Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[JackDaydream]

My post got sent as I was writing it with my left hand, as the other is in a cast, so continues here....

As I argued in my thread on intention I don't believe that events in daily life are coincidental. The nature of cause and effects may be far more complex and may involve the 'soul' as the underlying connection. In speaking of a soul I am not suggesting a disembodied entity but more of a faculty of self awareness and realisation which can be tapped into. Personally, I do see my own experiences as being an ongoing learning curve of experience, but not reward or punishment; but as the law of 'As you reap so you will sow'. This is more about the inner aspects of causation and may be linked with the idea of a personal relationship with God. Of course, this is at odds with materialistic determinism and, ultimately, neither the perspective of atheist materialism or a spiritual form of idealism can be verified in a definitive and final way.

You are correct in suggesting my leaning towards panpsychism because that is the way my thinking has been going for some time. I am particularly interested in the links between quantum physics and spirituality and I am currently rereading Fritjof Capra's 'The Tao of Physics'.

I am not sure about Spinoza and pantheism but I plan to read his writings and I have come across the idea that it has bearing on the issue of substance dualism. If anything, there may too many isms in philosophy.

[JackDaydream]

My post got sent as I was writing it with my left hand, as the other is in a cast, so continues here....

As I argued in my thread on intention I don't believe that events in daily life are coincidental. The nature of cause and effects may be far more complex and may involve the 'soul' as the underlying connection. In speaking of a soul I am not suggesting a disembodied entity but more of a faculty of self awareness and realisation which can be tapped into. Personally, I do see my own experiences as being an ongoing learning curve of experience, but not reward or punishment; but as the law of 'As you reap so you will sow'. This is more about the inner aspects of causation and may be linked with the idea of a personal relationship with God. Of course, this is at odds with materialistic determinism and, ultimately, neither the perspective of atheist materialism or a spiritual form of idealism can be verified in a definitive and final way.

Then again, we cannot verify in a definitive and final way if we are simulations in godlike being's video game. Nor can we definitively very that we are not just brains in a vat,, dreaming our existence. (Though I find those ideas silly too).

So I go with probabilities and naturally lean towards atheism. Then again,, I'm not typical as I have a rather worshipful attitude towards the Earth and Sun, well worthy of the same reverence given to God - the reflection of Man's mind.

I don't see any reason to give Abrahamic religions a special pass over Greek or Norse mythology. As far as I can tell, the Abrahamic religions simply had better PR. Having said that, I am mindful of how European invaders threw the baby out with the bathwater when they invaded indigenous people's lands, ignoring the knowledge they had accumulated about their lands, and colonising Europeans' ignorance about conquered lands caused many problems for the environment and food supplies later on.

My guess is that the baby in the bathwater of religion is the idea that we are not the ultimate beings but part of something far larger and grander that we don't much understand. What do you think religion's baby and what do you see as the dirty bathwater to be tipped out?

I agree with your final paragraph about 'something far larger that we don't understand. A couple of years ago I came fo the conclusion that theism and atheism were like two sides of a coin. This was while writing on another philosophy site, and I received a reply suggesting that was as ridiculous as comparing an Afro with a bald head. However, some while later, I read John Huston's 'Forgotten Truth',in which the author argues that both atheism and theism are only partial 'truths'.

I have always seen a problem with too much value placed upon the Abrahamic religions. Huston takes a wider perspective of comparative religion, including Buddhism, which does not suggest an anthropomorphic deity at all. In anthropologist, James Frazer's, 'The Golden Bough', I was curious about the suggestion that the evolution of ideas included transitions from magic to religion to science and a possible stage after this. So, the challenge may be to seek this 'beyond-ism', as the baby of both religion and science.

[Sy Borg]

My post got sent as I was writing it with my left hand, as the other is in a cast, so continues here....

As I argued in my thread on intention I don't believe that events in daily life are coincidental. The nature of cause and effects may be far more complex and may involve the 'soul' as the underlying connection. In speaking of a soul I am not suggesting a disembodied entity but more of a faculty of self awareness and realisation which can be tapped into. Personally, I do see my own experiences as being an ongoing learning curve of experience, but not reward or punishment; but as the law of 'As you reap so you will sow'. This is more about the inner aspects of causation and may be linked with the idea of a personal relationship with God. Of course, this is at odds with materialistic determinism and, ultimately, neither the perspective of atheist materialism or a spiritual form of idealism can be verified in a definitive and final way.

Then again, we cannot verify in a definitive and final way if we are simulations in godlike being's video game. Nor can we definitively very that we are not just brains in a vat,, dreaming our existence. (Though I find those ideas silly too).

So I go with probabilities and naturally lean towards atheism. Then again,, I'm not typical as I have a rather worshipful attitude towards the Earth and Sun, well worthy of the same reverence given to God - the reflection of Man's mind.

I don't see any reason to give Abrahamic religions a special pass over Greek or Norse mythology. As far as I can tell, the Abrahamic religions simply had better PR. Having said that, I am mindful of how European invaders threw the baby out with the bathwater when they invaded indigenous people's lands, ignoring the knowledge they had accumulated about their lands, and colonising Europeans' ignorance about conquered lands caused many problems for the environment and food supplies later on.

