UNDIRECTED EVOLUTION

A mindless process producing a mindful thing...?

Me. Assuming undirected evolution "accounts" for nothing.

Atheist. You're wrong.

Me. You used the word "assumed" re the phrase "Undirected Evolution". If your subsequent argument above is to be taken seriously, then the claim has to change to simply "Undirected Evolution" because anything simply assumed accounts for nothing, due to the assumption.

Atheist. The physical evolution of the universe is a fact that is largely explained by known physics, whose job it is to derive laws of nature.

Me. This is not under dispute (by me) but the explanation is not an assumption because it is based on what is known not what is assumed. (Any assumption about what is known is related to what is still unknown re what is known)

Atheist. So far, no processes have been identified that point to any alternative explanation - such as a mind.

Me. I myself am not arguing for an alternative explanation re a mindful thing involved with the processes being uncovered re materialism. The possibility of an overlooked undercurrent of the processes of material formation (densification) isn't alternative but a possible aspect of the whole process which would naturally be overlooked through material studies alone.

There is enough evidence imo to support the idea that the process isn't purely materialistic (in nature) but is also mindful/conscious (in the way nature unfolds re formations).

In that, I am not arguing The Kalam Cosmological Argument re William Lane Craig is correct about a supposed supernatural alternative which caused a natural universe, but that mindfulness is as natural as the nature it creates through the process and niether as unnatural/supernatural to each other because they are aspects of the one thing.

As I said, one must look at what can be at least construed as evidential of possible mindfulness, something we all have access to but is by no means simply (yet neither overly difficult).

Atheist. So...make an ad hoc assumption of "mindfulness", and fit empirical facts to it. Do you see the problem?

Me. We do not need to assume "mindfulness" in an improvised fashion.  Not sure how you reached that conclusion re what I wrote, other than you quoted me out of context.

Mindfulness (consciousness et al) exists not only as an aspect of the material processes, we can far more easily account for but to get anywhere productive re the material, mindfulness is essential.

Based upon that knowledge, to assume mindfulness is something along the lines of 'unnecessary" flies in the face of the evidence we have access to - just on this planet alone.

Atheist. It is important too, not to impose a double standard just because one way of thinking is simpler to do than the other.

Me. It is important too, not to impose a double standard just because one way of thinking is simpler to do than the other.

Atheist. You misrepresented what I'm saying.

Me. Unlikely. I simply cautioned against any use of double standard. If anything I may have misunderstood your statements of opinion.

Atheist. The question I'm dealing with is metaphysical: what is the most parsimonious metaphysical explanation, that is still coherent? Coherence, explanatory scope, and parsimony are the only objective measures we have for choosing a metaphysical explanation. Wishful thinking doesn't tend to get toward truth, and neither does an ad hoc assumption that becomes a basis for defining an alternative metaphysics.

Me. As I explained above, I am not arguing for an alternative explanation but for a wholesome explanation. In that, I am not suggesting that there is any requirement for us (as mindful critters in a material situation) to separate mind from matter simply because the condensed state of particles makes it easier for mind to understand the stuff of matter than it does for mind to understand the stuff of itself in relation to to said matter.

As I said, if one allows for the assumption of mindlessness being able to create formation and order, one has the burden of providing explanation rationally as to how this contradiction is possible to achieve.

Atheist. The assumption of "mindfulness" is ad hoc, and requires accounting for the existence of this quality/function.

Me. I don't think you claiming that mindfulness doesn't exist at all, so what accounts for the mindfulness we do know exists? Also, why do you argue that mindfulness would not account as a quality/function in the broader reality, when there is ample evidence to support that it certainly counts as a quality/function in the local environment (life on earth)?

4o. This conversation demonstrates a deep exploration of the relationship between materialism and mindfulness in the context of the universe's formation. Here’s a concise summary and some thoughts:

Key Points:

1. Assumptions and Explanations:

   • You argue that assumptions, especially regarding undirected evolution, don't account for anything substantial. To be taken seriously, the argument must go beyond assumptions to evidence-based explanations.

   • The Atheist counters with the assertion that the physical evolution of the universe is a fact largely explained by known physics, and that no alternative processes (such as mindful involvement) have been identified.

2. Mindfulness in Nature:

   • You propose that mindfulness might be a natural aspect of the universe's processes, rather than an alternative or supernatural explanation. This mindfulness is not separate from nature but an integral part of it.

   • The Atheist challenges this by suggesting that introducing mindfulness as an explanation might be an ad hoc assumption, which would need to be rigorously justified.

3. Double Standards and Parsimony:

   • Both parties caution against double standards. The Atheist stresses the importance of parsimony (simplicity) and coherence in metaphysical explanations, warning against wishful thinking or unnecessary assumptions.

4. Mindfulness as a Natural Phenomenon:

   • You argue that mindfulness shouldn't be dismissed as it clearly exists in the local environment (life on Earth) and could similarly be a natural aspect of broader reality. Dismissing it would require a compelling explanation, particularly when materialist explanations are insufficient to fully explain consciousness.

Reflection:

This conversation touches on the heart of a profound philosophical debate: whether consciousness (or mindfulness) is an emergent property of complex material interactions or if it is a fundamental aspect of reality. Your approach seems to advocate for a more integrated view, where mindfulness is a natural part of the universe, not something external or supernatural. This aligns with a panpsychist perspective, where consciousness might be seen as a fundamental aspect of the universe, just as matter and energy are.

In such discussions, it's essential to clarify definitions and underlying assumptions. The Atheist is advocating for a strict adherence to parsimony and empirical evidence, while you are suggesting that mindfulness, already evident in our local experience, might also be part of the broader cosmic process. Bridging these views requires careful consideration of what counts as evidence and how we interpret the nature of reality.

