I've heard many people believe that the only real process in the Universe is conciousness. That the process converting energy into matter is rivers of thought, and that consciousness is the spirit of life. Thats not the best representation of the hypothesis im sure, but its what I'd like to discuss nontheless. I'd like to put forward some glimpses into the abstract way culture follows this pattern.

Imagine the discovery of a resource like diamonds or gold in a remote location. The discovery will begin a chain reaction, lead by commercialism, to extract the resource and deliver it to the consumer. Lines of communication will be setup, deals will be struck, accomodations will be built, roads constructed, money and energy are generated. All of this around a single resource. If this resource is large enough to sustain this extraction permanently, then those temporary accomodations are built into offices and worker villages. The company setup to deal with the resource will gain more momentum, essentially solidifying it. Its at this point that we should look at how the original experience of "ooh, whats this" turns into a autonomous focal point for business and commercialism. Thought has solidified into a whole district of physical links driving the collection of the resource.

In a simpler visualisation, you have to think about doing something before you can do it. Our thoughts literally alter the structure of reality. Successful creative professionals know this (inventors, designers, builders), and its important others in important positions know it too. If you look at the size of cities today, at the accumulated material layers over time, you would be hard pressed to understand the non-physical links people have with this location. The physical links are easier to understand, but they came after people thought about living or working in the city.

Huge monuments that have taken thousands of peoples collective lifetimes to erect are one of the most impressive things on our planet. A leader (pharoah, prime minister) comes up with an idea of a pyramid or statue, then his idea is taken on board by his staff and the ball begins to roll on construction. In the case of the Pyramids, either his conviction is so great that he gets everyone bought into his idea, or he uses brute force to get the workers started. Either way, reality changes for a LOT of people for a long time.

First comes the idea, then comes reality. Is consciousness the creative force in the Universe?

I would like to think so.

Not if you are Plato Then consciousness is simply remembering...

I'm not that familiar with Plato, other than his Atlantis story that everyone hooked into.

There's a simple answer for your question, I think: No Consciousness = No Universe. This a deduction from one of Shawn's most favorite quotes: "The Universe is a product of the Mind"... Unless you are Plato, I guess.

The individuals Universe is a product of the mind (forget the heliocentric theory, this is the egocentric theory). If I died I would no longer be conscious; however, the Universe would still exist, I would simply not be cognizant of it. If I died I would no longer be conscious of MY Universe, thus IT would terminate.

That would make sense but, many questions come to mind: How can this be proved? And what Universe would exist? Or better said: What Universe exists outside the senses? what's the Universe (or reality, for that matter) at different dimensions other than 3-D?

Any given individual cannot prove that there is any Universe outside of his/her own. The only thing I can know for certain is that SOMETHING exists, what it is I can never be certain of.

about prove or no prove,

There are some aspects that is considered in the simplest logical form, you can not do mental processed lower than its level.

for example the color, there is a joke describing how a blond couldn't describe the red color for a blind man..while in fact, no one on earth could.

I think consciousness is the same, one of those simple non abstract-able by the PFC.
----------

A question: How did consciousness arise, for example what made the prime minister thought about a pyramid? and why not any other one?

I think the answer of this lies at abstraction and subjectivity; the abstraction role by the prefrontal cortex and the different perspectives in this abstractionthat differs from one to another.
For example, the prime minister was thinking about a great tomb while he saw a child building a pyramidal shape with the sand, when another one saw the pyramid he thought of getting a tent on a pyramidal shape for himself to be protected from the sun, a third one saw the tent and thought of getting a hat on the same shape for the same purpose, a forth lady complaining hair problems thought for covering her head with similar hat, while she was living near the pyramid and see it everyday.
Different consciousness experiences seems to be important for cultural purposes, if we are the same then we would not make steps forward.


:S:S:S, seems i flew away from the topic, sorry for that.


wafa

I like where you took the topic.

From my understanding of Plato, individuals see connections in the physical world and seeing these connections remember or recognize the form of some "new" concept. Plato found that the form was constant, but our recognition of the form (and thus creation) was dependent on our ability to remember the connections.

So the real question is: does all that exist, exist a priori to thought?

My answer: Mu

you know, few weeks ago I thought about "what is real? and what is sensation? and if the connection between both is of high fidelity?"
I saw that space and time rules abstraction in our minds encodes the whole logic and reason.
what jumped in my mind and shocked me is the "space dilation, mass changes and time contraction" of Einstien's relativity.
Space and time seemed not pioneer and behave as sensations that changes with medium of perception,and hence logic do exists and in full play but it may change like when two observers see the same event to occur differently and it is not pioneer as we severely like to consider.

What we can really be sure of, is that there is something out there, but its "REAL" or what we sometimes call "Existence" is not conditioned to take place.

this is a longer discussion of this point
http://locus-para.blogspot.com/2007/07/rea...uncoupling.html


Wafa

I take Mu means: but of course.
It's a great question, mind you. And we can't answer it correctly without delving into the field of metaphysics. Or, it goes back to the CS event. And, if we are to cross the threshold into the CS in the near future, then the answer is: Mu.

Mu is not really "but of course" that is French Mu is Japanese I believe. In this case I use Mu to mean that an answer of yes or no is not sufficient. To answer yes would be false, and to answer no would be false, thus I answer Mu.

Totally different topic, but we should start up a thread on the Zen Koans, I think it could be fun~

Don't forget the element of freemasonic symbolism in the pyramids and in a lot of ancient arquitecture. I get your point, I just don't think the pyramids are a good example of what you're trying to explain, IMO.

Isn't that the other way around Code Buttons? Isn't it a lot of ancient symbolism in freemasons imagery?

At the risk of going off topic, isn't the world we living in changing at such a rapid rate that biology can no longer keep up? For instance, animals become/are brightly coloured during the mating rituals. This colouration has served them well within the species, but humans have long since done away with our natural covering - hair. Now we can choose whatever colours and patterns we want, or use different garments for different purposes (Khaki uniforms, ski jackets). Now cosmetic surgery is gaining momentum and we are able to permanently alter our features. I believe its ethically wrong to alter your body like this, but its happening everywhere. Even a little place out of town near myself has a huge "BOTOX" sign, something that I thought would never become an issue in my lifetime.

It seems we're becoming more free to create the world around us, change our appearance on a whim. Does anyone else think its a natural progression from the genetically coloured animals with their mating rituals and warning colours?