My guess is that the baby in the bathwater of religion is the idea that we are not the ultimate beings but part of something far larger and grander that we don't much understand. What do you think religion's baby and what do you see as the dirty bathwater to be tipped out?

I agree with your final paragraph about 'something far larger that we don't understand. A couple of years ago I came fo the conclusion that theism and atheism were like two sides of a coin. This was while writing on another philosophy site, and I received a reply suggesting that was as ridiculous as comparing an Afro with a bald head. However, some while later, I read John Huston's 'Forgotten Truth',in which the author argues that both atheism and theism are only partial 'truths'.

I have always seen a problem with too much value placed upon the Abrahamic religions. Huston takes a wider perspective of comparative religion, including Buddhism, which does not suggest an anthropomorphic deity at all. In anthropologist, James Frazer's, 'The Golden Bough', I was curious about the suggestion that the evolution of ideas included transitions from magic to religion to science and a possible stage after this. So, the challenge may be to seek this 'beyond-ism', as the baby of both religion and science.

I'm jealous, I have tried to join other philosophy sites The Philosophy Forum many times and my application is always ignored or rejected. Any attempt to message them about this has been ignored. No idea what they think I have done wrong.

While both religion and science are incomplete, the former makes so many unsubstantiated, and often ridiculous claims, that I think most of it is "bathwater". When you consider what Christians take out from the Bible, I'd wager that the content absorbed from "the good book" could fit on one page, one paragraph in some instances.

It seems to me that Buddhism has a much more sophisticated model than the Abrahamics, not based on invariant dogma but concepts and ideas. Frazer's ideas sound interesting. What are his thoughts about post-science stages?

[JackDaydream]

My post got sent as I was writing it with my left hand, as the other is in a cast, so continues here....

As I argued in my thread on intention I don't believe that events in daily life are coincidental. The nature of cause and effects may be far more complex and may involve the 'soul' as the underlying connection. In speaking of a soul I am not suggesting a disembodied entity but more of a faculty of self awareness and realisation which can be tapped into. Personally, I do see my own experiences as being an ongoing learning curve of experience, but not reward or punishment; but as the law of 'As you reap so you will sow'. This is more about the inner aspects of causation and may be linked with the idea of a personal relationship with God. Of course, this is at odds with materialistic determinism and, ultimately, neither the perspective of atheist materialism or a spiritual form of idealism can be verified in a definitive and final way.

Then again, we cannot verify in a definitive and final way if we are simulations in godlike being's video game. Nor can we definitively very that we are not just brains in a vat,, dreaming our existence. (Though I find those ideas silly too).

So I go with probabilities and naturally lean towards atheism. Then again,, I'm not typical as I have a rather worshipful attitude towards the Earth and Sun, well worthy of the same reverence given to God - the reflection of Man's mind.

I don't see any reason to give Abrahamic religions a special pass over Greek or Norse mythology. As far as I can tell, the Abrahamic religions simply had better PR. Having said that, I am mindful of how European invaders threw the baby out with the bathwater when they invaded indigenous people's lands, ignoring the knowledge they had accumulated about their lands, and colonising Europeans' ignorance about conquered lands caused many problems for the environment and food supplies later on.

My guess is that the baby in the bathwater of religion is the idea that we are not the ultimate beings but part of something far larger and grander that we don't much understand. What do you think religion's baby and what do you see as the dirty bathwater to be tipped out?

I agree with your final paragraph about 'something far larger that we don't understand. A couple of years ago I came fo the conclusion that theism and atheism were like two sides of a coin. This was while writing on another philosophy site, and I received a reply suggesting that was as ridiculous as comparing an Afro with a bald head. However, some while later, I read John Huston's 'Forgotten Truth',in which the author argues that both atheism and theism are only partial 'truths'.

I have always seen a problem with too much value placed upon the Abrahamic religions. Huston takes a wider perspective of comparative religion, including Buddhism, which does not suggest an anthropomorphic deity at all. In anthropologist, James Frazer's, 'The Golden Bough', I was curious about the suggestion that the evolution of ideas included transitions from magic to religion to science and a possible stage after this. So, the challenge may be to seek this 'beyond-ism', as the baby of both religion and science.

I'm jealous, I have tried to join other philosophy sites The Philosophy Forum many times and my application is always ignored or rejected. Any attempt to message them about this has been ignored. No idea what they think I have done wrong.

While both religion and science are incomplete, the former makes so many unsubstantiated, and often ridiculous claims, that I think most of it is "bathwater". When you consider what Christians take out from the Bible, I'd wager that the content absorbed from "the good book" could fit on one page, one paragraph in some instances.

It seems to me that Buddhism has a much more sophisticated model than the Abrahamics, not based on invariant dogma but concepts and ideas. Frazer's ideas sound interesting. What are his thoughts about post-science stages?

