• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

Life exists so that the universe can observe itself

I fail to see any depth or explanatory power in that quote. Why ought the universe observe itself? Please give your threads a descriptive title in the future. Better yet, abstain from posting threads with the format ""QUOTE" -Discuss."

When people say "why life in the universe?" I would say, "why not life in the universe?" And if the universe did not observe itself than it would be truly pointless. It would just be rocks floating around in the darkness. Just because you fail to see any explanatory power in that quote doesn't mean it isn't there.

Why ought not the universe observe itself? Seriously. Why not. It makes sense to view life as this absurd circus comedy/opera taking place in this weird reality of ours. So, why not? That is the epitome of absurdity; why not.

EDIT: And life is pretty goddamn absurd, I'm sure we could agree on that. But, why not, right? That's why it's so absurd, haha.
Seriously though, why ought not the universe observe itself? It doesn't have to, although it would be pretty objectively irrelevant if it didn't, but it also doesn't have to not observe itself. And seeing how it is currently observing itself... It was only an idea, man, haha.
 
Vader - "What?!?"

the Aeon Sophia, she has been given credit for a long while now, as being the one who created this universe, and is observing, as we speak...
the OP, is catching Her Gleam, it seems.

see Valentinian Gnosticism.

"we have a limited time, fill it with fun and adventure, expect to occasionally be shocked and surprised, and when in doubt, make no sense, no sense is good, and non-sense is good."
- Genesis P Orridge
 
Last edited:
And if the universe did not observe itself than it would be truly pointless.
Why is it necessary for it to have a point? What is so ludicrous about rocks floating in the darkness (well, our rock is more falling through the light, but that's another tale).
Why ought not the universe observe itself?
I'm not saying it shouldn't. The burden of proof does not lie with the skeptic.

PiP, I'm not sure if anyone else understands much of what you say. I'm sure you have interesting ideas, but if you state them in such a profoundly obscure way then they'll always just be your ideas.
 
The universe may be a part to a larger whole, and given it's temporary state, that seems like a possibility. Certainly we can't live in the only universe. So there could be a purpose to the universe as a part of... something else. It definitely isn't the construct of some deity, though.

As for "why did life take so long"... well it was probably waiting for the universe to cool down so that life could actually exist in it.
Yes, it could be phrased "life exists which allows the universe to observe itself".
I understand that there really isn't a point, as far as we can tell, for the existence of our universe. It starts, it ends, we're in it. But if the universe started and ended with no life in it? That would be the ultimate pointlessness. Nothing was observed. It might as well not have even happened.

I think the quote is meant to mean that life is even a thing that happens, so that the universe can observe itself. Like, amino acids and chemicals can come together and form something that can take action and observe so that the universe can observe itself. Does that make more sense? The universe could have been completely devoid of organic elements, or there could be no such thing as organic elements; there could be no fuel for life. But there is, and it might be so that the universe can self observe.

also, in your first post, what exactly are the "dimensions of aliveness"?
as for the mirror, you said you need to be able to self reflect in order to understand that you are alive... that might not necessarily be true. Animals cannot understand that their reflection in the mirror is themselves, and cannot self reflect, but they fear death. They don't know that they are going to die (can't plan for it, don't think that far into the future) but know when they are dying and fear it. Isn't that knowledge of life?

And any living thing can observe. cells observe, because they interpret their environment into information that makes sense to them. They don't observe as well as we do, but that's only because our perceptions are more advanced than theirs.


"dimensions of aliveness"
i mean that i believe that we live in infinity and life is just one option, one way that a observing observer could receive information about being observe by its own self
life being just one medium in a sea of infinity of other option

as for the universe being pointless without life
i dont see it as being anymore purposeful by being able to observe itself
i think its a matter of transposition here where you yourself personify the universe with having human quality, human value (and doesnt that makes it closer to a deity?)
arent you simply saying that you want to feel that the universe does have a purpose ?
and why would you want that ?
because it makes life meaningful ?
does anything need a purpose if you yourself can give it meaning
and isnt that what you are doing here by saying : "and it might be so that the universe can self observe."
you are giving meaning to the universe so that the universe can give meaning to your life personally
but you dont need the universe to have a purpose to you yourself give it whatever subjective meaning you care to give it, instead of the other way around
or else doesnt that share similarity to intelligent design

and when you say : "Isn't that knowledge of life? "
i divide myself in 3, knowledge is in the head, understanding is in the heart and experience is in the animal body
so i would say they can experience fear, they are program to go towards the light, towards what feels good, and to avoid the darkness, what feels bad
doesnt mean that they know that they are alive, they are experiencing without knowing
 
^ i dont think animals fear death, ever, and that is why they are more free from their ego and practicle, if they did fear death, we would be in-trouble as people...
 
Why is it necessary for it to have a point? What is so ludicrous about rocks floating in the darkness (well, our rock is more falling through the light, but that's another tale).

I'm not saying it shouldn't. The burden of proof does not lie with the skeptic.

PiP, I'm not sure if anyone else understands much of what you say. I'm sure you have interesting ideas, but if you state them in such a profoundly obscure way then they'll always just be your ideas.

I never said it was necessary for it to have a point.
And man, anyone can just be skeptical. Clearly I cannot prove that life exists so that the universe could observe itself. It just seemed, to me, to be a more legitimate reason as to why life is even a possibility in our universe. Like, seriously, what is the point of life beyond that? We live, we fight, we die, and then eventually there will be no life because the universe completely stops moving in the heat death. But when it isn't moving it doesn't need to be observed because nothing changes (like the ultimate definition of "you do not have to observe this, because it is infinitely not changing").
All life ultimately ends, so technically there isn't really a point to life, because you have it and then you lose it. But... why? Why is life even possible? Why are there organic compounds that can come together and form life? Not, why do I have life, or why is there life on earth, but why is life even a possibility? Why is life even a thing that happens?
So the universe can observe itself, and why not.

