One consciousness

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Metaphysics
  3. » One consciousness

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Sun 31 Aug, 2008 10:28 am
I suddenly came up with a theory that makes very much sense to me, some months ago, all of a sudden when I least expected it. I think that there is only one consciousness in the whole of existence, let's call it God. In God's purest form, God is infinitely creative and intelligent, and also, strangely enough both sadistic and masochistic. Let me explain.

God created this universe (and perhaps other universes, I'll get to that), creating matter, and the universal laws. I think that everything is pre-determined, I think the apparently random patterns as explained by quantum theory actually do have a pattern, it's just too absurd for humans to understand at this point. Since God is infinitely intelligent in the purest form, God would know how it would react in every given situation in every given time and space, as any creature or spirit, and God inherits all the roles himself in the play he has created. This means that both destiny and free will are right.

It also means that since we are the Creator, everything we imagine is real. Perhaps there are an infinite number of dimensions, and the energy can work in different patterns, they may have other universal laws, that means that the worlds of Narnia, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Zelda and so on are real, in other dimensions. Yes, and the magic you see in those things might exist as well, because perhaps people's consciousness are more in tune with the matter, because of other universal laws and conscious development. Since, according to quantum mechanics, everything is possible, your desk can turn into a donkey, and mind works over matter, as demonstrated by telekinetics, summoning a fireball at will or teleporting yourself to another plane of existence should theoretically be possible.

One thing I don't understand though, is why God would expose himself to horrible torment? Of course, without suffering, the good things wouldn't be as joyful, but if you think of the torture inflicted on people in the middle ages by the church, it's pretty damn extreme.... Hmmm.. Any thoughts, anyone thinking the same as me?
 
VideCorSpoon
 
Reply Sun 31 Aug, 2008 10:58 am
@Stormalv,
I would recommend Spinoza's "Ethics" as he underlines one thing, nature, which is identified as God. Pre-determination is covered by Spinoza as well. So you may identify with his thoughts.

To tell the truth, you would like the post modern rationalist's all together. Your thoughts on what we imagine is real is outlined by Rene Descartes, Spinoza on God and its attributes, and Leibniz for his thoughts on monadology.

When you ask why god would expose himself to horrible torment? Spinoza would say that God wouldn't do this because it would be a contradiction in Gods modus operandi. Because, as outlined in his Ethics, the world that exists is God, God is infinite, nothing can limit God, God has an infinity of attributes, and has no internal contradiction. Does a perfect being experience imperfect things?

But, thinking more on the topic, Spinoza also says that God is indivisible. So does this mean that Spinoza does not believe in the trinity (which he should because he was after all Jewish) or that all actors are God?
 
savagemonk
 
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2008 03:04 pm
@VideCorSpoon,
It is proven in some cases in my life that there is a benevolent presence among us. There have been cases where I should have been dead but miraculously avoided death. I can't say that I saw angels or the hand of God reach down and save me. I searched long and relentlessly for an explanation to why I was not gone from this realm. The only thing that I could come to was that. God does exist just not in a manner that we can explain. It is clearly quoted throughout history that God is everything and is in everything. There for we can not place him in one perception. Human nature forces us to try and put an identity to God. To create a point of reference to give us a fuzzy feeling that we know what God is.

The way that I see it is that God works through variables in the physical plane. For example you are driving down the road late at night. As you round the corner a deer is standing in your lane. It was to sudden for you to react. But "coincidently" the dear just happened to be inches from impact , and you slide past. Most people would write that off as being lucky. I personally see it as God changing the variables to answer your prayer.

Most people are under the impression that a miracle has to be some grand display of supernatural power. A miracle can be as subtle as a distraction, keeping you from walking into a bus.