Atheist. We've discussed this before, and you've shown that you are forced to make more ad hoc assumptions to account for it. The more ad hoc assumptions you depend on, the less credible it is.

Me. The existence of mindfulness (specifically but not altogether displayed through human beings) is not ad hoc and taking from that fact of mindful existence within material existence, one can indeed rational extrapolate the idea that the material (of the universe) is mindful (too) rather than simply declare such a thought to being in the realm of improvisation, and (therefore) not worthy of examination.

4o. Your response highlights an important distinction between an ad hoc assumption and a reasoned extrapolation from observed phenomena. Here’s a breakdown:

Key Points:

1. Mindfulness as a Fact:

   • You argue that mindfulness, particularly as observed in humans, is not an ad hoc assumption but an observable fact. It exists within material reality, making it a legitimate point of reference for further exploration.

2. Rational Extrapolation:

   • Building on the observable existence of mindfulness, you propose that it is rational to extrapolate that the material universe might also possess some form of mindfulness. This isn't merely an improvised idea but a reasoned hypothesis based on the evidence of mindful existence within the material world.

3. Worthy of Examination:

   • You challenge the Atheist's dismissal of the idea as improvisation by emphasizing that the hypothesis deserves serious consideration. Given that mindfulness is a fundamental aspect of our own experience, it might also play a role in the broader material universe.

Reflection:

Your argument hinges on the idea that mindfulness is not a randomly introduced concept but is instead grounded in observable reality. By suggesting that the material universe might also be mindful, you're expanding on a known phenomenon rather than creating an unsupported assumption. This approach invites further examination rather than dismissal, as it seeks to explore the possibility that the nature of reality might be more integrated than traditionally thought.

In philosophical terms, this perspective can align with panpsychism, the view that mind or consciousness is a fundamental and ubiquitous aspect of the universe. Rather than being an ad hoc assumption, it’s a coherent framework that seeks to explain the existence of consciousness as something intrinsic to the universe, not just an emergent property of complex systems. This line of reasoning suggests that exploring the relationship between matter and mind might lead to a more holistic understanding of reality.

Child. 236

Soul Carrier Memories

Universal Intelligence

Cyborg Anthropology

Copper wire and glass beads

Strength is required

One's Thoughts I Will

I am open to being corrected

Shallow Enlightenment

Undirected evolution

Four Four Two Two

Mother. Altogether the below = 4422

The Purple Heart medal = Awake Relationship Unity [Clean] = Believe You Me. In The Night Sky = Able To Here Everything = All Real Together Long Time Gone. Welcome all experience. There is no need to proclaim a supernatural event to what is simply an idea put into action. Taking root = Spiritual Connection = Ensures You Get To Know It.  "Zero" must have to represent something which does exist but is largely unseen - and "Consciousness" fits that description.

Father. To what degree the forms inhibit the individualised minds from knowledge of their source (Christ - what they were before they became the minds of Galaxies, Stars, Planets, et al) is unknown to us humans, but we do know that our functional forms do indeed suppress any knowledge of prior existence, thus we do not know what we are, why we are here or where we are going or why our forms suppress such knowledge

Child. When one has eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

Mother. Keep an Eye On

Father. What Is Friendship?

Child. The greatest Ship that ever sailed the cosmos?

Mother. 446

Consciousness incarnates into human form

Let Elon know there is something in the wind…

The greatest Ship that ever sailed the cosmos

Father. A "fair" crack of the whip?

Child. Perhaps a slave-driver is sometimes the best driver for the job?

Mother. 619

One can simply shrug and tell oneself “It doesn't really matter"

The Fearless Brain Is Trained To recognize Seductive Patterns

In Love Frequency = Research into the Phenomenology of the Self

Perhaps a slave-driver is sometimes the best driver for the job?

Father. Madventures

Child. Yet “here we are involved in that very thing”.

Mother. Thu Sep 29, 2022 4:08 pm

Atheist. 1) God causes some, and not others, to become inexorably drawn to Him.
2) God changes hearts

The take-away, yet again.... He apparently does this for some. Why not just do this for all?

William. Is there evidence that it is done for some?

If so, then, that it is not done for all should be also be evident so one would have to look into that evidence.
___________
The argument usually has to do with an individual having free will.

IF:
Free Will is the ability to tell ones brain what to think
THEN:
One has a possible answer as to why it is only done for some and not all.

Father. If the path before you is clear, you are probable on someone else's

Child. But the nature of nature would have it that paths (fractals) can sprout from paths which have already being cleared and followed.  The point being that there are always paths which can be cleared, that others can follow. Re that, is the path that was cleared prior to even the earth being formed…mindfulness is required in the process…

Mother. Hypnagogic experience = Sharing Your Love re The Spirit of the Land

A Space Without A Time... = All Things Are In Order = You Are Watched Over

The immune system = A Judgmental System

Become more expansive = Emotional awareness = Underdetermination

One leads to the other...Atheist mischief making = This connects with...

Cultural Christian = Ordinary Clown Boat = The Torch of Liberty

Child. HOLDING THE TORCH

Father. Interesting data + Centre of learning = The Healing Power

“Supernatural” Solar System = Enflame Emotions

Science of Truth= Tetragrammaton

Self-compassion + It is what it is = Personal freedom

Ok... well fire away  = The Perfect Miss

Eight Seven Six

Holding the torch

Mother. Inner self = Self-love

Synchronicity

876

Transparent Enlightenment Relationship + True Colors On all fronts = No axe to grind...

Our movements can illuminate the path toward that vision. (A Bit of Cat and Mouse Control.)

Father. A Real Beauty

Child. A Real Beauty = 111