Mind and Matter

[bert]

mind and matter are always evident to each other:a crystal does not appear to us as an intelligent thing,yet it is perfectly so with respect to its own form and function.to us,a blade of grass seems more intelligent and courageous,too,as it fights for its place in nature with the oak.the insect,bird,reptile,and mammal appear successively more intelligent as complexity increases.this is the great illusion.the minds of the crystal,the rabbit,Michaelangelo,or God,are the same,only the means difffer;the one is manifested more fully then the other.ability is always equal or superior to the means.the dynamic inter-relationship of all things causes the universality of change,a transformation process embracing everything,although the over-all content is the same - everything in time changing into everything else.thus the butterfly became Aristotle!but change is so gradual that any thing is always completely itself as manifest reality.nature does show us rapid metamorphosis,but only during gestative periods or in early forms of life.the most magnificent example being the egg-larve-butterfly emanation;the most perfect allegory of a thing becoming its own Imago.

[Sophia19]

mind and matter are always evident to each other:a crystal does not appear to us as an intelligent thing,yet it is perfectly so with respect to its own form and function.to us,a blade of grass seems more intelligent and courageous,too,as it fights for its place in nature with the oak.the insect,bird,reptile,and mammal appear successively more intelligent as complexity increases.this is the great illusion.the minds of the crystal,the rabbit,Michaelangelo,or God,are the same,only the means difffer;the one is manifested more fully then the other.ability is always equal or superior to the means.the dynamic inter-relationship of all things causes the universality of change,a transformation process embracing everything,although the over-all content is the same - everything in time changing into everything else.thus the butterfly became Aristotle!but change is so gradual that any thing is always completely itself as manifest reality.nature does show us rapid metamorphosis,but only during gestative periods or in early forms of life.the most magnificent example being the egg-larve-butterfly emanation;the most perfect allegory of a thing becoming its own Imago.

In what way is ability equal or superior? why not simply more evident? movement can be seen..... however much able it is to be measured.....

what the eye or (scope) cannot see ...... does it not exist?

what role and power does the imagination have?

Is this not in some ways what we must do to "understand" the transformation of energy from entity or element to the next?

Sophia

[bert]

mind and matter are always evident to each other:a crystal does not appear to us as an intelligent thing,yet it is perfectly so with respect to its own form and function.to us,a blade of grass seems more intelligent and courageous,too,as it fights for its place in nature with the oak.the insect,bird,reptile,and mammal appear successively more intelligent as complexity increases.this is the great illusion.the minds of the crystal,the rabbit,Michaelangelo,or God,are the same,only the means difffer;the one is manifested more fully then the other.ability is always equal or superior to the means.the dynamic inter-relationship of all things causes the universality of change,a transformation process embracing everything,although the over-all content is the same - everything in time changing into everything else.thus the butterfly became Aristotle!but change is so gradual that any thing is always completely itself as manifest reality.nature does show us rapid metamorphosis,but only during gestative periods or in early forms of life.the most magnificent example being the egg-larve-butterfly emanation;the most perfect allegory of a thing becoming its own Imago.

In what way is ability equal or superior? why not simply more evident? movement can be seen..... however much able it is to be measured.....

what the eye or (scope) cannot see ...... does it not exist?

what role and power does the imagination have?

Is this not in some ways what we must do to "understand" the transformation of energy from entity or element to the next?

Sophia

from the least form to the highest there is a fundamental pattern of change - from simple to complex - which follows definite laws,the whole purpose being to further expressional means and individual perfection for ultimate independence.the case of the individual appears to be more important than the mass.nature's quest is for the genius,the altruistic few who create everything worthwhile in the world.certain beings are older in time ,a point which everyone reaches,but not at the same time.hence there is no equality but always equity - an insoluble mystery of 'Why?'.

[bert]

this is mere supposition only if it presupposses that we are but automata. this is what happens: Nature creates and is manifoldly re-creative - a dual concurrent production of replicas. body not only creates body but mind also; ego and soul replicate themselves as our own. indeed, God recreates the npotential of God as our individual self. thus, all universals appear ultimately within the individual. within each of us , by our own encouragement, will be developed all possibilities from whatever our residuum of experience and present means. this will entail voluntary frustration of one thing to obtain another. to become good - sacrifice evil, and our choice will manifest itself, though sporadically, depending on our consistency in overcoming periods of fatigue. when sacrifice is total, i.e., all for one thing, then the result is a cataract of power.

[sagerage]

intelligent design, can only be understood by an intelligent being. I doubt a crystal or a piece of paper can understand what...it all means.

How does evolution take place, why, and for what purpose??? Sure, cause and effect. But what started this process and why?

[Sapius]

How does evolution take place, why, and for what purpose???

How about survival?

Sure, cause and effect. But what started this process and why?

