Enformy, Anthropics & God
>>I short, under TES, there's inevitably superhuman SELFs, but
there's no need for a transcendent creator. Enforming is "sub-
cendent." And assuming enforming doesn't evolve (i.e, enformy is
conserved), enformed systems ("gestalts") do.<<
In your Noetic article:
you state that enformy is the universal creative principle. This is a
pretty a pretty good definition of God. So to say that enformy is conserved
is to say that God is conserved. QED.
Enformy occurs within our Universe. But then how was the Universe created?
Is the Universe and its laws of physics just an accident? You do not even
mention the Anthropic Principle. Is this an *accidental* oversight?
The Enformic Principle is logically contradicted by the Anthropic Principle.
I then turn to Gary Schwartz' "Living Energy Universe" and discover to my
amazement that the Anthropic Principle is not even listed in the index!!!
It was precisely Jack's mention of the Anthropic Principle in "Beyond Space
and Time" in 1975 that originally turned me toward metaphysics and the
transcendence of Time.
No wonder you and Gary are having so much difficulty communicating with
physicists. You are ignoring what is arguably the most important discovery
in physics in the last half of the 20th century.
Enformy, Mathematics & the Cosmic Soul
>>"In the beginning," enforming created space-time and all the laws,
discovered and still undiscovered, of science. How? I don't know,
but it's implicit in the organizing principle. That is, everything that is
organized--i.e., everything we can perceive or imagine--derives from
By this same token, enformy created Mathematics. Yet, Mathematics can only
be conceived by a rational mind. How could a non-rational process create
something that can only be conceived by a rational mind? Are you going to
say that Mathematics evolved? That is what the Intuitionists believe, but
they believe that Mathematics only could have evolved in the minds of
rational beings. Intuitionists do not have an explanation for the existence of
mathematical structures such as the Monster Group which has 10^52 elements
and appears to be the template for the laws of physics. How could physics
be based on something that is just intuited by humans? Reason demands that
the Monster Group was intuited by a pre-existent, rational being who
breathed/dreamed reality into the abstractions.
Neither you nor Gary S. touch upon the problem of explaining the existence
and 'unreasonable effectiveness' of Mathematics. Is this just another
oversight, or does Mathematics not prove anything?!!
>>Enformy is not an entity, but a
quantity--the capacity to organize (enform). Moreover, enformy isn't
conscious. Instead, it is the foundation of consciousness.<<
Who says that Dan Smith is an entity? How do I know that I am not just a
creative process with a memory?
Are you suggesting that consciousness is not something fundamental? How can
you claim that enformy creates consciousness? Elsewhere you suggest that
consciousness is an inevitable result of enformy, but this implies that
enformy had to create space-time in order to then evolve into consciousness.
In other words, enformy had to create biological creatures before it could
create conscious souls that could survive the death of the creature. You
are prohibiting the pre-existence of souls. A soul may only exist during
and after the creation of a body.
But are these souls eternal? What will happen if and when the space-time of
this Universe ceases to exist? Will all our souls die when this physical
Universe dies? You would then have to hypothesize a *pseudo* eternity at
the end of the Universe just as Frank Tipler has done in order to
artificially conserve souls.
But you have said that enformy is eternal and conserved. Once a soul is
made it is unphysical and no longer subject to the physics of space-time.
If so, these souls could use enformy to organize themselves into a Cosmic
Soul or Self. What would a Cosmic Soul do other than create, imagine or
dream up its own realities? Are you prohibiting souls from dreaming? Why
do you insist then that this Universe could not be the dream of a Cosmic
Don, once you open the door to immaterialism, you will find that it is a
Pandora's box -- very difficult to close again. That is why scientists
tread so cautiously in the waters of immaterialism and idealism.
Collectively they intuit the eschatological implication of allowing their
minds to wander past an invisible point of no return.
Guess what Don? You have just stepped over into the Twilight Zone!
- | Contents |