I should have said this before that there exist not a being/set which contains everything, everything be unbounded. This is known as Cantor's theorem which states that a universal set which contains all sets does not exist. You can read more about it in here.Age wrote: ↑Tue Dec 25, 2018 1:31 pmBUT if there is one Mind that DOES KNOW ALL, that is; HAS ALL KNOWLEDGE, then IT ALREADY has that KNOWLEDGE.bahman wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 5:33 pmYes.
Yes.Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 3:19 pm If Mind or minds have/has existed forever, is within EVERY physical thing, has the ability to experience, decide, and cause, and also with KNOWLEDGE that comes from being able to experience, decide, and cause with and from EVERY physical thing, then sure this Mind or minds would be actually Creating the Universe, the way it is?
Bounded with what they know. That is the natural conclusion of boundlessness of knowledge. No matter how much a mind know there is always possible to know more.
If knowledge is unbound, then it would already exist, right? Otherwise, what is bounding knowledge?
And, if knowledge is unbounded, then WHERE is this KNOWLEDGE?
Of course, human beings will always learn and discover more, and thus know more. But remember we are talking about a Mind that already has the KNOWLEDGE to Create the Universe, the way It is.
If you want to still say that there are many minds, then I can show you HOW this one Mind exists. This is, of course, only if you are OPEN enough to the idea that there actually could be one Mind.
I can give you a brief explanation if you wish.
That is the part which is confusing and it is hard to explain at first. The universe is unbound which means that there is no being that could be in charge of all changes in the universe as it is discussed in previous comment. Mind however could be in charge of infinite amount of changes but everything which is unbound is bigger than infinity (Cantor's theorem).Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:02 amAnd, are we NOT talking about WHAT is Creating the Universe the way it is?bahman wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 5:33 pmI know what you are talking about. Mind or God, if there is any, to me is merely the creator.
You did agree that we are, further up this post.
Mind is a dimensionless point. But it presents everywhere that experience and action happens. Basically I think that mind stays close to body.Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:02 amAnd WHERE is that?bahman wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 5:33 pmHuman's mind is where s/he is.Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:02 am
One reason human beings are still so confused on this issue is because they continually think, believe and/or say that human beings have their own minds. The actual Truth is there are 'thoughts,' within each and every human body, over a certain age. But, WHERE is the, so called, "human 'mind' "?
A person is made of mind and physical matter.
I have been working in philosophy of mind more than 6 years now. My understanding is not complete yet. For example I still don't know how reproduction happens? How mind get involved in the process of reproduction?Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:02 am There are many upon many other clarifying questions I could ask in relation to just this very few word statement.
We could go on forever with me asking clarifying questions and you responding to each and every one of them. But to speed things up, do you think or know that you already have ALL the answers, which when put together will form a perfect and clear picture of ALL-THERE-IS?
Good to hear that we agree on the argument for existence of mind. I think I can show that there is at least two minds involved in changes, what I am aware of and responsible for it and the rest.Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:02 amI UNDERSTOOD this argument first time around.bahman wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 5:33 pmI think I already provide an argument in another thread for existence of mind and causation whenever there is a change. I repeat it here for sake of clarity for the readers: Consider a change in a system, X to Y. X and Y cannot coexist therefore X has to vanishes before Y takes place. Y however cannot comes out of nothingness (remember that there is nothing when X vanishes). Therefore there should exist a mind that experiences X and causes Y.
I also have stated that I accept it and agree with it. I, however, question about your later inference that there are many 'minds', especially since many minds can NOT experience ALL X, and cause ALL Y. But one Mind, however, can experience ALL X's and cause ALL Y's.
If you want to argue that, Therefore there should exist a "mind" that experiences X and causes Y, then the word 'a' infers one. BUT, if you want to insist that there are many minds, then YOUR conclusion should be, Therefore there should exist many minds that experiences X and causes Y.
If, and when, you do, however, I will then question WHY add the word "should"? If ALL the premises are accurate, then the conclusion WOULD just follow accurately, and thus there would NOT be a need for the word "should".
If, however, if YOUR conclusion follows with the words "many minds", then I will, most likely, do some further questioning.