Why is it that we have to prove the differences in science, religion, and spirituality. To me it makes more sense to see that they are all in connection with each other. Basically God is everything and everything has a pattern to it's existence and evolution. There for science would be the tools of creation that God uses to aid and create.
 
iconoclast
 
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2008 03:52 pm
@savagemonk,
I think that no-one exists, no universe, no people, no god, nothing, for while it seems like things exist, it is proven in some cases in my life that i've been wrong - and therefore nothing exists. It's like when you close your eyes, or in a pitch black room, when you seem to see lights and shapes - that's all there is, an illusion of something, but nothing real, forever and ever. Amen.
 
sarathustrah
 
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 06:24 pm
@Stormalv,
my theory is pretty parallel to yours...

im a fan of the native american idea that "All is One"

i think that the whole universe was manifested by the will of a force unconceivable by us... that as alan watts proposes, we are in a strange game of hide and seek with our creator... i think that we all have a sliver of consciousness granted by the force that is everything.. not above it or behind it or waiting for us on some other plain of reality when we die... it does not have divine intervention... is not cruel to us... but is just plain everything... matter as well as all the forces in nature and rules of nature... everything is as it is out of necessity to BE. And the purpose being EXPERIENCE...

but this is a very very shortened summary of my complete thoughts about the creator and our purpose... and explaining existance

i also tend to mention "nothing" about now... we imagine before everything came to be, however it happened... there was nothing... yet how can there BE a nothing... if it IS... it is something.. and therefore is not nothing... nothing is a concept without a TRUE meaning...

i think before physical existance... there was still consciousness... and thats what the creator is... and when our bodies expire, we return to the collective consciousness...
 
sarathustrah
 
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 06:34 pm
@Stormalv,
Stormalv wrote:

It also means that since we are the Creator, everything we imagine is real. Perhaps there are an infinite number of dimensions, and the energy can work in different patterns, they may have other universal laws, that means that the worlds of Narnia, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Zelda and so on are real, in other dimensions. Yes, and the magic you see in those things might exist as well, because perhaps people's consciousness are more in tune with the matter, because of other universal laws and conscious development. Since, according to quantum mechanics, everything is possible, your desk can turn into a donkey, and mind works over matter, as demonstrated by telekinetics, summoning a fireball at will or teleporting yourself to another plane of existence should theoretically be possible.


i forgot i wanted to talk about this paragraph in detail too... i agree in a way...
take gryphons, phoenixes, unicorns, dragons, etc
are they not real because they are not physical creatures... if you dream of one, and imagine one... draw one, or just fantasize of one... does that not make it real? Why does everything called Real have to physically BE...

define the word real as you want though... my dreams are real... they are real experiences... real memories.. and in them i can really feel whats goin on...

i dont think everything is physically possible though... i think we live with limits. because there needs to be a delicate balance to have the physical world in working order...
but with the gift of imagination... it is all possible...
its not so sad that i cant REALLY summon a fireball... or teleport myself... but i can imagine doing it... and since when is that not good enough?

oh and i dont know why the creator has to be imagined as entirely perfect... how egotistical huh... there are NO design flaws? come on Razz
 
Solace
 
Reply Sun 21 Sep, 2008 10:06 am
@sarathustrah,
God is a playwright and we are the actors. Free will exists only in the parmaters of how well we play our role. Some choose to be good actors, some choose not to be. Some deliver their lines with finesse and poise, gripping the hearts of the audience, who are, themselves, but other actors and extras, and, of course, the playwright, who both watches and directs. Others have no feel for their role, forget their lines, or just plain can't act. Those are generally forgotten.

And some have the role to follow the way of the playwright, to imagine and create their own little worlds and plays. Whether or not you follow my analogy, don't we take something away from authors by suggesting that they are somehow tapped into other dimensions whereupon they draw inspiration for their creations? Is not the human mind deep enough a pool within to delve to find these imaginary people and places? As for the question of what is real, it is irrelevant. Memory is real; what is done that is worth remembering is remembered, all else is forgotten so that it might as well have never been.
 
Binyamin Tsadik
 
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2008 04:28 am
@Solace,
To say that we are all part of the conciousness of The Limitless (God), is correct. Anything that we create and invision is also part of the consciousness of The Limitless, and therefore, on some level, exist aswell.

We are in a world of Limitation, however. We all have individual and separate consciousness. Separation and individual existance is only possible because we are in the world of Limitation. In the world of the Limitless, everything is one, and nothing can have a separate existance. One may argue that we are also part of the limitlessness, which is correct, which brings one to the conclusion that separation and limit is just illusion. We, however, are a part of that illusion and limit and separation are real to us, unless we attain the consciousness of unity which is accomplished by connecting to The Limitless.

