God probably exists ii

[Big Eye]

Define 'thought'. What is 'Thought'? How is thought formed?

Thought is the processing of information by will. Thought is produced by beings ...which are collections of thoughts that are directed by will.

Will is a force which operates in thought, it is a form of thought too .

I am trying to make this as simple as possible, I may actually over distil this, I'll try not to.

 

[RAMOSS]

Thought is the processing of information by will. Thought is produced by beings ...which are collections of thoughts that are directed by will.

Will is a force which operates in thought, it is a form of thought too .

I am trying to make this as simple as possible, I may actually over distil this, I'll try not to.

Ah, more conceptual concepts that can not be measured. What is 'will', How is thought produced by 'Beings'. Can you show that thoughts are independent of a complex brain, or perhaps circuits (which might or might not be possible). Can you measure 'will'? It that more the just conceptual?

Show your work, be precise.

Then, you will have to show that the universe was a product of thought. Good luck on that one.

 

[soylentgreen]

Thought is the processing of information by will. Thought is produced by beings ...which are collections of thoughts that are directed by will.

Will is a force which operates in thought, it is a form of thought too .

I am trying to make this as simple as possible, I may actually over distil this, I'll try not to.

How amusing. You entertain us with a circular argument.

What creates thought, willpower does.

But what creates willpower, why, thought does.

You're not making it simple, you're making it laughable.

 

[grip]

Just a quick one because I'm going out shortly...

I came to this idea on my own however it seems that I am not alone and those that think the idea is daft need to appreciate that there are some highly qualified people who are at least beginning to explore the possibility that the Universe is a conscious construct...

The universe may be conscious, say prominent scientists - Big Think

Your right, everything is made of thought. Before we can ascribe physical attributes to reality, giving it a solid foundation, it must first be contemplated. Without mental awareness to recognize physical reality, it stays out of focus as an undefinable and meaningless blob of energy potential. 'I think, therefore I am.' Without thinking there is no 'I am.'

Our reality is nothing more than energy with structure, given symbolism through thought processes and communication.

 

[devildavid]

Your right, everything is made of thought. Before we can ascribe physical attributes to reality, giving it a solid foundation, it must first be contemplated. Without mental awareness to recognize physical reality, it stays out of focus as an undefinable and meaningless blob of energy potential. 'I think, therefore I am.' Without thinking there is no 'I am.'

Our reality is nothing more than energy with structure, given symbolism through thought processes and communication.

Thought does not create reality, it is part of reality.

 

[grip]

Thought does not create reality, it is part of reality.

Thought is a part of reality that is a prerequisite for awareness, which gives reality focus and definition.

In quantum mechanics, particles don't have a definite shape or specific location, until they are observed or measured.

 

[zyzygy]

Your right, everything is made of thought. Before we can ascribe physical attributes to reality, giving it a solid foundation, it must first be contemplated. Without mental awareness to recognize physical reality, it stays out of focus as an undefinable and meaningless blob of energy potential. 'I think, therefore I am.' Without thinking there is no 'I am.'

Our reality is nothing more than energy with structure, given symbolism through thought processes and communication.

You do realize that the universe, i.e. everything was around long before we were.

 

[grip]

You do realize that the universe, i.e. everything was around long before we were.

So? That doesn't invalidate my logic that reality is meaningless without conscious observation.

 

[zyzygy]

So? That doesn't invalidate my logic that reality is meaningless without conscious observation.

I disagree. Where was conscious observation two minutes after the Big Bang?

 

[grip]

I disagree. Where was conscious observation two minutes after the Big Bang?

I'm not saying that the energy that makes up the universe needs consciousness to exist in some form but that for it to have definition and purpose, it requires awareness.

 

[watsup]

Thought is the processing of information by will. Thought is produced by beings ...which are collections of thoughts that are directed by will.

Will is a force which operates in thought, it is a form of thought too .

I am trying to make this as simple as possible, I may actually over distil this, I'll try not to.

So let me get this straight: thought and will must both be associated with a "being", is that correct? And yet this "being" is so highly complex that it can somehow produce thoughts that basically produce the entire universe and everything that is in it and basically puppet-like humans whose own thoughts are not really their own, but just an extension of the thoughts of this "being" that you proclaim. "

I hate to tell you, but that doesn't sound simple at all. And no matter how often you use Occam's Razor, the fact is that it simply does not and was never meant to apply in a case like this, whereby it somehow explains the entire universe. That's crazy.

