insight and religious teachings.
In studying belief and the evolution of revelation and belief, what remains consistent between teachings is viable.
The need to know and the means to know keep evolving.
I like the way they describe it from their perspective.
I don't know if you believe in a race or races of people that exist beyond the comprehensive reality of earth life but if you did, to listen to a point of view that is supposedly given after having traversed earth life into greater experience of reality and living within an alternate construct still having its own natural laws to maintain levels of successive evolution and experience makes sense to me.

It sort of picks up where Seth, in the Jane Roberts books I read back in the mid 70's left off. Going into greater detail.

What I found useful was tuning in to the information and playing with resonance.
A Wise man once taught me that if it ain't true in the heart then set it aside and seek that which resonates.
The first time I read the Urantia book about 6 years ago I could hardly read it. I've found that on occasion I can pick up a book that I read once before and got nothing out of and get something I didn't notice before.
It's the same with the Upanishads and the Bible.
If you can filter through the crap, what stands out is resonating at levels that are not often comprehended when you are in a certain state of mind that prevents you from being objective.

Part III is an easy read.(for me)
I suppose I should mention that the Urantia book has a lot of truth mixed with fabrication, and so when reading it I think one has to be inspired to look for Truth rather than just accepting what has been written as Truth.

[Rick]

... I don't know if you believe in a race or races of people that exist beyond the comprehensive reality of earth life but if you did, to listen to a point of view that is supposedly given after having traversed earth life into greater experience of reality and living within an alternate construct still having its own natural laws to maintain levels of successive evolution and experience makes sense to me. ...

I don't believe any people exist except on Earth. Nobody can be certain, but I have a hunch we are alone in the universe. Some life had to be the first to arise and it may be here that it did.

[LifeMirage]

life..........is a mirage.

[forgottenpresence]

life..........is a mirage.

is it ever not a mirage?

[Flex]

life..........is a mirage.

is it ever not a mirage?

IMO no. I find life to be nothing more than a classification.

[forgottenpresence]

life..........is a mirage.

is it ever not a mirage?

IMO no. I find life to be nothing more than a classification.

How about outside the confinement of conceptualization, like when experiencing astral projection or expanded consciousness?

[Flex]

Expanded consciousness to me seems as much an illusion as my current consciousness, unless by expanded you mean my consciousness has become a vaccuume of sorts, in which case I would not be conscious.

[code buttons]

I don't believe any people exist except on Earth. Nobody can be certain, but I have a hunch we are alone in the universe. Some life had to be the first to arise and it may be here that it did.

I concur with you wholeheartedly. We are the first. And all we got is NOW. And I also believe that's all we need.

[trojan_libido]

What about panspermia? I thought that was gaining a little weight since it was discovered that the Moon was bombarded millions of years ago by a wave of asteroids which had been flung out of orbit from the resonance of Jupiter.

It was simply a hypothesis because every rock they brought back from the Moon had the same geological age, which seemed strange. But they eventually found moon rock on the Earth that correlated the same date. Obviously we weren't bombarded like the Moon because of Earths atmosphere.

[Rick]

What about panspermia?

Panspermia merely shifts the problem of the origin of life elsewhere. Earth is the best place for life to originate because it is the only known planet with liquid water.

[forgottenpresence]

Expanded consciousness to me seems as much an illusion as my current consciousness, unless by expanded you mean my consciousness has become a vaccuume of sorts, in which case I would not be conscious.

Expanded consciousness will always be an illusion when perceiving within conceptual reality. It doesn't make much sense to say there would be no consciousness when experiencing an expanded sate of consciousness.

[Rick]

Expanded consciousness to me seems as much an illusion as my current consciousness, ...

On the contrary, consciousness, expanded or not, is the only thing that we can know directly. If consciousness itself is an illusion, then there is no hope of ever knowing anything for sure.

[forgottenpresence]

The fact that I am conscious could never be an illusion, based on my own personal experience.

And then there is the fact that I could become either less conscious or more conscious. If this is what you mean by consciousness, that is.

Becoming more conscious is a good interpretation of expanded consciousness, but of course it could never cut it.

[Rick]

... If this is what you mean by consciousness, that is. ...

Consciousness is what one experiences when one is conscious. It is a thing that can be observed (sort of) as well as experienced. Consciousness expansion can result from consciousness expanding drugs. Some say meditation can do that as well. Others say that meditation is something to be done when consciousness has already been expanded by drugs.

[forgottenpresence]

Like those couple of times I blew myself up on acid and had to integrate the experience through meditation!

I'm followin ya

[forgottenpresence]

or should I have said, re-integrate myself

[Hey Hey]

If this is an illusion, how could we ever know it?

If this (consciousness) is an illusion, what is the illusion and what might the actual nature of "us" be? (And I don't mean the nature of the physical world, cos we already know that what we see is not what is there, though we don't quite know what IS there yet).

Seems like "expanded consciousness" has too many definitions to be useful. It's bad enough having no useful definitions for mind, consciousness, thought and life, but let's at least deal with them first, eh, before getting into science fiction.

(By the way, chilli highs are almost mystical.)

[Joesus]

If this is an illusion, how could we ever know it?

If you believe the senses are not capable of such an ability there would be no opening for the awareness.
If you a have a belief that it is possible you would have to find a way around the ego and its other beliefs in what is possible and impossible, to open yourself to the reality of knowledge and experience beyond illusion.

But then how are you defining illusion and how do you apply it to the relative?

[josephrettig]

Meaning of life is enjoy,peace and happiness.