Panpsychism

[mfbukowski]

Stone holm, you may be interested in this:

 

 

This is a presentation by Chris Bradford of the Mormon Transhumanist Association entitled "The Viability of Panpsychism"

 

He goes over several points to prefer panpsychism including it's commitment to some sort of monism and materialism. 

He makes some interesting points including how Cotton & Conway's Free Will Theorum might demonstrate how particles may actually be deciding how to respond to measurement in quantum mechanics.  

Don't get me wrong- this is fascinating stuff, but for me religion is not about what makes the universe go.  This stuff is not "religion" - it is unproven science which presumes that in principle science and religion study the same questions.

 

That is what I do not buy.

 

For me, religion will never be about the way things work,- for me that is fundamentalism.  It is taking spiritual matters literally. It is no different than the belief that God made the earth in 6 days- it just changes the date.

 

What I want to know about is WHY God made it in the first place, and why it's even being here is something of importance in MY LIFE as a human being.

 

That has nothing to do with chasing electrons or any similar activity.

[mfbukowski]

Hello. Panpsychism is, specifically, the belief that when you trace all phenemona to their point of inception, they possess a single original, essential soul or psyche.

 

Perhaps the LDS idea that all originally unorganized matter is simultaneously endowed with some form of undifferentiated intelligence is equatable with panpsychism?

Dang, that's a whole bunch of big words!  I just get nervous around 12 concentric layers of ambiguous symbols all strung together

 

Idea

all

originally

unorganized

matter

simultaneously

endowed

form

undifferentiated

intelligence

equatable

panpsychism

 

Gotta get the definitions of each one right  because they build on each other.  Phew!

 

Sounds like a job for a Kabbalist there!

 

But heck yeah, we are definitely in the ballpark there! 

Edited January 27, 2015 by mfbukowski

[Hillel2]

Dang, that's a whole bunch of big words!  I just get nervous around 12 concentric layers of ambiguous symbols all strung together

 

Idea

all

originally

unorganized

matter

simultaneously

endowed

form

undifferentiated

intelligence

equatable

panpsychism

 

Gotta get the definitions of each one right  because they build on each other.  Phew!

 

Sounds like a job for a Kabbalist there!

 

But heck yeah, we are definitely in the ballpark there! 

Hello!

 

Yeah, i suppose i overdid it. My background is in linguistics and then, yes, You throw in a heavy dose of Kabbalah and there You go. Was it Laurie Anderson who said "language is a virus from outer space?" Words do seem to multiply.

 

[Uncle Dale]

 

LDS theology is monistic, not binary... Does LDS theology cohere with the facts better than any other theology?

...

 

Somewhere, back around 1879, the "LDS theology" began to evolve (or devolve)

into something other than its previous single, unitary system and viewpoint.

 

Of course, if we limit the term merely to Mormon theology, then I'll have no arguments

with you. But, when we speak of "LDS theology," I'm the sort of guy who wanders off,

rather quickly, into looking at what J. J. Strang, or Amasa Lyman, or Rulon Jeffs, or

any one of a number of different latter-day voices have professed.

 

So, yes, let's confine our exchange to what Mormons instruct and counsel other

Mormons, on what is doctrine and what is not. If we do that, you'll receive mostly

smiles and head-nods from me.

 

Then there'll be no need to ponder Eloheim's DNA, nor primate evolution.

 

UD

Edited January 27, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[Uncle Dale]

double posting

Edited January 27, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[Uncle Dale]

Then there'll be no need to ponder Eloheim's DNA, nor primate evolution.

 

I did not mean to convey a sarcastic mood here, however.

 

My introduction to God-with-a-beard was not by way of any

Sistine Chapel ceiling paintings, but rather in the form of a

slightly blurred, mimeographed reproduction of President

Smith's "first vision," passed out in Primary, back in 1953.

(Yes, my cousins did drag me off to that class now and then).

 

Xeroxing had not yet been invented, so I suppose I should

not be too harsh in reviewing that picture of two figures

sporting white beards, suspended in space over Manchester.

 

But my question then (as it continues to be now) was -- Why

does God have a beard? and Does he need to trim it when

it gets too long? -- The latter query arising out of the fact

that the Primary lesson picture pictured Jehovah with a

slightly shorter white beard, than that of Heavenly Father.

 

I never bothered to imagine whether Heavenly Grandfather's

beard would be even longer than that of Eloheim -- but that

impious thought just now passed through my imagination.

 

Sorry about that...

 

UD

[ERayR]

Hello!

 

Yeah, i suppose i overdid it. My background is in linguistics and then, yes, You throw in a heavy dose of Kabbalah and there You go. Was it Laurie Anderson who said "language is a virus from outer space?" Words do seem to multiply.

 

 

And with politicians the multiply exponentially.

[mfbukowski]

Hello!

