15 Jun '10 00:31>
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-lanza/what-happens-when-you-die_b_596600.html
Originally posted by zeeblebotThat piece says pretty much nothing:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-lanza/what-happens-when-you-die_b_596600.html
Originally posted by zeeblebotFor one thing, we presumably have to just take his word for his comment 'without consciousness, there is no space and time'. Seems intuitively obvious but that does not make it true. For one thing, when the universe was born, presumably in the BB, there certainly was no consciousness in OUR universe, that didn't come about at least on Earth for billions of years. Of course there MUST be other consciousnesses in the universe now and most certainly in the first couple billion years of the universe I would think but still, the first billion years there would have been a very low probability of any kind of consciousness in our universe. So connecting consciousness to space and time seems just a bit more than iffy to me.
maybe he's just putting it out there to get people to buy his book, Biocentrism.
actually, i can imagine there are departments full of (taxpayer-funded) philosophers who go gaga over this stuff.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageWell does that mean you are saying space and time or space-time didn't exist before consciousness, that consciousness is REQUIRED for space-time to exist?
Concept requires consciousness. Consciousness modifies concepts. Hence the development:'space', 'time'; 'space-time'.
Originally posted by sonhouseNo, simply that 'space' and 'time' are meaningless without some consciousness to apprehend them.
Well does that mean you are saying space and time or space-time didn't exist before consciousness, that consciousness is REQUIRED for space-time to exist?
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI think you mean 'comprehend' it? I don't think we are in a position to apprehend the whole universe, I don't think the universe has committed that big a crime🙂
No, simply that 'space' and 'time' are meaningless without some consciousness to apprehend them.
Your statement accords with what is generally accepted, but note that it would be meaningless without some consciousness to apprehend it.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageThis is as profound as the falling tree in the forest with nobody around to hear it fall.
No, simply that 'space' and 'time' are meaningless without some consciousness to apprehend them.
Your statement accords with what is generally accepted, but note that it would be meaningless without some consciousness to apprehend it.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI disagree. A book written 1000 years ago about space still retains meaning even if no consciousness has read it since it was written, or even if no consciousness ever reads it.
No, simply that 'space' and 'time' are meaningless without some consciousness to apprehend them.