Law of Intelligence

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Sapius
Posts: 1619
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 4:59 pm

Post by Sapius »

DavidQuinn000 wrote:Entirely right, it's an accidental phenomenon. Sapius's statement has no logic to it.
May be, I’m no expert, let me try to explain then.....

Firstly, I don't think the word 'accident' is appropriate in this context for the simple reason that things could not have been any other way, so how is it an "accident"? At the same time, it was never "pre-planned" either, because it simply unfolds dictated by causality. I don't think there can be any "accidents" as far as causality is concerned. We might be arrogant enough to think we are the only accidental 'intelligent' beings around, but considering the vastness of Totality, this could be a most common phenomenon happening on a "daily" basis.

If whatever exists, or seems to exist, does exist in some form or another, then it surely had the potential to exist, hence, just as it is impossible for something to exist without a prior cause, things that exist must have the potential and are causally connected back to…. infinity. Hence, my poor use of the word 'ingrained'. Don't take it too literally, as in ‘your’ particular kind of intelligence being ingrained in Reality, since....... Infinity.

Reality cannot bring forth that which it does not have the potential to, no accidents, no mistakes, by what standards would they be? Transcend duality, and the “accident” disappears. It’s that simple, at least for me.
Nothing is ingrained in the fabric of the Universe. Things just come into being when the causal circumstances are ripe, and then they disappear again.
Of course, David, it is not only you who has the right to be poetic at times. Don't tell me that you take my sentences at face value.

Hence, the yellowness of a banana skin did have the potential hidden in the chain of cause and effect, which one can glimpse when the causal circumstances are ripe. Similarly, “intelligence” is necessarily “ingrained” and appears when the time is ripe. It’s all appearances, David, just appearances, like in a "self", which lay hidden in Reality, until the time is ripe. As in a ripe banana. hehehe…..

Having said that; Reality is not that which I could even imagine conceptualizing.
Sapius
Posts: 1619
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 4:59 pm

Post by Sapius »

Diebert wrote:
There doesn't seem to be any logic in talking about 'accidental' phenomenons on this level, because this implies some intentional or non-random phenomenons to make this distinction in the first place. Awareness is certainly ingrained in the 'fabric' of all that one is becoming aware of. And awareness is the foundation of reason and intelligence, is it not?
I wouldn't have spent two hours on my post if I had seen this. This is exactly what i mean. Thanks Diebert. It is quite difficult for me to actually express what I mean.
thesynapseislife
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 11:47 am

Post by thesynapseislife »

If whatever exists, or seems to exist, does exist in some form or another, then it surely had the potential to exist
Maybe it's just me but I see something as either existing or not. I perceive the situation as being more binary. If something doesn't exist it's a '0' and doesn't become '1' until creation through causally connected events stemming from the "beginning" (very loose term here, I don't know if I believe in beginnings anymore). I don't see potential as part of the equation.
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by David Quinn »

Diebert wrote:
There doesn't seem to be any logic in talking about 'accidental' phenomenons on this level, because this implies some intentional or non-random phenomenons to make this distinction in the first place.
It's accidental in the sense that Nature had no intention to create intelligence or consciousness. These things just evolve into being by chance. Nature cares not one whit whether intelligence/consciousness exists or not.

Thus, you can see that it is indeed meaningful to speak of intelligence arising "accidently" because it is contrasted with the idea that Nature can behave intentionally.

Awareness is certainly ingrained in the 'fabric' of all that one is becoming aware of. And awareness is the foundation of reason and intelligence, is it not?

Awareness is certainly integral to the existence of all things, but that doesn't change the fact that awareness/existence arises "accidently" - that is, without any intention from Nature.

-
Sapius
Posts: 1619
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 4:59 pm

Post by Sapius »

David wrote:
It's accidental in the sense that Nature had no intention to create intelligence or consciousness.
Who ever said anything about Nature having any intentions? It is not wise to assume.
These things just evolve into being by chance.
Like in the throwing of a dice?
Nature cares not one whit whether intelligence/consciousness exists or not.
Of course not! How could it care if it cannot even think?!
Thus, you can see that it is indeed meaningful to speak of intelligence arising "accidently" because it is contrasted with the idea that Nature can behave intentionally.
I see you are using quotation marks now, but still, it is meaningless to call it "accidental", and more meaningless yet to call it "intentional" since neither apply, and there is no contradiction. And yet, “intelligence” permeates the fabric of Reality. In fact, what doesn’t?
analog57
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 10:20 am

Post by analog57 »

DavidQuinn000 wrote:It's accidental in the sense that Nature had no intention to create intelligence or consciousness. These things just evolve into being by chance. Nature cares not one whit whether intelligence/consciousness exists or not.

Thus, you can see that it is indeed meaningful to speak of intelligence arising "accidently" because it is contrasted with the idea that Nature can behave intentionally.


DQ says that causality is accidental?


Image
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by David Quinn »

It's non-intentional. So whether it throws up conscious, intelligent beings or not is purely a matter of chance. It doesn't care whether intelligence exists or not - or wisdom, for that matter, or enlightenment - just as it wouldn't care if the human race suddenly became extinct tomorrow. It has no values.

The processs of cause and effect itself isn't accidental, of course. Its existence couldn't be otherwise. It goes to the heart of reality.

-
Sapius
Posts: 1619
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 4:59 pm

Post by Sapius »

analog57 wrote:
DavidQuinn000 wrote:It's accidental in the sense that Nature had no intention to create intelligence or consciousness. These things just evolve into being by chance. Nature cares not one whit whether intelligence/consciousness exists or not.