Frazer's writing is a little vague if I remember it correctly and the idea of what may follow from science was not substantiated clearly and the book was written a long time ago. It may conjure up some kind of mysteriunism and I do wish to avoid that trap myself in speculation about the whole picture not being seen. Buddhism certainly presents a unique challenge, as does the idea of the perennial wisdom and the tradition of transpersonal philosophy.

But I will keep reading and thinking in the spirit of The Waterboys' song in trying to find, 'The Whole of the Moon', including pursuing pansychism. It may go back to ancient ideas and it is extraordinary that Christianity took over the world and there may a lot that is lost about this period in history and the finding of the Gnostic Gospels may be part of the story, including other strands, such as the Grail tradition.

[Sy Borg]

Then again, we cannot verify in a definitive and final way if we are simulations in godlike being's video game. Nor can we definitively very that we are not just brains in a vat,, dreaming our existence. (Though I find those ideas silly too).

So I go with probabilities and naturally lean towards atheism. Then again,, I'm not typical as I have a rather worshipful attitude towards the Earth and Sun, well worthy of the same reverence given to God - the reflection of Man's mind.

I don't see any reason to give Abrahamic religions a special pass over Greek or Norse mythology. As far as I can tell, the Abrahamic religions simply had better PR. Having said that, I am mindful of how European invaders threw the baby out with the bathwater when they invaded indigenous people's lands, ignoring the knowledge they had accumulated about their lands, and colonising Europeans' ignorance about conquered lands caused many problems for the environment and food supplies later on.

My guess is that the baby in the bathwater of religion is the idea that we are not the ultimate beings but part of something far larger and grander that we don't much understand. What do you think religion's baby and what do you see as the dirty bathwater to be tipped out?

I agree with your final paragraph about 'something far larger that we don't understand. A couple of years ago I came fo the conclusion that theism and atheism were like two sides of a coin. This was while writing on another philosophy site, and I received a reply suggesting that was as ridiculous as comparing an Afro with a bald head. However, some while later, I read John Huston's 'Forgotten Truth',in which the author argues that both atheism and theism are only partial 'truths'.

I have always seen a problem with too much value placed upon the Abrahamic religions. Huston takes a wider perspective of comparative religion, including Buddhism, which does not suggest an anthropomorphic deity at all. In anthropologist, James Frazer's, 'The Golden Bough', I was curious about the suggestion that the evolution of ideas included transitions from magic to religion to science and a possible stage after this. So, the challenge may be to seek this 'beyond-ism', as the baby of both religion and science.

I'm jealous, I have tried to join other philosophy sites The Philosophy Forum many times and my application is always ignored or rejected. Any attempt to message them about this has been ignored. No idea what they think I have done wrong.

While both religion and science are incomplete, the former makes so many unsubstantiated, and often ridiculous claims, that I think most of it is "bathwater". When you consider what Christians take out from the Bible, I'd wager that the content absorbed from "the good book" could fit on one page, one paragraph in some instances.

It seems to me that Buddhism has a much more sophisticated model than the Abrahamics, not based on invariant dogma but concepts and ideas. Frazer's ideas sound interesting. What are his thoughts about post-science stages?

Frazer's writing is a little vague if I remember it correctly and the idea of what may follow from science was not substantiated clearly and the book was written a long time ago. It may conjure up some kind of mysteriunism and I do wish to avoid that trap myself in speculation about the whole picture not being seen. Buddhism certainly presents a unique challenge, as does the idea of the perennial wisdom and the tradition of transpersonal philosophy.

But I will keep reading and thinking in the spirit of The Waterboys' song in trying to find, 'The Whole of the Moon', including pursuing pansychism. It may go back to ancient ideas and it is extraordinary that Christianity took over the world and there may a lot that is lost about this period in history and the finding of the Gnostic Gospels may be part of the story, including other strands, such as the Grail tradition.

Thanks to my errant brain, I am not good at following lyrics so I never really knew what the song was about, but I do remember liking the kind of epic emotionalism of the track.

My own thought is that the next great project of life is to transcend violence and suffering by transcending the physical body with digitisation. While I love nature, especially other animal species, but I also appreciate that the wild is replete with unbelievable suffering. Or perhaps it is believable because we see immense suffering in humans too? Whatever, it's gotta go. Every single organism is driven to escape suffering. Perhaps in time, humanity will find the key?

[JackDaydream]

I agree with your final paragraph about 'something far larger that we don't understand. A couple of years ago I came fo the conclusion that theism and atheism were like two sides of a coin. This was while writing on another philosophy site, and I received a reply suggesting that was as ridiculous as comparing an Afro with a bald head. However, some while later, I read John Huston's 'Forgotten Truth',in which the author argues that both atheism and theism are only partial 'truths'.

I have always seen a problem with too much value placed upon the Abrahamic religions. Huston takes a wider perspective of comparative religion, including Buddhism, which does not suggest an anthropomorphic deity at all. In anthropologist, James Frazer's, 'The Golden Bough', I was curious about the suggestion that the evolution of ideas included transitions from magic to religion to science and a possible stage after this. So, the challenge may be to seek this 'beyond-ism', as the baby of both religion and science.