 

[RAMOSS]

Thought is a part of reality that is a prerequisite for awareness, which gives reality focus and definition.

In quantum mechanics, particles don't have a definite shape or specific location, until they are observed or measured.

Not quite. The 'observation' does not have to be intelligent or thought. The 'observation' can be merely intereacting with another particle, or energy field. So, you being mislead by the limitation of language.

 

[RAMOSS]

So? That doesn't invalidate my logic that reality is meaningless without conscious observation.

This is what is known as egotistical; You see, reality is meaning even with conscious, observation, except by the individuals who are observing. Meaning is subjective. Your ego might insist that your observation makes things meaningful, but that is merely an opinion.
The rest of existence does not care.

 

[zyzygy]

So let me get this straight: thought and will must both be associated with a "being", is that correct? And yet this "being" is so highly complex that it can somehow produce thoughts that basically produce the entire universe and everything that is in it and basically puppet-like humans whose own thoughts are not really their own, but just an extension of the thoughts of this "being" that you proclaim. "

I hate to tell you, but that doesn't sound simple at all. And no matter how often you use Occam's Razor, the fact is that it simply does not and was never meant to apply in a case like this, whereby it somehow explains the entire universe. That's crazy.

Can you make it simpler for him?

 

[zyzygy]

I'm not saying that the energy that makes up the universe needs consciousness to exist in some form but that for it to have definition and purpose, it requires awareness.

Awareness requires conciousness.

 

[Big Eye]

Ah, more conceptual concepts that can not be measured. What is 'will', How is thought produced by 'Beings'. Can you show that thoughts are independent of a complex brain, or perhaps circuits (which might or might not be possible). Can you measure 'will'? It that more the just conceptual?

Show your work, be precise.

Then, you will have to show that the universe was a product of thought. Good luck on that one.

Are you honestly saying you don't know what Will is? Bloody hell, no wonder you're struggling with this subject! Thought is produced by things called minds (beings)...you seriously didn't know that? I've already stated that thoughts correlate to brain activity...but correlation does not prove causation...didn't you know that? I don't know if there is a precise measurable scale for will...but there are different levels of will, we all know that surely? Everything is "just conceptual" because that is enough to explain everything.

Is that precise enough for you ? Be , honest, nothing would be enough for you in regard to this theory because it doesn't suit your godless agenda. But you can falsify my theory be demonstrating that material reality definitely exists mind independently...show your work and be precise though!


The universe is probably a product of thought because it works in a similar way as a program works...if the universe (ie, the laws of nature) do not act in a similar way to a program explain your thinking on this...be precise, explain why it is definitely not a program because it sure as **** looks like one.Good luck on that one.

 

[Big Eye]

How amusing. You entertain us with a circular argument.

What creates thought, willpower does.

But what creates willpower, why, thought does.

You're not making it simple, you're making it laughable.

Your "laughing" simply demonstrates your lack of understanding.

Will is a form of thought. Will is probably the simplest form of thought and therefore exists before other forms of thought (I can go into this later but ,for instance, will is simpler than advanced mathematics). Its relation to thought is similar to the relationship a materialist sees when a force acts on an object (forces and objects are all materialist). Hope that's simple enough for you (but I doubt it:lamo).

 

[Big Eye]

Your right, everything is made of thought. Before we can ascribe physical attributes to reality, giving it a solid foundation, it must first be contemplated. Without mental awareness to recognize physical reality, it stays out of focus as an undefinable and meaningless blob of energy potential. 'I think, therefore I am.' Without thinking there is no 'I am.'

Our reality is nothing more than energy with structure, given symbolism through thought processes and communication.

This theory is simpler than yours because there is clearly no requirement for mind independent reality (materialism). Reality can be constructed by rules being applied to a universe of correlation.

Where we agree is that thought is central to meaning and value...materialism has no inherent use ...other than to sometimes deny God. Materialism brings nothing to the table and when compared to idealism is far less useful...another indication that materialism is false. Truth is generally useful, unlike materialism.

 

[Big Eye]

You do realize that the universe, i.e. everything was around long before we were.

Well , if this is a program type event that may not ,or may be, the case. You come out with some very dogmatic statements that you can not prove...the worrying thing is that you really think you know such things. If it's any consolation you may be right...but you certainly can't prove it.