Thus, you can see that it is indeed meaningful to speak of intelligence arising "accidently" because it is contrasted with the idea that Nature can behave intentionally.


DQ says that causality is accidental?
No, not really, he is just being stubborn, and that he is being just careful enough for people who he thinks will get confused and apply the attribute of 'literally thinking' to Nature since it is all connected through cause and effect. Although all things are natural, it is not my toe that thinks, so how could one logically accept that Nature as a whole is an intelligent thing that thinks?

One of the reasons to call it 'accidental' is that we think in terms of Nature doing this and doing that, but in fact, what is happening is Nature itself, not an outside force doing anything at all. It is the process itself that we call Nature, so how could anything be accidental in any sense in such a seamless flow? Including the emergence of intelligence, which by the way, must permeate the fabric of Reality just like any other thing, but that does not make Reality or Nature "intelligent" in the sense we take the meaning of 'intelligence' as applied to us, a thinking entity.
User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Accidental vs. fundamental

Post by DHodges »

Sapius wrote: One of the reasons to call it 'accidental' is that we think in terms of Nature doing this and doing that, but in fact, what is happening is Nature itself, not an outside force doing anything at all. It is the process itself that we call Nature, so how could anything be accidental in any sense in such a seamless flow?
I think the distinction that should be made is between the fundamental structure of cause and effect - how it operates - and how it happens to work out in a particular instance. The distinction is not beetween 'accidental' and 'on purpose', but between 'accidental' and 'essential'.

The existence of dinosaurs, or humans, or any particular thing, are not due to the fundamental nature of reality, but due to the particular way things happened to work out.
Sapius
Posts: 1619
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 4:59 pm

Post by Sapius »

DHodges wrote:The distinction is not beetween 'accidental' and 'on purpose', but between 'accidental' and 'essential'.
Even then, as far as reality is concerned, nothing is accidental nor essential. I don't see what is the difference here.
The existence of dinosaurs, or humans, or any particular thing, are not due to the fundamental nature of reality, but due to the particular way things happened to work out.
Sure, but the question is, the things that happened to work out the way they did, could they have happened any other way? If the answer is no, then it is no accident. On the other hand, did Reality/Nature intend to create life and intelligence, no, because it does not essentially plan as such. On the other hand, can it help not bring forth life and intelligence, no, it is absolutely helpless in that regard due to its un-intentionally self-created conditions. That is what it is if anything at all. Can life and intelligence pop up somewhere else in the Universe? Sure it can, we do not have a monopoly in this corner of our universe. Things do happen, and they are essentially neither accidents nor pre-planed or intended. Nature/Reality simply is, and in my opinion we simply cannot talk about Nature/Reality in such terms.
analog57
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 10:20 am

Post by analog57 »

DavidQuinn000 wrote:It's non-intentional. So whether it throws up conscious, intelligent beings or not is purely a matter of chance. It doesn't care whether intelligence exists or not - or wisdom, for that matter, or enlightenment - just as it wouldn't care if the human race suddenly became extinct tomorrow. It has no values.

The processs of cause and effect itself isn't accidental, of course. Its existence couldn't be otherwise. It goes to the heart of reality.

-

I agree that causality is NOT accidental. But that leads to the question, is there a first cause?

http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/pimatrix.html
"Somewhere inside the digits of pi is a representation for all of us -- the atomic coordinates of all our atoms, our genetic code, all our thoughts, all our memories. Given this fact, all of us are alive, and hopefully happy, in pi. Pi makes us live forever. We all lead virtual lives in pi. We are immortal." - Cliff Pickover
Sapius
Posts: 1619
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 4:59 pm

Post by Sapius »

Analog
I agree that causality is NOT accidental. But that leads to the question, is there a first cause?
Do we know how energy came to be?
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by David Quinn »

Analog wrote:
I agree that causality is NOT accidental. But that leads to the question, is there a first cause?
What caused casuality, you mean? The question has no meaning. Causality is timeless.

"Somewhere inside the digits of pi is a representation for all of us -- the atomic coordinates of all our atoms, our genetic code, all our thoughts, all our memories. Given this fact, all of us are alive, and hopefully happy, in pi. Pi makes us live forever. We all lead virtual lives in pi. We are immortal." - Cliff Pickover
Maybe the universe is just a big sneeze and we're all waiting for the Coming of the Great White Hankerchief.

-
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by David Quinn »

David Hodges wrote:
I think the distinction that should be made is between the fundamental structure of cause and effect - how it operates - and how it happens to work out in a particular instance. The distinction is not beetween 'accidental' and 'on purpose', but between 'accidental' and 'essential'.

The existence of dinosaurs, or humans, or any particular thing, are not due to the fundamental nature of reality, but due to the particular way things happened to work out.
It depends on how you look at it. We can say that the dinosaurs were destined to evolve into being, given the existence of the causal conditions at the time. And these causal conditions were themselves destined by their causal conditions, and so on. So we can say that the existence of the dinosaurs was destined from beginningless time and thus "essential". Reality could not be what it is without them.

Even a speck of dust lying on a forgotten table is essential. It too is a product of countless causes, which, when we trace them back, spread out and intermingle with the rest of Nature. If the speck of dust did not exist, or even if it was in a slightly different position, the Universe, as we currently know it, wouldn't be possible. For the countless causes of the speck's different position would themselves be different. The entire past history of the Universe would be drastically altered.

Of course, this doesn't negate what you're saying. Dave. It's just an added perspective. Dave Toast summed up this perspective when he talked about the "iron block" of Reality a few weeks back.

-
Locked