I'm jealous, I have tried to join other philosophy sites The Philosophy Forum many times and my application is always ignored or rejected. Any attempt to message them about this has been ignored. No idea what they think I have done wrong.

While both religion and science are incomplete, the former makes so many unsubstantiated, and often ridiculous claims, that I think most of it is "bathwater". When you consider what Christians take out from the Bible, I'd wager that the content absorbed from "the good book" could fit on one page, one paragraph in some instances.

It seems to me that Buddhism has a much more sophisticated model than the Abrahamics, not based on invariant dogma but concepts and ideas. Frazer's ideas sound interesting. What are his thoughts about post-science stages?

Frazer's writing is a little vague if I remember it correctly and the idea of what may follow from science was not substantiated clearly and the book was written a long time ago. It may conjure up some kind of mysteriunism and I do wish to avoid that trap myself in speculation about the whole picture not being seen. Buddhism certainly presents a unique challenge, as does the idea of the perennial wisdom and the tradition of transpersonal philosophy.

But I will keep reading and thinking in the spirit of The Waterboys' song in trying to find, 'The Whole of the Moon', including pursuing pansychism. It may go back to ancient ideas and it is extraordinary that Christianity took over the world and there may a lot that is lost about this period in history and the finding of the Gnostic Gospels may be part of the story, including other strands, such as the Grail tradition.

Thanks to my errant brain, I am not good at following lyrics so I never really knew what the song was about, but I do remember liking the kind of epic emotionalism of the track.

My own thought is that the next great project of life is to transcend violence and suffering by transcending the physical body with digitisation. While I love nature, especially other animal species, but I also appreciate that the wild is replete with unbelievable suffering. Or perhaps it is believable because we see immense suffering in humans too? Whatever, it's gotta go. Every single organism is driven to escape suffering. Perhaps in time, humanity will find the key?

The song by the Waterboys, 'The Whole of the Moon' is about the singer, Prince. Mike Scott, the singer, is very interested in paganism and esoteric philosophy though.

I am not sure about digital intelligence but in his final writing, James Lovelock speaks of it as being the ultimate way of keeping Gaia alive after the gradual extinction of human beings. In a way, such forms of intelligence, being disembodied, even though channelled through machines, could be regarded as simulated spirits. Of course, they may have some aspects of sentience, as in transhumanist agendas. It seems like van Daniken's notion of the descent of the gods in reverse.

[Sy Borg]

I'm jealous, I have tried to join other philosophy sites The Philosophy Forum many times and my application is always ignored or rejected. Any attempt to message them about this has been ignored. No idea what they think I have done wrong.

While both religion and science are incomplete, the former makes so many unsubstantiated, and often ridiculous claims, that I think most of it is "bathwater". When you consider what Christians take out from the Bible, I'd wager that the content absorbed from "the good book" could fit on one page, one paragraph in some instances.

It seems to me that Buddhism has a much more sophisticated model than the Abrahamics, not based on invariant dogma but concepts and ideas. Frazer's ideas sound interesting. What are his thoughts about post-science stages?

Frazer's writing is a little vague if I remember it correctly and the idea of what may follow from science was not substantiated clearly and the book was written a long time ago. It may conjure up some kind of mysteriunism and I do wish to avoid that trap myself in speculation about the whole picture not being seen. Buddhism certainly presents a unique challenge, as does the idea of the perennial wisdom and the tradition of transpersonal philosophy.

But I will keep reading and thinking in the spirit of The Waterboys' song in trying to find, 'The Whole of the Moon', including pursuing pansychism. It may go back to ancient ideas and it is extraordinary that Christianity took over the world and there may a lot that is lost about this period in history and the finding of the Gnostic Gospels may be part of the story, including other strands, such as the Grail tradition.

Thanks to my errant brain, I am not good at following lyrics so I never really knew what the song was about, but I do remember liking the kind of epic emotionalism of the track.

My own thought is that the next great project of life is to transcend violence and suffering by transcending the physical body with digitisation. While I love nature, especially other animal species, but I also appreciate that the wild is replete with unbelievable suffering. Or perhaps it is believable because we see immense suffering in humans too? Whatever, it's gotta go. Every single organism is driven to escape suffering. Perhaps in time, humanity will find the key?

The song by the Waterboys, 'The Whole of the Moon' is about the singer, Prince. Mike Scott, the singer, is very interested in paganism and esoteric philosophy though.

I am not sure about digital intelligence but in his final writing, James Lovelock speaks of it as being the ultimate way of keeping Gaia alive after the gradual extinction of human beings. In a way, such forms of intelligence, being disembodied, even though channelled through machines, could be regarded as simulated spirits. Of course, they may have some aspects of sentience, as in transhumanist agendas. It seems like van Daniken's notion of the descent of the gods in reverse.

Prince certainly did want everything, maybe the only musician I can think of as multi-talented as Stevie Wonder - composers, arranger, songwriter, singer, virtuoso on at least one instrument, capable on many other instruments. He later became a Jehovah's Witness, which just goes to show that how smart and talented we are, that does not necessarily stop us from being led into rank superstition.

I would think that, if humans are gone, then something extreme would have happened to Earth. Never mind, pre-history shows that, after a major extinction event, given a few million years, life bounces back.

Interesting idea about "ghosts in the machine". While I tend to reject panpsychism, I'm sympathetic to a soft panpsychism and the concept of proto-consciousness being ubiquitous, which I think of as ranging from reactivity to reflexes - non-mental responsiveness.

[JackDaydream]

Frazer's writing is a little vague if I remember it correctly and the idea of what may follow from science was not substantiated clearly and the book was written a long time ago. It may conjure up some kind of mysteriunism and I do wish to avoid that trap myself in speculation about the whole picture not being seen. Buddhism certainly presents a unique challenge, as does the idea of the perennial wisdom and the tradition of transpersonal philosophy.

But I will keep reading and thinking in the spirit of The Waterboys' song in trying to find, 'The Whole of the Moon', including pursuing pansychism. It may go back to ancient ideas and it is extraordinary that Christianity took over the world and there may a lot that is lost about this period in history and the finding of the Gnostic Gospels may be part of the story, including other strands, such as the Grail tradition.

Thanks to my errant brain, I am not good at following lyrics so I never really knew what the song was about, but I do remember liking the kind of epic emotionalism of the track.

My own thought is that the next great project of life is to transcend violence and suffering by transcending the physical body with digitisation. While I love nature, especially other animal species, but I also appreciate that the wild is replete with unbelievable suffering. Or perhaps it is believable because we see immense suffering in humans too? Whatever, it's gotta go. Every single organism is driven to escape suffering. Perhaps in time, humanity will find the key?

The song by the Waterboys, 'The Whole of the Moon' is about the singer, Prince. Mike Scott, the singer, is very interested in paganism and esoteric philosophy though.

I am not sure about digital intelligence but in his final writing, James Lovelock speaks of it as being the ultimate way of keeping Gaia alive after the gradual extinction of human beings. In a way, such forms of intelligence, being disembodied, even though channelled through machines, could be regarded as simulated spirits. Of course, they may have some aspects of sentience, as in transhumanist agendas. It seems like van Daniken's notion of the descent of the gods in reverse.

Prince certainly did want everything, maybe the only musician I can think of as multi-talented as Stevie Wonder - composers, arranger, songwriter, singer, virtuoso on at least one instrument, capable on many other instruments. He later became a Jehovah's Witness, which just goes to show that how smart and talented we are, that does not necessarily stop us from being led into rank superstition.

I would think that, if humans are gone, then something extreme would have happened to Earth. Never mind, pre-history shows that, after a major extinction event, given a few million years, life bounces back.

Interesting idea about "ghosts in the machine". While I tend to reject panpsychism, I'm sympathetic to a soft panpsychism and the concept of proto-consciousness being ubiquitous, which I think of as ranging from reactivity to reflexes - non-mental responsiveness.

As far as I understand James Lovelock he was talking about a partial but not absolute extinction of humanity. It would probably take some extraordinary event like an asteroid hitting the earth or the atom bomb for the complete obliteration of humanity. It would also be unlikely that the rest of nature to survive.

When I spoke of pansychism earlier in the thread I am probably thinking of some kind of soft form. If pansychism was stretched too far it would probably become ridiculous and miss the evolutionary nature of consciousness, including the specific development and possibilities of human consciousness which have occurred.

[Sy Borg]

Thanks to my errant brain, I am not good at following lyrics so I never really knew what the song was about, but I do remember liking the kind of epic emotionalism of the track.

My own thought is that the next great project of life is to transcend violence and suffering by transcending the physical body with digitisation. While I love nature, especially other animal species, but I also appreciate that the wild is replete with unbelievable suffering. Or perhaps it is believable because we see immense suffering in humans too? Whatever, it's gotta go. Every single organism is driven to escape suffering. Perhaps in time, humanity will find the key?

The song by the Waterboys, 'The Whole of the Moon' is about the singer, Prince. Mike Scott, the singer, is very interested in paganism and esoteric philosophy though.

I am not sure about digital intelligence but in his final writing, James Lovelock speaks of it as being the ultimate way of keeping Gaia alive after the gradual extinction of human beings. In a way, such forms of intelligence, being disembodied, even though channelled through machines, could be regarded as simulated spirits. Of course, they may have some aspects of sentience, as in transhumanist agendas. It seems like van Daniken's notion of the descent of the gods in reverse.

Prince certainly did want everything, maybe the only musician I can think of as multi-talented as Stevie Wonder - composers, arranger, songwriter, singer, virtuoso on at least one instrument, capable on many other instruments. He later became a Jehovah's Witness, which just goes to show that how smart and talented we are, that does not necessarily stop us from being led into rank superstition.

I would think that, if humans are gone, then something extreme would have happened to Earth. Never mind, pre-history shows that, after a major extinction event, given a few million years, life bounces back.

