[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by baudrunner Private language religion? There is no scientific evidence for creation other than creation itself, let alone the cause of it. I will however challenge anyone else to come up with an explanation for existence, whether scientifically substantial or not. Consciousness is a predisposition to the premonition that was created by and which created it.

What is the conceptual intentionality of the universe? Does the universe have life separate from us biological beings, plants, etc.? What does it desire? Does it desire as we do? Does it have quantum consciousness? Since the sun gives all life, must it be alive, as well? Is premonition anything but a private language religion? Did creation create itself? Was creation even created, or did it always just exist? Just because the singularity supports us creating, does it need to create itself? Is not us pro-creating ourselves, the same as the singularity also creating itself without being self-self-created? As Poincare said years ago, "Singularities are required to exhibit paradoxes." It is very difficult when talking about the singularity of "What Is Life" not to be very confusing. I think David Levi Wing has offered the best fundamentals for solving many of these singularity puzzles, on this board. Just go to this link; http://www.toequest.com/forum/journa...owjournal&j=32 and check out his absolute fundamentals. Just scroll down to "The Mystery of Mass" and check it out from there to bottom. I recommend the rest as well, so we might all get on similar pages. I don't see any other way to talk about such ideas seriously, until we have similar ideas of fundamental definitions.

As to life before the biosphere, I'm still trying to figure this one out, myself. I can logically and intuitively create several alternative scenarios, yet I can not make up my mind as to which is true. The possibilities seem profound... Yet, as long as the sceptical camel can still stick his nose under the tent of erected truth systems, with that little bit of doubt, we still must work toward a greater truth... That final result, me thinks, must be the TOE>>>

regards

[baudrunner]

On the subject of the premonition, it gets weirder. I use the word because it is very applicable. It becomes a ridiculous idea really, but that does not prevent me from believing it. Check this out.

There was no time before the premonition. The practice of extrapolating sense out of the creation is the residual by-product of the creation of time itself and can be considered meaningless when one realizes that we exist in but a single moment that has been stretched out a bit and that everything is really happening at the same time. If we were really truly colossal then it would all go by in a spark, but we are just so little that we insist on dragging out the complex rationalizations that justify its existence, because our minimalist dimensions afford us the time to do so. What is even crazier when you think about it is that the occasional justification is wrong!

The idea that the Universe created itself is absurd, of course. But life is an exercise in the theatre of the absurd. I don't know why a Universe that always was is any less absurd but it all boils down to preference, not religion, as you suggest, for religion has no scientific basis. I prefer to believe that the universe was created out of nothing by an awareness that the idea that anything would exist being so staggeringly profound that it simply manifests by virtue of the weight of its importance, and that this establishes dimensional substance by way of the difference of potential that is immediately established and that this idea can only grow, and grow faster, which is what it is doing. The root is idea. The result is existence making sense of itself though, isn't it? Order from Chaos? Since we are but the residual hysteresis product, the detritus of a fading notion that continues to forge a new front at its periphery, leaving us behind to eventually peter out, the whole process becomes a rational manifestation of what we see occurring in nature all around us. Things are born and die. Existence will follow suit, but the idea is perpetual and continues to propagate itself, leaving behind more wondrous existence for ever more. What is indeed inescapable is that there was a beginning of the whole anthropocentric process, and God had nothing to do with it, being as much a manifestation of the predispostion to that idea as are we all. Consciousness is a matter of course in the cosmic scheme of things for there can be no premonition without it.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by baudrunner On the subject of the premonition, it gets weirder. I use the word because it is very applicable.

Baud, since premonition comes from basic intuition, why not use the absolute basic term of intuition, instead of the less descriptive...?

regards

[baudrunner]

Baud, since premonition comes from basic intuition, why not use the absolute basic term of intuition, instead of the less descriptive...?

I use the term "premonition" over "intuition" because I think it is more suitable. There is no saying "an intuition" as there is in saying "a premonition", considering that the event is a singular one. The word "intuition" is a general term referring to the propensity for having premonitions, or the ability to have them.

We can advance the theory. Consider the law of conservation of energy. The energy that comprises what we are made of has always been around, it is merely being converted. It is creation in the process of rationalizing itself, and we are but a manifestation of that. We are required to be corporeal and finite because evolution is acellerating, and if consciousness were to become manifest as a single giant cognizant entity it would grow obsolete over time, and this hysteresis process which expresses us must of needs require that we express the finite nature of it and the acellerating evolution itself virtually proves that we are but the product of this hysteresis. It's another beautiful paradox which applies, like poles of a battery.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by baudrunner I use the term "premonition" over "intuition" because I think it is more suitable. There is no saying "an intuition" as there is in saying "a premonition", considering that the event is a singular one. The word "intuition" is a general term referring to the propensity for having premonitions, or the ability to have them. We can advance the theory. Consider the law of conservation of energy. The energy that comprises what we are made of has always been around, it is merely being converted. It is creation in the process of rationalizing itself, and we are but a manifestation of that. We are required to be corporeal and finite because evolution is acellerating, and if consciousness were to become manifest as a single giant cognizant entity it would grow obsolete over time, and this hysteresis process which expresses us must of needs require that we express the finite nature of it and the acellerating evolution itself virtually proves that we are but the product of this hysteresis. It's another beautiful paradox which applies, like poles of a battery.

That is strange___the differences between intuition and premonition... I'll think on it...

regards