Is the Universe Mechanistic?

[Bro Dave]

If this were a mechanistic universe...

Urantia Book p846:6 75:8.7 If this were a mechanistic universe, if the First Great Source and Center were only a force and not also a personality, if all creation were a vast aggregation of physical matter dominated by precise laws characterized by unvarying energy actions, then might perfection obtain, even despite the incompleteness of universe status. {There would be no disagreement; there would be no friction. But in our evolving universe of relative perfection and imperfection we rejoice that disagreement and misunderstanding are possible, for thereby is evidenced the fact and the act of personality in the universe.} And if our creation is an existence dominated by personality, then can you be assured of the possibilities of personality survival, advancement, and achievement; we can be confident of personality growth, experience, and adventure. What a glorious universe, in that it is personal and progressive, not merely mechanical or even passively perfect!

Like a wine goblet, the universe only has value by what it contains. The sort of "grey" mindless processes that would produce an mechanistic universe, would have not values or meaning associated with them, and therefore no beauty or love.

Bro Dave

[Scrotum]

Value, or meaning as you are refering to is a Human concept. There is no "reality" to it. Whatever you decide to have meaning, has a meaning. the Universe exist, thats it, there is no cause for it, it just is.

Humans usually need a meaning of some sort, like work, family, or even God when its really bad. But the only thing you really need to know that you exist, thats it, just make the best of it.

[ST88]

If this were a mechanistic universe...

{There would be no disagreement; there would be no friction.

Friction is a mechanical concept.

Like a wine goblet, the universe only has value by what it contains.

Like a wine goblet, the universe only has value by that which we pour into it.

The sort of "grey" mindless processes that would produce an mechanistic universe, would have not values or meaning associated with them, and therefore no beauty or love.

We can prove this is not true by the different meanings applied to different objects, and the different standards of beauty held by different people.

[Bro Dave]

Y'all are missing the point. Mechanical "things" are incapable of the process of recognising those qualities such as beauty. Were the Universe strictly mechanistic, pragmatism would rule, and the concept of beauty would not only be superfulous, but unatainable. Like a stuffed raccoon is techically still a raccoon but with all reasons for its existance removed. While animals appear to be capable of enjoying life, their response remains superfical, with no hint of being philosophical.

That we do not all have exactly the same appreciation for, or definitions of beauty, love and honor, hardly negates the concepts. It simply demonstrates that individuality upon which we were created. Were it not so, then indeed would be expect a robotic sameness in how we perceive the world and placed everything in its "proper" pigeon hole.

Bro Dave

[Scrotum]

Beauty love and honor is human concepts. They do not exist outside of our subjective minds. You should know this yourself very well Bro.

[QED]

Dave -- beauty, as they say, is in the eye of the beholder. If there was such a thing as objective beauty then the case against a mechanistic universe might be stronger. But I think if we examine any candidate we care to choose I think we will find that someone, somewhere might have a different opinion. Do you acknowledge this or are you of the opinion that there is such a thing as objective beauty, in which case I'd be very interested to know what you think that might be.

Once we eliminate (if indeed we can) the notion of absolute, external and objective beauty we are left with it being a perception. This is wholly compatible with a mechanistic universe because what is being perceived is just another arrangement of particles and fields. Different values are attached to these particular arrangements by different people. All the "magic" then is a personal reaction to what is being perceived. Perhaps we can go into the mechanism of perception later.

[ST88]

Y'all are missing the point. Mechanical "things" are incapable of the process of recognising those qualities such as beauty...

Bro Dave:
I think you are misunderstanding what "beauty" is. That which we find beautiful; that which pleases us to the eye or the intellect; that which conveys to us a sense of personal meaning; that which shows us that such things are possible for even us to accomplish; these can all be explained within the mechanics of the universe. We are attracted to beauty because to distinguish beautiful things from non-beautiful things, or even ugly things, is a pre-requisite for survival. This can be traced back in evolution to pre-mammalian brains. Brightly colored animals and vegetation convey signals that demand attention and discernment. Monarch butterfiles taste bad. Fluorescent red frogs will kill you. Distinctively colored wasps should not be bothered. Oranges taste good. Even mating with attractive opposite-gendered individuals raises the chances that offspring will find mates due to their potential attractiveness. The vast amount of tastes in the human population ensures that any one resource-well of beauty is not depleted (or exploited) all at once.

Beauty is not a conscious choice, nor is it an objective, intrinsic quality -- it's a survival technique.

[Bro Dave]

Beauty love and honor is human concepts. They do not exist outside of our subjective minds. You should know this yourself very well Bro.

PRESICELY! Human, not robotic! The driver is capable of those kinds of concepts, the vehicle is not.

Bro Dave

[Bro Dave]

Dave -- beauty, as they say, is in the eye of the beholder. If there was such a thing as objective beauty then the case against a mechanistic universe might be stronger. But I think if we examine any candidate we care to choose I think we will find that someone, somewhere might have a different opinion. Do you acknowledge this or are you of the opinion that there is such a thing as objective beauty, in which case I'd be very interested to know what you think that might be.

While I suspect there well may be an area where virtually everyone agrees, even there will we find differences in perception of that beauty. That really goes to the root of my argument. The Universe was created that individuality might be expressed and experienced by us and our Creator partner simultaneously. God did not want Cyborgs. He wanted progeny with whom He could experience the wonder and excitment of adventure and growth. (a lot like what we do with our own kids...)

Once we eliminate (if indeed we can) the notion of absolute, external and objective beauty we are left with it being a perception. This is wholly compatible with a mechanistic universe because what is being perceived is just another arrangement of particles and fields. Different values are attached to these particular arrangements by different people. All the "magic" then is a personal reaction to what is being perceived. Perhaps we can go into the mechanism of perception later.

Same fact, different conclusions. For me, a purely logical mechanistic base funnels to common perceptions and similar conclusions. That we see a spectrum of opinions is a reflection of planned diversity, not robotic sameness.

Cyborgs we ain't!

Bro Dave

[Scrotum]

Cyborgs we ain't!

So what is the point of the entire topic ?


Humans, as alla Animals, have their specific points. If we would take a racoon, what is the difference?

You could CLAIM that the racoon does not see "Beauty, love and honor", but this would be ridiculous, you could not possible claim this with any sort of intellect. You can of course say that the racoon does not nderstand the HUMAN CONCEPT of "Beauty, love and honor", but then again, we dont understand the racoon concept of MIRP, whatever this would be.

All other animals would most likely have equal concepts, as to such humans have. Beauty for them may not be the same, but they have it. The same goes for "love" and "honor". We humans on the otherh and have manage to give our own SPECIFIC concepts to it, BUT THIS DOES NOT MAKE IT THE ONLY ONE.