Saying that the Limitlessness is sadistic is illogical, however. You are applying Bodily desires and pleasures to the bodyless and unlimited. It may appear to us that the Limitless is many things, but the simple act of categorizing the Limitless placing it within Limits.

All of the actions of the Limitless is for one Goal, and one Goal alone.
Perfection.
The fact that the world was created incomplete and limited is necissary for Perfection. Because only the imperfect can be perfected.
The Limitlessness is Perfect and Good. And it is a property of Goodness to want to give of this Good to a receiver. Thus in order to give something, it must first be empty of it. And therefore the world is lacking of Good.

It is also the Property of the Limitless to desire to give of this Good in the best possible way. One who receives a gift that one has not worked for, feels shame in the receiving of a gift. The highest level of giving is therefore allowing the receiver to beleive that he earned the reward and there is thus no shame in the receiving.

Thus in the Limitless wisdom of the Limitless, the world was created incomplete so that we could complete it, and so that the attainment of completion is the reward itself. Thus our own effort is what directly leads to the reward.

Therefore all actions of the Limitless is for one purpose, to awaken us in striving to attain perfection so that the Limitless can bestow us with reward.

The reward is limitless because we will never get to infinity from a world of limit. We will always move closer and attain more and more. Thus every generation can attain more and more reward.
 
alex717
 
Reply Sat 25 Oct, 2008 04:25 pm
@iconoclast,
iconoclast wrote:
I think that no-one exists, no universe, no people, no god, nothing, for while it seems like things exist, it is proven in some cases in my life that i've been wrong - and therefore nothing exists. It's like when you close your eyes, or in a pitch black room, when you seem to see lights and shapes - that's all there is, an illusion of something, but nothing real, forever and ever. Amen.


careful to not become nihilistic
 
Rose phil
 
Reply Sat 25 Oct, 2008 08:24 pm
@Stormalv,
Personally, I think we work through many levels of consciousness. And these levels of consciousness range from a baser level to a higher level. And we rise through these different levels through personal and spiritual growth. We can also move up and down these levels through fatigue and depression.
 
TickTockMan
 
Reply Sat 25 Oct, 2008 11:55 pm
@Rose phil,
savagemonk;23257 wrote:
The way that I see it is that God works through variables in the physical plane. For example you are driving down the road late at night. As you round the corner a deer is standing in your lane. It was too sudden for you to react. But "coincidently" the deer just happened to be inches from impact , and you slide past. Most people would write that off as being lucky. I personally see it as God changing the variables to answer your prayer.


This seems counterintuitive to the whole idea of God being omnipotent and infallible, and creating the universe with a likewise infallible Master Plan.

If you are facing imminent death and throw out a prayer for Him to spare you, it seems a bit like shouting, "Hey there, God! You seem to have made a mistake here! Do ya mind changing it for me?"

Multiply your prayer by the millions of other prayers being broadcast each day and it seems like God is spending most of His time listening to people either asking for favors or insinuating that He goofed up.

At this point in this particular discussion, it starts to look like we only have a few options to play with:

1) God answers our prayer, changes His plans, admits He makes mistakes. Whoops! All of a sudden all of His creation starts to look pretty unstable. Good news though! No more predestination! Yay! We're free!

2) We pray to God to save our life from impending death. Miraculously, we are spared. "Thank you, God," we say. God hears our thanks, nods, and thinks to Himself, "You're welcome, but your thanks are unnecessary. I didn't have it planned for you to go yet. You're not scheduled to be gathered for another . . . let's see (checks Master Plan), 2 years, 3 months, 2 weeks, 9 hours, 11 minutes, and 23 seconds." The good news is we're still alive! That was close! But darn it! Where did our free will go? It was here just a minute ago . . .

3) We pray to God to spare us in this, our moment of greatest need, but He doesn't. When we shout, "But why?" God comes to us with the voice of a thousand thunderstorms happening all at once and says, "Who are you to ask Me that? Where were you when I was creating the universe? I had this conversation with Job ages ago. Don't you people listen? Oh, and by the way, I love you."


