0 views
Skip to first unread message

Srinivasa Rao Kankipati

unread,
May 23, 2017, 8:21:34 AM5/23/17
to vasa...@iupui.edu, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Mr Vasavada, I went through your reply to Mr Bob and find it very fresh and interesting. I like your bottom-up approach rather than the top-down one. But I would like to hear your own interpretation of what "consciousness' is. Then we can settle whether it is so universal as you hypothesise. According to our ordinary understanding of consciousness, matter is abundant in the universe, life is not so abundant but still plenty, and consciousness is a faculty available in living beings in a minuscule percentage and seems to be somewhat developed in humans. Matter is a necessary condition for life but not sufficient, and life is a necessary condition for consciousness  but not sufficient. For Vedantists to talk of universality of consciousness is a big flight of their own consciousness, but not true, I think.
- Dr K Srinivasa Rao, Hyderabad, camp Cupertino. 

Don Salmon

unread,
May 23, 2017, 8:57:12 AM5/23/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, vasa...@iupui.edu
Dr. Rao:  You may wish to look at Christof Koch's ideas on panpsychism (consciousness as universal, pervading the universe).  Whether or not you agree, at least now, with one of the world's leading scientists on board, one cannot dismiss outright the possibility of consciousness being, as Sri Aurobindo wrote, "the fundamental thing in the universe."


On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Srinivasa Rao Kankipati <ksra...@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Mr Vasavada, I went through your reply to Mr Bob and find it very fresh and interesting. I like your bottom-up approach rather than the top-down one. But I would like to hear your own interpretation of what "consciousness' is. Then we can settle whether it is so universal as you hypothesise. According to our ordinary understanding of consciousness, matter is abundant in the universe, life is not so abundant but still plenty, and consciousness is a faculty available in living beings in a minuscule percentage and seems to be somewhat developed in humans. Matter is a necessary condition for life but not sufficient, and life is a necessary condition for consciousness  but not sufficient. For Vedantists to talk of universality of consciousness is a big flight of their own consciousness, but not true, I think.
- Dr K Srinivasa Rao, Hyderabad, camp Cupertino. 

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAKx2H5U%2B%2Bg%2Bn8PxT5ei5qnJ%3D_AB7-v7mZP4HB6VOuzggWRaYeg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Srinivasa Rao Kankipati

unread,
May 24, 2017, 11:50:01 AM5/24/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Vasavada, Kashyap V
With due respect to Koch, I find it difficult to accept the universality of consciousness. A living brain is always anxious for information, it is gathering information all the time automatically by way of gossip or genuine knowledge. For this reason, we cannot conceive a  " universal anxiousness.". It is even more objectionable to impart consciousness to matter. Ever since God (or whoever it may be) created the universe, it is working itself out according to the laws, of which we have understood some and are on way to understanding some others and may never understand the rest of them. Simply because humans are more capable than other beings, how is it ipso facto to be taken for granted that he will know everything? It is nothing but sheer arrogance on the part of man to disregard his limitations. Still, with his superior powers, he may discover wonderful truths in times to come, as chapters in his book of history are not yet over, unless North Korea finishes off all humanity with its nuclear weapons soon. If dinosaurs could be extinct why not man? Any asteroid may strike the earth, or our own foolish warming of the globe may stuff out life. That is why our own President-Scientist Abdul Kalaam and the great astronomer Stephen Hawking have suggested that we should hurry up to shift to some other planet in good time.
When we go to bed switching on the AC, it keeps working even during our sleep. This does not mean that the AC has some consciousness. It only acts according to some laws. So even, the universe keeps working according to its own laws even when we are not looking at it. Millions of its parts obeying the laws without any deviation make us feel that some Universal Consciousness is guiding them constantly. I think God has gone to sleep after creating the universe and creating its rules. That's all.

On 23 May 2017 at 18:13, Don Salmon <donsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
Boxbe This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (donsa...@gmail.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

Dr. Rao:  You may wish to look at Christof Koch's ideas on panpsychism (consciousness as universal, pervading the universe).  Whether or not you agree, at least now, with one of the world's leading scientists on board, one cannot dismiss outright the possibility of consciousness being, as Sri Aurobindo wrote, "the fundamental thing in the universe."


