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

[Sy Borg]

Who knows that the universe is at the largest of scales? If we existed in a larger intelligence, we would have no way of knowing, just as gut bacteria are not exposed to our intelligence. Further, we hugely underestimate the Sun and the Earth, as if our sentience has almost nothing to do with that in which were are only a tiny part. We think we live on the Earth, when we are are just a part of the crust, hydrosphere and atmosphere.

Our sentience and sapience IS the Earth's and Sun's sentience and sapience, just as our brains are not divisible from our bodies. It's all one thing, and life and sentience occur at a particular fine balance points within the Sun's extended layers.

But people prefer to think that we are separate entities that evolved on top on the Earth's crust. I guess it makes us feel more important.

[Lagayascienza]

Yes, “who knows what the universe is at the largest of scales”? You are surely right that everything is connected to everything else, that it’s "all the one thing". And, like the mysics, might usefully meditate on that oneness, but I don't think doing so will give us an answer to the question of why there is something rather than nothing. It is just a raw fact that we can’t do much with, except maybe feel at one with everything, or at ease in the universe. But it’s the parts, how they are connected and the phenomena generated by their interactions that are really interesting. We try to understand the parts and their interactions in our efforts to arrive at a greater understanding of the whole - there is no other way for us to put together the big picture. It’s like putting together an immensely complicated jigsaw.

It might turn out that the universe is a giant brain unfolding. The only way we are ever going to know is to study its parts and the laws that govern the interactions of those parts. That is what science does. To say that everything is one, and that there’s nothing else to see here, is what mysticism does. To say that the universe is God is what religion does.

Maybe if the universe is one great mind that had wanted us to understand nothing but its oneness, we would not have consciousness, rationality and curiosity. Maybe life was the universe’s first, feeble attempts at understanding itself, an attempt that developed into consciousness, curiosity and rationality. These are fun ideas to think about, but the only way we have to find out what’s actually going on is with scientific reductionism which, IMO, is not the bogeyman some make it out to be.

[Belinda]

Who knows that the universe is at the largest of scales? If we existed in a larger intelligence, we would have no way of knowing, just as gut bacteria are not exposed to our intelligence. Further, we hugely underestimate the Sun and the Earth, as if our sentience has almost nothing to do with that in which were are only a tiny part. We think we live on the Earth, when we are are just a part of the crust, hydrosphere and atmosphere.

Our sentience and sapience IS the Earth's and Sun's sentience and sapience, just as our brains are not divisible from our bodies. It's all one thing, and life and sentience occur at a particular fine balance points within the Sun's extended layers.

But people prefer to think that we are separate entities that evolved on top on the Earth's crust. I guess it makes us feel more important.

We are not so much "part of that crust" as that we are that biosphere. We share so many living organisms with what we call "the natural environment " that we are actually that environment. The biosphere is not a host of separate beings, it's a big relationship.

[Sy Borg]

Who knows that the universe is at the largest of scales? If we existed in a larger intelligence, we would have no way of knowing, just as gut bacteria are not exposed to our intelligence. Further, we hugely underestimate the Sun and the Earth, as if our sentience has almost nothing to do with that in which were are only a tiny part. We think we live on the Earth, when we are are just a part of the crust, hydrosphere and atmosphere.

Our sentience and sapience IS the Earth's and Sun's sentience and sapience, just as our brains are not divisible from our bodies. It's all one thing, and life and sentience occur at a particular fine balance points within the Sun's extended layers.

But people prefer to think that we are separate entities that evolved on top on the Earth's crust. I guess it makes us feel more important.

We are not so much "part of that crust" as that we are that biosphere. We share so many living organisms with what we call "the natural environment " that we are actually that environment. The biosphere is not a host of separate beings, it's a big relationship.

The biosphere is part of the crust, the hydrosphere and the atmosphere. These are indivisible. This is very gradually being recognised, hence the relatively new field of geobiology.

[Tegularius]

I encourage atheists to believe in the one God.

And, pray, who or what would that be in whom or whatever, we should believe?

[Lagayascienza]

That would be the god of the person encouraging atheists to believe. The religious are funny like that. But why should we believe in that god rather another? And why should we believe in any of them?

