Call it what you want to. So you’re saying my “intention” (which is a thought) caused the chair to move?
All evolution is change but not all change is evolution.
And the thought to move the chair happened in your brain when your neurons changed and decided to move the chair. The neurons in your brain decided to move the chair, you just agreed with it enough to actually do it.
The Earth changed. We evolved from Earth.
Again, to evolve means to change, so to change is to evolve. You are defining God to be change, so you are defining God as evolution.
I’m pretty sure the God people don’t want you defining them as evolution people. They deny evolution in favor of the “God did it” concept.
They aren’t the same. Not all changes necessarily have come from evolution. Evolution as it is defined relates to the DNA structure in living things. You are using the term evolution very liberally. And not all change is evolution. If I rearrange my house I didn’t cause it to evolve, I simply changed it.
Well if evolution is change and God changed something wouldn’t that mean God caused some sort of evolution to occur? You aren’t making any sense.
Yes they are! The word evolve literally means to change. Evolution as a “theory” is that things CHANGED into what they are today, as opposed to God saying “let there be light” and suddenly there was light.
To evolve is to change and to change is to evolve. Evolution is simply change. Creatures evolve by adapting to their environment. They change because their environment changes and they evolve by “equalizing” with that environment.
Evolution is no different than putting an ice cube into a glass of water, the ice cube is cold and the water is warm. Eventually the ice cube evolves by warming up and melting, and the water gets colder. They are coming to an equilibrium with each other. When the ice cube is gone the water comes to an equilibrium with the room temperature.
Ever wonder why chameleons change colors, or creatures blend in with their environment? You think that’s an accident? They EVOLVED, they changed to adapt to their surroundings. They changed. They evolved.
I disagree and I have already expressed why. You can take it or leave it. The fact that you didn’t even quote my entire argument is evidence of self-denial.
You can disagree all you want to, but the fact remains that to evolve means to change. For you to define God as change is…laughable!
Change is a product of time, space and causality all of which are a priori superimpositions of the mind on perceptions to produce the phenomena we experience. That’s all a representation of the Matrix that is your mind.
Yet change exists without the mind as well. In fact, most of the change that happened after the Universe was created happened before any life even existed. Your idealism is commendable but reality, and change, still exists without it.
So you’re saying I believe in telekinesis, is what you’re inferring here?
Intention leads to action, through ‘will’ caused by ‘need’ probably… simply thinking about moving the chair, doesn’t move the chair, as in the case of the paralysed… well, without the help of technology, that is.
The mind is the only way we have of knowing anything. So to say what exists or existed without the mind is impossible. All we know as objects are phenomena. Without a mind there are no phenomena.Phenomena are the way things appear to a mind not the way things are in themselves? Without a point of view we can’t say anything about anything. With a point of view we can say what it looks like not how it is. There is no view from nowhere. And “where” is a product of mind which represents things in space.
Ah, the classic “if a tree fell in a forest and nobody was around would it make a sound?” I would contend that it did make the sound, because I believe the nearby plants, and the tree, can hear itself. This has already been demonstrated in shows like Myth Busters. Does the plant have a mind? Does the plant have a spirit? On the argument between human idealism and panpsychism I side closer, if not entirely, on the panpsychism part of this debate. Without change there is no cause and effect. Without cause or effect there can be no causer. Without a causer the being cannot exist. Therefore change is God; not the being.
Change is not a cause.
Change is an effect.
An imbalanced situation causes change in the situation - that is the effect - the potential that causes the action - that is creation.
Without an imbalanced situation - there can be no change - there can be no creator - there would be no God.
The universe is an infinite imbalanced situation altering itself endlessly - always renewing - always being changed - evolving up and down - round and round - because the cause of change - the imbalanced situation - is ever present - and never escaped.
Wow. This is really good. I however would argue that something has to change in order to cause the cause it is doing.
For example. The chicken and the egg situation. The imbalanced situation is: the chicken existed but the evolution of the chicken means it didn’t always exist. So what existed first, the chicken that created the egg or the egg that became the chicken?
Evolution does happen due to an imbalanced situation. But what caused that imbalanced situation? Nature did. Something fundamentally changed on Earth to change whatever chickens were before to what they became. So therefore, there is always a causer. Some people call that God. We keep going down this hole, this God of the gaps scenario. The only thing we do know is there is some imbalance of some kind for the cause to create this effect.
What I do believe however is that on some fundamental level, whether it is the neurons in your brain firing at different signals or a star being born, there is always a reason behind this change. The reason, or imbalance, is change itself. I simply call this causal set of connections behind this God. And I no longer live as if it’s one central super intelligent being doing this.
Existence is not symmetrical.
If it were, every positive would have an equal negative cancelling it out. Which would be nothing at all.
Existence is asymmetrical. It exists.
It always will be.
There is no being who can make or change that.
What is boils down to, really, is that change is a factor for change itself. This is why Republicans and Democrats exist. This is why Barack Obama became the President and then Donald Trump. It’s better however than a dictator who needs to stay in the middle to please everybody but then becomes an autocrat. Or rebels for anarchy. Some progress does get made however. Look at what we are doing in Ukraine to try to stop this war, from both the left and the right. But see, that’s the problem, if we only did what 99% of people agreed with not much would be done. We mix the poison and the cure together to bring our society together to find the common ground between people. And that’s why democracy ultimately exists.
Sorry, this isn’t politics, it’s religion and spirituality. But this applies to everything if you really think about it.
Edit: This is why I agree with asymmetrical take. Believe it or not I wrote this before I saw your post.
Double edit: Believe it or not I’ve been calling myself a radical centrist for awhile. I guess if I have to choose one boat I fall somewhere between the transhumanists and libertarians.
Change is the difference between cause and effect.
Cause can be considered the start line. Effect can be considered the finish line. Change is what happens between the start and finish line. Change is the car in motion, changing a distance over a changing time.
Change is what happens between the time you are born and the time you die. Life is about change (evolution).
Change is the motion of the ocean, constantly evolving, constantly changing.
I guess that’s the debate. If change (God) is absolute then it does not change. If change (God) changes then it is not absolute. I think we can all agree that somethings should remain the same for awhile at least.
I think I understand it now. Somethings should stay the same while other things should change. What that change is up to us. And no, I’m not saying we are God. We just have a slight way of affecting it. We are the characters of our lives. So instead of just philosophizing about it you should live it!
Total breakthrough Shinji Ikari moment
Consciousness is the way we perceive God through the ever-growing, entropy-ridden Universe. The more entropy exists the less changes happen. Extropy isn’t the opposite of entropy, it seeks to expand the positive and downplay the negative. And that’s it.
I feel pretty good now. I couldn’t have done this without everybody’s help. Thanks!
Nothing wrong with giving a little thought to life, but don’t “waste” your life thinking about it.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRMf3wKBCPo[/youtube]