The Valiancy of Trees, revisited. Progress of Intelligences, Brigham Young

[mfbukowski]

17 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness. (Max Planck)

Yeah because we cannot talk about or regard anything as "existing" if we are unconscious.  

This is not a big deal- idealism is the rule of thumb in these times.

Adam Nieman

 · 

Follow

Data VisualiserUpvoted by 

Jocelyn Brown-Eaton

, B.S. Psychology & Philosophy, Salem State University (2020)9y

I'm not aware of Max Planck's statement but it sounds to me like he is making a fundamental claim about what kinds of things make up the universe (an 'ontological' claim). There are three basic positions that philosophers have adopted over the years:

1. Materialism: the universe is made wholly of matter - everything else (including ideas) is just the interaction of material things
2. Idealism: the universe is made wholly of ideas - what we take to be 'matter' is actually just an illusion brought about by consciousness
3. Dualism: both matter and ideas exist and interact (e.g. you can have an idea about moving your hand and thus make your hand move)

Dualism makes intuitive sense to most people, but it is very hard to follow through. How can these two completely different substances (ideas and matter) interact? Materialism makes intuitive sense to modern scientists because matter is where modern scientists look for explanations. Idealism seems very counterintuitive, but becomes much more attractive once you've put some thought into the question, 'what is there?' The 'problem of qualia', for instance, makes materialism untenable for many - it's a subtle but fundamental challenge to the idea that ideas are by-products of matter (see: Hard problem of consciousness).

Without knowing the context, it seems to me that Planck may be saying: 'I'm an idealist, not a materialist nor a dualist'. It's not as bonkers as it might sound for a physicist to make such a claim, though it is a rare opinion amongst physicists.

 

6.8K views

View 25 upvotes

 

 

3

 

5. Mind and Matter as Dual Aspects

5.1 Compositional and Decompositional Approaches

Dual-aspect approaches consider mental and material domains of reality as aspects, or manifestations, of one underlying reality in which mind and matter are unseparated. In such a framework, the distinction between mind and matter results from the application of a basic tool for achieving epistemic access to, i.e., gather knowledge about, both the separated domains and the underlying reality.[14] Consequently, the status of the underlying, psychophysically neutral domain is considered as ontic relative to the mind-matter distinction.

As mentioned in Section 2, dual-aspect approaches have a long history, essentially beginning with Spinoza as its earliest explicit protagonist in occidental philosophy. Major directions in the 20th century have been described and compared to some detail by Atmanspacher (2014). An important distinction between two basic classes of dual-aspect thinking is the way in which the psychophysically neutral domain is related to the mental and the physical. For Russell and the neo-Russellians the compositional arrangements of psychophysically neutral elements decide how they differ with respect to mental or physical properties. As a consequence, the mental and the physical are reducible to the neutral domain. Chalmers’ (1996, Chap. ideas on “consciousness and information” fall into this class. Tononi’s theoretical framework of “integrated information theory” (see Oizumi et al. 2014, Tononi 2015) can be seen as a concrete implementation of a number of features of Chalmers’ proposal. No quantum structures are involved in this work.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-consciousness/

ALSO:

 

Max Planck, Schrodinger, Bohr, and other founders of quantum mechanics have all expressed an idealist or subjective idealist position: in other words, they believed reality is created by or dependent on the mind.Jan 25, 2024

 

Why were the founders of quantum mechanics idealists?

Philosophy Stack Exchange

https://philosophy.stackexchange.com › questions › wh...

Edited June 10, 2024 by mfbukowski

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Yeah because we cannot talk about or regard anything as "existing" if we are unconscious.  

This is not a big deal- idealism is the rule of thumb in these times.

Adam Nieman

 · 

Follow

Data VisualiserUpvoted by 

Jocelyn Brown-Eaton

, B.S. Psychology & Philosophy, Salem State University (2020)9y

I'm not aware of Max Planck's statement but it sounds to me like he is making a fundamental claim about what kinds of things make up the universe (an 'ontological' claim). There are three basic positions that philosophers have adopted over the years:

1. Materialism: the universe is made wholly of matter - everything else (including ideas) is just the interaction of material things
2. Idealism: the universe is made wholly of ideas - what we take to be 'matter' is actually just an illusion brought about by consciousness
3. Dualism: both matter and ideas exist and interact (e.g. you can have an idea about moving your hand and thus make your hand move)

Dualism makes intuitive sense to most people, but it is very hard to follow through. How can these two completely different substances (ideas and matter) interact? Materialism makes intuitive sense to modern scientists because matter is where modern scientists look for explanations. Idealism seems very counterintuitive, but becomes much more attractive once you've put some thought into the question, 'what is there?' The 'problem of qualia', for instance, makes materialism untenable for many - it's a subtle but fundamental challenge to the idea that ideas are by-products of matter (see: Hard problem of consciousness).

