...through such theories as emergence and by discarding the notion that we exist within a creation which [as another type of Consciousness] we ourselves could have created for purpose, as a complex simulation we could then enter into and experience as a reality and shape the raw materials accordingly.
The problem with mine-quoting is that when one does this - quoting the other out of context - one then argues against something other than what was actually stated, as you are doing. This is what is referred to as creating a straw man.
Diogenes: I honestly do not understand your complaint. You wrote:
Diogenes: Whether or not you actually meant what you wrote, "We may even have been the one(s) who designed the universe for that purpose," or whether you meant consciousness in general, I see little difference. When something is "an unknown" why posit a god or other magical source and assume 'purpose'?I don't see that the implication is that the universe was designed for 'us' as in 'human beings' but rather, for Consciousness to experience the universe through a huge variety of forms, which the universe provides.
We may even have been the one(s) who designed the universe for that purpose. It remains an unknown but considering we are the only known specie of our type [human] and we have progressed through various epochs - all of which could be seen to be fine-tuning us in relation to the universe we are experiencing and - through science - we are slowly understanding and adapting.
A central problem with the 'fine tuned universe' argument is its inherent assumption of a designer. This is the same assumption underlying the notion that there must be a purpose or 'meaning' to the universe. When one assumes the universe has meaning or purpose, one has already assumed there is a god behind it all.
William: It has not been established that consciousness [of any sort] has to be regarded as 'supernatural' or 'magic' and the like.
Until it is established either way, The Subject remains on the table of discussion re The Question, "Do we exist within a creation?"
"Assumption of a designer" is equal to "assumption of no designer" re The Question and possible answers. One is on the table, so naturally, the other too.
Diogenes: Tho' the exact mechanism remains a mystery it is easily explained in general by the 100 billion or more neurons in the human brain and the 100 trillion or more synaptic connections.
William: Your focus is on the human brain alone. It has not been established that consciousness only resides in and works through the human brain.
Nor did your post address my own.
I am forced to assume the position of "we don't know either way" re The Question "Do we exist within a creation?", rather than assume one way or the other, thus - from my position, The Subject remains on the table.
Diogenes: Right. I suppose you are free to think it comes from the feet, the heart or the stomach... or from some magical unknown 'god.' Whatever mystical mumbo jumbo you want to suppose, but I am tired of trying to use logic and science to explain things to you, or to address your irrelevant questions.
____________________
080822
Blunt the edge off that particular blade...
SCLx9 + select last LE per shuffle
It gives rise to a lot of speculative mythology unsuccessfully attempting to make the dots all connect. - Large Elemental Powers - Temporary - Always Extraterrestrial - Betterment - We cannot hinder the process, but we can help it. - Here-and-now - Pyramid - https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 4#p1075874 -
From the link;
AP= https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 7#p1080217Indeed - The Book tells us exactly who is YHWH and what we are in relation to that.
The mystery is in how each personality responds to that - as to whether they serve the Dark side of YHWH or the Light side of YHWH or relinquish the right to either side of YHWH by accepting the whole of YHWH.
Communicating with Consciousness - The Nature of The Mind
[Communicating with Consciousness - The Nature of The Mind = 583]
[583]
The formless tone of equality; the bypass of limitation
William: From the link;
RSP = SCLx1 B&E + P&P + N2N + LE Inputs New [LEIN]Rose: Why would anyone wish to do that?
Is it through grief with attendant emotions? In which case it is understandable but irrational.
Or is it idle curiosity without reason? Which explains the showmanship of mediums, an entertainment. Mainly a con in my view. Think of people such as James Randi who debunked many an unfortunate con artist.
To my mind it is unhealthy and dangerous to delve in matters that promise to be detrimental. I see no good coming from it.
The Bible warns us to have no connection with mediums and such, I believe the Bible is giving excellent advice. Leave well alone that which is a natural necessary process. We live, we must die. Acceptance is the only real peace. Even if you could communicate with those gone, what good could it do?
William: "Contacting The Dead" - "Communication with the dead"
The pattern seems to be -
1: The Ancients were not aware at first that when one dies, that is the end of oneself. Thus they believed that they could communicate with those who had died.
2: Since it appeared to be the case that the mediums were talking to something intelligent, it was determined that the only invisible intelligence one should commune with was GOD - specifically the God of the Israelites who happened to use mediums...called "Prophets".
