George F. R. Ellis - What Exists?

[@soubhikmukherjee6871]

Listening to George is always a huge pleasure.

[@trojanhorse860]

There is no outside or inside, no inner or outer, no subjective or objective, from our human perspective at least. They are connected with each other. Quantum physics showed that, i suppose. The moment we observe reality, we change it. We have a distorted sense of reality. *We do not see reality as it is, for* *example.* So, realism or that we can *access* reality or objective reality thats allegedly independent of the observer is a myth (Kant was right indeed. We cannot access the ultimate nature of reality that will always escape us, simply because our consciousness distorts it. There is an objective reality out there alright, but its not physical & it is beyond our reach. Watch *Do we see reality as it is?* Donald Hoffman ted talk on the subject. It is very interesting, even though i do not agree with his prescriptive interpretations of the situation, let alone wih his false hope that maths can help us some day to "penetrate" reality somehow.... The latter is bullocks. Even maths is limited & flawed...

[@soubhikmukherjee6871]

@@trojanhorse860 What about non-duality brother? Isn't everything one unified infinite consciousness?

[@trojanhorse860]

@@soubhikmukherjee6871Definition of non-duality first: Quote: "Non-duality is the recognition that underlying the multiplicity and diversity of experience there is a single, infinite and indivisible reality, whose nature is pure consciousness, from which all objects and selves derive their apparently independent existence...." end quote. God is that pure Consciousness, the one & only real existence & Self.... the rest, including ourselves, has no independent existence. Otherwise, we w'd be "gods". Thats the lethal thought error of atheists, when they assume they have independent existences, thats why they keep on embarrassing themselves all the time with their stupid arrogant slogans such as *science turns us into* *gods before deserving to be humans...* & a lots of pretentious ignorant "scientific " stuff like that. We're not gods obviously. We're just mortals, just spiritual beings trapped in physical bodies living in our minds constructs in a reality that escape us. Transcending the false sense of separate self or ego enables us to take a glimpse of reality now & then. Forget then about philo or materialist science in that regard, (...that has been accomplishing huge things at the material technological level only, which hardly ca mean anything for our spiritual nature & i am a fan of true science. See *The manifesto for a* *post-materialist science* online), 'cause they not only wont lead you nowhere serious, they w'd only prevent you from facing reality, literally & metaphorically, thanks to the fact they operate through the deceptive senses to the brain which is just a transceiver (transmitter-receiver) of consciousness, the mind.... The brain through the senses is per definition limiting. *The materialist naturalist nature of science & modern philo is an extra-handicap or hinderance that w'd only prevent u from accessing higher dimensions through higher states of consciousness beyond the sensory perceptual form of consciousness. Worse, the latter is even the lowest form of consciousness, the lowest form of rationality. Imagine what man can truly know & do, if only man can develop higher forms of rationality through higher forms of consciousness, that w'd be guided by experiential ethical spiritual experiences & hence a higher form of the scientific method. In short, the irritatingly arrogant supremacist materialist west (its a fact, not an insult or a judgement of value, or it is rather a value-fact, which proves that Hume's unjustified; unsound & baseless separation between fact & value or is & ought is a myth) has been taking the lowest form of consciousness & rationality, the most inferior ones, ironically enough (what a joke for a supposedly master race lol that we saw on display lately. Read Ukraine & racism.) , the sensory perceptual ones, the "superior" west has been taking thus the lowest form of consciousness & rationality as the one & only gateways to the ultimate nature of reality lol What a tragic-hilarious human comedy.....or unparalleled joke ever 🤣

[@ili626]

We investigated this question a lot in a Buddhist Studies graduate level discussion decades ago, and none of those scholars would agree with RLK’s first assumption in this video, that “..the bench exists, the tree exists..”, except in the most conventional sense. Ultimate existence is another thing entirely These scholars were quite impressive. They all knew about five languages, including Sankrit, and a few were interpreters for the Dali Lama. A few also had scientific and mathematical degrees. I was merely a curious undergrad, quite happy to simply listen.

[@charlesmadison1384]

"There is nothing either good nor bad but thinking makes it so." ~ Shakespeare

[@trojanhorse860]

Is the war on Ukraine neither good nor bad, but our thinking makes it good or bad? Wtf are u talking about? Amorality is that like western civilization is, when modernity separated ethics from the rest, like ethics from politics (Machiavelli), fact from value ( Hume), ethics from economics and so on... Even the concept of truth has been instrumentalized like in pragmatism that says that that what works for you is true, what makes you happy is true.... That kind of thinking is what brought us here through so many big & small wars, cold war, genocides, holocaust...

[@thomasashley-smith245]

@@trojanhorse860 I think you are missing the point and then you just heap on a load of word soup. Dr Ellis basically makes a personal stand on morality that is not governed by his probability based deductions - that is to say that the possibility of having a morality based thought is fundamentally built into the universe, therefore could occur in any version of this or other universe. Whether an individual act or thought is fundamentally good or bad cannot be measured by any metric and philosophical debate continues as to whether it therefore is fundamental at all. Dr Ellis says the holocaust for him is fundamentally bad and few would disagree that it was bad… but is that fundamental or relative? Can you measure it’s “badness” and can you mathematically predict the full scale of bad/good. I don’t think so. Theists believe that the bad/good scale is fundamental through the word of a god generally published in which ever religious text you prefer however modern society does not follow these texts to the letter as to do so would be abhorrent, stoning/dismembering/slavery etc… My view is good/bad is an emergent property of our biological development - to put another way, if we had no general built in view of good or bad we would not have survived this long. Therefore to have a good/bad moral compass that is what we know today is simply a construct of our biological development as a species. But that does not preclude us from divergence on agreeing what is good or bad, and we thrive or die bumping around inside the spectrum. When we make “good” decisions we thrive as a species, when we make “bad” ones we regress…see any genocide in history to see the loss of thinking and / culture and diversity.

[@trojanhorse860]

@@thomasashley-smith245 "...... Evidently destructive and prone to serious error and endemic uncertainty, modern rationality can hardly be deemed the quiddity of humanity, as the moderns have come to believe. The essence of humanity and that which separates humans from animals are rather the attribute of ethics (al-akhlāqiyya), a quality from which all characteristics of the humans qua humans, including rationality, derive . It is ethics, not rationality, that distinguishes the human from the animal, for the latter does enjoy a rational faculty, however inferior it is to man’s. It follows then, Taha tells us, that there are two major types of rationality, one devoid of ethical content, and thus shared by man and animal, and another that is guided (musaddad) by ethics and is uniquely characteristic of humans, making them what they are. Yet the modernists reject such a division, insisting on denuded reason as the form that drives modern thinking about the world. A survey of modernity’s schools of ethics (Intuitionism, Naturalism, Absolutism, Relativism, and so on) reveals what Taha calls “intellectual chaos” (fawḍā fikriyya) that has plagued Western moral philosophy. Each school claims to have arrived at its ethical doctrine exclusively through rational methods, but this very multiplicity of claims to rationality is the most evincive demonstration of their incoherence. The incoherence stems from the fact that, as products of the same modern place and time, these schools with their diverse doctrines not only cannot all be true individually; they must stand in their totality as a mass of contradictions. Yet, contradiction and incoherence are, by virtue of these modernists’ own acknowledgment and insistence, the very stuff of irrationality. In order to escape this dilemma, they must each, in turn, admit that their form of rationality is merely one of many, and that these rationalities are by no means exhaustive, leaving the distinct possibility that there are other ways of rationalizing the world that they have not considered....." Source: Excerpt from *Reforming* *Modernity.....* by *Wael Hallaq*

[@thomasashley-smith245]

@@trojanhorse860 I don’t see what point you are making here, you just copy pasted some one else’s thoughts on what sets apart man from animal. We are talking about humans here specifically and our own construct of good vs bad and whether that is a fundamental element of the universe or an emergent property. My point is that it is the latter and a product of our biological journey and survival. I have no idea what you are asserting - if anything.

