The Wonder of Reality

[Alex K]

Except that it isn't. We can easily demonstrate the phenomenon to occur in computer simulations in which we control all the variables.

The 'emergent' order is an artifact designed by an already intelligent entity.

How do you justify this assertion?

[Little Rik]

Hi, Riketto

A theistic outlook on life would involve believing that the universe itself has a meaning (I hope this idea does not get confused with personal meaning which is an entirely different concept that I will get to it in a moment). However, there is, as of now, no evidence to suggest that there is a higher power or some ultimate fate for the cosmos, and therefore as a result, atheists do not believe in god or some larger meaning. However, in the quote I posted, Krauss is trying to tell people that this idea should not depress us or make us feel hopeless, but rather that we should contemplate our immense luck to be alive at all and to be part of a species that has evolved to the point that we are able to think and be self-aware. The fact that we all burst into consciousness and woke up into this world is incomprehensibly amazing and he's simply emphasising that this fact is meaningful enough in itself
On top of this, when you think about it, we don't tie our personal goals to the ultimate fate of the cosmos in reality. The real things that give meaning to life are far more personal - the love we share with family and friends, being kind to people, achieving our potential, helping people in need, and just making the most of the time that we have on this Earth. I feel that this quote from the genius that was Christopher Hitchens better sums up my point:
“A life that partakes even a little of friendship, love, irony, humor, parenthood, literature, and music, and the chance to take part in battles for the liberation of others cannot be called 'meaningless'...”Life is wonderful and there doesn't need to be an ultimate meaning for this to be true.  

Of course i agree that life can be beautiful regardless whether there is an universe with or without a purpose or not.
This is not the point however.
The point that i wanted to make is all about Krauss remark that he assume of an universe without purpose.

As for consciousness, this remains to be a deeply complex, unsolved issue which scientists are working on. It is true that we do not yet understand it, but with no proper explanation, the most rational course is to keep trying to figure it out.

I believe that sooner or later the truth will come out but not by scientists that work on physical science as consciousness is not something physical so to speak.
Ciao.

[Spooky]

I could be a brain in a jar and have no idea.

Reality is often interesting and wonderful when it doesn't suck.

[PhilosophicalZebra]

Riketto, you're mistaken in your belief that Krauss stated the universe certainly has no purpose. He simply described the beauty that exists even if the universe does indeed have no purpose, not that he can prove for certain that it doesn't. Also, the burden of proof is on those who propose something to be true.

On what basis do you believe that the universe does have a purpose, just out of interest?

[Simon Moon]

I beg your pardon!!!.
In the reference that Zebra show us it clearly say that Krauss state that the universe doesn't have a purpose so why should be me that should come up with the burden of proof?
It seems that your outlook is all upside down at the moment.

Having a bit of a reading comprehension problem, eh?

The quote clearly states what Krauss likes about the idea of a universe without purpose. He is not claiming to know that the universe does not have a purpose. You really should read a book on how the scientific process works so you can understand Krauss's mindset.

If he was making a claim that he knows the universe does not have a purpose, he would have stated it. You would have seen phrases in his statement such as, "Given that I know that our universe has no purpose...". 

Scientists so far have found out that the consciousness and the brain need each other to work but they haven't found out whether the consciousness once the body die can

Simply no.

Scientists have found that consciousness is a product of a physical brain. Consciousness has never been observed absent a brain. There is no demonstrable evidence that shows otherwise.

or can not continue to live without a body (brain included of course) so please don't state the obvious and neglect or refuse to see this possibility which by the way has already
been experienced by thousand of NDEs that the consciousness can live outside the brain.

NDE's have never been proved to be anything other than a brain state brought about by a brain under extreme stress, releasing a chemical soup.

The fact that the consciousness and the brain need each other while the person is alive does not means that the consciousness is a product of the brain.
If you think so you must back it up with solid evidence.

Ah, no.

People that suffer brain injuries can have their entire personality reset and become a completely different person. This happened to my aunt.

If consciousness is not a product of the physical brain, why would physical damage cause such drastic alterations?