 

Yeah, i suppose i overdid it. My background is in linguistics and then, yes, You throw in a heavy dose of Kabbalah and there You go. Was it Laurie Anderson who said "language is a virus from outer space?" Words do seem to multiply.

 

Well I love words as well and know that they are inherently ambiguous and translations between far distant cultures in both time and space are incredibly difficult

 

But that said, I think it is important to strive for clarity even though it might be an impossible dream.

 

I tend toward being a mystic myself because the gap between experiencing God and saying what you experienced is impossible and trying to slice and dice such experiences into logical discourse is ultimately futile.  It's better to teach others how to have the experiences for themselves and then just see it in their eyes.

[Robert F. Smith]

..................................................................   

My introduction to God-with-a-beard was not by way of any

Sistine Chapel ceiling paintings, but rather in the form of a

slightly blurred, mimeographed reproduction of President

Smith's "first vision," passed out in Primary, back in 1953.

..................................................................

But my question then (as it continues to be now) was -- Why

does God have a beard? and Does he need to trim it when

it gets too long? -- The latter query arising out of the fact

that the Primary lesson picture pictured Jehovah with a

slightly shorter white beard, than that of Heavenly Father.

 

I never bothered to imagine whether Heavenly Grandfather's

beard would be even longer than that of Eloheim --

..................................................   

Whether God and His Son have beards is unknown, Dale.  We have only general descriptions of white hair in Daniel 7:9, Rev 1:12 (which may or may not include beards), while some Jews prefer not to cut their beards in accord with Lev 19:27.  Joseph Smith simply didn't give us a detailed enough description of Father & Son, nor of Moroni.  You may want to read Diane E. Wirth in "The Bearded, White God Is Everywhere - or Is He?" FARMS Review of Books, 12/1 (2000):9-22, online at http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1451&index=4  .

 

There is the prophecy in Isaiah 50:6, "I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting," which suggests that Jesus was bearded during his ministry, but doesn't prove it. 

 

Anyone wishing to obtain a temple recommend and go the temple can have a full beard, and he will not be criticized.  That has always been true.

[Hillel2]

Well I love words as well and know that they are inherently ambiguous and translations between far distant cultures in both time and space are incredibly difficult

 

But that said, I think it is important to strive for clarity even though it might be an impossible dream.

 

I tend toward being a mystic myself because the gap between experiencing God and saying what you experienced is impossible and trying to slice and dice such experiences into logical discourse is ultimately futile.  It's better to teach others how to have the experiences for themselves and then just see it in their eyes.

True! Although ambiguity has virtue too. I remember when i first starting reading Talmud. I thought this is impossible. Between the time when the text was written down, the multiple points of view and the archane language it was enough to make me ask: is the intention to confuse? I was told, well yes, the particular style was intentional. It forced one to consider multiple and contradictory possibilities and interpretations. Short of direct experience, that might be the best we could hope for and/or it could lead to the experience which the mystically inclined were hoping for...or maybe not. That's a topic for another day.  

[mfbukowski]

True! Although ambiguity has virtue too. I remember when i first starting reading Talmud. I thought this is impossible. Between the time when the text was written down, the multiple points of view and the archane language it was enough to make me ask: is the intention to confuse? I was told, well yes, the particular style was intentional. It forced one to consider multiple and contradictory possibilities and interpretations. Short of direct experience, that might be the best we could hope for and/or it could lead to the experience which the mystically inclined were hoping for...or maybe not. That's a topic for another day.  

Ah! Talmud as a koan!  Never thought of it that way before!  Now if that is not a "translation" across time and space, I don't know what is!

[Uncle Dale]

....

Anyone wishing to obtain a temple recommend and go the temple can have a full beard, and he will not be criticized. That has always been true.

Well, then, I'll reluctantly revert back to my original thoughts,

(without attempting to fathom contemporary Mormon theology).

I was taught, somewhere along the line, that we humans have

facial hair because of our genetics -- shared to a great extent

with chimps and bonobos: with whom we share a common

ancestor. We diverged from them a few millions years ago,

and the two of them from each other more recently.

Take an ovum from a female bonobo, judiciously tweak just

a small percentage of the genes (primarily the 2nd chromosome

in the ape genome), put that egg a petri dish with human sperm,

and conception may well be possible (I'd be surprised if some

Korean or Japanese research geneticist is not already working

on this very experiment).

reference:

http://www.motherjones.com/files/HumanChimpGenomes630.jpg

But -- WHY do we, chimps, bonobos (and gorillas, for that matter)

share these body hair producing genes, when our presumed

reptilian ancestors did NOT? Perhaps due to pure chance, in the

eons of natural selection. Or, if I listen to certain RCC scientists

and other Darwin-friendly Christians, perhaps God has so guided

human evolution as to bring us to this stage, where we have

broken away from the other primates and can no longer mate

and reproduce with them.

"Creation Scientists" (?) publish peer-reviewed (?) papers telling

us not to worry about such things -- that having the same Creator

accounts for the not-so-remarkable similarities in us and the apes.

At any rate, if Eloheim impregnated Mary by "the same method

human beings use" -- and if we, the angels, and the gods are

"all of one species" (some just more progressed than others) --

then it is reasonable that I question such gods' relationship to the

earthly primates we know and study (both extant and extinct).

Are these professed gods Homo sapiens?

Primates?

Mammals?

Chordates?

Did Australopithecus have facial hair because of natural selection?

Or because Jehovah made it so?

Or because Adam, Jehovah, Eloheim and the rest of us share a

common ancestor with that extinct apeman?

If we choose to decree that the gods with celestialized bodies of flesh

and bone (but no blood, tears or saliva) MUST have hair, then it is

reasonable to ask if any being somewhere, somewhen, might have

become a god without scalp hair, facial hair, armpit hair, or whatever?

If, on the other hand, we agree not to limit the Divine to descriptions

in human languages, then perhaps the entire issue can be set aside.

Reorganized Saints have generally followed this latter path, no

matter what might be printed in the Times & Seasons, PGP, etc.

UD

Edited January 28, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[mfbukowski]

Well, then, I'll reluctantly revert back to my original thoughts,

(without attempting to fathom contemporary Mormon theology).

I was taught, somewhere along the line, that we humans have

facial hair because of our genetics -- shared to a great extent

with chimps and bonobos: with whom we share a common

ancestor. We diverged from them a few millions years ago,

and the two of them from each other more recently.

Take an ovum from a female bonobo, judiciously tweak just

a small percentage of the genes (primarily the 2nd chromosome

in the ape genome), put that egg a petri dish with human sperm,

and conception may well be possible (I'd be surprised if some

Korean or Japanese research geneticist is not already working

on this very experiment).

 

reference:

http://www.motherjones.com/files/HumanChimpGenomes630.jpg

But -- WHY do we, champs, bonobos (and gorillas, for that matter)

share these body hair producing genes, when our presumed

reptilian ancestors did NOT? Perhaps due to pure chance, in the

eons of natural selection. Or, if I listen to certain RCC scientists

and other Darwin-friendly Christians, perhaps God has so guided

human evolution as to bring us to this stage, where we have

broken away from the other primates and can no longer mate

and reproduce with them.

"Creation Scientists" (?) publish peer-reviewed (?) papers telling

us not to worry about such things -- that having the same Creator

accounts for the not-so-remarkable similarities in us and the apes.

At any rate, if Eloheim impregnated Mary by "the same method

human beings use" -- and if we, the angels, and the gods are

"all of one species" (some just more progressed than others) --

then it is reasonable that I question such gods' relationship to the

earthly primates we know and study (both extant and extinct).

Are these professed gods Homo sapiens?

Primates?

Mammals?

Chordates?

Did Australopithecus have facial hair because of natural selection?

Or because Jehovah made it so?

Or because Adam, Jehovah, Eloheim and the rest of us share a

common ancestor with that extinct apeman?

If we choose to decree that the gods with cestilaized bodies of flesh

and bone (but no blood, tears or saliva) MUST have hair, then it is

reasonable to ask if any being somewhere, somewhen, might have

become a god without scalp hair, facial hair, armpit hair, or whatever?

If, on the other hand, we agree not to limit the Divine to descriptions

in human languages, then perhaps the entire issue can be set aside.

Reorganized Saints have generally followed this latter path, no

matter what might be printed in the Times & Seasons, PGP, etc.

UD

Uh oh.

 

The "e" word.  That has been known to get at least 45 pages of responses in 17 minutes flat on this board.

 

Buckle up. 

 

One could simply postulate that the evolution experiment is repeatable.  Put down some organisms on any planet which can support life and let those organisms bang up against the environment long enough, and you will get an organism that can eventually create its own environment.

 

Heck I could take that one on faith about as well as I could take all the others on faith anyway.   Who knows?

[Uncle Dale]

...

Who knows...

Ok, I'll take up the matter with him, when the Dr. Seuss books

currently checked out of the children's section are returned.

Until then, I'll fight to the end anybody who dares contradict

the deduced fact, that exactly four zillion, two hundred and

six Moronis can dance upon the tip of Port Rockwell's

Bowie knife.

But, as for the smiling fellows in Truman era suits and

haircuts, showing up at my doorstep and assuring me

that their teachings are fully compatible with the truths

of the Universe.... Well, I suppose they cannot tell me

why Eloheim has no blood, but still retains the other

bodily fluid necessary to conceive future messiahs.

I weary of this trivia -- time to take a nap -- mimic an

Edgar Cayce trance, and consult the Akashic Records

of the Universal Consciousness.

Second star to the right, Wendy... Just past Kolob.

UD