Somewhere between logic and belief.

zeroKnots · Tadpole Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 22 Location: Oregon

Hello,
Interesting conversations in this group, so I thought I`d just run this up the flag-pole and see if anyone salutes.

I'm wonderring if the concept of consciousness (outside of only the mechanism of a brain), is orphaned by both science and religeon.

I`m finding that scientific circles are unwilling to entertain notions of consciousness in a mystical way, let alone conscious design, but I think all religeons have this premise as a common, ancient root.

I`m raised cristian which only left me with an undying respect for their persuit, but I`m off on a tangent of seeking via examining various kinds of 'knowledge' for lack of better term. Logic, belief, intuition, empiricism(cross-corroboriation in the clouds amounting only to odds), etc.

If anyone would be interested in sort of a comparative discussion with a perpetual n00b, between how the bible may be interpreted and.. you know, universal mystical common-denominators, scientific implications, or anything along those lines, I`d be extremely interested in your own take on `the big picture`.

I have a very rough mystical/existential 'model-o-the-universe' I hold up to anyone's scrutiny, whether through logic, intuition, religeous or scientific dogma, whatever youve got.

I`ll just dive right in assuming anyone`s reading:

Einstin`s initial understanding of energy was purely intuitive. That`s my idea of pure `knowledge` which in it`s primal form, needn`t be substanciated by its little brother: scientific empiracism.

So assuming this availability of universal truth, I suggest that anything in the universe can be used to model the intentions of a creator for his creation.

Theres a device I glibly call `prevolance` that indicates not only conscious design, but that the universe can be thought of as God's metaphorical 'language'. The universa was the only possible way to say this thing, and the vocabulary is these common, repeating, reusable concepts and laws we find in the universe.
Ie: if you see a sphere way too many times in nature, it may be the logically optimal form that`s perfectly expected, but given perfection of design, it`s also God`s way of saying that this form is an important way of thinking, if one is seeking perfection. Very very vague analogy, but I would appeal to your intuition, not your mode of speaking.

So that`s too much info already. Smile

Cept....
to say that I believe that the consciousness we see right now out of our eyes IS the singularity of God between us, and IS `the beginning and the end` and it`s along those lines of intuitional language that I`d love to gather interest.
The impossibility of death truly IS the `good news`, etc etc, I could go on an on without ever intending to antagonise faith with reductionist ambiguities, especially where a certain poetic nature of christianity is to their infinite credit when in an incomprehensible uiniverse as this. Smile

Only reason I would persue this group is that I`m convinced that certain modes of religeon can be proven outright and that faith was never intended to be over-taxed by lazilly negating the possibilities of certain types of knowledge.
And of course we are in a stage of history where differing religeous premises seem to be reaching some kind of dangerous crescendo that is addressable as long as reason is never abandoned in favor of blind faith.

Feel free though, to honor my weirdest notions by subjecting them to violent opposition, revision, disregard.. I`m sure none of this is remotely new.

Thanks for reading this unintended epic novel,
Mark

MoJo · Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:48 pm Post subject:

Hi zero. You posted this twice, so I deleted one of them. Welcome to the board. Very Happy

In regards to your post, I think I know what you mean, but could you clarify in a few simple sentences? And maybe you could do this in the debate section of the board to start a conversation as this section is really just for introductions. Thanks and enjoy!

Very Happy

_________________
matt 6: 34 "Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof."

FFT · Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:35 pm Post subject:

zeroKnots · Tadpole Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 22 Location: Oregon

Thanks MoJo.
I always manage to double-post.. Embarassed

theseldomscene · Banned Joined: 17 Mar 2005 Posts: 7817

hello...

Ana · Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:07 am Post subject:

Welcome to the board. I think you will offer an interesting perspective! Very Happy

zeroKnots · Tadpole Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 22 Location: Oregon