[Belinda]

Who knows that the universe is at the largest of scales? If we existed in a larger intelligence, we would have no way of knowing, just as gut bacteria are not exposed to our intelligence. Further, we hugely underestimate the Sun and the Earth, as if our sentience has almost nothing to do with that in which were are only a tiny part. We think we live on the Earth, when we are are just a part of the crust, hydrosphere and atmosphere.

Our sentience and sapience IS the Earth's and Sun's sentience and sapience, just as our brains are not divisible from our bodies. It's all one thing, and life and sentience occur at a particular fine balance points within the Sun's extended layers.

But people prefer to think that we are separate entities that evolved on top on the Earth's crust. I guess it makes us feel more important.

We are not so much "part of that crust" as that we are that biosphere. We share so many living organisms with what we call "the natural environment " that we are actually that environment. The biosphere is not a host of separate beings, it's a big relationship.

The biosphere is part of the crust, the hydrosphere and the atmosphere. These are indivisible. This is very gradually being recognised, hence the relatively new field of geobiology.

'Geobiology 'is new to me and it fits well with my attitude towards wholism. I.e. not only the biosphere but also the hydrosphere and the atmosphere are one big relationship.

[Sy Borg]

Who knows that the universe is at the largest of scales? If we existed in a larger intelligence, we would have no way of knowing, just as gut bacteria are not exposed to our intelligence. Further, we hugely underestimate the Sun and the Earth, as if our sentience has almost nothing to do with that in which were are only a tiny part. We think we live on the Earth, when we are are just a part of the crust, hydrosphere and atmosphere.

Our sentience and sapience IS the Earth's and Sun's sentience and sapience, just as our brains are not divisible from our bodies. It's all one thing, and life and sentience occur at a particular fine balance points within the Sun's extended layers.

But people prefer to think that we are separate entities that evolved on top on the Earth's crust. I guess it makes us feel more important.

We are not so much "part of that crust" as that we are that biosphere. We share so many living organisms with what we call "the natural environment " that we are actually that environment. The biosphere is not a host of separate beings, it's a big relationship.

The biosphere is part of the crust, the hydrosphere and the atmosphere. These are indivisible. This is very gradually being recognised, hence the relatively new field of geobiology.

'Geobiology 'is new to me and it fits well with my attitude towards wholism. I.e. not only the biosphere but also the hydrosphere and the atmosphere are one big relationship.

And utterly indivisible. Take any of these away and the whole system does not work. In fact, without volcanism, driven by magma beneath the crust is critical to a living planet. And let's not forget that which comprises 99.98% of the solar system. Really, the Earth exists within the Sun as one of its structures, existing deep within its heliosphere. It's not that we are made from star stuff, as Carl Sagan observed, but we ARE star stuff.

[Belinda]

We are not so much "part of that crust" as that we are that biosphere. We share so many living organisms with what we call "the natural environment " that we are actually that environment. The biosphere is not a host of separate beings, it's a big relationship.

The biosphere is part of the crust, the hydrosphere and the atmosphere. These are indivisible. This is very gradually being recognised, hence the relatively new field of geobiology.

'Geobiology 'is new to me and it fits well with my attitude towards wholism. I.e. not only the biosphere but also the hydrosphere and the atmosphere are one big relationship.

And utterly indivisible. Take any of these away and the whole system does not work. In fact, without volcanism, driven by magma beneath the crust is critical to a living planet. And let's not forget that which comprises 99.98% of the solar system. Really, the Earth exists within the Sun as one of its structures, existing deep within its heliosphere. It's not that we are made from star stuff, as Carl Sagan observed, but we ARE star stuff.

In view of all this, there is no way you and I can't be pantheists.

[Sy Borg]

The biosphere is part of the crust, the hydrosphere and the atmosphere. These are indivisible. This is very gradually being recognised, hence the relatively new field of geobiology.

'Geobiology 'is new to me and it fits well with my attitude towards wholism. I.e. not only the biosphere but also the hydrosphere and the atmosphere are one big relationship.