Physical damage to the area in her physical brain that controls emotion, caused her to become a different person. 

So far not even the clever scientists could find out any evidence in this regard so until this is the case you shouldn't state that the consciousness is an emergent property of a physical brain.

Complete rubbish. You have no idea what you are talking about.

The last decade of research into neuroscience has simply passed by your failed understanding. 

[/quote]

[Little Rik]

Having a bit of a reading comprehension problem, eh?

The quote clearly states what Krauss likes about the idea of a universe without purpose. He is not claiming to know that the universe does not have a purpose. You really should read a book on how the scientific process works so you can understand Krauss's mindset.

If he was making a claim that he knows the universe does not have a purpose, he would have stated it. You would have seen phrases in his statement such as, "Given that I know that our universe has no purpose...".

I did not read his book and i never heard about him before.
All i rely on in order to make a comment about him is the reference that Zebra brought in
and in this reference it state about an universe without a purpose.

Simply no.  
Scientists have found that consciousness is a product of a physical brain. Consciousness has never been observed absent a brain. There is no demonstrable evidence that shows otherwise.

Garbage.
Scientists have only found that consciousness can not function in the absence of a brain.
Does this means that the consciousness is a product of the brain?
Of course not.
Can a vehicle go without a driver?
Of course not.
They both need each other to function as far as they want to function in this universe.
But that doesn't mean that the driver can NOT get out of the vehicle and function without the vehicle
when the vehicle rot away.
Scientists only work on this particular arena or universe in which we live so what happen outside this 
universe is hypothetical all up in the air so to speak.

NDE's have never been proved to be anything other than a brain state brought about by a brain under extreme stress, releasing a chemical soup.

Wrong again.
If it is all bullshit how could many NDEs continue to experience and then describe what they have seen when their brain was totally off?
They described what happened in other rooms of the hospital and this was proven correct.

Ah, no.
People that suffer brain injuries can have their entire personality reset and become a completely different person. This happened to my aunt.
If consciousness is not a product of the physical brain, why would physical damage cause such drastic alterations?
Physical damage to the area in her physical brain that controls emotion, caused her to become a different person. 
Complete rubbish. You have no idea what you are talking about.
The last decade of research into neuroscience has simply passed by your failed understanding. 

The karma law can reset back your consciousness even at the stage to make you become totally demented.
We get our ideas from two totally different point of view.
According to me all the system works around action and reactions.
This is also a base of the law of physic but according to you i guess is all related to what happen right now in this
life so it is obvious that you can't see what it is not right in front of your nose.
Neuroscience is also based within the parameters of this physical universe so no wonder that they can't understand what is outside.
Brain is matter while the consciousness is something far far more great.
Since when the small can control the big?

[Esquilax]

The 'emergent' order is an artifact designed by an already intelligent entity.

How do you justify this assertion?

He never justifies any assertion.

[Simon Moon]

I believe that sooner or later the truth will come out but not by scientists that work on physical science as consciousness is not something physical so to speak.
Ciao.

When and if this 'truth' comes out (supported by demonstrable, falsifiable evidence and reasoned argument), that is the time to believe it. Not a moment before.


If you believe it before there is evidence to support it, you are being gullible. 

[Little Rik]

I believe that sooner or later the truth will come out but not by scientists that work on physical science as consciousness is not something physical so to speak.
Ciao.

When and if this 'truth' comes out (supported by demonstrable, falsifiable evidence and reasoned argument), that is the time to believe it. Not a moment before.


If you believe it before there is evidence to support it, you are being gullible. 

Columbus discovered America officially of course because it appear that the Vikings got there first
but before the general public believe that there was an other continent it took more time.
It is always the same story.
Every time someone discover something there is always an amount of time in which the
masses take to come to the conclusion that the discovery is real. 
So to me it is not a question to be gullible but a sign that i am smarter than the masses. 

[PhilosophicalZebra]

More on topic, this is an an absolutely amazing video illustrating the odds of existence.
http://youtu.be/lSutXXevSAQ