Interesting idea about "ghosts in the machine". While I tend to reject panpsychism, I'm sympathetic to a soft panpsychism and the concept of proto-consciousness being ubiquitous, which I think of as ranging from reactivity to reflexes - non-mental responsiveness.

As far as I understand James Lovelock he was talking about a partial but not absolute extinction of humanity. It would probably take some extraordinary event like an asteroid hitting the earth or the atom bomb for the complete obliteration of humanity. It would also be unlikely that the rest of nature to survive.

When I spoke of pansychism earlier in the thread I am probably thinking of some kind of soft form. If pansychism was stretched too far it would probably become ridiculous and miss the evolutionary nature of consciousness, including the specific development and possibilities of human consciousness which have occurred.

I think the main fear is the death of civilisation. After all, if an asteroid takes us out, no one knows any better.

I agree with what you say about panpsychism; it's well-expressed. I am interested in more subtle instances of consciousness, the faint, flickering lights that are lost by comparison with the 10,000 watt beacons of human consciousness, so to speak. I think consciousness is made up of cohesive sets of reflexes, millions of them. So I see reflexes as a type of consciousness, albeit exponentially less potent and sophisticated as animal minds. Further, I see the complex reactivity of "dead" molecules as similarly related to reflexes, again, exponentially less sophisticated. We can drill down further into atoms and how their reactivity relates to molecules. Everything is connected and reacting with something else, with variant levels of sophisticated and, at the upper end, variant levels of internality.

Panpsychism makes a lot more sense than anthropocentric interpretations of ancient religions.

[Pattern-chaser]

As far as I understand James Lovelock he was talking about a partial but not absolute extinction of humanity.

Maybe so, but if the very worst predictions of eco-disaster turn out to be correct, and there is no longer enough (non-toxic) water to drink, and (non-toxic) food to eat, we all will die. Every last one of us. And yes, life will recover, but the mess we will leave behind means that recovery will be slowed or delayed, probably by many millions of years. But that won't matter to us...

[JackDaydream]

As far as I understand James Lovelock he was talking about a partial but not absolute extinction of humanity.

Maybe so, but if the very worst predictions of eco-disaster turn out to be correct, and there is no longer enough (non-toxic) water to drink, and (non-toxic) food to eat, we all will die. Every last one of us. And yes, life will recover, but the mess we will leave behind means that recovery will be slowed or delayed, probably by many millions of years. But that won't matter to us...

It is hard to know what will happen exactly and, the whole area of uncertainty here may be a source of anxiety. It is hard to know to what extent disaster will occur, like the myth of the fall of Atlantis or even worse. In relation to any idea of God or of a cosmic plan, there is the question as to what extent it is humanity's, fault or where does it fit into the larger scheme or purpose?

[JackDaydream]

The song by the Waterboys, 'The Whole of the Moon' is about the singer, Prince. Mike Scott, the singer, is very interested in paganism and esoteric philosophy though.

I am not sure about digital intelligence but in his final writing, James Lovelock speaks of it as being the ultimate way of keeping Gaia alive after the gradual extinction of human beings. In a way, such forms of intelligence, being disembodied, even though channelled through machines, could be regarded as simulated spirits. Of course, they may have some aspects of sentience, as in transhumanist agendas. It seems like van Daniken's notion of the descent of the gods in reverse.

Prince certainly did want everything, maybe the only musician I can think of as multi-talented as Stevie Wonder - composers, arranger, songwriter, singer, virtuoso on at least one instrument, capable on many other instruments. He later became a Jehovah's Witness, which just goes to show that how smart and talented we are, that does not necessarily stop us from being led into rank superstition.

I would think that, if humans are gone, then something extreme would have happened to Earth. Never mind, pre-history shows that, after a major extinction event, given a few million years, life bounces back.

Interesting idea about "ghosts in the machine". While I tend to reject panpsychism, I'm sympathetic to a soft panpsychism and the concept of proto-consciousness being ubiquitous, which I think of as ranging from reactivity to reflexes - non-mental responsiveness.

As far as I understand James Lovelock he was talking about a partial but not absolute extinction of humanity. It would probably take some extraordinary event like an asteroid hitting the earth or the atom bomb for the complete obliteration of humanity. It would also be unlikely that the rest of nature to survive.

When I spoke of pansychism earlier in the thread I am probably thinking of some kind of soft form. If pansychism was stretched too far it would probably become ridiculous and miss the evolutionary nature of consciousness, including the specific development and possibilities of human consciousness which have occurred.

I think the main fear is the death of civilisation. After all, if an asteroid takes us out, no one knows any better.

I agree with what you say about panpsychism; it's well-expressed. I am interested in more subtle instances of consciousness, the faint, flickering lights that are lost by comparison with the 10,000 watt beacons of human consciousness, so to speak. I think consciousness is made up of cohesive sets of reflexes, millions of them. So I see reflexes as a type of consciousness, albeit exponentially less potent and sophisticated as animal minds. Further, I see the complex reactivity of "dead" molecules as similarly related to reflexes, again, exponentially less sophisticated. We can drill down further into atoms and how their reactivity relates to molecules. Everything is connected and reacting with something else, with variant levels of sophisticated and, at the upper end, variant levels of internality.

