God Threshold III

Philosophy, Religion

You take a photograph with a digital camera. You upload it to a computer. When you look at the image on the screen, it’s a familiar scene that you’ve just recorded. Underneath it though, is code, lots of code. While you see a picture, the image is produced on screen through a long string of coded information that the computer needs to display said image.

It’s not really all that different from your brain processing your sight. You open your eyes. Images are processed and the information is sent to your brain through signals in your nervous system. It is your brain that actually produces the image.

But there’s a tremendous difference between how a computer and a human brain translate and display images.

You can take two computers and connect them with a wire. That forms a network. Using software you can take the code of a photograph and send it to the second computer through the wire. The second computer, regardless of its operating system and sometimes regardless of its internal architecture, can then take that code and produce the exact same image that you first saw on the first computer.

The brain does not do that. If you witness two cars hitting each other on a street and a person standing next to you witnesses the same wreck, both of you can walk away with different interpretations about which driver was at fault. People disagree on what they see even if they see the same exact thing. You can show the same picture to two people and they can both see different things.

The point? No matter how much two people relate to each other whether it’s verbal or physical, it is impossible for one person to completely transmit their own personal experience to another. We can all look at the same thing and agree on the details of what we see but we can’t all see it the same. We can all listen to the same songs but we can’t fully share those songs between each other so that each person has the exact same code as another person.

No matter what we process through our experiences and reason, it is all colored by our individual minds. And every individual mind has its own color.

People, while they can communicate like a computer network, cannot have their brains wired together to share information and then experience that information in the precisely same manner. At the end of the day, all we really know is what we process through our own minds.

Is it any wonder then, that we can never fully agree on what reality is? We can all look at the same picture but we all have a different perspective.

Perhaps I’m wrong and reality does exist. It still doesn’t matter. We can never fully know reality because said reality would be processed by each of our different, unique minds.

Much of this boils down to the same question which I’ve posed many times on this blog: can something exist that is beyond our ability to experience? By that I mean is there something that we don’t possess the physiological necessities to experience? We didn’t have the ability to see bacteria until the microscope was invented. But even then, we had been experiencing bacteria (illness, etc.) despite the fact we couldn’t process its existence through base, empirical means. Our minds are incapable of processing the microscopic life form. But through technological advances, we can and did eventually experience it through sight.

I am speaking of something that can exist beyond any ability to experience; something that no amount of technology could ever find for us?

Or is the whole universe accessible to us and we can’t we just can’t experience it yet?

Advertisements

God Threshold II

Philosophy, Religion

galaxy cutout

Regarding the God Threshold.

Can something exist that we don’t have the physiological ability to experience? If it does exist, do we have the ability to comprehend and/or identify it? Can we ever fully understand that unknowable unknown?

I am not talking about something like a far-flung galaxy, a parallel universe or string theory. Those are things that we don’t yet have the capability to understand; we have the ability. I am referring to an ultimate unknown. We are all endowed with reason and the ability to process our experiences. How do we put our thumb on something that’s beyond both?

Heisenberg states that we cannot know the exact location and velocity of a given particle at the same time. It lends to not being able to know two things about one thing at the same time. How do we know something when we know nothing, and can experience nothing about it?

It’s an important question I think. If we think that everything is within reach or could become within reach, then to me, we make ourselves the center of the universe. If  nothing exists beyond our ability to experience, then we feel that nothing is beyond our grasp. It is then our universe; everything else is just a part of it.

To be continued…

God Threshold

Uncategorized

Allow me to be a hypocrite.

Not long ago I wrote about how everyone is trying to turn back the clock on science. So many religious fundamentalists and leftist activists are trying to deny the basic principles of sciences when they disagree with the conclusion.

In the past year, noted physicists including Stephen Hawking have made the conclusion that the idea of God’s place in creating the universe isn’t “necessary.” Interesting. They are basing their conclusions on the notion that every time they derive equations and close some gap regarding an unknown aspect of the universe and its creation, they find a reasonable explanation sans supernatural. So while there are still some mysteries about the spawning of the universe, they feel that whatever they discover, it will be based on something reasonable and not founded in divine mysticism.

I’m a Prime Mover man myself. While there are so many elements in life easily explained by evidence, such as atomic structures, evolution, DNA, etc., there still is no explanation or proof about what set this giant mechanism known as the universe into motion. Something had to do it. Even if physicists uncover what did spawn the universe, they can’t explain why it was created. Science is not concerned with the why, only the how. This is fine. It’s what science does— to provide explanations to the phenomena around us.

The theory of God’s necessity works the opposite for me. Every time they uncover something, whether it’s about atoms or the universe, they find yet another, unexplainable facet of their structure which needs investigation. It never seems to end. They have faith in that they will continue to find things deeper and deeper.

But at some point, there has to be an impetus, or a threshold from what we can perceive and understand to an area completely beyond our ability to experience. By ability to experience I do not mean something we can’t experience yet. I mean something that’s impossible to see, hear, taste, smell or touch.

I think there’s a gulf that we can never cross because there’s no ship to sail over it.

Maybe that’s where God is. Or isn’t.