Great Post!
Posted on 05/01/2017 9:06:53 PM PDT by Titus-Maximus
Excerpt
A scientific swamp
Then, too, in the last few decades there has been considerable discussion of a basic paradox in the construction of the universe. Why are the laws of physics exactly balanced for animal life to exist? There are over 200 physical parameters within the solar system and universe so exact that it strains credulity to propose that they are random — even if that is exactly what standard contemporary physics baldly suggests. These fundamental constants of the universe — constants that are not predicted by any theory — all seem to be carefully chosen, often with great precision, to allow for existence of life and consciousness (yes, consciousness raises its annoying head yet another time).
We have absolutely no reasonable explanation for this. When it comes right down to it, today’s science is amazingly good at figuring out how the parts work. What eludes us is the big picture. We provide interim answers, we create exquisite new technologies from our ever-expanding knowledge of physical processes. We do badly in just one area, which unfortunately encompasses all the bottom-line issues: What is the nature of this thing we call reality, the universe as a whole?
/snip/
Consciousness is not just an issue for biologists; it’s a problem for physics. There is nothing in modern physics that explains how a group of molecules in a brain creates consciousness. The beauty of a sunset, the taste of a delicious meal, these are all mysteries to science — which can sometimes pin down where in the brain the sensations arise, but not how and why there is any subjective personal experience to begin with. And, what’s worse, nothing in science can explain how consciousness arose from matter. Our understanding of this most basic phenomenon is virtually nil. Interestingly, most models of physics do not even recognize this as a problem.
He is seeking an "Explanation of Everything" and that our consciousness has been an inhibitor to actually explaining the universe.
It will require a couple takes to take on this essay.
Anthropic principle(s)
Oh what fun!
Thanks for posting.
This excerpt sounds like navel-gazing.
But I will check the whole things out.
Try this link
“Consciousness is the ground of all being.” — Amit Goswami, Ph.D.
“Why are the laws of physics exactly balanced for animal life to exist?”
How does anyone know all hypothetical life has to have the same parameters everywhere when we only have one example of life to go by so far? Seems like that could be saying all cows have to be brown cows when you have only ever observed exactly one cow that happened to be brown.
Freegards
Great Post!
The quantum physicist Amit Goswami says that the materialists who dominate science have it backwards. They preach what he calls “upward causation” — the idea that the basis of everything is subatomic particles, which give us atoms, which give us molecules, which give us organisms, which give us brains, which give us mind and consciousness.
In fact, according to Goswami, the Universe works on the exact opposite principle, which he refers to as “downward causation.” He says that “consciousness is the ground of all being” and it is from the consciousness of God that everything comes. Instead of starting with particles and working up to consciousness, it starts with consciousness and works down to minute particles.
You can't be conscious of nothing.
One of the best arguments I have read for creationism and the existence of a supreme being without once actually taking that position as an answer.
“It took 3 billion years for intelligent life on earth to evolve. I couldn’t call that exactly balanced.”
Balanced compared to what? I mean don’t you need more than one example to determine how balanced it is as far as the time required for intelligent life to come about?
Freegards
“But, you have to be conscious of something.
“You can’t be conscious of nothing.”
Which is why in Christianity there is a Trinity.
We cannot be in a world with the conscious as you describe with a monad god, as in Islam and all the others.
“Life creates the universe, instead of the other way around”
This is meaningless. And no one says the universe creates life.
“nothing can be perceived that is not already interacting with our consciousness”
This is also tautological nonsense. It’s like saying, “nothing can be sensed which isn’t sensed”.
(Still, thanks for posting).
That presumption is bordering on Marxian dialectics. Take a closer look at the mathematics.
“The quantum physicist Amit Goswami says that the materialists who dominate science have it backwards. They preach what he calls “upward causation” — the idea that the basis of everything is subatomic particles, which give us atoms, which give us molecules, which give us organisms, which give us brains, which give us mind and consciousness.”
He’d have to a) show that his upward and downward are not the same thing and b) show how his downward is more useful or viable than upward, or even more basic, has any utility at all.
The real problem is that it’s a tangled hierarchy. We would not be here, but for the Universe being the way it is. But if the quantum observer principle is correct, then teh Universe could not be the way it is except for us observing it and thus collapsing its probability wave.
You can’t be conscious of nothing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unless you’re a liberal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
