Agnostic.com

6 0

Dr Donald Hoffman has discovered that seeing accurately is not beneficial; the opposite is the case. This includes all life. We struggle, but the struggle feeds our intelligence. The one problem with this is; if all life is in the same boat, then why hasn't it all reached the same level of intelligence? There is only one answer; life is evolving as one. The supernatural therefore cannot exist, it would destroy the purpose needed to secure a balance in nature. Take for instance dreams of the future; (I have researched) they appear to forecast the future, but some are dreamt as the event happens. If you put life as evolving as one; it becomes like in our conscious world. if you think of doing something next week; you are seeing into the future. this is the only way that the subconscious could work.
Footnote-the subconscious works 24/7; our consciousness 16/7. In the greater scheme of things, which do you think is the most important?

dodin 4 Sep 7
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

6 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

this started with what sounded like a well understood scientific principle and devolved into near word salad. I'm sorry, but I literally can't understand parts of what you are saying here.

"life evolving as one" no, life is evolving as a bunch of different things, according to the fitness of given variations for a particular niche or the advantage of a variation in competitiion for resources. the way you say this leads to the impression you don't know what evolution is.

"if you think of doing something next week, you are seeing into the future". no, you are not, you are imagining the future as it may be.

"the purpose needed to secure balance in nature". there is no purpose, balance is achieved by natural process, it is not that way because of some mystical "connection" between living things, but because the natural state of chemistry is balancing out.

you seem to think that life is something other than a chemical process. to me, this post makes as much sense as suggesting that there is a "purpose" to hydrogen combining with chlorine when you put salt in water and introduce a current. it's just what happens, it's how the chemicals act. that's all life is, complex chemistry.

IF I have misinterpreted what you mean, then perhaps you should take the time to write a more coherent version of it.

You have not addressed my point. Dr Hoffman's work defines that all life cannot see accurately. Not seeing accurately feeds our intelligence. My main point is; if all life is in the same boat, then why hasn't all life evolved to a higher state of intelligence? When considering the balance in nature and taking in Hoffman's conclusion, that rules out the supernatural, Can you explain why all life has not evolved to the same level of intelligence? The only other option, unless you can think of another is; we are all connected? Purpose is the food of intelligent life; variety gives it that purpose.

1

i'll start at the end. what scheme? there is no scheme.

i do not believe in the usual definition of the supernatural either but my reason cannot be it cannot exist because it would destroy a purpose. if it existed and destroyed something, then that thing would be destroyed, and too bad. that would just mean rethinking everything. so that reasoning is way off.

who says all life is in the same boat? all life is not in the same boat in every respect. we don't even really have a solid definition of life. scientists have long thought that without water there can be no life, and yet recently they have found life forms (not very advanced but still life forms) living happily enough in methane, which would kill everything else we think of as being alive. i think there are a lot of different boats! and life is not evolving as one. if it was, extinction would be... well, extinct.

i don't know this dr. donald hoffman but what he thinks he has discovered, if your description is to be credited, is false. even the opening statement -- that seeing accurately is not beneficial -- is ridiculous. does he mean seeing with our eyes, or seeing as in understanding, and beneficial to whom? maybe a mole doesn't need to see; an owl does! it's a vague statement and most interpretations of it would lead an intelligent person to reject it, which i do.

g

You are making the same mistake that many make. An iIntelligent species is not the same as an intelligent individual within that species. An intelligent species gives purpose to the individual; it is purpose that keeps a species surviving. Without purpose we could not exist, which is why religion has a negative affect on life - it destroys constructive purpose.

@dodin you have made a mistake about my making a mistake. i have not mistaken individual intelligence for special intelligence. i was speaking of special intelligence.

g

genessa, please read Dr Hoffman's work before you criticize, that is what religious people do; they change the facts to suit their view. Hoffman researched the Australian jewel beetle and found it could not see accurately. Not seeing accurately makes us struggle for answers, but the positive side to this is; the struggle feeds our intelligence. Hofffman doesn't think he has discovered something the truth is he has. The jewel beetle has been successfully breeding for millions of years, but suddenly it began to die out. Hoffman discovered that the female beetle was shiny dimpled and brown. The beer bottles that were scattered across the outback were shiny dimpled and brown. The male beetle couldn't tell the difference between a bottle and a female. Let's forget about other species, just take the jewel beetle which is in the same boat as us, it cannot see accurately, which is suppose to feed its intelligence and explain to me why we have evolved intelligently and the beetle hasn't? Please look at the evidence.

@dodin i don't care to be compared to a religionist, and have said nothing to warrant such a comparison. disagreeing with you doesn't make me a fact-changer. it means i disagree with you, which i still do. nothing you've said inclines me to explore this topic further. in fact, your assertions turn me off to the point of wanting nothing more to do with this. you seem okay with changing the subject but accuse me of changing facts. great. i'll go read someone else's posts now.

g

0

Deja vu .

0

Dr. Hoffman is fascinating.

He clearly explains his theory here:

I don't entirely agree with him, but I do think he is right about a lot.

cava Level 7 Sep 7, 2018
0

"Not seeing....is beneficial"???? Sorry, I prefer my dentist, surgeon, and the guy in the next lane going 85mph to be able to see Very clearly!

0

I am struggling over your post sorry. Hoffman hasn't 'discovered' anything. He, like all scientists, have theories. I just want to get that out of the way first. Now what do you mean by 'seeing accurately is not beneficial'? And what do you mean by 'all life is in the same boat'? Are we talking people? or all life? I'm not sure I understand about 'dreams of the future' either. There's no evidence of that occurring. I see subconscious as our automatic reactions. From our most basic eg flight of fight, to driving a car on automatic pilot. Consciousness, is what we are focused on. Both are part of the mind or brain. And both are equally important because subconsious allows us to react quickly and efficiently based on past experience or evolutionary development. Consciousness allows us to modify or adjust those subconscious reactions as required. Perhaps I am missing the entire point of your post.

Imagine two worlds and to simplify let's call them two jigsaws. On jigsaw No 1 lives a species that can see accurately; it completes the jigsaw without purpose. On jigsaw No2 lives a species that cannot see accurately; it struggles, but its struggle feeds its intelligence which is passed down to the individuals, giving them purpose. Like I wrote, if all life cannot see accurately then why hasn't all life reached the same level of intelligence? Because nature works in this way, the supernatural cannot exist, it would put us on jigsaw No1 with nowhere to go. This leaves us with only one answer; all life is connected. Life must be evolving as one energy. It started as one and is still evolving as one.This could be the main reason for sleep when the subconscious is most active. At any one time over half of the worlds population is asleep. When I look at Feynman's one electron theory combined with Newton's constant and plus quantum entanglement I begin to see the answer being the same. I am not a scientist and I know I could be wrong, but when I see what could be the beginning of the reality that explains the whole, which way should I choose to go?

I would just like to add; Hoffman's research is not a theory, he came across the fact that life cannot see accurately by studying the Australian jewel beetle.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:173379
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.