Welcome to UK420

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.


Guest

The Gaia hypothesis

85 posts in this topic

As a pantheist this theory is of interest. Just have a look how many very clever, deep thinking people were or are Pantheists by the way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

This theory is just as likely as what else is proposed to be our reality or believed to be 'true'....

Edited by Virgeels
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

i remember reading Lovelock's book when it first came out, it coud be argued that the planet functions as an organism but actually possessing a consciousness would be stretching things.

Presumably you are all familiar with George Carlin's spin on the theory:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rld0KDcan_w

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
actually possessing a consciousness would be stretching things

Having hyper intelligence would be taking it up to another level alltogether!

Lots of people say magic mushrooms are intelligent, apparently they talk to you and its the only drug which does that. Terence Mckenna used to ask it questions lol and its pretty far out shit but so many say it

You have to have an open mind it shouldnt be difficult as reality is stranger than we can suppose

if you look at quantum mechanics enough it ties back to religion and philosophy and its mind blowing to be able to see how it really does

George Cantor was mentally ill and had a load of grief for what he proposed (different infinities lol) he was beaten down however its a part of the basics these days (set theory) and it has been tied right back to pantheism

Pantheism is that old famous I am god stuff that Alan Watts and so many other people and belief systems talk about its quite spooky how it all ties together

Hail Schrodinger he did more than Einstein but nobody knows him! I find it completely amazing how if you take the time to learn what the greatest scientists told us it goes right back to God science does not eliminate God and the scientists don't like it they are trying to write God out hence they call the Higgs Boson the god particle and build the biggest science project to date to try and get rid of God

Shrodinger and Einstein and many others believed whole heartedly in God and most think oh thats because of their upbringing or indoctrination from what I can gather it isnt the case at all they have worked it out!

:yinyang:

E2A

1. My body functions as a pure mechanism according to the laws of nature (Materialist Assumption).

2, Yet I know by direct and incontrovertible experience that I am directing its motions, of which I correctly foresee the effects.

3. Conclusion: I am the Person who controls the motions of the atoms according to the Law of Nature = I am God.

Theres a lot to it, how does the wave function collapse is a big question, how a photographic plate counts as an observer to the double slit experiment they cant even answer that WTF happens in your brain to collapse the wave funtion we are way way off adressing, lets crack the photographic plate first lol

Edited by Davey Jones
6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Eco vs. Ego?

Gotta side with ego. Dominate the world around me. Which is not meant to mean in a military or violent sense, but rather in a "lifting off the land" sense.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes there's more, stands to reason and been pondering it all my life :yes:

Share this post


Link to post

is pantheism paganism rebadged ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
On 27/02/2017 at 9:12 PM, TeaJay said:

is pantheism paganism rebadged ?

 

 

In a way, sort of. Whilst paganism does have views that are pantheistic, it is still a religion. Pantheism is a theory and belief, not a religion. Quite a difference IMO.

 

:yinyang:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

I find it a little odd that as a species we perceive ourselves as having limitless potential in terms of consciousness and development, yet, we do not impart this theory to ANY OTHER LIVING THING. That to me smacks of arrogance from a spiritual, scientific and theoretical stand point. I'm not religious nor do I think in order to appreciate the complexities of the cosmos that religion is necessary. It is interesting though, that so many deep thinkers as it were, have commonality regarding potential for all organic life to have consciousness. 

 

Open minds are our greatest tool. 

:yinyang:

8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

 

:yinyang:

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, Breezus said:

I find it a little odd that as a species we perceive ourselves as having limitless potential in terms of consciousness and development, yet, we do not impart this theory to ANY OTHER LIVING THING. That to me smacks of arrogance from a spiritual, scientific and theoretical stand point. I'm not religious nor do I think in order to appreciate the complexities of the cosmos that religion is necessary. It is interesting though, that so many deep thinkers as it were, have commonality regarding potential for all organic life to have consciousness. 

 

Open minds are our greatest tool. 

:yinyang:

 

Your post conflicts with itself. Fist sentence seems to be saying that we don't think that much of life has the ability to experience consciousness, but the last sentence indicates that we do.

 

FWIW I personally think that our definitions fall short and our use of language around this isn't up to the task.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

2 minutes ago, Cambium said:

 

Your post conflicts with itself. Fist sentence seems to be saying that we don't think that much of life has the ability to experience consciousness, but the last sentence indicates that we do.

 

"We" in the first instance related to 7 billion , "We" in the last instance related to a very small collective of individuals. Hardly conflicting if you read it .

Edited by Breezus
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Breezus said:

"We" in the first instance related to 7 billion , "We" in the last instance related to a very small collective of individuals. Hardly conflicting if you read it .

 

Thanks, that's clearer. Although I don't think that many "deep thinkers" do believe that all life has the potential for consciousness. What they do believe is that our definitions and language around this is inadequate. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Cambium said:

FWIW I personally think that our definitions fall short and our use of language around this isn't up to the task.

 

I agree. However, maybe our line of thought that everything needs to be defined with words is in fact a barrier to understanding in itself.

 

:yinyang:

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

large_alan.png.7958ba0f762e0964648c9502e

9 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now