Quote: Original post by polymorphed

Quote: Original post by Eelco
So, this creator, is it less or more complex and well thought out than the complexity of the universe?

Complexity starts somewhere. In the absence of evidence of other forms of complexity preceeding it, one might aswell accept it as-is, no?

The Creator is the universe. The Creator grows from experiencing itself subjectively.

Right... If you dont mind me getting a little analytical; would you mind parsing those sentences for me?

Quote: Original post by Marmin
Can't argue with that. Although, without consciousness we wouldn't know we exist.

Consciousness is interesting, because it is beyond anything we can measure or even understand. How would you describe consciousness? I can't. Consciousness is 100% subjective. Only the person itself who is conscious is able to perceive its own consciousness. I could be the only real conscious person in this world, I would have no idea of knowing.

Quote: Original post by Marmin
A bird is a very living thing, but it is not conscious of itself.

How do you know that a bird isn't self-aware? [smile]
A bird's brain is primitive and unable to form complex thoughts, but that doesn't mean that there isn't some form of self-awareness/consciousness in there, perceiving itself as it's acting out its instincts.

Quote: Original post by Dmytry

Quote: Original post by Eelco

Quote: Original post by Straudos

Quote: I believe the universe is intelligently designed, but I don't call that entity God, but rather the Creator.

I'm pretty sure this is what people mean by "God" - the designer and creator of the universe. Why are you reluctant to use the word?

To assert that the universe is created is one thing; kindof pointless, but anyway. The word 'god' is however quite a bit broader than just 'creator'.

To assert that this creator would bother to spawn stone tablets, prophets or have other properties commonly associated with 'god', are entirely orthogonal assertions.

I propose creator machine. It simply runs random program for all eternity (for infinite number of steps), it runs another random program, and so on, forever.
Most programs just enter infinite loop but some are processing data in the loop, applying same rule over and over again. Simulating universes, essentially. Complicated rules are rare (unlikely to arise by chance), while simple rules are common (and a lot of programs can end up looping same loop). We're more likely to find ourselves in universe with simple rules, but not too simple as with too simple physics laws nothing interesting happens and no life arises.
Its every bit as good explanation as God.
edit: actually its better. It can provide some probability theory insights to anthropic principle, and descriptive complexity of such machine can be smaller than that of physics laws of our universe.

Indeed sounds a lot more plausible than other conceptions of a creator ive seen mentioned.

As for complexity of physics, youve gotta love dF=0, d*F=*J; Maxwell's equations in 3+1 space expressed in exterior calculus. Pretty much the 1+1=2 of spacetime.

What complexity? Which tuning?

Quote: Original post by polymorphed

Quote: Original post by Marmin
A bird is a very living thing, but it is not conscious of itself.

How do you know that a bird isn't self-aware? [smile]
A bird's brain is primitive and unable to form complex thoughts, but that doesn't mean that there isn't some form of self-awareness/consciousness in there, perceiving itself as it's acting out its instincts.

Okay, I'm not sure if birds like Owls or Eagles are not conscious of themselves, but I was speaking of 'lower' birds like Robins or blackbirds. I observe them frequently, and I'm pretty sure they have no consciousness of their own mortal existence whatsoever. Although they can learn simple things that does not make them have self-awareness (which is imo different than awareness of other birds, which some of them have). It may be they are learning it. Still they are very nice birds. Other than this awareness (which is a burden actually for survival) they behave pretty much like humans .Eat, mate, sleep.

On the subject of philosophy: go read Hume. Everyone.

Is he really such a genius, or do i think so just because i agree with him so much? (on nearly everything, vs nearly nothing for any other 'philosopher')

And unlike other philosophers, instead of boring me to tears, he actually amuses me to tears. His subtle sarcasm is killing me.

Go read Hume. Now:
http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/f_hume.html

Quote: Original post by Eelco
Right... If you dont mind me getting a little analytical; would you mind parsing those sentences for me?

I can't say that I understand this anywhere near completely myself, but this is from the mystical mysterious teaching I was talking about in the OP, in my own words:

The Creator is self-aware infinity. Everything is the Creator, you're the Creator, I'm the Creator. The tree in your backyard is the Creator, expressing itself. The Creator splits itself in order to have the possibility of experiencing itself subjectively. This split gives the Creator the possibility of perceiving itself as "you" and "me", instead of only "I". This in turn creates a richer experience for the Creator to enjoy. If you want I can post the source to this "mystical mysterious teaching", but I'd prefer to keep it just that, it makes this thread a lot more interesting. [grin]

Quote: Original post by polymorphed

Quote: Original post by Eelco
Right... If you dont mind me getting a little analytical; would you mind parsing those sentences for me?

I can't say that I understand this anywhere near completely myself, but this is from the mystical mysterious teaching I was talking about in the OP, in my own words:

The Creator is self-aware infinity. Everything is the Creator, you're the Creator, I'm the Creator. The tree in your backyard is the Creator, expressing itself. The Creator splits itself in order to have the possibility of experiencing itself subjectively. This split gives the Creator the possibility of perceiving itself as "you" and "me", instead of only "I". This in turn creates a richer experience for the Creator to enjoy. If you want I can post the source to this "mystical mysterious teaching", but I'd prefer to keep it just that, it makes this thread a lot more interesting. [grin]

I cant say i understand it anywhere near at all. If you are not even capable of translating these short snippets to english (and i somehow doubt you can), please spare me more of where this came from.

Quote: The Creator is self-aware infinity. Everything is the Creator, you're the Creator, I'm the Creator. The tree in your backyard is the Creator, expressing itself. The Creator splits itself in order to have the possibility of experiencing itself subjectively. This split gives the Creator the possibility of perceiving itself as "you" and "me", instead of only "I". This in turn creates a richer experience for the Creator to enjoy.

That's pretty basic New-Age philosophy.

Quote: Original post by Eelco
I cant say i understand it anywhere near at all. If you are not even capable of translating these short snippets to english (and i somehow doubt you can), please spare me more of where this came from.

Well, again, in my own words:
The highest truth is that there is one infinite Creator. This Creator is only capable of seeing itself as "I", there is no "you" or "me" to it, because it knows that it is all alone. In order to entertain itself, it creates (that's what the Creator does) a universe in which it is able to perceive itself subjectively. With the expression "perceiving itself subjectively", I mean that it is able to see parts of itself as not being parts of itself, which creates the possibility of "you" and "me". That's as good as I can explain it, I'll spare you from any more of this. [wink]

Quote: Original post by Marmin
Okay, I'm not sure if birds like Owls or Eagles are not conscious of themselves, but I was speaking of 'lower' birds like Robins or blackbirds. I observe them frequently, and I'm pretty sure they have no consciousness of their own mortal existence whatsoever. Although they can learn simple things that does not make them have self-awareness (which is imo different than awareness of other birds, which some of them have). It may be they are learning it. Still they are very nice birds. Other than this awareness (which is a burden actually for survival) they behave pretty much like humans .Eat, mate, sleep.

How do you define consciousness? From your posts you seem to think that consciousness is the same thing as complex thought?

I define consciousness as being self aware. Animals will flee larger predators out of fear for their own lives. The instinct of survival is one of the very defining factors for being conscious to me. Again, this could be alternate definitions.

Quote: Original post by Marmin
I'm pretty sure they have no consciousness of their own mortal existence whatsoever.

Find a flock of birds and run at them. That will show you that they fear for their mortal existence. They don't fly away for some arbitrary reason, they run for survival.