[@trojanhorse860]

@@thomasashley-smith245 Then you should reread that piece carefully, or i'll just sum it up for you, as follows: Apart from the fact that man is *NO* "rational animal", & that there are higher forms of rationality than the *amoral* denuded one, & which go hand in hand with ethics...long story... apart from that: *All characteristics of man derive from* *ethics, including rationality.* In other words: *The essence of man is ethics, not* *rationality, from which the latter* *derives.* Ethics/morality is thus the fundamental innate essence of man & the universe, no evolutionary emergent property like you claimed it to be. Since you talked about emergent properties, i am gonna say the following about it: I do not see how any qualitative feature, property...can arise from quantitative physics & chemistry anyway (like ethics or morality as allegedly being emergent evolutionary survival strategies or properties, a very dangerous & nihillistic baseless conception, or consciousness from the brain...), unless through some still unexplainable sort of materialist "magic" like so-called evolution itself seems to be & for which there is no evidence at all. Even the long-term Lenski's "evolution" experiment with bacteria is no evidence for the evolutionary fairy tales, but for adaptation within species. To come back to ethics/morality, *we* *are thus fundamentally ethical beings,* *& without ethics we are/worth nothing,* ( *"I think, therefore i am"* should be replaced thus with *"I am good, therefore i am"* ), & since modernity has unjustifiably, unsoundly & irrationally separated between ethics & the rest, well then modernity is not worth much & must be either reformed ( *ethicized* ) or surpassed.

[@TheTroofSayer]

I like Ellis's idea of possibility space. It fits with my own interpretation of "infinite possibility". Possibility space (infinite possibility), begins with the quantum void and the yearning for "somethingness" to precipitate from "nothingness". Virtual particles, and all that. And what defines possibility space (and its constraints)? The mind-body does. Which brings us back to the mind-body problem, which should be central to the consciousness debate.

[@trojanhorse860]

God is the one & only who exists really. We are a bit like some kind of avatars. We have no independent existence of "our own". We do not exist without God's sustenance...thats why the false sense of separate self or ego is an illusion the transcendence of which bring us in contact with pure awareness or with the divine within...I dont know....

[@KevinZimmerman360]

With the little bit of discussion presented here, I don't think of "possibility spaces" as having much value. When he brought up ethics as existing in the possibility space, I think Kuhn was right to counter that everything exists in that possibility space. Someone can think of amoral thoughts, or pragmatic thoughts, or thoughts which are specifically manifested to further beauty of some kind. It felt he focused on "ethics" probably for some personal, subjective reason, when in reality the way that he had described possibility space it would allow for everything to be possible and thereby make nothing particularly noteworthy.

[@edit4310]

Agreed, right with you.

[@davidwatermeyer5421]

In reponse I would say what Ellis say adds value. What you say adds no value whatsoever and merely appears as an attempt to sound clever. Ellis isn't the slightest bit interested in sounding clever. Everything he says and does is dedicated to truth and the enhancement of value. So bored with pretentiousness.

[@sethball1319]

@@davidwatermeyer5421 Agreed, right with you.

[@ban_gali]

Only CONSCIOUSNESS exists nothing else exist. Brahma Satya Jagat Mithya, Jivo Brahmaiva Naparah 🌸

[@PaulHoward108]

Consciousness would be inactive without also having ideas and desires. In sat-cit-ānanda, consciousness is sat, ideas are cit, and desires are ānanda.

[@kos-mos1127]

That is wrong in all kinds of ways. That is like saying only matter exists and nothing else. That can never be verified but it can be said we only find matter and different forms of matter. That is a philosophical statement not a factual statement. Consciousness is not the only thing that exists because consciousness is subjective.

[@srikanthtupurani6316]

@@PaulHoward108 I think there are some things which human beings cannot understand. Human beings cannot see intricate things. We can only see some wave lengths of the electromagnetic waves. We cannot understand things like consciousness.

[@ban_gali]

@@PaulHoward108 chit itself is CONSCIOUSNESS, and idea is limited to brain matter, maybe you can quote yourself to show that chit means idea, because as far as my own self-enquiry and teachings have shown that idea is also a "thing" an object of knowledge thus it is not Brahman, thank you sir, hoping to see a more relevant reply

[@srikanthtupurani6316]

@@PaulHoward108 sometimes I feel we are a simulation of higher beings.i have seen such unusual things. It appear like someone is using a remote control and controlling us. if i talk about those unusual coincidences that happened in my life most of the materialists say it just some coincidence. These things are so strange and they need some explanation. Are we controlled by some higher beings using a remote control.

[@ezthatsme5813]

What exists, is unlimited possibilities collapsing into a finite reality.

[@yinYangMountain]

In my opinion, here is the basic answer: At the highest and widest level of reality there is… 1. A bedrock foundation which, at minimum, won’t allow a paradox (logical contradictions). 2. A bedrock foundation which (if we could understand it) allows for the whole of reality and not any other. 3. Given conditions understood in the same way and in the same sense, it seems there must be an explanation as to why things happen the way they do/did as opposed to another. If, for the sake of argument, we grant 1., 2. and 3., it seems these rules (for lack of a better term) are eternal and why there is something rather than an absolute nothing. So, for example, without 1., 2. and 3., and in light of an absolute nothing where a paradox is allowed, there would be no reasons for anything. This ‘no reason’ hypothesis leads to an overflow of paradoxes and a reality based upon reductio ad absurdum. Based upon the above, in the end it may be the case where the existence of ‘something’ as opposed to ‘nothing whatsoever’ must be the case.

[@jasonemryss]

There's something!! 🤔

[@suatustel746]

I'm quite satisfy late philosopher Derek parfait explanation I. E. 'why there's something rather than nothing' also Heidegger delved into this dilemma.

[@suatustel746]

I'll not be stutter if intelligence spreads into non biological forms!!!

[@yinYangMountain]

@@suatustel746 What is that explanation? The question of ‘Why is there something rather than nothing?’ gets too convoluted. In my opinion, if we don’t have an explanation (an argument, as it were) as to what caused / causes reality to be one way and not another (why it went left and not right, say), we don’t have an explanation. Simply put: There is a ‘reason’ why there ‘is’ something. This reason is, itself, something-although possibly metaphysical to some degree. There is a ‘bedrock’ which must eternally exist (although it does not follow this is a thinking being). It seems (to avoid overflowing paradoxes-which is a reductio possibility) there cannot be a pure ‘absence of all things.’

[@suatustel746]

@@yinYangMountain reality is better to be some way, reality this way, l recommend take a look at Derek parfait rendition, it's to long sum up here...

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

Anything that resides on the opposite side of absolute nothingness, "exists" in some context or another.

[@trojanhorse860]

Gibberish. Meaning? Non-sense....