Think of all possible forms which exists which is unbound. Consider the universe which is unbound too. Each mind has capacity to have infinite amount of power but not unlimited power. There exist a power larger than infinity and more than that, etc.Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:02 amP2. WHY do you say this is true? I SEE the quality that absolute power exerts already. I also SEE the boundaries for quality, such as power.bahman wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 5:33 pmThe argument is as following:Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:02 am I would like to see that. Especially as what I SEE now is that if there is an absolute power, which I am always SEEING by the way, then that power could be in relation to an absolute God. Also, if that absolute power, was in relation to an absolute God, then there would NOT be any higher god than that God.
P1. Power has some value and therefore can be discussed mathematically.
P2. There exists not any bound for any quality, such as power.
P3. Absolute power requires a bound (it is simply maximum in a quality).
C. Therefore absolute power does not exists.
No, to me that is contrary considering the Cantor's theorem.
There problem is that all there is cannot be summed in a set. It is unbound. The concept of unbound is a little confusing at first place.
By we I means mind plus their bodies. I provided an argument for the existence of at least two minds in this post.Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:02 amNow, 'we', you and I, are back to the beginning. Who/what is the 'we' that you are referring to here? You used the word 'we' twice in this sentence. Is who/what the 'we' is, the exact same in both usages?bahman wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 5:33 pmYes.Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:02 am Agreed.
Human beings have this freedom to decide. I call that free-will. However, and just as equally determinism plays a part in human beings. Human beings are TOTALLY FREE to decide between available options, these 'options' by the way are just thoughts, and it is these available options/thoughts that have been pre-determined from past experiences, (or pre-programmed), and thus also determine what can and actually WILL happen in the future.
Free-will and determinism EQUALLY cause what IS going to come and BE.
I see. I however think that we know without doubt that we are in charge of changes.Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:02 am
I am just wondering do you have a picture of how EVERY thing fits together perfectly?
If no, then what might help is;
There is a 'human being', which consists of a physical human body and a being within it. I call the being within a human body the 'person'. The 'person' just being the thoughts and emotions, which are by the way both invisible to the human eyes, like a soul or being IS.
There is, also, a 'God-being', which consists of absolutely EVERY physical object and a Being with them. I call the Being within EVERY physical object the 'God'. This 'God' just being thee Mind, which is by the way invisible to the human eyes, like a Spirit IS.
Thee Being is the invisible source of Energy, or as some might say the Life Force, behind EVERY physical thing, but this Being NEVER forces so It really is just Free Energy. This has NEVER been created as It just IS.
The being is the invisible thoughts and emotions that drive human beings to do what they do.
Human beings are absolutely FREE to choose whatever they want to do. The very reason WHY the God-Being allows this to happen will become much clearer and far more obvious, further "down the track".
And, what you have been calling "thing", and now generally for "object", is just what I call "physical matter".
Thee Being, or the being, is just the One, or the one, living within physical matter.
One KNOWS, and, the other one THINKS it KNOWS. I am sure you would KNOW which one is which here.
Who/what is the 'we' that, supposedly, KNOWS without doubt, and, who/what is the 'we' that is, supposedly, in charge of changes?
I will await your response, before I continue here.
I am in charge of changes which I am aware of. The rest of changes can be done by another mind. So there is at least two minds. By we I mean all entities when I use that in "we are in charge of everything", otherwise "we" refers to me and you.Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:02 amTo me anyway, your argument does not YET stand, until I have a clear understanding of who/what these 'we's' are that you say ARE in charge of changes.
From one perspective, I think you are referring to one person.
From another perspective, I think you are referring to ALL human beings.
From another perspective, I think you are referring to ALL animal beings, including the human beings.
From another perspective, I think you are referring to ALL physical objects, things, and beings.
And there are a few other perspectives I am SEEING this from.
When the definitions of ALL of your words are clarified, fit together to form a clear and accurate True picture, then YOUR argument WILL stand. Until then I will just remain OPEN, and seek clarification, through questioning.
By the way there are other things in your argument that need clarification, other than just that one "illusion" proposal that you mention about in relation to objecting.
I KNOW your argument WILL stand, WILL be accepted, and WILL be agreed with, by EVERY one, but just not in its current form.