On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Srinivasa Rao Kankipati <ksra...@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Mr Vasavada, I went through your reply to Mr Bob and find it very fresh and interesting. I like your bottom-up approach rather than the top-down one. But I would like to hear your own interpretation of what "consciousness' is. Then we can settle whether it is so universal as you hypothesise. According to our ordinary understanding of consciousness, matter is abundant in the universe, life is not so abundant but still plenty, and consciousness is a faculty available in living beings in a minuscule percentage and seems to be somewhat developed in humans. Matter is a necessary condition for life but not sufficient, and life is a necessary condition for consciousness  but not sufficient. For Vedantists to talk of universality of consciousness is a big flight of their own consciousness, but not true, I think.
- Dr K Srinivasa Rao, Hyderabad, camp Cupertino. 

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAOzTBUPmmH%3DBbc7UGWC0bN%2B_79wU6M8Xn0NG8aZaq3oB7cmJ1A%40mail.gmail.com.

priyedarshi jetli

unread,
May 24, 2017, 1:50:39 PM5/24/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Srinavasa,

What you say seems plausible. Knowing one's limitations is the key. In the history of philosophy we see this emphasized by Socrates, Plato and Kant among others. However, most of the discussion in this forum is about going beyond the limit of human knowledge and big claims are made about the existence of God and consciousness and their causal role. This is what Kant would call dielectic illusion, that is claims to knowledge of something that is beyond the abilities of humans to know. To justify such knowledge the only recourse is to appeal to some sort of divine interference. And it always amuses me how we know that God made humans superior so that only they can know this, yet every life form is necessary for the survival of the planet. In any case I see a paradox that even you might have to face. If you are going to claim that there is a God and this God is the final cause of everything or that there is a universal consciousness and it is supervenient over the physical, then how do we acquire knowledge of this since it is beyond the capacity of humans to know this as we hear repeatedly. 

Priyedarshi

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAOzTBUPmmH%3DBbc7UGWC0bN%2B_79wU6M8Xn0NG8aZaq3oB7cmJ1A%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAKx2H5W%2Bdr7BEjXj6tPbN_CUgebvdAZMYC2R4WEw%2BGYY7zZ3eQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Robert Boyer

unread,
May 24, 2017, 3:25:41 PM5/24/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
priyedarshi jetli,
Thanks again for the thoughtful reply. The key point in my comment was that how 'we acquire knowledge' and develop higher states of consciousness isn't 'beyond the capacity of humans to know. It is facilitated by natural effortless transcending of all levels of thinking, feeling, and intellectualizing by systematic means in Vedic Yoga that had been lost and not available. Being outside the range of individual experience in the ordinary waking state doesn't mean beyond the capacity of humans to know--the capacity is inherent in the human mind. We can discuss it more if you like. You might look at a recent paper in the open access ejournal by Boyer and Hensley, Meditation as Transcending All Thought, which goes into it more deeply. Thanks for the question, and for considering this reply.
RW (Bob) Boyer


From: priyedarshi jetli <pje...@gmail.com>
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga]


For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
 Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

C. S. Morrison

unread,
May 24, 2017, 3:40:18 PM5/24/17
to Srinivasa Rao Kankipati, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Vasavada, Kashyap V

Dear Rao

You said 'a living brain is always anxious for information, it is gathering information all the time automatically by way of gossip or genuine knowledge. For this reason, we cannot conceive a  " universal anxiousness".'

My confusion here  may be semantic but I have no problem conceiving of a universal anxiousness - the mental state of a universewide consciousness who is anxious for the universe to develop in a certain way (North Korea to dismantle its nuclear weapons, for example,  and other major aggressors to stop their evil terror campaigns).

On the contrary,  I find your claim that the brain is anxious for information objectionable except as a mere metaphor.  For me the brain is not a conscious thing in the sense that the universe is. It does of course contain a consciousness. In fact it may well contain more than one consciousness.  Judging from how little of the data present in the brain appears in our conscious experience, we cannot constitute much of our brain's activity, and the anxiousness you attribute to the brain is certainly not one  that we feel.  My theory of what consciousness is suggests that the brain doesn't have a consciousness other than the ones like us that in my theory arise at the highly localized level of the single cell.

Of course you may only be meaning that the brain has an evolved tendency to gather information.  Like every other functional aspect of the brain you will probably agree that this tendency is a product of natural selection fully formed from the properties and interactions of tiny particles.  Those of us who attribute consciousness to matter are merely applying the same logic. For our highly organised consciousness to be formed out of the properties of tiny particles, those particles must have properties that combine to form the qualia we experience - colours,  sounds,  feelings, etc. Since we cannot conceive of such qualia being formed out of anything but simpler instances of qualia, qualia must be fundamental - an aspect of matter whose effect has, I suspect, already been documented by physics.

If this means there really is an intelligent consciousness experiencing everything throughout the universe, as I suspect, I think it is unlikely that such a being would go to sleep after creating its laws. It would after all presumably have created these laws for a purpose and would not, I think, want to  miss finding out what they could produce. We should in fact rather expect it to participate in the universe's evolution (a claim that I think is supported by certain objective evidence).

Best wishes,
Colin

C.  S.  Morrison - Author of THE BLIND MINDMAKER: Explaining Consciousness without Magic or Misrepresentation.

https://www.amazon.com/Blind-Mindmaker-Explaining-Consciousness-Misrepresentation/dp/1541283953

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Blind-Mindmaker-Explaining-Consciousness-Misrepresentation/dp/1541283953

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

Oliver Manuel

unread,
May 24, 2017, 6:17:51 PM5/24/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Srinivasa Rao Kankipati, Vasavada, Kashyap V
Dear friends, 

Universal anxiety is driven by isolation from God/Reality/Truth

Please see Jon Rappoport's new discussion blog on the great vision and sad reality of technocracy:


Social anxiety and isolation from God were driven from a simple logical error in 1935 that   contradicted the earlier research findings by Prout (1815), Einstein (1905), Rutherford (1920) and Chadwick (1932):  The universe is composed of two forms of one fundamental particle:

1. The neutron: A compacted (e-, p+) pair

2. The H-atom: an expanded (e-, p+) pair


To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.

priyedarshi jetli

unread,
May 25, 2017, 4:32:21 AM5/25/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Robert,

Thanks for explaining. I will take a look at your work.

Priyedarshi

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 12:39 AM, 'Robert Boyer' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
priyedarshi jetli,
Thanks again for the thoughtful reply. The key point in my comment was that how 'we acquire knowledge' and develop higher states of consciousness isn't 'beyond the capacity of humans to know. It is facilitated by natural effortless transcending of all levels of thinking, feeling, and intellectualizing by systematic means in Vedic Yoga that had been lost and not available. Being outside the range of individual experience in the ordinary waking state doesn't mean beyond the capacity of humans to know--the capacity is inherent in the human mind. We can discuss it more if you like. You might look at a recent paper in the open access ejournal by Boyer and Hensley, Meditation as Transcending All Thought, which goes into it more deeply. Thanks for the question, and for considering this reply.
RW (Bob) Boyer


From: priyedarshi jetli <pje...@gmail.com>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/536100302.1340652.1495652966289%40mail.yahoo.com.

Bruno Marchal

unread,
May 25, 2017, 6:55:48 AM5/25/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Priyedarshi,

On 24 May 2017, at 19:41, priyedarshi jetli wrote:

Srinavasa,

What you say seems plausible. Knowing one's limitations is the key. In the history of philosophy we see this emphasized by Socrates, Plato and Kant among others. However, most of the discussion in this forum is about going beyond the limit of human knowledge and big claims are made about the existence of God and consciousness and their causal role. This is what Kant would call dielectic illusion, that is claims to knowledge of something that is beyond the abilities of humans to know. To justify such knowledge the only recourse is to appeal to some sort of divine interference.

Important remark. 




And it always amuses me how we know that God made humans superior so that only they can know this, yet every life form is necessary for the survival of the planet.

Or maybe God has not made the humans superior. Maybe all machine already "knows" that in some sense. May be God has only made the "universal machine" somehow superior ...

It is here that Gödel's theorem provides a formidable clue. For each machine there is an arithmetical proposition (Dt, no need to even know what it means just now) which is true, but beyond the machine's ability to prove. Penrose and Lucas used it to claim that we are superior to machine. 

But Penrose and Lucas did not see that the machine can prove its own incompleteness theorem. Peano Arithmetic can prove that If Dt is true, then Peano Arithmetic cannot prove Dt, and the machine can even postulate Dt to explain its inability to prove Dt.

Dt is ~[]f. It is the machine's self-consistency. A machine can prove that if she is self-consistent then she will never been able to prove its self-consistency.

Then, the machine can *bet* that the reason of why she cannot prove its self-consistency is the fact that she is self-consistent. This requires from the machine something akin to a reference to Truth, which plays the role of God (in this context). Note that tarski has proved that the machine cannot really define Truth.

There is something similar with (human) consciousness. If X is conscious, X can eventually understand that X is unable to prove his consciousness to another.


In any case I see a paradox that even you might have to face. If you are going to claim that there is a God and this God is the final cause of everything or that there is a universal consciousness and it is supervenient over the physical, then how do we acquire knowledge of this since it is beyond the capacity of humans to know this as we hear repeatedly. 


We can, by reason only, understand that there are truth which extends properly reason. Theology acquires a reasonable base. Something is beyond us. The question becomes if that something is a physical universe (impersonal god), or a personal god behind, or Consciousness, or the chinese Tao, or perhaps no more than the arithmetical truth.  A case for Arithmetical Truth playing the role of "God" can be made when we assume Mechanism. Please note that 99,9% of the Arithmetical Truth is well beyond the computable.

Scientific theology can become the scientific study of what extends properly science, and incompleteness illustrates that this has sense. 
Not all of theology can so reduced, though, but that very fact can also be proved (assuming mechanism), and can still let some places to many different religions, albeit consistent with arithmetic, and mechanism.

Bruno
 




To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Alex Hankey

unread,
May 25, 2017, 11:35:34 AM5/25/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Consciousness is NOT beyond one's ability to know. 
Advaita Vedanta sums it up perfectly, and in ways that can 
be put into strictly accurate physical terms. 
The nature of consciousness is to know itself (Adishankara) 
in a singularity (Abhivinagupta & Kashmiri Shaivism) 
This is the heart of the theory of 'Experience Information' 
derived from Complexity Biology. 
Best wishes to all, 
Alex 


Priyedarshi,


Priyedarshi

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0782855B-ED0C-4F6B-B5B3-B9A45A91A366%40ulb.ac.be.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Alex Hankey M.A. (Cantab.) PhD (M.I.T.)
Distinguished Professor of Yoga and Physical Science,
SVYASA, Eknath Bhavan, 19 Gavipuram Circle
Bangalore 560019, Karnataka, India 
Mobile (Intn'l): +44 7710 534195 
Mobile (India) +91 900 800 8789

priyedarshi jetli

unread,
May 25, 2017, 12:35:21 PM5/25/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Bruno,

Thanks for a detailed response. I like your turning on the head of Penrose's conclusion from incompleteness. Turing in his famous paper long time ago also encounter the incompleteness problem and simply said that computers in the future will be able to prove incompleteness. Though it will take me to understand you technically, you are essentially saying that. Now, if this is true, Turing's somewhat sarcastic remark is vindicated. He said, so what if one smart human (God) is smarter than all machines, but any machine is smarter than the average human. After all it took many millennia for Godel's incompleteness to emerge.  

I also think, as I mentioned to you earlier that the halting problem cannot be realized in humans due to mortality whereas it can be realized in machines as they can build other machines to carry on the problem. I do not know if this is related to what you are saying.

Of course we can go beyond our limitations to know. I was being a bit cryptic about the definitive jump to the conclusion of the existence of a God or cosmic consciousness that is often made here.

Coming back to machines, it is interesting that Descartes thought of non human animals as machines without a mind. Surely they have brains and they seem to operate on principles such as induction which humans also operate on. A lot of work is done today on their cognitive abilities. In the end, if I understand you correctly, it is not a matter of 'superiority' but of completeness. Perhaps human have more completeness than other non human animals because they can build formal systems and prove completeness. Yet, it is not easy for humans to prove incompleteness, which is a further stage of completeness. But machines can prove incompleteness and the human proof given by Godel is also really a machine proof. So, it is the machine in us, like the machine in non human animals that is the computational mind that can prove incompleteness. What you are saying, if I am not wrong, is that without mechanism, incompleteness would not emerge and without being able to formalize the Godel sentence and then prove it we would really have an incomplete view  of the universe. 

In any case there can be a turning on the head of Descartes as well because he thoughts machines to be inferior to humans and thereby non human animals who were machines to be inferior to humans. Whereas as it turns out that humans are superior to non human animals because they are superior machines than non human animals and the machines built by humans is even more superior to the machine in humans and the machine of the universe of course is the most superior. 

I like that because as a student of philosophy I have always felt that Descartes is overrated as the founder of Modern philosophy. In terms of methodology Galileo was more of a founder of Modern philosophy and he was also closer to mechanism. 

That the universe is a machine and that our brains/minds are also machines is a match, as Leibniz would perhaps say, that is not surprising at all. It is not at all a matter of which came first or a final cause but of a simultaneity in which the perfection  (completeness including incompleteness) emerges.

Sorry, I went into a stream of consciousness but it was spurned by your insights.

Priyedarshi



Still trying to understand your conception of theology, but find it interesting.

 

Priyedarshi,


Priyedarshi

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0782855B-ED0C-4F6B-B5B3-B9A45A91A366%40ulb.ac.be.

Bruno Marchal

unread,
May 26, 2017, 5:04:00 AM5/26/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Priyedarshi,




Thanks for a detailed response. I like your turning on the head of Penrose's conclusion from incompleteness.

Thank you.

Emil Post anticipated all this in 1922. He found "Church's thesis", the proof of incompleteness from it (still rather unknown, one day I can give it here, because it is not that difficult, compared to Gödel's proof without it), but he found also the argument against Mechanism (like Lucas and Penrose), and then the main error in that argument, and then he found immateriality (my work) but added that he changes his mind on this after discussing with Turing, who was a Naturalist (and I think was wrong).



Turing in his famous paper long time ago also encounter the incompleteness problem and simply said that computers in the future will be able to prove incompleteness. Though it will take me to understand you technically, you are essentially saying that.

I am not sure Turing talk about incompleteness in the Gödel sense. I would be astonished that Turing did not see this. The idea that the machines or theories, rich enough, can prove the incompleteness appears already at the end of Gödel 1931 paper, without proof, but that will be accepted quickly, even if not really understood (Gödel will miss Church's thesis, and Mechanism). That will be proved in 1939 by Hilbert and Bernays (and perfectionned by Löb in 1955).




Now, if this is true, Turing's somewhat sarcastic remark is vindicated.

OK. But by adding the mechanist hypothesis. Turing, unlike Gödel, was rather in favor of mechanism, despite his naturalism. He did not see the incompatibilty between Mechanism and (metaphysical) Naturalism (assuming my own argument is correct).



He said, so what if one smart human (God) is smarter than all machines, but any machine is smarter than the average human. After all it took many millennia for Godel's incompleteness to emerge.  

Someday, I will give a "simple" proof of incompleteness, which is still rather unknown, although Post saw it in 1922 (ten years before Gödel!). Incompleteness can be proved in one diagonalization from Church thesis. Kleene also saw this.



I also think, as I mentioned to you earlier that the halting problem cannot be realized in humans due to mortality

Assuming the human mortality.



whereas it can be realized in machines as they can build other machines to carry on the problem.

Is this not what we do with our kids? Or even with the machines?

Is nhe distinction between natural and artificial ... artificial?



I do not know if this is related to what you are saying.

Of course we can go beyond our limitations to know. I was being a bit cryptic about the definitive jump to the conclusion of the existence of a God or cosmic consciousness that is often made here.

I use the word "God" in the general sense of whatever is the reason of our existence. Then the question becomes: is God a physical universe, or a universal person, or the arithmetical reality, or ...

I have a high respect for all sacred texts, but avoid any literal interpretations. I use them for inspirational personal insight only. I have my favorite one, like "the question of King Milinda", but I do think "Alice in Wonderland" is very deep too.

We can't prove the existence of God, but we can't prove the existence of any reality, in the admittedly string sense of "proof" the logician are accustomed with.





Coming back to machines, it is interesting that Descartes thought of non human animals as machines without a mind.

I think that the idea that animals have a mind is recent, at least in occident. I take as a human mind progress to recognize a mind, paerhaps a soul, to animals. In the east, people have been more open, perhaps thanks to the re-incarnation theory.




Surely they have brains and they seem to operate on principles such as induction which humans also operate on.

Indeed.



A lot of work is done today on their cognitive abilities. In the end, if I understand you correctly, it is not a matter of 'superiority' but of completeness. Perhaps human have more completeness than other non human animals because they can build formal systems and prove completeness.

I am not sure. Animal might be more complete than us. Completeness is a sort of defect. A complete theory cannot be Turing complete. OK, I see the problem.

A complete-with-respect-proving-or-knowing theory cannot be complete-with-respect-to-computability. Turing (computability) completeness entails Gödel (provability) incompleteness. 

So provability incompleteness is a sort of quality, as it makes possible Turing (computability) completeness. It is a pedagogical problem: completeness is udes in different sense by logicians, which are sometimes opposite. We will have opportunities to come back on this.




Yet, it is not easy for humans to prove incompleteness, which is a further stage of completeness.

In some sense; yes.



But machines can prove incompleteness and the human proof given by Godel is also really a machine proof. So, it is the machine in us, like the machine in non human animals that is the computational mind that can prove incompleteness. What you are saying, if I am not wrong, is that without mechanism, incompleteness would not emerge and without being able to formalize the Godel sentence and then prove it we would really have an incomplete view  of the universe. 

OK.




In any case there can be a turning on the head of Descartes as well because he thoughts machines to be inferior to humans and thereby non human animals who were machines to be inferior to humans. Whereas as it turns out that humans are superior to non human animals because they are superior machines than non human animals and the machines built by humans is even more superior to the machine in humans and the machine of the universe of course is the most superior. 

You can see it that way.



I like that because as a student of philosophy I have always felt that Descartes is overrated as the founder of Modern philosophy. In terms of methodology Galileo was more of a founder of Modern philosophy and he was also closer to mechanism. 

I like Galileo, but I have a deep respect for Descartes. We need to read him by taking into account he was harassed by the religious authorities, and so said things just to appease him. I don't really believe he took seriously his dualism. It is debatable of course. 




That the universe is a machine and that our brains/minds are also machines is a match, as Leibniz would perhaps say, that is not surprising at all. It is not at all a matter of which came first or a final cause but of a simultaneity in which the perfection  (completeness including incompleteness) emerges.

Maybe, except I don't think that the physical universe, nor God, can be a machine. I will explain later.




Sorry, I went into a stream of consciousness but it was spurned by your insights.

Thank you for your comment. I would like to add many precisions, but unfortunately I have to go, and the next days are overscheduled. Let us go slowly, at ease. I reassured you that I got the mails normally now. Don't worry if I don't answer quickly, because I will be superbusy those last days of May, and then I will have the June exams, etc. 

Kindest regards,

Bruno




To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

priyedarshi jetli

unread,
May 26, 2017, 5:54:26 AM5/26/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Bruno,

I also have great respect for Descartes, especially as a mathematician. I am more worried about the press he gets as the founder of Modern philosophy that I am precarious about. In one way he was a continuation of medieval philosophy and his method of doubt can also be traced back as far as Augustine. Leibniz was a greater philosopher and a more comprehensive mind. 

I guess I tend to be a naturalist as well, but I am beginning to see your perspective of on what criterion do we distinguish the natural from the artificial. I believe Turing was interested in biology and chemistry, perhaps this is why he was a naturalist.

Priyedarshi

Priyedarshi,


Priyedarshi,


--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ABB21910-B0D0-4C83-A789-F6B958A36844%40ulb.ac.be.

Srinivasa Rao Kankipati

unread,
Jun 7, 2017, 5:32:10 AM6/7/17
to Oliver Manuel, sadhak_insight, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Vasavada, Kashyap V
"... the brain is not a conscious thing in the sense that the universe is". I do not know in what sense the universe is conscious. First one has to define one's terms before embarking on a short or prolonged narration.
For me consciousness is a faculty of the brain of a living being called human being. Other living beings also may be having consciousness to a lesser or greater degree, but so far as we know, not to the same extent as the wonderful and awesome species called humans. It is our faculty of consciousness that even makes us feel that consciousness is universal. To me , the statement that consciousness pervades the universe does not mean anything. It is a mere play on words, made possible by the imagination of man, at whose base lies his own faculty of consciousness.
And then investing a so-called God with a universal consciousness is a travesty of words. I do not know whether the originator of all laws governing the universe is God or not, but I am convinced that the universe runs according to laws  and laws only. God, if He is there, does not act like an interventionist God. He simply lets the universe run. If tomorrow the earth is eradicated by North Korean bombs and man is wiped out, God will  be least bothered about it. If man goes on with his reckless misuse of natural resources and makes the globe too hot to be habitable, then no God or universal consciousness will come to our rescue. Until then, of course, we can keep discussing profitless such as whether consciousness is universal or not, without any discussant caring to define what universal consciousness is.

On 25 May 2017 at 01:41, Oliver Manuel <omat...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear friends, 

Universal anxiety is driven by isolation from God/Reality/Truth

Please see Jon Rappoport's new discussion blog on the great vision and sad reality of technocracy:


Social anxiety and isolation from God were driven from a simple logical error in 1935 that   contradicted the earlier research findings by Prout (1815), Einstein (1905), Rutherford (1920) and Chadwick (1932):  The universe is composed of two forms of one fundamental particle:

1. The neutron: A compacted (e-, p+) pair

2. The H-atom: an expanded (e-, p+) pair


On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 2:39 PM C. S. Morrison <cs...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.

Paul Werbos

unread,
Jun 7, 2017, 9:26:27 AM6/7/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Srinivasa Rao Kankipati, Vasavada, Kashyap V
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 3:34 PM, C. S. Morrison <cs...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

Dear Rao

You said 'a living brain is always anxious for information, it is gathering information all the time automatically by way of gossip or genuine knowledge. For this reason, we cannot conceive a  " universal anxiousness".'


Wow!

And then I see  a third message next to the other two in my inbox, which certainly fits my reaction to the other two.

Previously, I mentioned the difference between our local noosphere -- which is the site of the vast bulk of our spiritual travels, and which appears near-infinite to us small beings -- versus the greater cosmos as a whole.

"Universal anxiousness" within our own pseudo-universe, the earth, is certainly part of the real deep story now, as we have good reasons for anxiety in the face of abuse of technology by short-sighted people. We have reason to be concerned about survival of all mammals on the earth due to simple realities of climate change, as summarized in a brief blog post:


and other issues:


If we are conscious enough, we can survive the challenges, with a little help from our friends. If not, we may become like children who have become overstimulated, who need to be forcefully sent to bed to recover and reincarnate. I do hope for the former, and will try to help as best I can,
even though I am just a retired old guy with no power left but what resides in my mind.

Best of luck,

     Paul  



 
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages