Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(May 22, 2011 at 12:05 pm)Whirling Moat Wrote: Peace...
This video, with the accent and all..is seriously flawed...
Here is a quote taken from 00:52 of the video "Without evidence from the cube itself, we can only ever make valid justifiable statements about what is not inside the cube"
He goes on to say at 01:12 "What if we were talking about a realm of existence independant of universe that like the cube is physically inaccesible to us, would things be different, would we be able to deduce precisely what occupies such a realm.."
According to his logic any statement about what the object must be is flawed since without looking into the cube the possiblities are endless. This is very ridiculous when you apply this reasoning to the being which created the universe. If we are asking "Who created the process by which everything comes into existence" the possibilities for what is inside the cube is limited not endless. There could be no wooden spoon or ant or egg or anything else in there...The only thing which could be in the cube would be something which is not a product of the physical creation process.
The question would be, "What created everything?" Are the possibilities endless? No....We would have to subtract from the possibilities everything which cannot be proven to exist independent of physical processes. That leaves us with one real thing-Consciousness. Consciousnesss must be in the box.....
Whirling Moat
The question "would we be able to deduce precisely what occupies such a realm.." was followed by "such as a divine being.." and he stated that while we can list countless numbers of beings that could not exist.. We could not list those that do... I'm not sure if you followed what the person was saying.. The analogy stopped at "knowingness" and did not progress into comparing material items in this universe ..
As it stands consciousness is a property of matter..
Otherwise you would need to provide evidence that consciousness exists outside of being created by, supported by matter.. (You'd have to prove it exists in another realm and know its properties in that realm as well) AND that this consciousness is not inert... AND that this consciousness existed prior to material life.. AND describe the type of environment wherein this consciousness resides outside of the material universe.. AND that this consciousness has the ability to create material life from its non material existence... AND that this particular consciousness is the only of its kind.. AND that this particular non inert non created by or supported by consciousness created the laws of physics that make up the current universe as we know it..AND that periodically this consciousness becomes incarnate..
But that's your own separate belief system..
The video was simply saying that one does not have the ability to state conclusively anything about the realm outside of this one especially as it relates to the concept of "god"..
I'm not sure your statement is specific enough for my tastes. As it stands consciousness is predominantly a property of matter, but not entirely. It's not nearly as conclusive as you're making it out to seem. There was a very long and recent thread about that.
I think the video was simply saying that one does not have the ability to use logic of evidence conclusively about the realm outside of this one, which is flawed. You can have logical or illogical things outside of this universe, but the author obviously had no interest in the logically possible, yet emperically unevidenced.
I did a search.. I did not see where someone proved that consciousness is independent of matter.. Are you suggesting that there is evidence of an immaterial world that is not created or supported by matter?
I don't understand your last paragraph.. please clarify..