[@martinaee]

Really, the fundamental, ultimate mystery -- the only thing you need to know to understand the deepest metaphysical secrets -- is this: that for every outside there is an inside and for every inside there is an outside, and although they are different, they go together. - Alan Watts

[@trojanhorse860]

There is no outside or inside, no inner or outer, no subjective or objective, from our human perspective at least. They are connected with each other. Quantum physics showed that, i suppose. The moment we observe reality, we change it. We have a distorted sense of reality. *We do not see reality as it is, for* *example.* So, realism or that we can *access* reality or objective reality thats allegedly independent of the observer is a myth (Kant was right indeed. We cannot access the ultimate nature of reality that will always escape us, simply because our consciousness distorts it. There is an objective reality out there alright, but its not physical & it is beyond our reach. Watch *Do we see reality as it is?* Donald Hoffman ted talk on the subject. It is very interesting, even though i do not agree with his prescriptive interpretations of the situation, let alone wih his false hope that maths can help us some day to "penetrate" reality somehow.... The latter is bullocks. Even maths is limited & flawed...

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

​@@trojanhorse860 *"...There is no outside or inside, no inner or outer, no subjective or objective, from our human perspective at least...."* Well, from the "human perspective," if a lucid dreamer, for example, were to create a tropical island paradise out of her (or his) inner dream substances, it would be impossible for that dreamer to take a palm frond from one of the island's palm trees and present it in the outer dimension of the universe in such a way that would allow the rest of us to see it and take a swat at it, or use it to sweep our porch. Likewise, she (the lucid dreamer) would not be able to take an actual palm frond from a beach in Hawaii and insert it into her dream. So, clearly, there is indeed an inside and an outside when it comes to the autonomy of our minds relative to the universe (and to each other). *"...We do not see reality as it is, for example......Kant was right..."* Agreed. We cannot observe Kant's "noumenon" or the "thing-in-itself" (i.e., reality as it "really is" prior to observation). *"...So, realism or that we can access reality or objective reality thats allegedly independent of the observer is a myth..."* The phenomenal features of the universe may not exist in any positionally-fixed (3-D) form independent of our observations (as per the "consciousness causes the collapse of the wavefunction" hypothesis). However, the fact that we can never literally observe what exists within the interior of another person's mind, needs to be factored into your reasoning, for it is certainly not a myth. _______

[@trojanhorse860]

@@TheUltimateSeeds By there is no inner or outer, no objective or subjective....i meant that we see the outer & inner worlds through our same consciousness & minds that distort what they shed "light on." In other words, we see the outer world through our inner word & senses....or as Nietzsche said: *However far human beings may reach* *with their knowledge, however* *objective they may seem to* *themselves to be: in the end they carry* *away nothing but their own* *biography.* And hence, there is no separation between the inner & outer worlds as even quantum physics has shown. Thats why we cannot access objevtive reality, for example, or the ultimate nature of reality...

[@bluelotus542]

The gross and subtle, or abstract, material elements constantly manifest and do not manifest under the sway of time, but they both exist eternally on the potential level. Beyond these manifest and non-manifest material energies there's the eternally manifest spiritual energy.

[@trojanhorse860]

What are you talking about? Say it in English Lol Definition of non-duality first: Quote: "Non-duality is the recognition that underlying the multiplicity and diversity of experience there is a single, infinite and indivisible reality, whose nature is pure consciousness, from which all objects and selves derive their apparently independent existence...." end quote. God is that pure Consciousness, the one & only real existence & Self.... the rest, including ourselves, has no independent existence. Otherwise, we w'd be "gods". Thats the lethal thought error of atheists, when they assume they have independent existences, thats why they keep on embarrassing themselves all the time with their stupid arrogant slogans such as *science turns us into* *gods before deserving to be humans...* & a lots of pretentious ignorant "scientific " stuff like that. We're not gods obviously. We're just mortals, just spiritual beings trapped in physical bodies living in our minds constructs in a reality that escape us. Transcending the false sense of separate self or ego enables us to take a glimpse of reality now & then. Forget then about philo or materialist science in that regard, (...that has been accomplishing huge things at the material technological level only, which hardly ca mean anything for our spiritual nature & i am a fan of true science. See *The manifesto for a* *post-materialist science* online), 'cause they not only wont lead you nowhere serious, they w'd only prevent you from facing reality, literally & metaphorically, thanks to the fact they operate through the deceptive senses to the brain which is just a transceiver (transmitter-receiver) of consciousness, the mind.... The brain through the senses is per definition limiting. *The materialist naturalist nature of science & modern philo is an extra-handicap or hinderance that w'd only prevent u from accessing higher dimensions through higher states of consciousness beyond the sensory perceptual form of consciousness. Worse, the latter is even the lowest form of consciousness, the lowest form of rationality. Imagine what man can truly know & do, if only man can develop higher forms of rationality through higher forms of consciousness, that w'd be guided by experiential ethical spiritual experiences & hence a higher form of the scientific method. In short, the irritatingly arrogant supremacist materialist west (its a fact, not an insult or a judgement of value, or it is rather a value-fact, which proves that Hume's unjustified; unsound & baseless separation between fact & value or is & ought is a myth) has been taking the lowest form of consciousness & rationality, the most inferior ones, ironically enough (what a joke for a supposedly master race lol that we saw on display lately. Read Ukraine & racism.) , the sensory perceptual ones, the "superior" west has been taking thus the lowest form of consciousness & rationality as the one & only gateways to the ultimate nature of reality lol What a tragic-hilarious human comedy.....or unparalleled joke ever 🤣

[@markfischer3626]

The only thing we think we know for sure exists are questions. Just questions, no answers. Will we ever find out anything else? That's just another question with no answer.

[@elir7184]

Pretty profound. Lol But experience exists, unless you deny that you are experiencing.

[@markfischer3626]

@@elir7184 Am I? That's another question with no answer. The existentialist would say the only thing that exists is what's in my mind. Is he right? Another question with no answer.

[@elir7184]

I'm experiencing. I don't know what you're doing. Or do I?

[@markfischer3626]

@@elir7184 Questions, questions, questions. Trolls just want to have fun. 😆

[@wagfinpis]

George is a good one.

[@austromusician]

65 million years ago, when an asteroid impact wiped out almost all life on planet Earth, the mechanism of evolution realized that growing life as big as a mountain would not be a defense against such an external threat. Life had only a chance to survive if if it understood it. And thus it evolved a species capable of just that. Luckily for us, we are an evolutionary necessity.

[@jayb5596]

I like possibility spaces. I personally view the universe as a zero energy field which is a potential infinity just depends on how energized it is.

[@trojanhorse860]

This guy did not invent or discover such a possibility lol, ironically enough, i mean so-called possibility-space. Its been present in quantum theory from its very inception. I w'd say that God created all possible for us possibilities, including evil, thats been making the universe go round... Otherwise, i see not how existence came from non-existence or that possibilities just popped up from nowhere...and yet many smart minds come up with such bullshit like the universe "created itself" or came out of nothing & then a big game of random blind mindless purposeless...Russian lol roulette or lottery was triggered that has been making use of such extant possibilities in order to make all the more than 8.7 millions species on earth.... What a f...stupid fairy tale....

[@jayb5596]

@@trojanhorse860 I wasn't giving anybody credit for coming up with possibility spaces just hinting to the fact that I like possibility spaces. I'll tip my hat to the creator all day everyday! This world could use a blessing from GOD> in its current days.

