Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:12 pm Post subject: Unguided natural evolution makes even more sense with God.
I must stress that I have a very technical perspective. I *do not* look at this from a religious and/or emotional standpoint.
I am not a religious nut job with a "Jesus died for you!!1"-attitude.
To me, the evolution of the species definitely took place the way that science describes it. And to me, abiogenesis is on the right track:
As you can see, I believe that the big bang is the source of the universe's "shape", of biological life and of human intelligence.
All of this does not require a god. And the conviction that a god is necessary to kick off the big bang in the first place is a non-argument to me. It could also have been 100 other things, for example an eternally fluctuating universe.
I have the opinion that the decision-making process in human brains is not really different from the decision-making process of reality. The stone that falls to the floor has to stop because of the obstacle. This "decision" that the stone stops there is of course purely mechanical. The "decision" that a certain sub-species dies out because of its inferiority / lack of survivability is also purely mechanical.
I reiterate: I do not believe that these "decisions" are that of an intelligent designer or something. They are purely mechanical.
But I also believe that a human mind's decision process works non-supernatural, just using atoms, natural forces etc. - also purely mechanical.
At the same time, I do *not* believe that we are merely biological robots. I believe that the feeling to be conscious, to have will, to be someone, is legit and not just an illusion.
That, of course, raises the question: Where does consciousness begin? Is it a special feature that comes into existence in certain configurations?
The subject of this posting is: "Unguided natural evolution makes even more sense with God."
I think that the universe itself might be a consciousness. The bodyless holy eternal God in a dream-state. Not that christianity asshole-god from the bible. Just a free consciousness without any outer reality. The natural god.
Consciousness would be *everywhere*, and the configuration of human minds would give this consciousness a shape that allows it to look at the universe (which is *itself!*) in the most sophisticated manner.
A cow's perspective of reality is rather simple in comparison, but still much more sophisticated than that of a flower. A flower's consciousness-apparatus merely allows it to direct itself towards the sun. A single-celled organism would be an even simpler manifestation of the cosmic consciousness.
Decision-making. That's the key. Reality is a decision-making engine, and it is purely mechanical. Purely? Well... the rules its decisions have to follow are *absolutely strict* and have been described by science. In human minds this decision making force, the essence of consciousness, finds a playground where it can act more freely.
Maybe it is really a primary eternal consciousness that decided to dream up *the coexistence*. We, the humans, might be God himself manifesting as many inside himself.
Earth might be the focus point of cosmic evolution where God can finally break free from the shackles of the necessary rules that he bound himself by to be able to be *several*.
Religion / the idea of a God might have occurred because this is really God himself in a dream: A wake-up (which would destroy the universe) would always be possible for God because the universe would not be the only thing that he can dream. And so, the idea of God kinda leaked into the info-space of mankind, the manifested eyes.
What you are talking about is less evolution and more of a philosophical question. If I understand it correctly you talking about eastern religion 101, not that there is anything wrong with that because I find them fairly interesting myself.
Now I am a Christian so I admit my bias so I will follow a different path to answer your question. Logically there are three things the big bang cannot really answer, that is, Matter, Energy, and Process. We do not know how Matter came into existence. How Energy first stimulated Matter and how the Process of the combining of these elements to make such stable equations such as H2O, the closest we have to in terms of ideas is something you might want to call the super power theory. This is very closely related to the big bang.
This super power theory has six elements to it one I know for sure is gravity but I do not remember the other five for sure. Matter and Energy is believed to either have been held in the center or were created when the six blew apart from each other.
The fundamental problem with science is it asked the question how not why. It always answers the question why with a single answer though. If I ask science why I exist, the answer will be I exist to exist. That is basically the same as saying you have no purpose. If that is the only reason for our existence, I might as well kill myself, because the planet does not need me leeching off it. So I go back and ask if those six powers were brought together how did it happen? It is obvious to as should it be to all who will read this that those six powers must have had a tremendous power to create the universe if so, how could they be bottled like that? Unless if it was by something even more powerful then the powers themselves?
The final question you must ask is how did those six powers come into existence? I am fairly sure they didn’t just go *pop* “Here I am!!!” They would have had to been shaped for this purpose hence I believe in God.
Once you reach the point that there must be a God, you have to ask the question why.
Now this is where religions come into the equation for they propose to answer the question why. Some eastern religions say that man is but a water drop that is trying to reach God “the ocean of God” to be absorbed. This is literally, what Nirvana means, the state of the snuffed out candle. Where you are no longer yourself but are a part of God. Much like your dream state of God, which we are, only splinters of him.
Now different religions have different answer. Like my own, that has a very different answer to that of Nirvana.
I hope this was the kind of post you were hoping to have in return.
The fundamental problem with science is it asked the question how not why.
That's not true. Just looking at evolution, you can see that it answers both the questions "how did we evolve?" and "why did we evolve?" We evolved through processes like mutation and natural selection, and the reason we evolved was for some of the same reasons and processes.
If I ask science why I exist, the answer will be I exist to exist.
Science won't tell you anything in that regard, because science can't answer that question. Can you tell me why you exist and prove it? Of course not, because you aren't god.
If that is the only reason for our existence, I might as well kill myself, because the planet does not need me leeching off it.
Just because you were put here for no purpose doesn't mean you can't forge your own purposes. I don't think we were given a specific task no matter how we got here, but I have given myself the purpose of enjoying my life, striving to be successful, helping those in need, and so on.
So I go back and ask if those six powers were brought together how did it happen? It is obvious to as should it be to all who will read this that those six powers must have had a tremendous power to create the universe if so, how could they be bottled like that? Unless if it was by something even more powerful then the powers themselves?
And the necessary follow up: who created god? The typical answer I've seen given is that god just was, in which case why is that any more probable than the universe just being here?[/i]
I am sorry but you seemed to have misunderstood my meaning of how and why. I was talking about the scientific how does this clock work, and the philosophical why does this clock work. These are two very different questions in purpose. The how is very similar to a puzzle picture in that it is about finding the piece that fits and putting them in the correct order so that the picture is formed. The Philosophical “WHY” is the purpose behind the action. I have known people who would do the puzzles because they thought the pictures looked beautiful. After they completed them, they would put glue on cardboard or something like it so that they could frame the nice looking puzzle.
The fact of the matter is science cannot understand the idea of beauty. Let us do an experiment lets take some beautiful H2O put it in an ugly pot and heat it with some really ugly flames. The water will turn into beautiful vapor end of story. Now lets use Ugly water; you get the point the water even if I add the word beautiful or ugly will turn to vapor when I apply heat to it.
Much like you cannot you cannot apply the why question to evolution. Because evolution is not about why but the how all complex life came about in this world.
All true evolutions know or should know that evolution is not the theory of life and this is where many people get in trouble when they combine evolution and the theory of life. True evolution begins after the first living cell. No one knows how the first cell came about, and to state your own thought back at you. Why is the cell always existing any more provable then a God forming it?
If you are talking about pure English then I would absolutely agree with you that they have a very similar meaning. However, I am that I am is not pure English it is from old Hebrew so there is a meaning behind the words. Much like how the Hebrew names have many meanings. When I said, “I exist to exist” I was referring to myself and that “I believe” there is no deeper meaning to life then I eat, I sleep, I die if I believe only in science. When you used “I am that I am”, you were making a direct reference to God and to not just any God but the God of the Old Testament.
Because it is the God of the Old Testament we must read, “I am that I am” with a different pair of reading glasses. Instead of the ones we use for English. Once that is changed out, we can start reading the words again. “I AM that I AM”, on a simple level it means I am God, I am the creator of all things, and I stand outside of all things. The last bit is a kinda poetic way of saying I exist outside of time and space.
The last part is very radical to us Humans but not so to “God” if you will. The reason for this is, is that Time and Space are inventions of Humans so that we may measure the world around us. If God is infinite what is time and space to Him? Much like if God was really your dream state God. For when we see our own dreams while we sleep does it really matter because one minute we can fit in a teacup or the next watch the entire history of the world in our dreams.