Without knowing the context, it seems to me that Planck may be saying: 'I'm an idealist, not a materialist nor a dualist'. It's not as bonkers as it might sound for a physicist to make such a claim, though it is a rare opinion amongst physicists.

 

6.8K views

View 25 upvotes

 

 

3

 

5. Mind and Matter as Dual Aspects

5.1 Compositional and Decompositional Approaches

Dual-aspect approaches consider mental and material domains of reality as aspects, or manifestations, of one underlying reality in which mind and matter are unseparated. In such a framework, the distinction between mind and matter results from the application of a basic tool for achieving epistemic access to, i.e., gather knowledge about, both the separated domains and the underlying reality.[14] Consequently, the status of the underlying, psychophysically neutral domain is considered as ontic relative to the mind-matter distinction.

As mentioned in Section 2, dual-aspect approaches have a long history, essentially beginning with Spinoza as its earliest explicit protagonist in occidental philosophy. Major directions in the 20th century have been described and compared to some detail by Atmanspacher (2014). An important distinction between two basic classes of dual-aspect thinking is the way in which the psychophysically neutral domain is related to the mental and the physical. For Russell and the neo-Russellians the compositional arrangements of psychophysically neutral elements decide how they differ with respect to mental or physical properties. As a consequence, the mental and the physical are reducible to the neutral domain. Chalmers’ (1996, Chap. ideas on “consciousness and information” fall into this class. Tononi’s theoretical framework of “integrated information theory” (see Oizumi et al. 2014, Tononi 2015) can be seen as a concrete implementation of a number of features of Chalmers’ proposal. No quantum structures are involved in this work.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-consciousness/

ALSO:

 

Max Planck, Schrodinger, Bohr, and other founders of quantum mechanics have all expressed an idealist or subjective idealist position: in other words, they believed reality is created by or dependent on the mind.Jan 25, 2024

 

Why were the founders of quantum mechanics idealists?

Philosophy Stack Exchange

https://philosophy.stackexchange.com › questions › wh...

But but but… I can kick the stone! 😁

[mfbukowski]

17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

But but but… I can kick the stone! 😁

Awwwwwwww   MAN!

Am I that predictable??

I hope so.  !

I want EVERYONE to see it and be able to predict it!   And then THINK it!

Just remember when you kick that stone - you will still be having a "human experience" known only to human consciousness! 

Had to get a "plug" in there - of course- for idealism as applied in pragmatism.   For all practical purposes ideas have FUNCTIONS in our lives.

What do your beliefs do for you? 

Alma 32: 30-ish.  This is the scientific method applied to religion.

Scientific Method:

What are the 8 steps of the scientific method?

Problem.

Observation.

Hypothesis.

Experiment.

Collect Data.

Analyze Results.

Conclusion.

Report findings.

Alma 32:

PROBLEM: 26 Now, as I said concerning faith—that it was not a perfect knowledge—even so it is with my words. Ye cannot know of their surety at first, unto perfection, any more than faith is a perfect knowledge.

Observation: 27 But behold, if ye will awake and arouse your faculties, even to an experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith, yea, even if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire work in you, even until ye believe in a manner that ye can give place for a portion of my words.

28 Now, we will compare the word unto a seed. Now, if ye give place, that a seed may be planted in your heart, behold, if it be a true seed, or a good seed, if ye do not cast it out by your unbelief, that ye will resist the Spirit of the Lord, behold, it will begin to swell within your breasts; and when you feel these swelling motions, ye will begin to say within yourselves—It must needs be that this is a good seed, or that the word is good, for it beginneth to enlarge my soul; yea, it beginneth to enlighten my understanding, yea, it beginneth to be delicious to me.

29 Now behold, would not this increase your faith? I say unto you, Yea; nevertheless it hath not grown up to a perfect knowledge.

HYPOTHESIS: 30 But behold, as the seed swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, then you must needs say that the seed is good; for behold it swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow. And now, behold, will not this strengthen your faith? Yea, it will strengthen your faith: for ye will say I know that this is a good seed; for behold it sprouteth and beginneth to grow.

EXPERIMENT: 31 And now, behold, are ye sure that this is a good seed? I say unto you, Yea; for every seed bringeth forth unto its own likeness.

32 Therefore, if a seed groweth it is good, but if it groweth not, behold it is not good, therefore it is cast away.

Collect Data: 33 And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good.

Analyze Results: 34 And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; and this because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and your mind doth begin to expand.