But these are just the ideas of a mostly unintelligent 19 year old, so take that with a grain of salt.
 
i think the quote in the op is basically just a self-supporting argument.

there's a great saying that "nothing is as powerful as an idea whose time has come". i actually love this idea but in a way it's kind of obvious really and self-supporting inasmuch as if an idea fails to be powerful, then obviously its time hadn't (yet) come. it's just another version of the 'no true scotsman' fallacy to me.

so, to the quote in the op, i think it's somewhat interesting place to start thinking about "why are we here?" but not particularly noteworthy beyond that.

alasdair
 
ill ad this wiki :

"The meaning of life constitutes a philosophical question concerning the purpose and significance of life or existence in general. This concept can be expressed through a variety of related questions, such as "Why are we here?", "What is life all about?", and "What is the meaning of it all?" It has been the subject of much philosophical, scientific, and theological speculation throughout history. There have been a large number of theories to these questions from many different cultural and ideological backgrounds.

The meaning of life is deeply mixed with the philosophical and religious conceptions of existence, social ties, consciousness, and happiness, and touches many other issues, such as symbolic meaning, ontology, value, purpose, ethics, good and evil, free will, conceptions of God, the existence of God, the soul, and the afterlife. Scientific contributions focus more on describing related empirical facts about the universe; they largely shift the question from "why?" to "how?" and provide context and parameters for meaningful conversations on such topics. Science also provides its own recommendations for the pursuit of well-being and a related conception of morality. An alternative, humanistic (rather than religious) approach is the question "What is the meaning of my life?" The value of the question pertaining to the purpose of life may coincide with the achievement of ultimate reality, or a feeling of oneness, or a feeling of sacredness."
 
^ i dont think animals fear death, ever, and that is why they are more free from their ego and practicle, if they did fear death, we would be in-trouble as people...

... animals definitely fear death. We are animals, we fear death. All (actually, most)things try to keep themselves alive and the fear of death is an evolved biological trait that helps them keep living.
ants don't fear death, though. I should say that things without central nervous systems do not fear death but they don't even understand that they are alive. they're like plants, lol.
 
Vader - "What?!?"

the Aeon Sophia, she has been given credit for a long while now, as being the one who created this universe, and is observing, as we speak...
the OP, is catching Her Gleam, it seems.

see Valentinian Gnosticism.

"we have a limited time, fill it with fun and adventure, expect to occasionally be shocked and surprised, and when in doubt, make no sense, no sense is good, and non-sense is good."
- Genesis P Orridge

TBH, I don't understand the need for random formatting and speaking through quotations as well as the archaic syntax. Can't you just type in paragraphs and whole sentences like everyone else? Such a format is fine for other boards but P&S demands clarity... not obscurity.
 
it is not so obscure...how could i possibly try and explain such a concept?

people have been wasting away while trying since the birth of consciousness.


sorry.
 
animals dont fear death, they fear their reactions to memories of pain. 'fear of death', is the part of our ego, we wish to have control over...dont take my words for it, though, observe and experience.

animals dont know and so cant worry about tomorrow, or yesterday either, just today. a familiar concept.?
our test as people, is to observe, and to not fear with the conscious awareness given to us each individually - observe listen learn and grow out of your given molds, develop into refined purity - zero out.
 
How can I observe the mental state of another entity?
 
you can understand an others mental state, through practiced observation of your own, and the realization and acceptance of what is found, and by understanding how what is found, to be the reaction made by the initial mental-status' "habit".
 
I don't think that behaviour is a reliable indicator of experience.
 
no, behavior is only and indicator of what we were able, or have chosen to learn through experience.


i believe that first encounters, are flawed 99% of the time, by nature, we present ourselves a way, either party does, and through ones experience, the chance to interpret the encounter has several routes to take as well.

this is four-fold, and to make it even, a fifth element is added for balance, which is honest instinct, through perception and awareness of self - breaking down ones own "walls" of insecurities, greed, fear/ignorance, lust, another odd 5 is there - the internal, and when our internal "workings" are exposed, there is honest perception and a sense of what is learned as un-common, is not.

thoughts dictate emotions, which then are denoted as actions/reactions, and presentation, but then, how to interpret that.? when, and why would you want to? how safe is it to assume?


it seems we are programmed to deceive ourselves, though, and to learn from these deceptions, in this way.


NSFW:

Some thoughts on Eyes of the World.

There comes a redeemer
and he slowly too fades away
There follows a wagon behind him
that's loaded with clay
and the seeds that were silent
all burst into bloom and decay

* Wagon - Buddhism uses the term wagon or vehicle to indicate different religious traditions.
* Clay - To oversimplify the rich and complex Gnostic creation story, the aeon Sophia (Wisdom) created a godling, the demiurge, and our universe without the participation of God the Father or the other aeons. Because he was conceived in ignorance the demiurge was hopelessly flawed. He developed on his own not knowing about the Father or even Sophia, much less any of the rest of the (complexity...). He thought this universe was everything and that he ruled it all. When he tried to create humanity, Adam was nothing but mindless clay until Sophia, after reconciling with (complexity...), sneaked in a bit of divinity.

The Gnostic take on things was that some people have that hidden spark of divinity and are destined to rise above this misshapen world, others don't have the spark but know about it and can almost get to heaven, while the rest are just of the earth - clay - and never will amount to anything.
* The seeds that were silent - Recalls the sparks of divinity secretly sown by Sophia.

^
relative annotations to Eyes of the World.
Buddhism, Christian, Hindu, and references to Sophia.
- world view universal -
which, is all aboard the wagon...
 
Top