Before we can explore that avenue practically, we need to have a solid understanding of what “spiritual” means and how it is useful to our exploration. The best evidence strongly suggests that spirituality (in the non-personal sense) is illusory, and history seems to show that it is not only superfluous but in fact serves more as an impediment to discovery.
What is a “spiritual force” and why should we think it might matter?
Quintessence, maybe?
There you go again, assuming to understand how the Universal Consciousness would operate if it actually exists. Heck, even human consciousness is barely understood, and inherently unpredictable.
How do we know that the universal consciousness isn’t doing exactly what it feels like doing? How do we know it’s “doing” anything at all?
For those playing along at home Quintessense isn’t actually spiritual anything, just a postulated 5th force.
Here’s my basic issue with this whole argument - we’re extrapolating a barely understood phenomena (consciousness) out onto the largest observable structure we know of and then arguing about how we don’t really understand how the hypothetical universal consciousness might or might not be communicating with us. To say there are several large, unpleasant and unsupported assumptions between points A and B is being generous to a fault.
What’s the point of postulating something that has no definite properties?
“Consciousness” is a folk psychology term we use to explain a constellation of behaviors we observe in humans and some animals. It’s a crude way of understanding why humans do things that trees don’t do. We have a rough idea of what consciousness entails, even thought we don’t have a deep grasp of the underlying mechanics of how its produced.
But now you’re suggesting that we transplant this term into an entirely different domain. “Maybe the universe is conscious!” Okay. What does that entail? Does it mean that the universe acts in ways that suggest a controlling intelligence? Does the universe work toward recognizable goals? Does the universe attempt to communicate with other consciousnesses? What is the functional effect of the universe being conscious?
But then you suggest that maybe universal consciousness is functionally different than human consciousness. That a consciousness universe doesn’t display the characteristics that we normally associate with the term “consciousness”. Okay. Well what’s the point of calling is “consciousness” then? Why not call it “bleb”?
Essentially you’re claiming that the universe is “bleb”. What’s “bleb”? Something beyond human comprehension.
What’s the point of making such a nebulous claim?
Good description of the issue, really impossible to have a factual discussion on.
Worse you can’t even have an informed discussion on it because you don’t have anything to build your arguments on. You can be all brave and free wheeling but it means nothing if it can’t be brought back to what we know. Amaze me with gee whiz magical descriptions but if you can’t fit what I know into your model as a limiting case or what you know as an extrapolation (with known predicted impacts on my knowledge) of what I know, then as far as I know you are *bullshitting *me. Unintentionally (hopefully) and possibly entertainingly but ultimately useless to deepening my understanding of the universe.
If that’s the case, which name would you give to the spiritual force?
How about “bleb”?
What are the properties of “bleb”? What does it DO?
I’m liking bleb actually. You haven’t established any reason to postulate bleb however. Well aside from a vague sense of the spiritual.
Why wouldn’t that be enough?
I recall hearing “bleb” used to describe a type of blister – specifically, in that case, in reference to a symptom of genital herpes. So, yeah, maybe that is a good choice, since this thing shows up periodically and is not really much fun to deal with.
Let’s call it Bob. Let’s call everything Bob. and everybody - just for fun.
New pain stuff is pure awesomeness.
If it acts as one thing on another or a force, it’s physical. Right? If it moves it’s physical, right? Or did I dream that
“I believe this thing because it pleases me to do so.” Yeah, I have things that I believe that way. But I wouldn’t claim those beliefs have any wider significance.
Well I don’t understand bleb. What is bleb? What does bleb do? Is bleb experienced uniformly across all people? Can bleb it be characterized and recreated based on a set procedure?
See I don’t know what you mean by bleb. I know what you mean by blue and even if I didn’t we could come to an agreement that a propagating electromagnetic field with a wavelength between 460 and 490 nm when directed against a white plane produces a region of colour that is “blue”. Naturally we’ll debate if it’s blue or blue but more or less we can narrow the gap in my understanding of what you mean by blue.
So what’s bleb?
It might be enough for you, which would be very well and good if you were just thinking vague thoughts to yourself…but in this situation, you’re not.
The thing about believing is that you stop thinking and stop looking at what’s there, preferring only what validates the belief. You’ve decided, you’ve concluded and you’re done exploring.
There’s no rule that says one must believe things. It’s actually the source of a lot of disorder and discomfort. You come face to face with something that contradicts a belief and kaboom - you’re mad or crushed or whatever - pick a lower emotion or psychological meltdown and you’ll probably find a shattered belief at the bottom of the rubble.
Beliefs are nothing more than decisions. They aren’t laws, they’re attempts at rigidity in a fluid universe and they aren’t necessary.
Bleb is the new blue!
ROFL!
I have no idea what you’re talking about.
Ain’t that the truth – and I’ll never trust gravity’s existence again after that one time I face-planted on the ceiling. :smack:
Horseshit. As a scientist, I believe I know certain things about how the world works, but anything and everything is up for review. However, I don’t throw out what I know on a whim. The review process begins with EVIDENCE. As soon as I have any evidence, no matter how small or seemingly unimportant, that contradicts what I think I know, I have to revisit and reevaluate. Science is ALL ABOUT exploring. But just because we don’t know everything doesn’t mean that we don’t know anything. There are lots of things that have been ruled out, and we can stop wasting our time yammering on about them.