 

[Big Eye]

So let me get this straight: thought and will must both be associated with a "being", is that correct? And yet this "being" is so highly complex that it can somehow produce thoughts that basically produce the entire universe and everything that is in it and basically puppet-like humans whose own thoughts are not really their own, but just an extension of the thoughts of this "being" that you proclaim. "

I hate to tell you, but that doesn't sound simple at all. And no matter how often you use Occam's Razor, the fact is that it simply does not and was never meant to apply in a case like this, whereby it somehow explains the entire universe. That's crazy.

I've been through this already , do keep up. A simple being (like you for instance) can potentially create something more complex than itself.

In a universe of will correlation there is space for God not to fully correlate our subjective opinions to His objective thoughts. Another argument for this theory is that it ties in with our natural belief that we make our own choices with regard to available options.

This theory is very simple , even a child could understand it...it's just some atheists on a message board that can't grasp it lol.:roll:

 

[soylentgreen]

Your "laughing" simply demonstrates your lack of understanding.

Will is a form of thought. Will is probably the simplest form of thought and therefore exists before other forms of thought (I can go into this later but ,for instance, will is simpler than advanced mathematics). Its relation to thought is similar to the relationship a materialist sees when a force acts on an object (forces and objects are all materialist). Hope that's simple enough for you (but I doubt it:lamo).

No, it is not hard to understand. I do read fiction and can easily follow a story.

Are you making all this up as you go along or is this the careful speculation that a few beers can produce?

 

[ataraxia]

You know from personal experience that conscious will exists. You also know that conscious will is required were you to produce something finely balanced and predictable (like a watch). So from this it is reasonable to infer that if you wish to add an additional layer of predictable systems to the predictable system that constitutes the Universe then you have to will it. From this it is reasonable to infer that the Universe (which is a predictable system) is willed.

If we don't need mind independence in order to explain reality then Occam would advise us to drop it since there is no purpose to it (other than to deny God , which is political not scientific).

So who designed God?

And if you say “He just exists”, why can’t that just apply to the universe?

 

[Big Eye]

No, it is not hard to understand. I do read fiction and can easily follow a story.

Are you making all this up as you go along or is this the careful speculation that a few beers can produce?

There you go again...attacking the messenger rather than the message. You probably wouldn't insult me to my face so why bother here?

As it happens I've been carrying this idea around with me for years. It's the simplest explanation of reality that I can think of...plus it has the benefit of fully complying with science and answers some difficult philosophical questions (like the concept of objective meaning in life etc).

 

[Big Eye]

So who designed God?

And if you say “He just exists”, why can’t that just apply to the universe?

I think God is an inevitable consequence of "nothingness" not being a possibility...nothingness can not exist (obviously, that would be a contradiction of terms). As I have said, the simplest thought I can think of is will, so will is compelled to exist as the building block of reality.

I've never discounted the possibility that the Universe just exists...but that theory does not tie in with our direct experience of what will is capable of (creating complex balanced systems, ie the laws of nature are similar to an extremely complex program...an example of a simple idea like God creating something more complex than Himself). Nor is the materialist "just exists" idea simpler since it would entail every atom in the universe having to exist at any given time...whereas the God idea would mean that only that which is perceived needs to exist...it would be literally trillions upon trillions of times simpler than the materialist "just is" theory. We have no proof that complex systems (like electric motors) can just exist without will...so why should we assume that a program like the Laws of Nature exist without will...the onus is on you chaps , not me, my theory reflects real world events that are known to happen...yours is an assumption.

 

[RAMOSS]

Are you honestly saying you don't know what Will is? Bloody hell, no wonder you're struggling with this subject! Thought is produced by things called minds (beings)...you seriously didn't know that? I've already stated that thoughts correlate to brain activity...but correlation does not prove causation...didn't you know that? I don't know if there is a precise measurable scale for will...but there are different levels of will, we all know that surely? Everything is "just conceptual" because that is enough to explain everything.

Is that precise enough for you ? Be , honest, nothing would be enough for you in regard to this theory because it doesn't suit your godless agenda. But you can falsify my theory be demonstrating that material reality definitely exists mind independently...show your work and be precise though!


The universe is probably a product of thought because it works in a similar way as a program works...if the universe (ie, the laws of nature) do not act in a similar way to a program explain your thinking on this...be precise, explain why it is definitely not a program because it sure as **** looks like one.Good luck on that one.

Ah.. so you won't define it. Ok. so you don't know either. Fair enough.

As for the so called 'Laws of Nature', from a scientific point of view, it's descriptive, not prohibitive. And, not, it doesn't even look like a program. That's your imagination working overtime.