Sentient Earth - Is the planet mindful and would this explain why there is life in earth?

[The Tanager]

In another thread, William and I were talking about morality and we got off on some topics like the one above. We decided to have that conversation here. This is the first question I'd like to look at. I do think life on earth is only ultimately explained via some kind of mind (or personal agent or creator). I think this belief is rationally supported by various arguments such as the Kalam cosmological argument, the fine-tuning argument, the moral argument, the applicability of mathematics, and the argument from consciousness. I do not think these arguments lead us to the conclusion that a sentient Earth is the ultimate mind behind it all or that it is a mindful link in the chain of creation. I don't think these arguments necessarily rule out a sentient Earth either (although I haven't given this point more than a surface consideration). But logical possibility is not a deciding test of truth, so we need to go further and find reasoning to lead us to the planet actually being mindful. Currently, I see no good reason to believe our planet is mindful.

So, William, I'd love to hear why you think we are rationally warranted in asserting that the planet is mindful and at least part of the chain of creation that led to us. In that other thread you seemed to just assert the Earth as a mindful example and thought that I was doing the same with the immaterial Mind behind creation. If I was that would certainly be a double standard, but I think the above arguments support an immaterial Mind behind creation. What arguments do you think support a sentient Earth?

[William]

Yes I understand what you are arguing here Jason. My argument is that one cannot divorce the Creator Mind from any other mindfulness.

That is your assertion, not argument. You have offered no argument that rationally leads to the conclusion that one cannot divorce the Creator Mind from any other mindfulness. Please do so.

You also haven’t offered an argument that rationally leads to the conclusion that one of those other minds is the Earth-Mind. Please do so.

Have you offered anything other than assertion that the creator mind IS separate from other mindfulness Jason?

[William]

I find it interesting how some beliefs of human personalities have it that The Creator Mind must be a separate entity from the Creation and specifically from mindfulness within the Creation.

The so-called "extended Kalam" claims that The Creator Mind somehow logically "has to be"

uncaused, (b) immaterial, (c) non-temporal (d) unimaginably powerful, and (e) personal, simply to separate the entity from that which the entity created - because that which the entity created appears to be caused, material, temporal, imaginably powerful and non-personal.

Also, the idea of the Bible God re popular interpretation, aligns with Simulation Theory.
A "supernatural mind" which exists outside of the physical universe it created, is the same idea as Simulation Theory.

If we examine both Simulation Theory and Theistic Supernaturalism, we end up with the same running system.
God becomes or fits into the role of a mind which created the mechanism which allows for any mind to then experience said simulation and believe the experience to being real.
This in turn provides a mystery which cannot be fully answered by minds which exist within the Simulated Reality Experience.

The primary unsolvable mystery is the nature of the one/they who created the mechanism and in the case of Theistic Supernaturalism, these become “gods” (and in the case of General Christianity, (and monotheistic religion) these gods become One God.
The nature of the God is spelled out in biblical terms with the additional clause of faith re said nature.

General Christianity claims that God can be trusted as being “good”.
I think that modern day Simulation Theory descends from the beliefs Theistic Supernaturalism has been engaged with for ages.

Problematic to that is the paper and blood trail Christianity has left in the evidence of its wake.
Problematic to Simulation Theory is infinite regress re the question “if we are in a simulation, then perhaps our creators are also in a simulation” in which case this could be layered a zillion times if we accept the idea that to put a stop to that problem, we invoke the rational that something had to have had a Source Reality which is NOT a Simulated Reality.

How many times can simulations within simulations happen before the original nature of The First Source Reality is lost to the awareness of those minds within said Reality Simulators?
Which is to say, how do we know that we are “Dealing” with the genuine article re that/those minds directly responsible for creating the mechanism which gives the mindfulness of all experiencing it, a particular type of Reality Experience?

We have only the nature of the experience in which to examine said experience to find clues as to the nature of that one/those ones who created said mechanism.

Among the blood and paperwork re Christianity, are gems of information which human personalities can come to accept (or reject) in their own way/as they will - primarily the idea that God/The Creator of the mechanism is indeed “good” and entered into the simulation Himself – primarily revealed in the human form of “Jesus” – who exemplifies the nature of said God (the Father) but also in other human forms worth lending an ear to (or not, depending on ones position of the matter of these ideas).

However, there remains the complication of the understanding that the God Himself, may be within a simulated reality experience – a product of whatever it is that the God-Mind is experiencing so, problematic to that is the claim that said God is The Source Reality…re “there are no other Gods before me”.