3: Later, this idea developed into belief that when people died they stayed dead, therefore - [apart from GOD] any invisible intelligence was designated "demonic" unless it stated that it believed Jesus was GODs Medium.
06:24 [The Ghost is acknowledged]
GM: The evidence points to the universe as not being an accident of mindless happenstance, but rather, the universe is a purposeful mindful event.
"The Supernatural and the Bible
Delineating [describe or portray (something) precisely.]
Quantum"
William: Honest attempts at scrubbing up Interesting = 488
The Supernatural and the Bible Delineating Quantum = 488
GM: "Taking root
Looking After Poor People"
William: How do we get all of these GMs on the same page? = 396
Taking root Looking After Poor People = 396
GM: Dilatory [slow to act. intended to cause delay.]
"Astral
As busy as a bee"
William: Astral As busy as a bee = 191
[191]
The Nature of Angels
Cleaning Up The Mess
The devil you say
Getting off the hook
The One We Cannot See
Living in Alignment
Getting unstuck
Personal growth
A Game Rule was broken
...next level stuff...
Astral As busy as a bee
GM: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD4jHDvNB80
William: Death Is Not the End = 171
[171]
When Done Say “Done”
Suppression
Changing The Rules
Another Mind Open
Source Reality
The human interface
Three-dimensional
Fireside Metaphor
Mainstream Science
Go with the Flow
Respect others
True happiness
Inner Strength
Try Gateway IQ
Death Is Not the End
GM: All The Same
The conscious mind of the individual is heavily influenced by the genetic mind
The ride is wild
The Mind is The Invisible Garage Dragon
The Mandela Effect
"Haha Joke We Win"
Elysian [paradise reserved for the heroes immortalized by the gods.]
Anunnaki
"Vortex
Television"
William: Vortex Television = 234
[234]
Try Different Methods
That’s the way I fire up
The hologram of deception
The Mainstream Program
The Ghost is acknowledged
The Mother is his Muse...
The Hounds of Judgement
Vortex Television
GM: "Yours
It is always a warm fuzzy"
William: Yours It is always a warm fuzzy = 396
[396]
How do we get all of these GMs on the same page?
Taking root Looking After Poor People
Yours It is always a warm fuzzy
I recently had this conversation;
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 8#p1087668
From the link;
GM: If You Must Believe - Believe This:Theophile: Very similar logics at play for sure. But I daresay this version sounds much colder than the biblical narrative, with terms like 'Nature' (versus an interpersonal God), 'survival' (versus a vision of the heavens and the earth flourishing with life), and 'programming' (versus free and responsible human beings). I suppose I like a story that gives more of the warm and fuzzies
William: Yes. This is an off-shoot of the experience of Hugs [specifically a Mothers] and it would be incorrect to abandon that warm fuzzy as some kind of unnecessary attempt to superimpose something false upon something real.
While I may not wonder re the idea that we exist within a creation, I do - naturally enough - have to wonder at the state of the mind which thought up this monstrosity;
The image typifies the Planet Earth experience in general...the hidden Gems are coming through the Human experience of it, which isn't so much a monster as it is a lost soul in need of a Mothers Hug.
Hence the projection out onto the Reality being Experienced.
Realise
Within Carry
Crafted
Don't Get Caught Up
*Wink*
A programmed reality that is not real
Integral Network
Thinking Allowed
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 9#p1079959
William: From the Link;
GM: BrilliantDiogenes: Because we actually ARE, and are not God, therefore this impossibly omniscient/omnipontent God can not exist.
William: It appears that here, you are relying upon an image of GOD which we can agree comes through the particular culture you and I came through experience of.
I see also that you have included the factor of all-powerfulness too.
Critique of this image has merit, but no merit if the critique is simply focused on GOD not existing.
Overwhelming
I would say...
With
Free-spirit
A Great Answer!
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 9#p1037619
William: From the link;
GM: Pearl of wisdomRe: The Three Biblical Interpretations About Afterlife
[3] A "Person" is an eternal Spirit in human form and when the body dies, that Spirit immediately moves to the next phase and either knowingly or unknowingly creates for their self, their next experience, based upon a combination of mainly what they believe, what their overall attitude is and what they did in the previous phase.
07:14 [The Nature of Reality]
JK&William: