The guy talks about clay pots and even if you break a pot the clay will always be its essence .
When we pull reality apart , we will find that atoms are always the essence of physical objects and that reality is nothing more than atoms arranged in various patterns of various densities.
Now somebody comes along and says the essence of reality is clay, he hasn’t got a clue about science. And if he offers this in relation to human consciousness, then he equates this to the concept that because humans are conscious, all of reality is conscious and we can throw in a few “human motives” as well as “that what cannot be known”.
IMO, using the anthropomorphized term “who” for describing the essence of the universe is sheer hubris.
Nothing in reality “requires” consciousness. Just because organic consciousness emerged from certain biochemical patterns doesn’t mean that all atomic patterns are or need be conscious. They can be just cay!
But what can be proven is the fact that all of reality rests on mathematical relationships and interactions and fundamentally are all mathematical in essence and THAT CAN BE KNOWN, unlike an unknowable essence named God as a conscious agency WHO mysteriously drives this universe for His pleasure.
I don’t think brm is talking about something that you can know in terms of defining it as something in space and time. More like it IS spacetime, but he might not like that analogy. I don’t hear much concern for properties from him.
Scripture is very clear about the divine properties of God. You can start to redefine these properties, but then you lose context.
And these interpretive inconsistencies sum up the problems with religions and their mostly extinct species of Gods.
God is not a scientific nor a philosophical term. When you come right down to it God is an undefined object altogether. It is meaningless.
OTOH, the definition of quasi-intelligent mathematical guiding equations is well defined and is functionally applied in the universe, nature, and human existence.
There are many atheists. Are there any amathematists?
This is what Gervais was talking about .
Destroy all bibles and mathematical theories and rewrite them a 1000 years from now.
All scriptures will be completely different, but all maths will be exactly the same. One concept is ambiguous and undefined, the other is axiomatic and clearly defined.
God is an un-defined ideal projection of the human mind.
Mathematics are the well-defined functional properties of the universe.
But then we have completely altered the objective character as described in scripture and we have no longer need for the name God unless we are describing ourselves.
I am conscious, I ponder the future, I have created, I have destroyed.
I am made in God’s image. Am I God?
And I think that is his objectice. And just like any new prophet, they have to fold in the old while claiming the new revelation. Like Karen Armstrong, “God is the god beyond God”.
In general, the object that is causal to (experiences) the wave function collapse. A photographic plate or a reactive chemical (as found in the sensory organs). Every object or pattern in the universe experiences quantum mechanics, a “Bing”, a moment of resolution of superposed potentials.
Obviously a being with a neural system can experience that event as a moment of clarity and understanding (resolution).
The best I can explain the experience of a non-neural object , there will still be a moment of resolution and change. This may not be a conscious experience but it still would be a kinetic experience and causal to a physical response event.
Can we say that “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction” is an example of the moment of clarity and resolution experienced by both “observers” during a collapse of the wave function.
I include every instant of change as a quantum event, whether it be at micro-scale or macro-scale and both sides become observers during the event. The collapsing wave quantum becomes physically expressed, while the object that is causal to the collapse is changed. Both are affected by the quantum event.
IMO, every singular object with mass is (has) a generic mathematical quantum. I believe that superposition is not necessarily between 2 equal potentials but may be differently weighted and that may decide the direction of change, i.e. quantum is not always a 50/50 proposition.
Of course none of this explains “Who God is” and why the term “Who” is used as if God is a person which is a contradiction in terms.
The only thing that comes to my mind has me reflecting on my realization that “consciousness” is only a thing in the present moment, nothing in the past IS conscious, nothing in the future can be conscious.
Consciousness is a result of the act of life unfolding and interacting with other life.
So in a very hippy dippy sense, I could imagine consciousness as the eternity of now, still I fear that’s not what you’re driving at.
Sorry, other than that particular mental cascade I don’t know what to do with the concept.
Or, one could cut to the chase and say that “There is Only God”…the implications of which encourages one to practice the art of not projecting relativity onto the absolute.
There being no “past and present” is the definition of Eternity…give that a try.
I liked it when you asked Write4u “who is the observer?”…give that a try.
As I’ve been pointing out, it is your version of “consciousness” that has a lot of unexplained dependencies on other things and dimensions. We Hippies went the extra mile, having been inspired by the ancients and the chaos of our times. Where were you? (I mean seriously, what the hell?)