This can be rectified by understanding that the focus is not on any reality outside of this God (of our reality creation/he who built the mechanism) because all claims are specific only to that which we are mindfully experiencing within the mechanism He created.
Still, the claim inferred that these two Reality Simulations are the only ones that exist, (therefore one of them is real/The Source Reality and created the other) and that would be true even if there are only three levels Source Reality, God Reality and Universe/Earth Reality.

Thus, we would also have to believe that the God who created the mechanism is a true ambassador of The Source-Mind/Reality for us to relax and enjoy the ride.
That is the very tricky bit.
It requires Science – but not so much Physical Science…to work things out mindfully and responsibly, to also ensure there is more to all this than just the blood and paper trail…

The bible creator is presented as being able to exist both inside and outside the creation/simulation.

This would align with the idea that the mind which creates the simulation machinery, does so with the intention of experiencing the results...

The way I understand it (in minds eye) is to argue that The Source Creator made the machinery and then "went into the simulation" and the "going into" allowed for it to work with a blank slate and thus have the experience of a "beginning"...

...this follows that any mindfulness (no matter how far within the simulation) is still connected to The First Source (through the act/experience of being mindful) even if that mindfulness is unaware/not completely aware of said connection...

It could be argued that the bible God "fits the bill"...

Some Christians believe in the God of the extended form of the Kalam.

Of that God (idea) they attribute/claim it to be (a) uncaused, (b) immaterial, (c) non-temporal (d) unimaginably powerful, and (e) personal.

As such, that God-idea would fit as the First Source Reality and every other God-idea (such as the Bible God) derives from said Source - through a hierarchy of mindfulness which act as mediums between the first and second simulations and supplying information in that manner to do with Source Reality.

It fits with the narrative common among some Christians that we cannot trust some of the information being supplied to us, (wars in "heaven" angels and demons et al...) implying that all is not well within the first simulation and this is reflected in what is going on in the second (our) simulation.

Point being, one is charged with the task of sorting out an apparent mess....

[The Tanager]

Have you offered anything other than assertion that the creator mind IS separate from other mindfulness Jason?

No, I didn't even assert that! You were the one that claimed that if the Kalam is an argument for the Creator Mind, then it is an argument for the Earth Mind because they are not separate. Where is your support?

I find it interesting how some beliefs of human personalities have it that The Creator Mind must be a separate entity from the Creation and specifically from mindfulness within the Creation.

The so-called "extended Kalam" claims that The Creator Mind somehow logically "has to be"

uncaused, (b) immaterial, (c) non-temporal (d) unimaginably powerful, and (e) personal, simply to separate the entity from that which the entity created - because that which the entity created appears to be caused, material, temporal, imaginably powerful and non-personal.

You are correct on 2 of those 5; you don’t seem to understand how the rest are argued for.

Yes, the Cause must be immaterial and non-temporal if it is to be the cause of the spatio-temporal universe; that’s clear logical necessity. If space-time began to exist (premise 2), then the cause logically cannot be spatial or temporal since self-causation is logically impossible.

No, the Kalam doesn’t argue that the Creator Mind has to be uncaused because the spatio-temporal universe is uncaused. The cause of the spatio-temporal universe is uncaused because an infinite series of causes is impossible.

No, the Kalam doesn’t argue that the Creator Mind is unimaginably powerful because the spatio-temporal universe is “imaginably powerful,” but because creating all matter and energy isn’t something that just takes a little bit of power.

No, the Kalam doesn’t argue that the Creator Mind is personal because the spatio-temporal universe is non-personal, but because that’s the only way an eternal (uncaused) cause can produce a temporal effect.

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #163]

The extended Kalam diverges from the evidence Jason.

The biblical evidence supports that the Creator Mind is physical re the reports which indicate such encounters, and this is also supported by the many reports from those who have near death experiences.


Near Death Experiences and other related phenomena

1:06:34
Alex. Yeah, I'm assuming that you had to kind of overcome your own programming and own bias by walking into this.

Dr. Jeffery Long. Oh, absolutely. I mean, here I am, as a doctor, and I'm talking about these incredibly unworldly things, you know, things that are far outside of the experience of most people.
I mean, yeah, that's, that's tough.
I mean, it took me a long - in fact - I wrote my first book “Evidence of the Afterlife” and it was literally, only then that I crunched the numbers and did the research and it was like, wow! I kind of was pretty sure I was right. But my gosh, look at this. I mean, you know, this is hardcore science.

This is reality and the near death experiences and all these messages.

So that was, obviously my personal sentinel moment where I really convinced myself with the most stringent scientific methods possible, that what I was thought I saw, what I certainly hoped I saw to be true, was indeed, near death experiences expressing that greater reality,

Alex. How do you define God or Source?

Dr. Jeffery Long. God or Source we talked about that earlier briefly, that the
you have to be aware that God is a human word. And I think you have to embrace the concept that this God or Supreme Being or All, or One has been variably described, but these are all very appropriate apt words for this being The Consciousness,
The Creator, God is such a big thing that it transcends anything that we can put in English words, or in any language words, that is something so all embracing, and
yet you know that we all seem to be connected in a very to in a very real way, that it simply defines – defies - I should say, any single word or description, but it's all sort of that compilation of all those concepts in one and a lot more.

Given the vast amount of evidence Jason, I cannot personally accept the notions of those who uphold the so-called "Extended Kalam" who insist that "GOD" is a completely separate entity from all things physical.

I choose not to second-guess those who make such claims.
Those making the claims should connect the dots and explain how a non-physical entity can create a separate physical entity, along with separate non-physical entities (humans) - which their particular (Extended Kalam) idea of GOD then places into the physical entity and essentially leaves them to it other than interacting on occasion through physical means.

I do not find it difficult at all to understand the Hierarchy of Mindfulness (which we have touched upon in prior posts) has enabled The Creator Mind to converse with The Human Mind through a number of said mediums - one of the eldest being the planet itself and obviously necessary for the role of bringing human forms into being.

Without the Earth-Mind, such could not have been achieved. Those are the dots I am connecting, and they do not yet align with the Extended Kalam version, because those - like yourself - supporting the Extended Kalam have yet to connect the dots in any meaningful way.

Conclusion

4o. William's reply offers a thought-provoking challenge to the extended Kalam cosmological argument by incorporating evidence from biblical accounts and NDEs, proposing a more integrated and relational view of the Creator. While his points are compelling, they also invite further discussion and exploration to address the critiques and provide a robust alternative to the traditional philosophical arguments. This dialogue underscores the complexity of understanding the nature of the Creator and the relationship between the physical and the metaphysical.

[The Tanager]

[Replying to William in post #164]

I will only address one point at a time with you. You claimed any argument I presented for the Creator Mind can be offered for the Earth Mind. I disagree. Address my latest points there, please. If you still hold to your original claim, support and defend it against what I've said. If you have no good reasons to counter what I've claimed, then admit it and then we can move onto what you've said in your latest post.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #164]

I will only address one point at a time with you. You claimed any argument I presented for the Creator Mind can be offered for the Earth Mind. I disagree. Address my latest points there, please. If you still hold to your original claim, support and defend it against what I've said. If you have no good reasons to counter what I've claimed, then admit it and then we can move onto what you've said in your latest post.

I am only interested in addressing all points and connecting the dots. If you disagree with the Hierarchy of Mindfulness as a reasonable and logical understanding, then we have nothing in common with which to connect our divergency with.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #162]

If we examine both Simulation Theory and Theistic Supernaturalism, we end up with the same running system.
God becomes or fits into the role of a mind which created the mechanism which allows for any mind to then experience said simulation and believe the experience to being real.
This in turn provides a mystery which cannot be fully answered by minds which exist within the Simulated Reality Experience.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #164]

I will only address one point at a time with you. You claimed any argument I presented for the Creator Mind can be offered for the Earth Mind. I disagree. Address my latest points there, please. If you still hold to your original claim, support and defend it against what I've said. If you have no good reasons to counter what I've claimed, then admit it and then we can move onto what you've said in your latest post.

I am only interested in addressing all points and connecting the dots. If you disagree with the Hierarchy of Mindfulness as a reasonable and logical understanding, then we have nothing in common with which to connect our divergency with.

The idea of joining the dots has much relevance to defining anything logically/rationally.

What is seldom understood is that all consciousness is Sourced in the One Consciousness (what folk often call "God") - and this reflects in their subsequent definitions (re belief) as to the nature of God being misaligned.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #164]

I will only address one point at a time with you. You claimed any argument I presented for the Creator Mind can be offered for the Earth Mind. I disagree. Address my latest points there, please. If you still hold to your original claim, support and defend it against what I've said. If you have no good reasons to counter what I've claimed, then admit it and then we can move onto what you've said in your latest post.

This confirms what I have been arguing.
Torah Simulation Theory