Conclusion: 35 O then, is not this real? I say unto you, Yea, because it is light; and whatsoever is light, is good, because it is discernible, therefore ye must know that it is good; and now behold, after ye have tasted this light is your knowledge perfect?

36 Behold I say unto you, Nay; neither must ye lay aside your faith, for ye have only exercised your faith to plant the seed that ye might try the experiment to know if the seed was good.

37 And behold, as the tree beginneth to grow, ye will say: Let us nourish it with great care, that it may get root, that it may grow up, and bring forth fruit unto us. And now behold, if ye nourish it with much care it will get root, and grow up, and bring forth fruit.

38 But if ye neglect the tree, and take no thought for its nourishment, behold it will not get any root; and when the heat of the sun cometh and scorcheth it, because it hath no root it withers away, and ye pluck it up and cast it out.

39 Now, this is not because the seed was not good, neither is it because the fruit thereof would not be desirable; but it is because your ground is barren, and ye will not nourish the tree, therefore ye cannot have the fruit thereof.

40 And thus, if ye will not nourish the word, looking forward with an eye of faith to the fruit thereof, ye can never pluck of the fruit of the tree of life.

41 But if ye will nourish the word, yea, nourish the tree as it beginneth to grow, by your faith with great diligence, and with patience, looking forward to the fruit thereof, it shall take root; and behold it shall be a tree springing up unto everlasting life.

Report findings.: 42 And because of your diligence and your faith and your patience with the word in nourishing it, that it may take root in you, behold, by and by ye shall pluck the fruit thereof, which is most precious, which is sweet above all that is sweet, and which is white above all that is white, yea, and pure above all that is pure; and ye shall feast upon this fruit even until ye are filled, that ye hunger not, neither shall ye thirst.

43 Then, my brethren, ye shall reap the rewards of your faith, and your diligence, and patience, and long-suffering, waiting for the tree to bring forth fruit unto you.

Then go tell it on the mountain!

Edited June 10, 2024 by mfbukowski

[Rain]

On 6/2/2024 at 3:33 PM, nuclearfuels said:

Brigham Young said: If people understood true philosophy—eternal philosophy, they would understand that there is an eternity of matter. Astronomers estimate that there is between us and the nearest fixed star matter enough from which to organize millions of earths like this. There is an eternity of matter, and it is all acted upon and filled with a portion of divinity. Matter is to exist; it cannot be annihilated. Eternity is without bounds, and is filled with matter; and there is no such place as empty space. And matter is capacitated to receive intelligence.

If we could so understand true philosophy as to understand our own creation, and what it is for—what design and intent the Supreme Ruler had in organizing matter and bringing it forth in the capacity that I behold you here today, we could comprehend that matter cannot be destroyed—that it is subject to organization and disorganization; and could understand that matter can be organized and

brought forth into intelligence,

and to possess more intelligence,

and to continue to increase in that intelligence;

and could learn those principles that organized matter into animals, vegetables, and into intelligent beings; and could discern the Divinity acting, operating, and diffusing principles into matter to produce intelligent beings, and to exalt them—to what? Happiness. Will nothing short of that fully satisfy the spirits implanted within us? No.

(Emphasis added Source: https://journalofdiscourses.com/7/1 and https://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/digital/collection/JournalOfDiscourses3/id/347/)

 

Hi all,

What do you think about this? What's your take-away?

 

Pls correct me if I'm wrong here. My reading of this suggests:

 

1. Like us, plants, animals and materials have some level of intelligence

2. Like us, they may possess more intelligence

3. Like us, they may increase in their intelligence

 

Therefore:
1. Unless the plants, animals, and materials (rocks, etc.) are damned or stopped in their eternal progression, they like us will continue progressing eternally. 

1b - Would God not cease to be God if He arbitrarily damned plants, animals, materials? (2 Nephi 2, Alma 42 etc.)

2. When they reach the highest level of intelligence, they'll obtain a physical body with free agency be born on an earth, live, progress, die, get resurrected, progress to become like our Heavenly Parents.

3. To me, this suggests that we - as premortal intelligences may have had lessons / experiences / births / etc. on other earths where we lived as plants, rocks, animals, etc and progressed to the point of obtaining free will and a physical mortal body. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Certainly makes a whole new thinking process with veganism.

[The Nehor]

On 6/7/2024 at 3:46 PM, nuclearfuels said:

 

@The Nehor - would love your input on this topic. No wrong answers.

If there are spirit bodies I don’t see them as some other material being of the same general shape and size colocated with the physical body. That seems like it is just an assumed carryover over the Protestant’s belief in a dual world of matter and spirit.