And utterly indivisible. Take any of these away and the whole system does not work. In fact, without volcanism, driven by magma beneath the crust is critical to a living planet. And let's not forget that which comprises 99.98% of the solar system. Really, the Earth exists within the Sun as one of its structures, existing deep within its heliosphere. It's not that we are made from star stuff, as Carl Sagan observed, but we ARE star stuff.

In view of all this, there is no way you and I can't be pantheists.

I tend more not to rule pantheism out rather than firmly believe. Whether we are tiny components of a larger intelligence or a tiny oasis of sentience in a mindless cosmos, the universe will seemingly look the same.

[Belinda]

'Geobiology 'is new to me and it fits well with my attitude towards wholism. I.e. not only the biosphere but also the hydrosphere and the atmosphere are one big relationship.

And utterly indivisible. Take any of these away and the whole system does not work. In fact, without volcanism, driven by magma beneath the crust is critical to a living planet. And let's not forget that which comprises 99.98% of the solar system. Really, the Earth exists within the Sun as one of its structures, existing deep within its heliosphere. It's not that we are made from star stuff, as Carl Sagan observed, but we ARE star stuff.

In view of all this, there is no way you and I can't be pantheists.

I tend more not to rule pantheism out rather than firmly believe. Whether we are tiny components of a larger intelligence or a tiny oasis of sentience in a mindless cosmos, the universe will seemingly look the same.

I didn't mean the sort of pantheism that supposes human- type minds for all entities, and a great powerful spirit such as the poet Wordsworth wrote about. I meant the sort of pantheism that is scientific and holistic.

Pantheists In the sense that you and I ,and your little poodle ,and our gut bacteria are not separate entities but are members one of another . No man is an island sort of thing.

[Lagayascienza]

That is the sort of Pantheism I can relate to. And it is so evidently true. We are all of us part of the one great universal thing. We are expressions of the living earth. And we are star stuff. The earth may vaporize as our star expands in old age and engulfs it. But our atoms will eventuially go into making new stars and planets and living things in an almost endless cycle of being and becoming.

[Sy Borg]

I actually don't discount the possibility that the universe is a sentient entity (or entities) either. It's not going to be humanlike consciousness, of course, as there's no need for characteristics that evolved to enable simian life and reproduction in any non-simian entities.

[Belinda]

I actually don't discount the possibility that the universe is a sentient entity (or entities) either. It's not going to be humanlike consciousness, of course, as there's no need for characteristics that evolved to enable simian life and reproduction in any non-simian entities.

I regard sentience as an attribute only of systems that necessarily have central nervous systems and subjectivity.
I don't see how the universe can be aware of feeling anything when the universe does not necessarily depend for its existence on sentient beings.The universe does as a matter of fact contain sentient systems however what the universe is and has been is not the same as what the universe will be tomorrow.
Determinism doesn't imply prediction.

I gather that Abrahamic religions hold that the Logos is a thing. I don't know if one can be a Christian and an existentialist at the same time.

[Sy Borg]

I actually don't discount the possibility that the universe is a sentient entity (or entities) either. It's not going to be humanlike consciousness, of course, as there's no need for characteristics that evolved to enable simian life and reproduction in any non-simian entities.

I regard sentience as an attribute only of systems that necessarily have central nervous systems and subjectivity.
I don't see how the universe can be aware of feeling anything when the universe does not necessarily depend for its existence on sentient beings.The universe does as a matter of fact contain sentient systems however what the universe is and has been is not the same as what the universe will be tomorrow.
Determinism doesn't imply prediction.

I gather that Abrahamic religions hold that the Logos is a thing. I don't know if one can be a Christian and an existentialist at the same time.

That's a biocentric assumption. Why should sentience/sapience be limited to little biological beings of infinitesimal lifespans as compared with universal time scales? How would we know the dynamics of systems too large for us to comprehend?

It's possible that sapience is a very primitive state that will be transcended by entities that are so sophisticated that we seem like microbes by comparison. In fact, if sapience continues to evolve for another billion years, that will be the situation. It's impossible to imagine how something so much more sophisticated than ourselves would operate, just as bacteria cannot comprehend superannuation.