- #1
RAD4921
- 347
- 1
The universe is alive and thinking because we are alive and thinking.
THAT"S THE FACT JACK!
THAT"S THE FACT JACK!
Could it be that we are alive and thinking because the universe is alive and thinking?
RAD4921 said:The universe is alive and thinking because we are alive and thinking.
THAT"S THE FACT JACK!
FZ+ said:This doesn't really seem to follow. Is an electron alive and thinking, because the body which it is part of is alive and thinking? What about a photon which is emitted from a body which is alive and thinking? I don't think the concept of life carries with an increase, or decrease in scale.
Erazman said:so i do believe the universe is alive in this sense because of life...and that its ultimate death is *slowed* down by life's perception of time..
RAD4921 said:I agree that we are alive and thinking because the universe is alive and thinking. Unlike FZ, I believe the universe is composed of nothing but mind, and so do many physicists and philosophers. As to whether photons and electrons possesses consciousness I would say yes.
Les Sleeth said:I say, the minimum requirement for being conscious is self-awareness, and electrons haven't been shown to exhibit that trait.
Fliption said:Les, do you think that lower life forms are self aware? Like cats and dogs. If not then does this mean you wouldn't called them conscious? I remember reading somewhere about the theory that man himself hasn't been self aware all that long. Somehow by reading the writings of early man, there is evidence that there was no concept of self. Is that all bogus? I thought so when I read it but what do I know? :rofl:
RAD4921 said:Yes Les. as to the question of what consciousness is, whole books have been written on the subject. A burning question in my mind is can science ever explain it?
I think there are different levels of awareness. Not only in the animal kingdom in general but in human scociety to a lesser extent.
Fliption said:I remember reading somewhere about the theory that man himself hasn't been self aware all that long. Somehow by reading the writings of early man, there is evidence that there was no concept of self. Is that all bogus? I thought so when I read it but what do I know? :rofl:
Les Sleeth said:By "self aware" I mean at least two aspects are required to make it happen. 1) The being has to have a detection aspect; that is, it feels/senses. 2) The being has to have an aspect which recognizes (I say "knows") it has sensed/felt. To me, that is the absolute minimum required for self awareness. However, I also believe there is a third aspect, which is the being retains some of what it senses/feels and that is why all animal life seems to learn.
So to answer your question, I think all animal life, and maybe plant life too in some way, is self aware. And it seems to me that the evolution of the central nervous system is one which creates higher and higher level of self awareness.
Rader said:How can you make a distinction of what is self-aware except by assumptions of observation of behavior of different frames?
Rader said:How can you know what a particle feels or senses, except though its electro-magnetic covalent bonding?
Rader said:Is it only from your experience that you can make that distinction?
Rader said:You mentioned in your model that, non-living things did not appear to have that same pulsating vibrancy that living things did. Where and what is the distinction?
Rader said:Might it be that the physical reference frame used by us humans, does not allow us to make logical assumptions of what is not physical?
Rader said:Why does it appear, there is a quantum leap between [inanimate] and living matter . . . The reason, I ask you this, is to know, do you consider your experience a physical one? To rephrase the question better, is the subjective experience considered, physical in nature?
The "Living Universe" theory proposes that the universe is not a lifeless and static entity, but rather a living and constantly evolving system. It suggests that the universe is conscious and interconnected, with all living beings and matter playing a role in its existence.
The concept of a "Living Universe" has been explored by many philosophers and scientists throughout history, but it was first explicitly proposed by physicist and philosopher James Lovelock in the 1970s.
Some of the evidence for the "Living Universe" theory includes the interconnectedness and interdependence of all living beings and matter, the self-regulating systems within the universe, and the constant evolution and adaptation of the universe as a whole.
The "Living Universe" theory differs from traditional theories such as the Big Bang theory, which view the universe as a lifeless and mechanistic entity. It also differs from religious and spiritual beliefs about the universe as it is based on scientific principles and evidence.
The "Living Universe" theory challenges our traditional understanding of life and the universe, suggesting that everything is connected and that consciousness may exist on a universal scale. It also has implications for our relationship with the environment and our place in the universe.