_________________
"I've never trusted a man who starts a sentence with, 'I think what God meant to say . . .' " --Bill Hicks
"Deserve's got nothin' to do with it." -- Clint Eastwood as William Muny in Unforgiven.
 
Binyamin Tsadik
 
Reply Sun 26 Oct, 2008 04:08 am
@TickTockMan,
It's not that He makes a mistake. The world opperates based on an 'independant' system. If the system of reality brings one into a position of pain, then the individual may pray for 'intervention'.
 
bk-thinkaboom
 
Reply Sun 26 Oct, 2008 06:31 am
@Stormalv,
I am a Bright (The Brights' Net - Home Page) because I firmly believe that the only way we can go about attempting to understand the universe any further than we already do, is to begin by looking at what we perceive as nature, and by assuming that these perceptions are real and true.

I have emphasised those words simply because I do not want people to begin asking such questions as, 'but what can we really pecieve to be real or true? How can we really know?' because all this acheives is a set-back in progress of understanding; if we do want to progress, the best we can do for the time being is to draw a line and say that anything which a majority of people in the world can sense with a physical presence is real and exists. I say majority because this is simply how ideas and beleifs within the world function. I would like to beleive that, with a reference to 1984: 'Sanity is not statistical.' However, in the modern world, it well and truely is. For example, if one tourist states that they saw a giant cow performing a hand stand on the top of the Eiffel Tower, we would assume they are mad or simply lying, but if many people all over the world stated that they saw it, it would be perceived as a real event. I could go further into a debate about whether a majority could all lie and make something real, but I fear I am already wondering away from my main point.

What I am attempting to say is that, although I welcome these types of 'consciousness' theories and ideas, many of which regularly come from a good friend of mine during boring school lessons or inactive lunchtimes, I cannot bring myself to fully endorse them as progressive ideas that can be built upon, because I feel that there is simply not enough real evidence to ground them within the physical world that we perceive. Therefore, I become annoyed when such ideas get in the way of scientific research that bases its ideas upon real evidence, and not the evidence which exists in the minds of a worldwide minority and aren't based upon the facts of nature.

After that rather negative point, I must say that I have welcomed the way in which these theories have made me think. Thanks to such theories, and many other talking points, over the last few months I have come to realise how little we truely know about the universe, which has made me feel extremely frustrated at times, even now. I have also begun to find it comical how one minute I can be discussing the nature of conciousness and the enigma of life and of the existing universe, and the next I will be analysing a performance in drama, which seems very much pointless in comparison.

That has also been a recurring theme recently affecting both me and one of my friends. We both occaisionaly suffer from a lack of enthusiasm or drive for what we are doing education-wise as a result of pondering its apparent pointlessness in comparison to the most dumbfounding questions of life and existence, which sometimes can make for a quite depressing time. Does anyone else ever feel this way? And how does everyone regard what I have said in general?
 
Rose phil
 
Reply Sun 26 Oct, 2008 07:35 am
@Stormalv,
If we are to learn the truth then we must embrace the whole. Only when we are willing to embrace all beliefs and concepts are we ready to choose that which works for us without condemning the beliefs and concepts of others.
 
Binyamin Tsadik
 
Reply Sun 26 Oct, 2008 07:49 am
@Rose phil,
Rose wrote:
Only when we are willing to embrace all beliefs and concepts are we ready to choose that which works for us without condemning the beliefs and concepts of others.


Since when do we care about not condemning false beleifs and false concepts?

Are we not here to arrive at some degree of truth? Accepting the truth involves rejecting the lies.
 
bk-thinkaboom
 
Reply Sun 26 Oct, 2008 08:09 am
@Rose phil,
Rose wrote:
If we are to learn the truth then we must embrace the whole. Only when we are willing to embrace all beliefs and concepts are we ready to choose that which works for us without condemning the beliefs and concepts of others.


Like I have said, for the time being, if we inted to progress, I think we should draw a line under what is real and true as things that a majority of people can sense as a physical existence. If we spend too much time deeply embracing all beliefs, we may all just end up waiting for some ancient magician to turn up and answer our questions, which would be an enormous, if not infinite, setback for scientific research.
 
Binyamin Tsadik
 
Reply Sun 26 Oct, 2008 08:32 am
@bk-thinkaboom,
bk-thinkaboom wrote:
I firmly believe that the only way we can go about attempting to understand the universe any further than we already do, is to begin by looking at what we perceive as nature, and by assuming that these perceptions are real and true.


As I have stated previously in the physics section,
All perception is based on interaction.

The 5 senses, and all scientific Data must be attained through some type of interaction.

If one person said that he spoke to God in a cave (Mohammad) could we believe him?
The answer is no. How could the limitless perfection expect us to 'beleive' in Him or His Prophets without any type of proof?

If God were to provide proof of His 'existance' (for lack of a better word), it would have to be through some type of interaction.

Two completely independant systems have no evidence of each other unless there is some type of interaction or exchange.

Now, if God interacted in a past generation, how does this generation know that this interaction actually happened?
50 Years after the Holocaust people began denying that it ever occurred and there are still surrvivors that are alive today. What will happen when there are no more survivors to say "I was there! It happened!" How can we accept any history to be true for that matter?

If God interacted 3000 years ago, how can we know that this is true today?

First of all, it would have to be a Mass event that more than a small group or people witnessed.
This entire group would have to have recorded it in a physical form and there must be some proof that the generation that recorded it agrees with it.
The event would have had to have drastically changed the entire group and that change would have had to be a difficult change that goes against nature and the only reason that that change remains is because they agree with the occurrence.

Example

An alien comes to earth and makes a funny noise and then leaves.

one person witnessed it - Not enough proof -- could be lying
10 people witnessed it - Not enough proof -- could be a conspiracy
600 000 people witnessed it - Enough proof for someone to beleive it if he wanted to.

The Alien comes to earth and tells everyone to draw a circle once a year

one person does it, and then his decendants continue doing it.
Not enough proof -- could be lying to his children
10 people and their decendants -- not enough proof -- conspiracy
600 000 people and their decendants
-- enough proof but drawing a circle is not so challenging

The Alien comes to earth and gives over the recipe for a society but in that recipe there are 613 difficult laws for the society to keep that go against their natural inclination.

1 person and his decendants - could be lying
10 people and their decendants -- could be a conspiracy
600 000 people and their decendants -- enough proof to beleive but how do we know that nothing changed and evolved over time? The original occurance could have happened but how do we know that the nation preserved it?

When 600 000 people receive a book that says in it "They all heard the voice of God", and "They complained about the difficulty of the commandments" and "They are a stubborn people" (who would not beleive something that didnt happen).
And there is a cerimony that occurs for eight days, once a year where the father tells the son "Beleive that it happened. My father said it did, and his father said it did, and his father before him, all the way back to the people that were there that received this tradition to pass it on (pass over)"

And there is proof that the Text has not changed by a single letter in the last 2000 years and when the Arc is found it will be 3000 years.

Then all of that is enough proof to beleive that it occurred because it is far more probable that it occured than any other possible explanation.
Such as "Mass Hypnotism".

But beleiving in God without any proof is very rediculous. In fact there is no commandment in the Torah that says "Beleive"
The first of the 10 sayings (commonly mistranslated as commandments) is "I am the God that took you out of the land of Egypt" (Nothing mentioned about beleif.. Everyone heard the voice that said 'I AM')

Not "I am the God that created the world" because we did not witness the creation of the world. There is no proof of that. We did, however witness the Exodus of Egypt.
Which is a very great feat. Egypt was the Ruling Empire of Mesopotamia.

So, BK-Thinkaboom, there is nothing wrong with accepting this proof that there is a God today. It is a proof of Nature.

And there are tablets that were found in the last century in Egypt that describe the 10 plagues in the exact order that they occurred.
 
William
 
Reply Sun 26 Oct, 2008 08:54 am
@Binyamin Tsadik,
Binyamin Tsadik wrote:
To say that we are all part of the conciousness of The Limitless (God), is correct. Anything that we create and invision is also part of the consciousness of The Limitless, and therefore, on some level, exist aswell.

We are in a world of Limitation, however. We all have individual and separate consciousness. Separation and individual existance is only possible because we are in the world of Limitation. In the world of the Limitless, everything is one, and nothing can have a separate existance. One may argue that we are also part of the limitlessness, which is correct, which brings one to the conclusion that separation and limit is just illusion. We, however, are a part of that illusion and limit and separation are real to us, unless we attain the consciousness of unity which is accomplished by connecting to The Limitless.

Saying that the Limitlessness is sadistic is illogical, however. You are applying Bodily desires and pleasures to the bodyless and unlimited. It may appear to us that the Limitless is many things, but the simple act of categorizing the Limitless placing it within Limits.

All of the actions of the Limitless is for one Goal, and one Goal alone.
Perfection.
The fact that the world was created incomplete and limited is necissary for Perfection. Because only the imperfect can be perfected.
The Limitlessness is Perfect and Good. And it is a property of Goodness to want to give of this Good to a receiver. Thus in order to give something, it must first be empty of it. And therefore the world is lacking of Good.

It is also the Property of the Limitless to desire to give of this Good in the best possible way. One who receives a gift that one has not worked for, feels shame in the receiving of a gift. The highest level of giving is therefore allowing the receiver to beleive that he earned the reward and there is thus no shame in the receiving.

Thus in the Limitless wisdom of the Limitless, the world was created incomplete so that we could complete it, and so that the attainment of completion is the reward itself. Thus our own effort is what directly leads to the reward.

Therefore all actions of the Limitless is for one purpose, to awaken us in striving to attain perfection so that the Limitless can bestow us with reward.

The reward is limitless because we will never get to infinity from a world of limit. We will always move closer and attain more and more. Thus every generation can attain more and more reward.


Bin, where did this post come from? Ha. Have you been running around in my mind or something. I don't mind at all. You are coming around my friend. The "Bin" who posted the above words is not the same "Bin" that made the below statements in another threed:


"What about those that like their nation and refuse to be a part of your world nation?
Like me" (Post 34 in "One world nation or many nations")


"If there is no distinct land then the Nations will disperse and so will their cultures, and languages, and dress, and there will end up being one boring nation"(Post 31 same thread)


"Peace is between two nations, if there is only one nation then it can never really find peace with another". (Post 31 same thread)

The only exceptions I would make are minor IMO, the world was not created "incomplete" in that it will never be complete. It is unfolding and evolving and we are a part of that Divine process. The fact that we consider that process "limited and separate" from ourselves comes from "arrogance" due to the "perfection of our own creation" forcing us to assume our autonomy and being separate from it.

The three above quotes are, as it seems to me, offering "mixed messages" and I can only hope it is you coming to a better understanding. We are one, my friend and any effort to maintain those "separations" that identify us as "nations" will never lead to that "perfection" you mentioned. We are "one" people. There is much we can learn from each other once we effort to bring down those boundaries that separate us and that means establishing common ground founded in trush and respect. Once we recognise all are 'divine", then and only then will we begin to understand the "oneness" of which you speak.

Nice post.

William
 
Rose phil
 
Reply Sun 26 Oct, 2008 09:46 am
@Binyamin Tsadik,
Binyamin Tsadik,

Quote:
Since when do we care about not condemning false beleifs and false concepts?


I don't know.

Quote:
Are we not here to arrive at some degree of truth? Accepting the truth involves rejecting the lies.


How do we know they are lies? Just because they are not what we believe doesn't mean they are lies.
 
Rose phil
 
Reply Sun 26 Oct, 2008 09:54 am
@bk-thinkaboom,
bk-thinkaboom;29490 wrote:
Like I have said, for the time being, if we inted to progress, I think we should draw a line under what is real and true as things that a majority of people can sense as a physical existence. If we spend too much time deeply embracing all beliefs, we may all just end up waiting for some ancient magician to turn up and answer our questions, which would be an enormous, if not infinite, setback for scientific research.



When I say embrace I mean let them be. People who express their beliefs by putting down other people's beliefs fail to see the bigger picture, of which I believe there is one.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Metaphysics
  3. » One consciousness
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 12/12/2019 at 12:44:33