I think you are intelligent enough to find out that that question is illogical to begin with; that is, if you already know that ‘change’ could not have a beginning.

intelligent design, can only be understood by an intelligent being.

I’m quite sure.

I doubt a crystal or a piece of paper can understand what...it all means.

I doubt a cow could too.

In my opinion, at the heart of human intelligence lies the capability of questioning; ‘why?’; including intelligence itself. Basically cognition, but just that at times it can go overboard. Side-effects, I guess.

[sagerage]

sagerage wrote:
How does evolution take place, why, and for what purpose???

How about survival?

Yeah, I know, but why and for what is the question. Let's pretend that we didn't evolve and were still monkeys or bacteria, what would be the meaning of this and did it all come about as chance? (I don't believe in a Christian God, but it does seem like there's much more going on then meets the eye) Another thing, why didn't all monkeys evolve? (circumstance?) How is it that nature is conscious enough to change it's own DNA, it doesn't make sense to me.

I think you are intelligent enough to find out that that question is illogical to begin with; that is, if you already know that ‘change’ could not have a beginning.

Can you honestly tell me you can fully comprehend that? I cannot understand in any meaningful way how nature always was, is and will be. It's beyond my comprehension. Now, if you see this in a different way, then I must encourage you to share the insight.

In my opinion, at the heart of human intelligence lies the capability of questioning; ‘why?’; including intelligence itself. Basically cognition, but just that at times it can go overboard. Side-effects, I guess.

I mostly notice the missing pieces. It can make me crazy, to not know. I can think my heart out, but I'd like some answers once in a while and that doesn't seem to happen (instead more questions - drives me crazy.).

[sagerage]

Cause and effect has no beginning and no end - how convenient. I can't rap my mind around that! (Is nature a donut?)

[Sapius]

I mostly notice the missing pieces. It can make me crazy, to not know. I can think my heart out, but I'd like some answers once in a while and that doesn't seem to happen (instead more questions - drives me crazy.).

That’s perfectly normal, if one is passionately driven to question existence.

Cause and effect has no beginning and no end - how convenient. I can't rap my mind around that! (Is nature a donut?)

Sagerage, as much as I would like to engage in a discussion, I must beg you pardon since I might be away for quite a few days.

In the meanwhile, you could take a look at this, and discuss it with its author David Quinn, who is one of the forum hosts here.

[sagerage]

Sapius,
I've printed it. Have you read all of it? Do you understand it all?

[brokenhead]

Another thing, why didn't all monkeys evolve? (circumstance?) How is it that nature is conscious enough to change it's own DNA, it doesn't make sense to me.

Humans did not evlove from all monkeys, If you think about it, far back in the human ancestral line were single-celled organisms. Yet there still exists single-celled organisms today. No need to single out primates.

Let's assume humans evolved - and I belive the new species that was first truly human arrived suddenly - from one particular primate species, and even one particular primate set of parents. Close by were other primates of that species, and maybe other genetically very similar primate species. The new humans could have mated with these nonhuman primates and given rise to regressive strains that survived into primates that were more successful than their primate ancestor, but still primates. Such infusion of human DNA did not result in humans but rather more evolutionarily successful primate strains, perhaps the lasting descendants of whom are today's great apes.

[sagerage]

The new humans could have mated with these nonhuman primates and given rise to regressive strains that survived into primates that were more successful than their primate ancestor, but still primates. Such infusion of human DNA did not result in humans but rather more evolutionarily successful primate strains, perhaps the lasting descendants of whom are today's great apes.

The theory, is that by luck things came together and over millions of years, they evolved, one generation to the next (meaning, humans, couldn't have appeared all of a sudden). Great, so what does that tell you? Mate, what do we truly understand through all this?

[Sapius]

Sapius,
I've printed it. Have you read all of it? Do you understand it all?

Yes I do, but that is not even the authors point, since he keeps insisting, that it is not what's in there, (as all that have come before him have said), but what it "points to" that needs to be understood, or rather accepted, and my point is, that that understanding is absolutely personal in nature, because no two individual's could actually agree with another's 'entirety' of thought processes, or match the causal conditions. However, one can come to terms, or agree, with some parts of reasoning.

Every particular individually is absolutely unique in my opinion; otherwise individuality wouldn't hold much meaning. Generally we are quite comfortable in loosing that individuality, the highest form of it being, my individuality ain't real. In my opinion of course.

[bert]

conclusive on Mind and Matter:

our past experience alone bears valid inference (organic or intuitive) not only from our reactions to it but from the sensational aftermath value of our active participation. all actions become irrecollectably formative, whereas our thoughts are mutable and mainly directive. the only elements opposing Man are exterior ones which may cause conflict,.., man himself, disease (unities without empathy; or natural decay). all actions create our destiny, therefore whatever environment and accidents we inherit are to a certain extent our liability.