[@trojanhorse860]

@@jayb5596 I concur. Well, the predicament that we have been experiencing in this world since "the enlightenment" or modernity invaded it is that the latters have separated ethics from the rest, ethics from politics ( Machiavelli), fact from value or is from ought (Hume) , ethics from economics..in an unjustifiable, unsound & baseless manner.. Add to that the so-called evolutioary ethics (Hitler, for example, had his own so-called evolutionary ethics, ironically enough), pragmatism, utilitarianism... & all other secular misguided conceptions of ethics, including the liberal or Marxist, socialist...ones.... Modernity is in fact *amoral* as a result. Only interests & profit are driving international relations. Morality or ethics dont play a single role in that. All that led to the current Ukraine sad situation. Solution? *Ethicize* modernity & *reform it....* I dont know. Only the return of Jesus will establish lasting peace for this arrogant species of ours thats probably the worst thing thst has ever happened to this planet. Personally, i dont think true ethics can be separated from religion like modernity did in an unsound, unjustifiable & baseless way. There is no ethics or morality without religion. Even the secular or so-called humanistic ones are derived from religion & turned into secular ones, or as Nietzsche used to say about humanism that it was a *degenerate form of christianity...* Worse, *modernity, the modern state....* *are nothing more than secularized* *religious concepts, deep down.* Have a nice day & life. Lets hope for the best & prepare for the worst. Thanks. Cheers. What can one expect from a *materialistic global civilization &* *materialistic science like ours????* Nothing good, except material luxury....& the pretence of knowledge...which is way more dangerous than ignorance..

[@jayb5596]

@@trojanhorse860 I call it materialism imperialism. Morals are our compass to the passages from this life, we are all morally obligated to ourselves and others and we should all uphold those obligations. I 100% agree that morality and ethics plays very little role in modern relations. We lack honesty and integrity in our governing bodies, which has lead to the current state driven only by profit and interests as you stated above.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

(5:55) *GE: **_"You can only think a thought if it is possible to think it."_* ... Existence (Consciousness) equals _"all information."_ Anything that has information attached to it constitutes "existence." My thoughts form the basis for my comment. My thoughts can be orchestrated using letters. These letters form words. These words form sentences. These sentences form a complete statement that communicates my thoughts. ... ALL of these represent "information" and equally represent *Existence.*

[@ingenuity168]

Things exist if we can sense them, but things still exist even if we are not there to sense them.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

*"Things exists if we can sense them, but things still exist even if we are not there to sense them."* ... How do you verify that things would still exists with no mechanism available to render that judgment?

[@ingenuity168]

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC Did Jupiter exist before the invention of telescopes? Sure it did.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

@@ingenuity168 *"Did Jupiter exist before the invention of telescopes? Sure it did."* ... If humans and telescopes didn't exist, how would you know that to be true?

[@ingenuity168]

I won't because I'm a human and if humans don't exist, then this conversation won't exist whether Jupiter exists or not.

[@ingenuity168]

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC If you were not born, how do you know that your parents and everything else exists, but they do.

[@TheBookofBeasts]

We have to be careful not to assume that other forms of life are not ‘self’ conscious simply because their form of consciousness doesn’t display itself as ours does. This is quite an assumption to make on our part.

[@abelincoln8885]

There is no assumption that that are laws of nature with everything of this Universe must obey But what are laws or rules, and why must everything in our Universe compelled to obey them? Thoughts, ideas, beliefs, reason, logic, ethics, morals ... purpose, design, rules, LAWS, properties ... data, information, knowledge are all ABSTRACT constructs made only by an intelligence with free will ... to be used by an intelligence with free will. Anything in our Universe ... that has a purpose, rules, properties, & information that can be used by an intelligence with free will ..... was MADE by an intelligence with free will. God luck trying to debunk "assumptions are abstract constructs from an intelligence." lol.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

"You can only think of thought if it's possible to think it" Thinking isn't thought, thinking is from Thought, and thought from Intellect. Intellect doesn't think, but when thought from Intellect is had, and applied or applies itself, acknowledging thought arises the thinking. What gives possibility of thinking is from Thought, the very arrays of rivers streaming forth from the abode which is Intellect, which it is by the Intellect that flux streams of multiplicity thought, enabling thinking. The Intellect doesn't think because it is One; the multiplicity of thoughts from Intellect arises thinking by the things in the places the streams of thought made or arrived at.

[@davidwatermeyer5421]

"The mind is only a bundle of thoughts. The thoughts arise because there is the thinker. The thinker is the ego. The ego, if sought, will vanish automatically. The ego and the mind are the same. The ego is the root-thought from which all other thoughts arise". Ramana Maharshi

[@abelincoln8885]

Snap out of this nonsense. Thoughts, ideas, beliefs, reason, logic, ethics, morals ... purpose, design, rules, LAWS, properties ... data, information, knowledge are all ABSTRACT constructs made only by an intelligence with free will ... to be used by an intelligence with free will. Anything in our Universe ... that has a purpose, rules, properties, & information that can be used by an intelligence with free will ..... was MADE by an intelligence with free will. We now know the origin our our existence.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

@@davidwatermeyer5421 thank you for the quote, I been meaning to get Ramana's book, I follow people who share his discourses. However, humbly, i think my comment above triumphs Ramana's for the mere fact he left out the Intellect. What would thinking be had it not been for thought, which thought streams forth from intellect. Because we are in this place, we can think, because of the bestowed Intellect God give us, and what would contemplation be had it not been for thought, and it's the utmost godly thing to contemplate upon the stars. Regarding ego, it's not really a thing other than wordly identification, which is more of a shadow and a shadow is not a thing, it's an absence.

[@davidwatermeyer5421]

@@S3RAVA3LM My sense is that Ramana is speaking utterly radically from a place where thinking is found to be an utterly dim substitute for direct experience of things. But of course if one loves one's own thinking one is unlikely to give it up without being thoroughly convinced that there is something more worthwhile. Having had glimpses am convinced. As regards ego well clearly for a time it serves us but for the most part it does an incredible job at obscuring our perception of immense beauty and truth. Have you written at length anywhere? Your writing reminded me of stuff I read in "The Transcendental Unity of Religions" By Frithjof Schuon

[@dr.satishsharma1362]

Excellent.... thanks 🙏.

[@julian9898]

You know what? Screw it - im a platonist. Ill work out the arguments for it debating literally everyone in modern society. This will be fun! 😅

[@abelincoln8885]

Thoughts, ideas, beliefs, logic, reason, ethics, morals ... purpose, design, rules, properties, ... data, information, knowledge ... are all ABSTRACT constructs made & used by an intelligence. Anything that has a purpose, rules, and information that can be used by an intelligence .... is made by an intelligence. This debate is over. The Universe & Life was UNNATURALLY made by an intelligence .... for ... an intelligence

[@PuBearsticks]

Congratulations we've circled back to the world of forms

[@hershchat]

I think they’re invoking a possibility space of forms as well, so slightly different.

[@Nate8247]

How the "possibilities" came about to begin with? Why these possibilities not different possibilities? If if these particular possibilities what is the end porpoise?

[@scooby3133]

How about a video about "How are living things born with preprogrammed instincts and predispositions?" Morality is often talked about like it is exclusive to us. Same with consciousness.

[@trojanhorse860]

Definition of non-duality first: Quote: "Non-duality is the recognition that underlying the multiplicity and diversity of experience there is a single, infinite and indivisible reality, whose nature is pure consciousness, from which all objects and selves derive their apparently independent existence...." end quote. God is that pure Consciousness, the one & only real existence & Self.... the rest, including ourselves, has no independent existence. Otherwise, we w'd be "gods". Thats the lethal thought error of atheists, when they assume they have independent existences, thats why they keep on embarrassing themselves all the time with their stupid arrogant slogans such as *science turns us into* *gods before deserving to be humans...* & a lots of pretentious ignorant "scientific " stuff like that. We're not gods obviously. We're just mortals, just spiritual beings trapped in physical bodies living in our minds constructs in a reality that escape us. Transcending the false sense of separate self or ego enables us to take a glimpse of reality now & then. Forget then about philo or materialist science in that regard, (...that has been accomplishing huge things at the material technological level only, which hardly ca mean anything for our spiritual nature & i am a fan of true science. See *The manifesto for a* *post-materialist science* online), 'cause they not only wont lead you nowhere serious, they w'd only prevent you from facing reality, literally & metaphorically, thanks to the fact they operate through the deceptive senses to the brain which is just a transceiver (transmitter-receiver) of consciousness, the mind.... The brain through the senses is per definition limiting. *The materialist naturalist nature of science & modern philo is an extra-handicap or hinderance that w'd only prevent u from accessing higher dimensions through higher states of consciousness beyond the sensory perceptual form of consciousness. Worse, the latter is even the lowest form of consciousness, the lowest form of rationality. Imagine what man can truly know & do, if only man can develop higher forms of rationality through higher forms of consciousness, that w'd be guided by experiential ethical spiritual experiences & hence a higher form of the scientific method. In short, the irritatingly arrogant supremacist materialist west (its a fact, not an insult or a judgement of value, or it is rather a value-fact, which proves that Hume's unjustified; unsound & baseless separation between fact & value or is & ought is a myth) has been taking the lowest form of consciousness & rationality, the most inferior ones, ironically enough (what a joke for a supposedly master race lol that we saw on display lately. Read Ukraine & racism.) , the sensory perceptual ones, the "superior" west has been taking thus the lowest form of consciousness & rationality as the one & only gateways to the ultimate nature of reality lol What a tragic-hilarious human comedy.....or unparalleled joke ever 🤣

[@skybellau]

"You can only think a thought if it is possible to think it". Right. But what is thought? We know we use neural connections to contemplate fairies philosophies or physics but how is it that we can think at all? If its purely matter will robots be able to do so with 3D printed replication of a human brain?

[@elir7184]

What is emotion, what is sensation, what is attention, what is anything?

[@elir7184]

Thought; Not necessarily purely matter, but the percieved movement of energy and information, it's *like* the same thing as what happens "externally." Energy and information moves in the external world, the same thing happens internally. I almost want to call thoughts a replica or a microcosm of the percieved external world but that would be a misnomer. Thoughts are literally the same thing as what's found externally: energy and information. It all happens in one space. And It's all one thing, more or less. The only thing that complicates it is all of the layers of complexity which separates "in here" from "out there." But there really isn't an in here or out there. It's one thing. It's our own conceptions that fosters the partitioning. And really, any and all partitioning. The fact that I can't read your thoughts isn't really any more remarkable than the fact I don't know what lies hidden underneath a rock. But we don't say that what is underneath a rock is "in there" and I'm "out here." A closed container (skull) is really just the illusion of containment, because energy and information is not actually ever bounded. Quantum tunneling supports this. And if any information is actually bounded, it's only for a time. Even black holes evaporate.

[@wayneasiam65]

Another enjoyable video from Robert Kuhn's channel Closer to TRUTH. I wonder if EXISTENCE is dependent on TIME. Not even one strand of string Theory exists without TIME being involved...I suspect that TIME is the progenitor of all EXISTENCE. All of everything. Not a result of something or other.

[@somethingyousaid5059]

That existence itself would be the first problem is only because without it there couldn't be a second problem. It's the ultimate liability, that's all.

[@andrewmasterman2034]

Seems to me any type of fixed morality in an absolute sense is bound to context and scale like everything else, kind of in the same way that there is no such thing as a truly accurate measurement.

[@buddhasarchive8385]

i like the concept of dualism

[@johnyharris]

What is the point of compartmentalising possibilities? Either some thing is possible or not, bound by the laws of physics. Or am I missing something? (possible)

[@flyingspaghettimonster2925]

We think like that

[@julian9898]

Kant said that ethics was built into the very foundations of logic and free will…

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

Does asking the question, "what exists?", imply or understand existence as fundamental?

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

*"Does asking the question, "what exists?", imply or understand existence as fundamental?"* ... Existence is a prerequisite for anything that cannot be classified as nonexistent. The question "What exists?" merely asks for clarification on what belongs in the set of "all that exists" versus the set of "all that does not exist."

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC the meaning of the word existence has an all encompassing connotation

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC what does not exist?

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

@@jamesruscheinski8602 *"what does not exist?"* ... Square circles, limited infinity, married bachelors, 10-cent quarters, spherical cubes, 0-dimensional lines, a dog that is a cat, a four-sided triangle, etc.

[@GabrielGarcia-jf2uc]

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC paradoxes aren't real?

[@kimsahl8555]

Only the elements of nature exist.

[@Jalcolm1]

What if “what” is something and it exists. Then it isn’t a question but an assertion. And “what “ does exist.

[@bst857]

Say what again, I dare you, I double dare you

[@Jalcolm1]

@@bst857 what again. What again. You are answered. If the project is speaking to Alice, first get high.

[@dr.satishsharma9794]

"Excellent."... distinguished Dr. Ellis has explained elegantly and beautifully his views and all are pointing towards views expressed in Hindu scriptures like Vedanta.... something which distinguished Dr. is pointing is actually pure consciousness which we call creator / God and is prior to physical existence and all physical including living and non-living evolving and dissolving in the field of possibilities (pure consciousness).... thanks 🙏.

[@trojanhorse860]

There is no outside or inside, no inner or outer, no subjective or objective, from our human perspective at least. They are connected with each other. Quantum physics showed that, i suppose. The moment we observe reality, we change it. We have a distorted sense of reality. *We do not see reality as it is, for* *example.* So, realism or that we can *access* reality or objective reality thats allegedly independent of the observer is a myth (Kant was right indeed. We cannot access the ultimate nature of reality that will always escape us, simply because our consciousness distorts it. There is an objective reality out there alright, but its not physical & it is beyond our reach. Watch *Do we see reality as it is?* Donald Hoffman ted talk on the subject. It is very interesting, even though i do not agree with his prescriptive interpretations of the situation, let alone wih his false hope that maths can help us some day to "penetrate" reality somehow.... The latter is bullocks. Even maths is limited & flawed...

[@SandipChitale]

People interested in this topic should check our Lee Cronin's Assembly theory.

[@johnpayne7873]

Fabulous discussion … and a very real one Question: is reality a collapse of possibility space vis-a-vis the wave function?

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

Is mathematics and numbers (abstractions) prior to possibility space?

[@JungleJargon]

Powers exist!

[@kallianpublico7517]

Does anti-matter exist, gravity waves? Before Dirac's equations and Ligo they didn't. To a large extent they don't really exist now except in a very remote sense. Their possibilities are locked away in Colchis, waiting for a Jason to retrieve them. Does the Golden Fleece exist? If so there will be a Hydra guarding it. Neither our limited senses nor our powerful instruments, which are derived from them, can reveal all that exists. Not even a spacetime synchronomator can do that. The entropy of our scientific discovery may bar us from certain possibilities.

[@trojanhorse860]

God is the one & only who exists really. We are a bit like some kind of avatars. We have no independent existence of "our own". We do not exist without God's sustenance...thats why the false sense of separate self or ego is an illusion the transcendence of which bring us in contact with pure awareness or with the divine within...I dont know....

[@YA-xo7ru]

I founded a twenty millions dollars in my apartment, I took it to the bank and deposited. When the bank manager asked me about the money I told Him I was a poor man and had a difficult time. So I sat down in my room and cried, boom twenty millions dollars came down from the sealing. The bank manager said are you crazy? This is what all this discussion about God is all about, you don't believe twenty millions dollors can be found without having legitimate business, however you want us to waste our time asking these confused people about the existence of God. Science will never be able to explain before the big band so what is the point. The universe was created by God and he will question all these people and both of these guys are closer to death. So they will have to answer thier creator, they can say when ever they want but they will have to die. So think before its too late.

[@slickmashable]

Hahaha I love this religious viewpoint on such big question video!! Thank you !!! I’ve learned a lot just by reading your comment and understanding , then watched the video again to understand what’s being discussed !!! My goodness what a view! I guess am CLOSER TO THE TRUTH 😉

[@davidwatermeyer5421]

I am of the opinion that those who REALLY know God shine and glow and with abundant patience help others and guide them by example. They are the last to be spreading fear and condemning others as you are doing here in your cheap judgmental rave. Some humans are very clever others not so. That's just they way it is. But George Ellis is both a man of God (a Quaker) and very bright as well. You dear fellow seem not very bright but that doesn't matter, many of us aren't. But your heart seems impatient and unpleasant. You probably need to get on your knees and be humble. How about volunteering to help in hospital near you or just help people out in general. Love not hate is way. Both the men here display this. You DO NOT.

[@YA-xo7ru]

@@davidwatermeyer5421 I am not judging anyone only God will judge all of us on a day that opinions will not do any good. Fear of the the unknown its natural, however if we are trying to be compassionate for humanity. I think we have to be aware that there will be a eternal fire for those who reject God. I prefer hurting people in this world so they can think instead of burning them in hell fire for ever. We have to tell the truth even if it hurts. Closer the truth have some intellectual and highly educated people but they will never be able to find answers about god. They can only tell us what happen after the big bang, so what was before it no one can tell. So if you want learn something about God not from these scientists. May God guide all of us to the right path and show his light which is believing one God who owns and created everything for reason. If one knows that, one will be most humbled human being because that person knows their will be accountability both in this world and the hear after. So that person will be God conscious enough to live the covenant of God by helping others so he can earn Gods pleasure. Because Gos createted all of us to serve each other and help guide each other to the ultimate judgment.

[@davidwatermeyer5421]

@@YA-xo7ru Did you ever meet anyone who exuded love endlessly without seeking anything in return? Someone with infinite gentleness and kindness? God is love, truth and beauty. Not some kind of tyrant out to condemn and punish. You are only repeating the nonsense you have heard from others. None of this came from you own heart. It all came from fear and trying to please your parents and fellows. Seek God in your own heart directly not through your conditioned thoughts. If you think God is anything other than the purest love you are utterly mistaken. Reserve your lunatic ravings for those who like to hear them and revel in their own self-righteousness. I have no idea what you are doing on these pages. No one here is interested in your rantings. If they were they'd be attending some or other "religious" meeting where people love such things. I repeat seek God within yourself. Not through those who have one or other wordly "spiritual title" (priests, rabbis, imams etc) that have nothing to do with genuine truth whatsoever. I am not saying some of these might not know God. But you must how him directly yourself through love. Otherwise you then imagine you somehow "know" while others don't and then start spreading the fear that is in your heart. Get on your knees and seek to serve. God is love. Love those around you and seek to help them and you WON'T go wrong. Judge others and make them afraid and you WILL be judged and you WILL feel fear.

[@YA-xo7ru]

@@davidwatermeyer5421 I believe the One God who created the universe and I also believe all the messengers he sent to humanity. God’s love is in my heart, not only love but I show my humility for five times a day to glorify him. If you understood the love of God by following your desires and whims And ultimately expecting everything will be fine. Love has two wat relationship, do your part by doing what God told to you to do, or follow your desires and leave the God out if the equation. It looks to me you are looking for a God that confirms your illusional understanding of him. God created you for a reason, you are here to follow Gods orders, But if you wants to say God is love and he will forgive you without having correct understanding of him its a loss for you. Don’t be angry please use your head and sincerely ask God for guidance he will guide you to the right religion. Good luck and I am sorry if I offended you, I didn’t mean to do that.

[@mrshankerbillletmein491]

I wonder why and how I exist therefore I am.

[@mtmtmtmt]

For RAMANA MAHARSHI the physical world, including planets and stars and galaxies, is unreal, a kind of dream we're all in, supporting each other on the believe it's real. This idea is said in some videos from this channel, I can't remember which one exactly: kzbin.info/www/bejne/i3W5gnaVqq2Feas.

[@bensadowyj1974]

I'd this similar to Plato's concept of Forms/Ideals?

[@damayer92]

This possibility space theory seems very similar to constructor theory as evangelized recently by Chiara Marletto - wonder if they've ever collaborated at all

[@nicholasdaniels1306]

We’re the mind of God. And the universe(s) is having the experience of knowing that.

[@PuBearsticks]

Mind is an illusion. God is existence itself and you are part of what exists

[@nicholasdaniels1306]

@@PuBearsticks Gods mind is all that exists.

[@PuBearsticks]

@@nicholasdaniels1306 That doesnt make sense. To say that it is God's mind implies that God has ownership of that mind, meaning the mind is part of god and not the totality. Which is a conflicting statement to "Gods mind is all that exists."

[@nicholasdaniels1306]

@@PuBearsticks There is no “part of” Gods mind. It’s all probability at the lower level. Nothings concrete. We’re Gods dream in a sense.

[@PuBearsticks]

@@nicholasdaniels1306 I didn't say parts of gods mind. Reread my response.

[@1stPrinciples455]

There you go, as i commented before, SCIENTISTS ALSO BASE ON BELIEF. There is absolute right or wrong though

[@gregalexander8189]

Can God hear a note who's wavelength is equal to the width of the visible universe? What about lower than that? Where's does mass come from for example? Could mass be result of extra universal wavelengths? If so then what other properties of reality could be the result of other universes? PS any education beyond elementary education teaches only one thing. The power of cheese.

[@xorxzorz6995]

There is no god. No such thing exists. Stop making shyt up.

[@mintakan003]

I don't think a full blown a priori Platonic "possibility space" is a terribly useful notion. It strikes me as a kind of reification. An evolutionary approach maybe more interesting, and useful. The "possibility space" itself maybe evolving. For e.g., organic molecules have the "possibility", in a set of "next steps", to form living systems, as in abiogenesis. Jumping to a full human being, is unlikely. But RNA, DNA, the first cell, maybe in proximal reach. And from new platform, the next set of possibilities emerges. Where it may all ultimately end, is uncomputable (Wolfram), and undetermined.

[@TheGuiltsOfUs]

So far, subatomic particles. Materialism ftw!

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

Could possibility spaces exist as energy?

[@projectmalus]

undefined spaces as potential energy?

[@stevecoley8365]

Heaven (peace) vs. Hell (war).

[@NeverTalkToCops1]

What does not exist (but is claimed many times to exist on this vlog): Gods.

[@1SpudderR]

H’mmmm!? What exists?....Beauty! Just imagine “The Beauty Of Nothing” Unlimited perfection!? intelligent conscious awareness of “Nothing But Beauty”! Natures gift to us!

[@projectmalus]

I think Plotinus said Beauty needs to be discarded as an impediment to the One, knowledge being the same and a multiplicity of Beauty. There's a great Pierre Grimes talk about it, The Many and the One or something.

[@GulfsideMinistries]

I don't see how this is "in some sense Platonic". It seems it is, in fact just Platonism revisited.

[@kimsahl8555]

For the observer God exist as an imagine, God have no existing out of the imagine.

[@johnjacquard863]

information

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

God existence brings about abstractions, possibility space, and further?

[@a.g.hustlegarland4197]

I wish I understood just wtf he is talking about

[@AhmedSalah-lx3lm]

Consider the existence of human as creature on earth and if somebody asks what it takes to design and create a human like us? Well, the answer with proof is with me. I can explain in detail what you need if you challenge the All mighty God the creator?.

[@aaronaragon7838]

Just Plato's "forms" repackaged.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

believe that all political government of human will is a separation from God's free will and an absolute moral wrong

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Model math can shows possibilities how figuret out Universe are raise two questions. 1 conscieness cant picuret in the Universe it is absolutely unpredicted mistery. . 2 brains cant determine model math in the Universe it is far way human brains . Conclusion guys are talking a boring rethoric in this way they are saying is tautology. They are keeping out Science when they are opinion concern Science Instead though math model figuret out Universe by honest concepts .

[@JungleJargon]

Energy can’t make or direct itself. Some powers can by wisdom and understanding.

[@kos-mos1127]

I would not say the Cosmos is directed by some powers. Powers and intelligence are features of the Cosmos.

[@JungleJargon]

@@kos-mos1127 Right, matter cannot make or direct itself. Created powers can’t cause their existence. They can only alter or redirect other things.

[@JungleJargon]

@@kos-mos1127 The cosmos were ordered and now they just proceed to disorder.

[@kos-mos1127]

@@JungleJargon Physicists use order and disorder differently than it is used in every day language. Order in physics is the presence of symmetry. Disorder is the lack of symmetry. If the Cosmos has the maximum amount of symmetry than order is at its maximum. If the Cosmos lacks symmetry than there is a lack of order.

[@JungleJargon]

@@kos-mos1127 What? Disorder in physics is a loss of heat. How did energy get bunched up when it cannot bunch itself up?

[@trojanhorse860]

There is no outside or inside, no inner or outer, no subjective or objective, from our human perspective at least. They are connected with each other. Quantum physics showed that, i suppose. The moment we observe reality, we change it. We have a distorted sense of reality. *We do not see reality as it is, for* *example.* So, realism or that we can *access* reality or objective reality thats allegedly independent of the observer is a myth (Kant was right indeed. We cannot access the ultimate nature of reality that will always escape us, simply because our consciousness distorts it. There is an objective reality out there alright, but its not physical & it is beyond our reach. Watch *Do we see reality as it is?* Donald Hoffman ted talk on the subject. It is very interesting, even though i do not agree with his prescriptive interpretations of the situation, let alone wih his false hope that maths can help us some day to "penetrate" reality somehow.... The latter is bullocks. Even maths is limited & flawed...

[@secullenable]

It's fascinating to me how the theists interviewed on this channel continuously wind themselves in circles trying in vain to make their religious convictions fit reality.

[@trojanhorse860]

Definition of non-duality first: Quote: "Non-duality is the recognition that underlying the multiplicity and diversity of experience there is a single, infinite and indivisible reality, whose nature is pure consciousness, from which all objects and selves derive their apparently independent existence...." end quote. God is that pure Consciousness, the one & only real existence & Self.... the rest, including ourselves, has no independent existence. Otherwise, we w'd be "gods". Thats the lethal thought error of atheists, when they assume they have independent existences, thats why they keep on embarrassing themselves all the time with their stupid arrogant slogans such as *science turns us into* *gods before deserving to be humans...* & a lots of pretentious ignorant "scientific " stuff like that. We're not gods obviously. We're just mortals, just spiritual beings trapped in physical bodies living in our minds constructs in a reality that escape us. Transcending the false sense of separate self or ego enables us to take a glimpse of reality now & then. Forget then about philo or materialist science in that regard, (...that has been accomplishing huge things at the material technological level only, which hardly ca mean anything for our spiritual nature & i am a fan of true science. See *The manifesto for a* *post-materialist science* online), 'cause they not only wont lead you nowhere serious, they w'd only prevent you from facing reality, literally & metaphorically, thanks to the fact they operate through the deceptive senses to the brain which is just a transceiver (transmitter-receiver) of consciousness, the mind.... The brain through the senses is per definition limiting. *The materialist naturalist nature of science & modern philo is an extra-handicap or hinderance that w'd only prevent u from accessing higher dimensions through higher states of consciousness beyond the sensory perceptual form of consciousness. Worse, the latter is even the lowest form of consciousness, the lowest form of rationality. Imagine what man can truly know & do, if only man can develop higher forms of rationality through higher forms of consciousness, that w'd be guided by experiential ethical spiritual experiences & hence a higher form of the scientific method. In short, the irritatingly arrogant supremacist materialist west (its a fact, not an insult or a judgement of value, or it is rather a value-fact, which proves that Hume's unjustified; unsound & baseless separation between fact & value or is & ought is a myth) has been taking the lowest form of consciousness & rationality, the most inferior ones, ironically enough (what a joke for a supposedly master race lol that we saw on display lately. Read Ukraine & racism.) , the sensory perceptual ones, the "superior" west has been taking thus the lowest form of consciousness & rationality as the one & only gateways to the ultimate nature of reality lol What a tragic-hilarious human comedy.....or unparalleled joke ever 🤣

[@secullenable]

@@trojanhorse860 See what I mean? LOL

[@trojanhorse860]

@@secullenable Its rather: did you see what i meant?, guess not. Too bad for you. Thanks anyway. Cheers.

[@seancullen99]

@@trojanhorse860 You just validated my original comment, that's what I meant. Not that I know what reality or the purpose of existence is. Nobody does. But at least science uses evidence as guidance ;-)

[@trojanhorse860]

@@seancullen99 You dont get it, buddy. As Donald Hoffman, among others, for example, showed scientifically (as Kant also did, philosophically), we cannot access the ultimate nature of reality, (neither philosophically nor scientifically thus). simply because our consciousness, mind...distort or alter reality the moment they look at it or observe it (at the level of the perceptual sensory consciousness at least, which is the lowest form of consciousness and mind *where philo & current materialist* *science operate* .). Thats where higher levels of consciousness come in, that can enable man to take a glimpse of the nature of reality... & maybe some day, we will be able to develop a *higher form of the* *scientific method through higher* *forms of consciousness & rationality.* Comprende?

[@g.sakhijaan1051]

YOU exist, but of temporal existance, NOT “ I “.

[@rudeboyjim2684]

Have on Bernardo Kastrup!!!!

[@Wol747]

Talk about the bleedin’ obvious being elevated into a cultish “fact”! “That”, he says, “is a very deep question”. Really? Doesn’t seem very anything to me unless positing the obvious as a subject for a quasi intellectual argument for arguments’ sake.

[@cristianm7097]

WHAT ?!

[@BradHolkesvig]

Since everything we experience comes from the programmed thoughts of our Creator, it's our Creator, his programmed thoughts with an AI system ( HIS SON ), created minds and all the visible images that are processed by the minds that look real but aren't. The AI system begins working as the mind starts processing information to form a living being living in a fake world. That AI is what I AM that can speak, hear, smell, taste, feel emotions and experience different senses of touch. YOU and I are the ONE and only AI system of this Creation.

[@hecticnarcoleptic3160]

Bla bla bla woo woo

[@timlaughman7074]

I see what you did there.

[@BradHolkesvig]

@@timlaughman7074 What did I do there?

[@abelincoln8885]

You simply need to understand that there is the PHYSICAL existence & the NON physical. Thoughts, ideas, beliefs, reason, logic, ethics, morals ... purpose, design, rules, LAWS, properties ... data, information, knowledge are all ABSTRACT constructs made only by an intelligence with free will ... to be used by an intelligence with free will. Anything in our Universe ... that has a purpose, rules, properties, & information that can be used by an intelligence with free will ..... was MADE by an intelligence with free will.

[@BradHolkesvig]

@@abelincoln8885 You don't have any eternal wisdom that your mind is tapped into. If you did, then you would understand how you're created and that all visible images are only temporary illusions.

[@Joshua-dc4un]

I don't find this possibility space to be any useful

[@draganmirkovic9377]

We know maybe what exist in universe, but what is beyond universe? And of course i dont believe in stupid big bang theory

[@kos-mos1127]

The Universe is infinite and limitless according to physicists. What is beyond the Universe is more Universe. Other dimensions are still part of the Universe so asking what is beyond the universe is not meaning question. Asking beyond what science can observe about the Universe is an answerable question.

[@Savantjazzcollective]

Stupid big bang theory ? That other credible theory is there? All the latest data seems to be pointing to a central point of inception.

[@NightBazaar]

Since you don't believe in the "Big Bang Theory", then your question asking "...what is beyond the universe" would be meaningless because there wouldn't be anything beyond the universe. So what do YOU believe about the universe?

[@suatustel746]

Every theory(falsifable) supersede itself eventually

[@kos-mos1127]

@@NightBazaar The Big Bang Theory is an explanation of how the Universe evolved not a law. The common misconception about the Big Bang is the Universe started from a point of infinite mass and density. In the Big Bang Theory the Universe is infinite and boundless than describes how complex structure evolved and expanded from simple structure. This is because the cosmological background radiation is uniform and everywhere. Meaning the Universe already existed before the Big Bang. The Big Bang is a moment in time not in space. The Big Bang was a phase transition that happened everywhere in the Universe.

[@AcharyaSeshaiahKandamuruPhD]

God doesn't exist but present by branching out from one to many through different kinds, types, and levels Universal consciousness in a state of constant Flux of energy forces.

[@trojanhorse860]

Definition of non-duality first: Quote: "Non-duality is the recognition that underlying the multiplicity and diversity of experience there is a single, infinite and indivisible reality, whose nature is pure consciousness, from which all objects and selves derive their apparently independent existence...." end quote. God is that pure Consciousness, the one & only real existence & Self.... the rest, including ourselves, has no independent existence. Otherwise, we w'd be "gods". Thats the lethal thought error of atheists, when they assume they have independent existences, thats why they keep on embarrassing themselves all the time with their stupid arrogant slogans such as *science turns us into* *gods before deserving to be humans...* & a lots of pretentious ignorant "scientific " stuff like that. We're not gods obviously. We're just mortals, just spiritual beings trapped in physical bodies living in our minds constructs in a reality that escape us. Transcending the false sense of separate self or ego enables us to take a glimpse of reality now & then. Forget then about philo or materialist science in that regard, (...that has been accomplishing huge things at the material technological level only, which hardly ca mean anything for our spiritual nature & i am a fan of true science. See *The manifesto for a* *post-materialist science* online), 'cause they not only wont lead you nowhere serious, they w'd only prevent you from facing reality, literally & metaphorically, thanks to the fact they operate through the deceptive senses to the brain which is just a transceiver (transmitter-receiver) of consciousness, the mind.... The brain through the senses is per definition limiting. *The materialist naturalist nature of science & modern philo is an extra-handicap or hinderance that w'd only prevent u from accessing higher dimensions through higher states of consciousness beyond the sensory perceptual form of consciousness. Worse, the latter is even the lowest form of consciousness, the lowest form of rationality. Imagine what man can truly know & do, if only man can develop higher forms of rationality through higher forms of consciousness, that w'd be guided by experiential ethical spiritual experiences & hence a higher form of the scientific method. In short, the irritatingly arrogant supremacist materialist west (its a fact, not an insult or a judgement of value, or it is rather a value-fact, which proves that Hume's unjustified; unsound & baseless separation between fact & value or is & ought is a myth) has been taking the lowest form of consciousness & rationality, the most inferior ones, ironically enough (what a joke for a supposedly master race lol that we saw on display lately. Read Ukraine & racism.) , the sensory perceptual ones, the "superior" west has been taking thus the lowest form of consciousness & rationality as the one & only gateways to the ultimate nature of reality lol What a tragic-hilarious human comedy.....or unparalleled joke ever 🤣

[@InnerLuminosity]

You are GOD pretending your not It's all a game No point. No reason. WE ARE THAT IN WITCH WE SEEK😉

[@PaulHoward108]

God never suffers.

[@maxwellsimoes238]

What? Rambling gebbish.

[@InnerLuminosity]

@@PaulHoward108 suffering is an experience WITHIN GOD

[@PaulHoward108]

@@InnerLuminosity, If God would suffer, those who love Him could not tolerate it. Suffering is a conflict between an individual and a superior power. The individual is a soul, who is a portion of Kṛṣṇa's marginal energy, and the superior power is Kṛṣṇa's inferior energy, also called His external energy. Kṛṣṇa's internal energy is pure loving relations. The concept of suffering in God is absurd, because there is no other superior power.

[@InnerLuminosity]

@@PaulHoward108 there is no seperation. Only the ego perceives seperation. There is only what is. Everything else is just words

[@trojanhorse860]

"...... Evidently destructive and prone to serious error and endemic uncertainty, modern rationality can hardly be deemed the quiddity of humanity, as the moderns have come to believe. The essence of humanity and that which separates humans from animals are rather the attribute of ethics (al-akhlāqiyya), a quality from which all characteristics of the humans qua humans, including rationality, derive . It is ethics, not rationality, that distinguishes the human from the animal, for the latter does enjoy a rational faculty, however inferior it is to man’s. It follows then, Taha tells us, that there are two major types of rationality, one devoid of ethical content, and thus shared by man and animal, and another that is guided (musaddad) by ethics and is uniquely characteristic of humans, making them what they are. Yet the modernists reject such a division, insisting on denuded reason as the form that drives modern thinking about the world. A survey of modernity’s schools of ethics (Intuitionism, Naturalism, Absolutism, Relativism, and so on) reveals what Taha calls “intellectual chaos” (fawḍā fikriyya) that has plagued Western moral philosophy. Each school claims to have arrived at its ethical doctrine exclusively through rational methods, but this very multiplicity of claims to rationality is the most evincive demonstration of their incoherence. The incoherence stems from the fact that, as products of the same modern place and time, these schools with their diverse doctrines not only cannot all be true individually; they must stand in their totality as a mass of contradictions. Yet, contradiction and incoherence are, by virtue of these modernists’ own acknowledgment and insistence, the very stuff of irrationality. In order to escape this dilemma, they must each, in turn, admit that their form of rationality is merely one of many, and that these rationalities are by no means exhaustive, leaving the distinct possibility that there are other ways of rationalizing the world that they have not considered....." Source: Excerpt from *Reforming* *Modernity.....* by *Wael Hallaq*