Because the "essence" of the ACT may "live on" in the memory of the Universe ...It's "network of memories" being that which comprise the "spiritual domain". Thus, the essence of the act -- the EXPERIENCE of the act by the Universe -- transcends the transient suffering of the "physical system"...
Right. But a Being with "wisdom" would only "recommend" that we "apply" It's Wisdom.
I might go back later to see if it's worth it to respond ...but lost antecedents generally get passed over ...which might be a shame if there is something "important" ...if ANY of this "important". You see...
Wrong again. It is NOT whether "It" (God or the Universe) "believed that this was appropriate." It is something I decide based on what I CREATED as a way of DEMONSTRATING my profound appreciation of my Source. It is I who have decided to HONOUR "IT".
"It" hasn't ORDAINED that I...
That is correct: something is missing. And I am proposing what it is: that the basic sensing and responding to information within and among all PHYSICAL SYSTEMS give rise to consciousness based on complexity of detection systems, storage and response. This is how physicality gives rise to...
I don't know what this means? Is it that the energy available and the work being done cancel each other out? Whatever the case -- and by whatever manner of computation yeilds a "net energy of zero" -- I know you can't be implying that there is "no energy" in the Universe. Too much going on...
And "how" the Universe may actually "be" is "an Eternal Entity of Energy that's Experiencing Itself Evolving. The "mechanics" that may be "generating consciousness" is the "Information Exchange System(s)". When "storage" reaches a critical level, a "higher level" of understanding one's...
But this is only because "we" say so. If we allowed for consciousness to be fundamental to the Universe as a product of the intrinsic sense and response mechanism of the System ...then it WOULD be "sufficient".
And then we would understand that "consciousness" is a matter of "degrees" based...
Please help me tease out the distinctions between what is meant by "being conscious." In fact, let us turn to AHD (American Heritage Dictionary):
Conscious: Adj. 1. a. having an awarenes of one's own existence, sensation and thoughts and of one's environment ...as in "injured by conscious"...
Thanks.
Why? I think it's a GREAT idea.
Remember: there are "degrees of consciousness" ...even within a single system. A system as a whole might be "aware" of certain incoming -- or stored -- information ...but not of others at any given time. There is a distinction between the word...
You have asked excellent questions and I thank you for them.
Let me see if I can run them through my paradigm:
What would be the "contents of consciousness"? Possibly all that an entity "remembers". Our brains, for instance, are "set up" to "store" a LOT of information (units -- or...
Is consciousness "indicative" of a certain property that is intrinsic to all "matter" ...that is, the Exchange of Information?
Info Exchange -- DETECTION / RESPONSE -- may be the "cause" ...and consciousness the "effect".
And are the "equivalent"? Well, sort of ...in that they each...
Sorry, Hypnagogue, but I must reply to Dark Wing here:
Of COURSE energy and matter "change their behavior patterns" based on information they receive/perceive from each other. Does not the electron shift it's orbit based on something it's detecting? Do not elementary particles "stick...
Today is Feb. 5. Page 14 was Feb. 2. I don't think we're talking ancient history here. And even if it WERE, let us not pretend that the discussion on these threads is linear in any way. What I was doing was addressing the POVs of participants vis a vis a reductive explanation of...