Panpsychism makes a lot more sense than anthropocentric interpretations of ancient religions.

I find the subtle aspects of consciousness interesting, including the effects of human consciousness on matter and energy fields. In the tradition of theosophy, I came across the idea that ghosts are disturbances in the energy fields, often after a particular traumatic death. I have never seen a ghost but I know many people who claim to have such experiences.

One idea which I also wonder about is 'sick building syndrome'.In the last house I was in I remember one of the other tenants saying that he thought it was the problem. Of course, there is the possibility of superstitious thinking or synchronicities. For example, the kitchen ceiling collapsing while I was moving out seemed more symbolic and it was caused by a broken pipe upstairs. I think that the new place I am in has a lot of sickness, especially the heating system. My radiator in my room is boiling hot and if I manage to turn the knob to make it go out the hot water in the bathroom goes out too. I don't think that it is a coincidence because whenever I have my radiator off it seems to happen. At the moment I have full heat 24 hours a day but I will roast if it is a heatwave and, it is not good for energy resources. I don't know why I always seem to find all the sick buildings, and it may be because others manage to avoid them somehow. It is not as if I am oblivious to these disturbances but put up with them if I need somewhere urgently and there may be a lot of sick and disturbed energy fields, although many people may disregard such ideas completely.

[Sy Borg]

Prince certainly did want everything, maybe the only musician I can think of as multi-talented as Stevie Wonder - composers, arranger, songwriter, singer, virtuoso on at least one instrument, capable on many other instruments. He later became a Jehovah's Witness, which just goes to show that how smart and talented we are, that does not necessarily stop us from being led into rank superstition.

I would think that, if humans are gone, then something extreme would have happened to Earth. Never mind, pre-history shows that, after a major extinction event, given a few million years, life bounces back.

Interesting idea about "ghosts in the machine". While I tend to reject panpsychism, I'm sympathetic to a soft panpsychism and the concept of proto-consciousness being ubiquitous, which I think of as ranging from reactivity to reflexes - non-mental responsiveness.

As far as I understand James Lovelock he was talking about a partial but not absolute extinction of humanity. It would probably take some extraordinary event like an asteroid hitting the earth or the atom bomb for the complete obliteration of humanity. It would also be unlikely that the rest of nature to survive.

When I spoke of pansychism earlier in the thread I am probably thinking of some kind of soft form. If pansychism was stretched too far it would probably become ridiculous and miss the evolutionary nature of consciousness, including the specific development and possibilities of human consciousness which have occurred.

I think the main fear is the death of civilisation. After all, if an asteroid takes us out, no one knows any better.

I agree with what you say about panpsychism; it's well-expressed. I am interested in more subtle instances of consciousness, the faint, flickering lights that are lost by comparison with the 10,000 watt beacons of human consciousness, so to speak. I think consciousness is made up of cohesive sets of reflexes, millions of them. So I see reflexes as a type of consciousness, albeit exponentially less potent and sophisticated as animal minds. Further, I see the complex reactivity of "dead" molecules as similarly related to reflexes, again, exponentially less sophisticated. We can drill down further into atoms and how their reactivity relates to molecules. Everything is connected and reacting with something else, with variant levels of sophistication and, at the upper end, variant levels of internality.

Panpsychism makes a lot more sense than anthropocentric interpretations of ancient religions.

I find the subtle aspects of consciousness interesting, including the effects of human consciousness on matter and energy fields. In the tradition of theosophy, I came across the idea that ghosts are disturbances in the energy fields, often after a particular traumatic death. I have never seen a ghost but I know many people who claim to have such experiences.

One idea which I also wonder about is 'sick building syndrome'.In the last house I was in I remember one of the other tenants saying that he thought it was the problem. Of course, there is the possibility of superstitious thinking or synchronicities. For example, the kitchen ceiling collapsing while I was moving out seemed more symbolic and it was caused by a broken pipe upstairs. I think that the new place I am in has a lot of sickness, especially the heating system. My radiator in my room is boiling hot and if I manage to turn the knob to make it go out the hot water in the bathroom goes out too. I don't think that it is a coincidence because whenever I have my radiator off it seems to happen. At the moment I have full heat 24 hours a day but I will roast if it is a heatwave and, it is not good for energy resources. I don't know why I always seem to find all the sick buildings, and it may be because others manage to avoid them somehow. It is not as if I am oblivious to these disturbances but put up with them if I need somewhere urgently and there may be a lot of sick and disturbed energy fields, although many people may disregard such ideas completely.

Before looking at spirit-based causes, I'd be wondering about ventilation issues, possible contaminants in the foundations, shoddy or aged building materials, rising damp, mould, vermin, bacteria, electromagnetic problems, and so on.

[JackDaydream]

As far as I understand James Lovelock he was talking about a partial but not absolute extinction of humanity. It would probably take some extraordinary event like an asteroid hitting the earth or the atom bomb for the complete obliteration of humanity. It would also be unlikely that the rest of nature to survive.

When I spoke of pansychism earlier in the thread I am probably thinking of some kind of soft form. If pansychism was stretched too far it would probably become ridiculous and miss the evolutionary nature of consciousness, including the specific development and possibilities of human consciousness which have occurred.

I think the main fear is the death of civilisation. After all, if an asteroid takes us out, no one knows any better.

I agree with what you say about panpsychism; it's well-expressed. I am interested in more subtle instances of consciousness, the faint, flickering lights that are lost by comparison with the 10,000 watt beacons of human consciousness, so to speak. I think consciousness is made up of cohesive sets of reflexes, millions of them. So I see reflexes as a type of consciousness, albeit exponentially less potent and sophisticated as animal minds. Further, I see the complex reactivity of "dead" molecules as similarly related to reflexes, again, exponentially less sophisticated. We can drill down further into atoms and how their reactivity relates to molecules. Everything is connected and reacting with something else, with variant levels of sophistication and, at the upper end, variant levels of internality.

Panpsychism makes a lot more sense than anthropocentric interpretations of ancient religions.

I find the subtle aspects of consciousness interesting, including the effects of human consciousness on matter and energy fields. In the tradition of theosophy, I came across the idea that ghosts are disturbances in the energy fields, often after a particular traumatic death. I have never seen a ghost but I know many people who claim to have such experiences.

One idea which I also wonder about is 'sick building syndrome'.In the last house I was in I remember one of the other tenants saying that he thought it was the problem. Of course, there is the possibility of superstitious thinking or synchronicities. For example, the kitchen ceiling collapsing while I was moving out seemed more symbolic and it was caused by a broken pipe upstairs. I think that the new place I am in has a lot of sickness, especially the heating system. My radiator in my room is boiling hot and if I manage to turn the knob to make it go out the hot water in the bathroom goes out too. I don't think that it is a coincidence because whenever I have my radiator off it seems to happen. At the moment I have full heat 24 hours a day but I will roast if it is a heatwave and, it is not good for energy resources. I don't know why I always seem to find all the sick buildings, and it may be because others manage to avoid them somehow. It is not as if I am oblivious to these disturbances but put up with them if I need somewhere urgently and there may be a lot of sick and disturbed energy fields, although many people may disregard such ideas completely.

Before looking at spirit-based causes, I'd be wondering about ventilation issues, possible contaminants in the foundations, shoddy or aged building materials, rising damp, mould, vermin, bacteria, electromagnetic problems, and so on.

Of course, you are correct and the basis of problems in the material world is primary before thinking about spirit, otherwise there is a danger of slipping into the animistic thinking of magic in a literal way.

[Sy Borg]

I think the main fear is the death of civilisation. After all, if an asteroid takes us out, no one knows any better.

I agree with what you say about panpsychism; it's well-expressed. I am interested in more subtle instances of consciousness, the faint, flickering lights that are lost by comparison with the 10,000 watt beacons of human consciousness, so to speak. I think consciousness is made up of cohesive sets of reflexes, millions of them. So I see reflexes as a type of consciousness, albeit exponentially less potent and sophisticated as animal minds. Further, I see the complex reactivity of "dead" molecules as similarly related to reflexes, again, exponentially less sophisticated. We can drill down further into atoms and how their reactivity relates to molecules. Everything is connected and reacting with something else, with variant levels of sophistication and, at the upper end, variant levels of internality.

Panpsychism makes a lot more sense than anthropocentric interpretations of ancient religions.

I find the subtle aspects of consciousness interesting, including the effects of human consciousness on matter and energy fields. In the tradition of theosophy, I came across the idea that ghosts are disturbances in the energy fields, often after a particular traumatic death. I have never seen a ghost but I know many people who claim to have such experiences.

One idea which I also wonder about is 'sick building syndrome'.In the last house I was in I remember one of the other tenants saying that he thought it was the problem. Of course, there is the possibility of superstitious thinking or synchronicities. For example, the kitchen ceiling collapsing while I was moving out seemed more symbolic and it was caused by a broken pipe upstairs. I think that the new place I am in has a lot of sickness, especially the heating system. My radiator in my room is boiling hot and if I manage to turn the knob to make it go out the hot water in the bathroom goes out too. I don't think that it is a coincidence because whenever I have my radiator off it seems to happen. At the moment I have full heat 24 hours a day but I will roast if it is a heatwave and, it is not good for energy resources. I don't know why I always seem to find all the sick buildings, and it may be because others manage to avoid them somehow. It is not as if I am oblivious to these disturbances but put up with them if I need somewhere urgently and there may be a lot of sick and disturbed energy fields, although many people may disregard such ideas completely.

Before looking at spirit-based causes, I'd be wondering about ventilation issues, possible contaminants in the foundations, shoddy or aged building materials, rising damp, mould, vermin, bacteria, electromagnetic problems, and so on.

Of course, you are correct and the basis of problems in the material world is primary before thinking about spirit, otherwise there is a danger of slipping into the animistic thinking of magic in a literal way.

In my experience, whenever such mysteries are investigated, the results are invariably disappointingly prosaic :)