What God is to the Universe is what your mind is to your body

[The Grand Nudger]

No, I do not believe a camera sees anything.

I wasn't asking you about your beliefs, though, was I?  I asked you if what you called seeing red was qualitatively or quantitatively different from what other matter, such as camera, is doing. It's going to take more than "I don't believe cameras see" to respond to -that- question.

Show me what part of physics, what universal properties, qualities or forces, can, in any combination, allow for my actual experience of redness.  Sure, you can wave in the general direction of the brain.  But that's no more an explanation of the existence of subjective awareness than a computer is for the existence of League of Legends.

You already asked that question, and I already answered it.  I didn't wave at the brain at all, didn't even mention it.......strange, it's the only part of my post you -didn't- include in your quotes, and it's the very first portion of my previous response. I;'ll repeat it, for your benefit. Fundamentally, that matter can interact. You asked, and asked again, what could allow for the experience. If you expect a full or satisfying explanation of the experience then perhaps you should ask for that instead, and probably not to me? I only know enough to dispense with the low hanging fruit that people so often put forward as some sort of deepity.........

How serious can you possibly be about this shit if you insist that nuerology is "waving at the brain" btw, I've wanted to ask you that for a long time. Seems appropriate now, since you've started to repeat it like you're trying to cast a spell.

(I distinctly remember having had this conversation with you before...and iirc..we came to a mutual understanding. Really don't know why it's flared up again. You find all of this "brainwaiving" unsatisfying, for a host of reasons...some that I can understand, and some that make me say "wtf?"...that doesn't mean it's insufficient. You don't like the explanations offered, for a host of reasons, some that I understand and some that make me say "wtf?"....that doesn't make the phenomena inexplicable, even if it is partially or wholly unexplained.)

[fdesilva]

Unlike most here, I take the issue of qualia (the subjective experience of what things are like) as quite mysterious.  There's nothing I know about matter that would allow me to see red light as the experience of "redness."  I take as one possibility either that the Universe is actually idealistic, with all the physical reality really being our experience of a conglomeration of ideas (something like the Matrix), or that the Universe is panpsychic-- i.e. that at least the elements of mind are in everything, or at least in every energetic interchange.

In either of those cases, you could DEFINE God as the sum total of the mental activity of the universe.  But the problem with Christians who make this kind of philosophical argument is that it's a pivot point.  They'll generally say something like: "Panpsychism, therefore God, therefore believe in Sky Daddy and the resurrection of Christ."  This is a sad non sequitur at best.

qualia is not the only problem, there is something way more obvious. It’s this.
You are aware of simultaneous events. That is at any given instant say you were looking at tree that would mean you are aware of the collection of events. How come as special relativity (physics) precluded the possibility of simultaneous events creating anything collectively. Yet you experience is one and the same as these events at every instant if it were totally due to events alone.

[Foxaèr]

HOOEY TO THE EXTREME

[The Grand Nudger]

@Silva
I'm pretty sure that Jorg responded definitively to these statements in another thread, and now you're just spreading them around the boards as though it were an open question.

[fdesilva]

@Silva
I'm pretty sure that Jorg responded definitively to these statements in another thread, and now you're just spreading them around the boards as though it were an open question.

Sorry to say there has been no definitive response

[The Grand Nudger]

I suspect that for as long as you breath, you will contend that there hasn't been.  

[fdesilva]

Do you think its impossible for human or some other intelligence to develop to a stage where it can create an universe?

Impossible? No. But just because something is "possible", doesn't make it a fact - infinite number of things are "possible". At the moment there is no reason to believe a human, or some other intelligence created the universe. And even if there was, there would still be a question - "Who/what created that intelligence?".

However - that has nothing to do with what you posted in the OP, or with what I said in reply. You claim, that god is the mind of the Universe and while that's also technically "possible" - no one has any evidence, that the Universe has or needs a mind, or that it works in a way remotely resembling human body.


Does my hand know my mind controls it? I am not by any means trying to say the body and the universe are identical but rather using it to demonstrate how A could be in control of B and B not know about it. In this case the body is not conscious even though its made of cells etc like the brain

[robvalue]

Why are you do desperate to worship this "mind"? If it's just some intelligence external to our reality, what makes you think it even gives a toss about us?

[The Grand Nudger]

Wouldn;t that make your deepity a triviality?  OFC the universe isn't aware that god controls it, if god controls it...the universe is no more conscious than my hand is.

[Foxaèr]

Oh, my fucking goddess!

Grow the fuck up, already.

fdesilva, you are not in any way resembling intelligence.