Yes, I am postulating that. The human central nervous system, which creates the human consciousness, does indeed act in a way that other energy does not. It is a phenomenon observably unique to the human CNS.There is absolutely no reason to think that there is not some form of fundamental awareness at that level. In fact, if you do not, you are postulating that human consciousness acts in a way that no other form of energy in the universe acts.
So you retract the claim that energy is aware?No. I am energy that reacts to other energy. From this, I do not have any reason to believe that other energy is magically non-conscious.Here, you base your assertion that energy is conscious on two premises:
1. Energy is aware of energy, and
2. Energy reacts to energy.
Of course you have reason: the human brain is observably conscious. A rock is observably not conscious. The observations are probably correct. In addition, there is zero evidence of conscious on a quantum level. There the evidence shows that consciousness is contingent on the existence of nervous system, not merely on the fact that brains are made of energy.
Yet you insist on ignoring empirical evidence to avoid the burden of proof.
Consider the following syllogism:
1. Some energy is brains, and
2. Some brains have consciousness, therefore
2. All energy has consciousness.
Do you think that #3 follows from #1 and #2?
Yes, it's quite simple: quantum field theory does not stipulate that subatomic particles - or any quanta of energy - have consciousness. Just like it doesn't stipulate the existence of any number of religious fantasies. The absence of any stipulation of consciousness at the subatomic level in the literature on quantum field theory is the evidence.Umm, you're the one claiming that QFT shows that there is no consciousness at the quantum level. Do you have any proof your claim about QFT? If not, I'd say the BoP is on the side of those who claim QFTs indicate lack of consciousness on the quantum level.The onus on on you to explain how QFT is deficient and why our understanding of nature must include the claim that subatomic particles are conscious.
The majority of human cognition is unconscious: the processes you describe here are actually quite normal. The fact that you think a deity is responsible for these processes is nothing more than incredulity at what the human brain does.Maybe. I've seen "A Beautiful Mind" and read about various mental phenomena, and it could be something along those lines. Things I notice during the day pop up later on in television shows I'm watching, or someone will mention them here, or in a conversation somewhere else.It is also possible that you are the victim of any number of human faults of perception, just like all many other people who claim to have personal experiences with god. And such a hypothesis does not require the existence of a subatomic hive mind or any other hypothetical deity.
....
The special treatment you perceive is probably just in your imagination.
I've thought of someone while on a run, and they call the house the next day. Stuff like that seems to happen a bit.
Like I noticed the Catholic Church of St. Anthony of Padua while on a bike ride the other day and thought the name Padua was funny, and then watched the show Constantine that night, and "John (Constantine) digs around in his man-purse, pulling out interesting objects like the nails of St. Padua, trying to find something to use to break into the morgue."
So, maybe my brain re-wrote history, and presented things in a way that I feel connected.
Or, perhaps, there are many of trains of thought occurring in my brain, and I am not aware of the majority of them, and my consciousness is only made aware of the trains of thought when my brain reorders them to make me feel connected to the world. However, this would require that my brain consistently reorders events that have date stamps on them (conversations here on the message board), which would mean that I see a different date stamp on conversations than those around me.
I've had conversations with friends about stuff occurring, and they've confirmed the things that I've talked about. There are lots of coincidences that occur externally- but it could all be a trick. It could be the way my brain connects information, or it could be individuals (here, and friends) exploiting the way my brain connects information, or it could be a combination of the 2. It might even be that a majority of people are not aware of the duplicitous side of their brain, and the duplicitous side can filter events in such a way that we sometimes communicate with the duplicitous side of another person's brain, and sometimes we do not.
So the duplicitous side of your brain could now be engaging in this conversation with me, and be aware of various things that the duplicitous side of my brain has already communicated to you somehow without my awareness. In fact, I would never be able to absolutely circumvent the duplicitous side of my brain, as long as other individuals are all trapped by the duplicitous sides of their brain as well. So...
Any way things are occurring, there is a simple fact: I should not harm others, I should benefit others, and we should help one another.
I don't know what formed spacetime. Neither do the scientists who do this for a living. At most they have hypotheses. Yet you are able to state your claim as fact. It is also absurd to state that the expansion of spacetime is energy creating spacetime, and it does not sense to say that the influence of energy of spacetime means that energy 'formed' spacetime, i.e. a causal link.What do you think creates spacetime and forms it? Seriously? I'm curious. Large amounts of energy deform spacetime, and are causing the expansion of spacetime. You know- there is more spacetime the longer energy creates spacetime. Unless the whole expansion thing is bullshit.Energy formed spacetime?
Stating that 'matter is one form of energy' is not contradictory to 'matter is not interchangeable with energy'. This should be obvious, just as 'dog' is not interchangeable with 'Kelpie', as 'Kelpie' does not include dogs that are not Kelpies.Apparently your post was too long for you to not contradict yourself. From a bit earlier:Previously you claimed that subatomic particles were conscious; you even specifically mentioned quarks. Now you say that 'energy' is conscious. You do realise that the two concepts are not interchangeable?
perhaps matter which is just one form of energy.
Last edited: