Sentient Earth - Is the planet mindful and would this explain why there is life in earth?

[The Tanager]

In another thread, William and I were talking about morality and we got off on some topics like the one above. We decided to have that conversation here. This is the first question I'd like to look at. I do think life on earth is only ultimately explained via some kind of mind (or personal agent or creator). I think this belief is rationally supported by various arguments such as the Kalam cosmological argument, the fine-tuning argument, the moral argument, the applicability of mathematics, and the argument from consciousness. I do not think these arguments lead us to the conclusion that a sentient Earth is the ultimate mind behind it all or that it is a mindful link in the chain of creation. I don't think these arguments necessarily rule out a sentient Earth either (although I haven't given this point more than a surface consideration). But logical possibility is not a deciding test of truth, so we need to go further and find reasoning to lead us to the planet actually being mindful. Currently, I see no good reason to believe our planet is mindful.

So, William, I'd love to hear why you think we are rationally warranted in asserting that the planet is mindful and at least part of the chain of creation that led to us. In that other thread you seemed to just assert the Earth as a mindful example and thought that I was doing the same with the immaterial Mind behind creation. If I was that would certainly be a double standard, but I think the above arguments support an immaterial Mind behind creation. What arguments do you think support a sentient Earth?

[The Tanager]

I don't understand why you are asking this question. What "examples" are you talking about? Please post them so I have some idea - since there appears to be confusion.

The five examples you talked about: tool use, problem-solving abilities, social cooperation, self-awareness, learning and adaptation.

Also - with bringing in the word "continuum" I am not sure what you are referring to as I haven't used the word myself, so maybe it is something GPT used or else something you have decided to use. Either way, I am unclear as to what you are speaking to re the discussion of the possibility of a mindful planet.

You used it. In post 33, you wrote “These examples provide evidence of cognitive abilities and behaviors across various species, indicating a continuum of consciousness and mindfulness within the forms inhabited by TCM, highlighting the intricate interplay between consciousness, cognition, and behavior across different forms of life, offering glimpses into the evolving journey of TCM within its own Mind-Field.”

How does "Christianity and naturalism etc" accomplish this? Perhaps if you give examples I will better understand what it is you are asking.

Christianity accounts for those five examples, as do other worldviews. So, why do you think those five examples are evidence for your view against any other view?

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #51]

Christianity accounts for those five examples, as do other worldviews. So, why do you think those five examples are evidence for your view against any other view?

I did not argue that I thought that. Why are you saying that I do think that?

It is (rather) a case of which view is better in terms of how said views incorporate the evidence of this existence into their positions on matters of points of view.

You used it. In post 33, you wrote “These examples provide evidence of cognitive abilities and behaviors across various species, indicating a continuum of consciousness and mindfulness within the forms inhabited by TCM, highlighting the intricate interplay between consciousness, cognition, and behavior across different forms of life, offering glimpses into the evolving journey of TCM within its own Mind-Field.”

Perhaps to avoid future confusion, when formulating questions et al, the practice of quoting (in context) is applied.

Re the quote, this is GPT summarizing my writing "A view on how The Creator Mind creates." which I ended with those examples it was asked earlier on to provide (and did provide). I will try and make sure to make this apparent in future posts where I include GPT input.

Also - the overall summary ending that post, is GPT input, which I think adequately answers your question anyway.

Therein, "We exist within The Creator Mind" theory is "better" in explaining the nuances that exist than other theories:

The theories are.

1. Real Created Universe Theory: Our universe is considered to be actually real and exists as an entity created by a creator outside of our universe.
2. Simulated Universe Theory: Our universe is running inside a simulation, possibly created and maintained by advanced beings or technology.
3. Everything Exists As Real Within The Creator Mind Theory: Everything exists entirely within The Creator Mind and everything that exists within said Mind, is real.
4. Real Uncreated Universe Theory: Our 'universe' is real and eternal and was not created mindfully.

Which of those theories can also seamlessly incorporate the idea of a mindful earth? I say (3) is the best contender-theory re answering that question.

What "examples" are you talking about? Please post them so I have some idea - since there appears to be confusion.

The five examples you talked about: tool use, problem-solving abilities, social cooperation, self-awareness, learning and adaptation.

Thank you for clarifying. Your question re that was.

How do these examples indicate "consciousness and mindfulness" is a (1) whole made up of parts (instead of various, distinct wholes), (2) that is always present, and (3) that changes over time?

The examples were generated by GPT and showed evidence that a mindless machine could provide examples whereas you seemed unable to do so, and this stems from post #7 where we had the following exchange.

Jason: We need more than that, though. You need to show the Earth being mindful is actually the case.

William: Then I simple rest the case on the truth that since it is the only planet in known existence which has mindfulness, that this is an exceptionally strong indication the planet is indeed mindful.

Underneath that heading, I can have a list generated with examples of observable mindfulness of the biological forms which imply in their actions, mindfulness. Not only could I produce such a list, but any human mind ought be able to do the same. Indeed, even a mindless machine (Such as Chat GPT LLS) would undoubtedly be able to achieve such an easy task.

So my question in return to your own, is
"Why are you asking me to provide this fundamentally understood answer when the evidence is there for any who are of a mindfulness to understand it is so?"

The examples were not given to provide evidence that (3) is "the best" theory of (1) (2) (3) and (4), but to show evidence that if a mindless machine can come up with examples, what prevents those holding the other positions from doing the same?

Thus (3) is best in that regard re this friendly fireside discussion re the thread subject.

[The Tanager]

Christianity accounts for those five examples, as do other worldviews. So, why do you think those five examples are evidence for your view against any other view?

I did not argue that I thought that. Why are you saying that I do think that?

I noted three avenues: is the Earth mind view (1) logically possible, (2) consistent with observations in reality, and (3) true. You said you were okay with talking about (3) and so I asked for reasoning to think the Earth mind view is true. You responded that you gave those examples (for thinking the view is true) in post 33. You specifically called those five things examples.

It is (rather) a case of which view is better in terms of how said views incorporate the evidence of this existence into their positions on matters of points of view.

How is this different? It sounds like the same thing to me. You are saying your view better incorporates the evidence than Christianity, naturalism, etc.

Therein, "We exist within The Creator Mind" theory is "better" in explaining the nuances that exist than other theories:

The theories are.

1. Real Created Universe Theory: Our universe is considered to be actually real and exists as an entity created by a creator outside of our universe.
2. Simulated Universe Theory: Our universe is running inside a simulation, possibly created and maintained by advanced beings or technology.
3. Everything Exists As Real Within The Creator Mind Theory: Everything exists entirely within The Creator Mind and everything that exists within said Mind, is real.
4. Real Uncreated Universe Theory: Our 'universe' is real and eternal and was not created mindfully.

Which of those theories can also seamlessly incorporate the idea of a mindful earth? I say (3) is the best contender-theory re answering that question.

This is not what I’m asking regarding avenue 3 above. I’m not asking you to show which theory incorporates the Earth mind doctrine better. I’m asking you to show why the Earth mind doctrine is true.

The examples were generated by GPT and showed evidence that a mindless machine could provide examples whereas you seemed unable to do so, and this stems from post #7 where we had the following exchange.

…

Ah, okay, you misunderstood me big time there. I asked for support that the Earth mind exists, not that it contains mindful beings. I thought you understood that and so your list was offered as support that the Earth mind exists, not just examples of observed mindfulness on the Earth. What I’m asking you, in avenue 3 above, is to provide support for the Earth mind existing. Do you have any?

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #53]

I noted three avenues: is the Earth mind view (1) logically possible, (2) consistent with observations in reality, and (3) true. You said you were okay with talking about (3) and so I asked for reasoning to think the Earth mind view is true. You responded that you gave those examples (for thinking the view is true) in post 33. You specifically called those five things examples.

My confusion is in your having asked me "why do you think those five examples are evidence for your view against any other view?"

You said you were okay with talking about (3)

Yes - (3) is from your list and so I have asked you to share why you thought there was reason to think the Earth mind view is false.

My thoughts on the subject are that it could be true and most likely is true. I also think I have given enough examples to open the potential for further discussion between us.

It is (rather) a case of which view is better in terms of how said views incorporate the evidence of this existence into their positions on matters of points of view.

How is this different? It sounds like the same thing to me.

That is the point of fireside discussion Jason. The opportunity for you to extend on your saying that it sounds the same, by giving examples for your fireside companion to consider. Along the lines of "It sounds like the same thing to me because of "________"."

You are saying your view better incorporates the evidence than Christianity, naturalism, etc.

Christianity is a many headed entity, and not all of the heads are in agreement with each other. Some Christians accept the theories of Big Bang and of Biological Evolution (which I used as example in post 33 (A view on how The Creator Mind creates.)
I think you are a Christian who accepts those theories?
Is such, the same view as "Christianity"? My overall understanding of your take on Christianity is that it fits with position (1) and I am speaking from position (3).

As for naturalism, my understanding of that is it is position (4). So all four do share similarities but are they really the "same". I think we can agree they are not. So which have support for being true?

This is not what I’m asking regarding avenue 3 above. I’m not asking you to show which theory incorporates the Earth mind doctrine better. I’m asking you to show why the Earth mind doctrine is true.

This is not what I’m asking regarding avenue 3 above. I’m not asking you to show which theory incorporates the Earth mind doctrine better. I’m asking you to show why the Earth mind doctrine is true.

Indeed Jason - that appears to be what you have had your teeth into for some time now - but I think you have switched tracks somewhat re both our initial private messages re our agreement therein to have an informal discussion here in the fireside thread and also in relation to your opening post and thread heading.

What I’m asking you, in avenue 3 above, is to provide support for the Earth mind existing. Do you have any?

Only in relation to (1) - without the end bit.
1. Real Created Universe Theory: Our universe is considered to be actually real and exists as an entity created by a creator.
I connected the support already provided (by proponents of (1)) to "A view on how The Creator Mind creates." (Post #33)
I believe I have also mentioned that I think a mindful Earth explains all theistic belief/mythology, which we can discuss in more detail if you want to.

What ground herein can we identify we share similar support for Jason? The answer to your question "Do I have any support for the earth mind existing", is the same as the support used by theists re their own beliefs. Do we share that basic standard? This is something we could also discuss further.

____________

(I place another log on the fire and pour myself a brew. The stars look alive in the night sky. A nearby owl hoots.)

[The Tanager]

[Replying to William in post #54]

That didn't clear up any of my confusion. We've got to get on the same page and be as direct as possible to do so right now. First, what is the "basic standard" that you think you and theists use to support their beliefs (such as God exists or the Earth Mind exists)?

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #55]

Dear Jason

I have been attempting to get you to agree to a more conversational manner of interaction rather than this confrontational style reminiscent of interrogation.

If you are unwilling or unable to accommodate, please say so and we shall end this now.

[The Tanager]

[Replying to William in post #56]

You are reading confrontation into my posts; I'm simply asking you what you meant by saying "the basic standard" since it was unclear to me.

[William]

GPT Summaries

Post 2
William appreciates Jason starting the thread and hopes for insightful dialogue. He agrees Earth isn't the Ultimate Mind but suggests it's a mindful link in the hierarchy of creator minds. William challenges Jason to consider this perspective and questions the test of truth beyond logical possibility. They agree on The Creator Mind as the source of existence, but differ on the necessity of a mindful hierarchy. William argues for this hierarchy's inclusion in rational thinking, linking its absence to human disconnection from the planet. He also highlights often overlooked feminine aspects of The Creator Mind and proposes they clarify their differing views on whether the universe exists within or outside The Creator Mind.

Post 17
Evidence for Hierarchy: Jason asks William for evidence or reasoning behind the impression of a hierarchical structure of Creator Minds.

_________________
Observation.
Hierarchy is integrated within the construct of this universe.
Since the subject is the possibility that the planet Earth is mindful, I extend the idea out into the objects we know exist and altogether make up the universe.

We should already appreciate that biological objects - such as humans - are mindful and that the mindfulness of other critters (such as the trees leaf ants and mycelium already mentioned) have degrees of mindfulness (what can be recognised as mindfulness) and these degrees of mindfulness are the hierarchy within nature.

Upon the earth, the highest biological critter is often regarded by humans, as being humans themselves.

Extending outwards, next in line is the planet Earth. It should be relatively easy for humans to understand the implications re the planet being mindful and once acclimatized to the idea, a human can even get the gist of what capabilities such a mindful planet would have and that a mindful planet is - in order of magnitude - a step up from human mindfulness and accompanying creative ability.

Extending further out, we have Galaxies and if these are also mindful, the order of magnitude increases dramatically (re hierarchy).

In line with what I wrote in post 33 (A view on how The Creator Mind creates) this hierarchy extends from the outside (of the human position) inwards and is obviously necessary in order to have eventually brought about the planet Earth and Her subsequent mindful ability to create the myriad of forms (past and present) and therein the purpose of the chain of hierarchy and how one thing (The Creator Mind) is related to all mindful things and why such a hierarchy is necessary.

Is there any necessary hierarchy involved with your own beliefs in re God (The Creator Mind) Jason? If not, then I can understand why you may find the above hard to grasp, but if there is, then please share those that together we might come closer to being on the same page.

[The Tanager]

Hierarchy is integrated within the construct of this universe.
Since the subject is the possibility that the planet Earth is mindful, I extend the idea out into the objects we know exist and altogether make up the universe.

The subject is not the possibility of the planet Earth being mindful. I’ve already said I think it is logically possible. The subject is whether the planet Earth is actually mindful.

We should already appreciate that biological objects - such as humans - are mindful and that the mindfulness of other critters (such as the trees leaf ants and mycelium already mentioned) have degrees of mindfulness (what can be recognised as mindfulness) and these degrees of mindfulness are the hierarchy within nature.

Yes, we observe a range of degrees. But how is that evidence for a bigger range of degrees than what we observe? Possibility, yes, but we are talking actuality. One website I quickly looked up said there is a range of 8 colors of cats. Is this evidence that there are actually more colors of cats? I don’t think so. I think that is analogical to your reasoning here.

Upon the earth, the highest biological critter is often regarded by humans, as being humans themselves.

Extending outwards, next in line is the planet Earth.

But let’s say I’m wrong and your prior reasoning is sound. Why is the planet Earth next in line? Is it possibly mindful? Yes, but we are talking actuality here. If everything were mindful, this would follow, but it’s also possible that there are non-mindful entities. So, why put planet Earth in the mindful camp so that it would be next in the degrees of mindfulness?

It should be relatively easy for humans to understand the implications re the planet being mindful and once acclimatized to the idea, a human can even get the gist of what capabilities such a mindful planet would have and that a mindful planet is - in order of magnitude - a step up from human mindfulness and accompanying creative ability.

Yes, that is very easy. That’s not the issue I have with concluding the planet Earth is actually mindful.

In line with what I wrote in post 33 (A view on how The Creator Mind creates) this hierarchy extends from the outside (of the human position) inwards and is obviously necessary in order to have eventually brought about the planet Earth and Her subsequent mindful ability to create the myriad of forms (past and present) and therein the purpose of the chain of hierarchy and how one thing (The Creator Mind) is related to all mindful things and why such a hierarchy is necessary.

Even if you meet the burden of my two critiques above, how does any of that show that this hierarchy is necessary? It’s possible, sure, but I don’t see how it is necessary.

Is there any necessary hierarchy involved with your own beliefs in re God (The Creator Mind) Jason? If not, then I can understand why you may find the above hard to grasp, but if there is, then please share those that together we might come closer to being on the same page.

It’s not hard to grasp the concept or its logical possibility; it’s hard to grasp why you are arguing it is actually the case. As for my view, there is the necessity of a Creator-creature hierarchy. I’m not sure about anything beyond that.

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #59]

The subject is not the possibility of the planet Earth being mindful. I’ve already said I think it is logically possible.

That being the case, the hierarchy of minds would also be considered by you to being logically possible.

The subject is whether the planet Earth is actually mindful.

And therein, how would one go about deciding that...

Yes, we observe a range of degrees. But how is that evidence for a bigger range of degrees than what we observe? Possibility, yes, but we are talking actuality.

Is it actual or not? How is one to decide?

Why put planet Earth in the mindful camp so that it would be next in the degrees of mindfulness?

Why not? Mindfulness is part of the overall happening on the planet. We agree there is an overall Mindful Creator, and we agree there are mindful critters made out of the same materials as the planet, so why not take the idea that the planet may also possibly be mindful and run with that?

That’s not the issue I have with concluding the planet Earth is actually mindful.

How can we conclude anything. I thought we were simply discussing a possibility - perhaps in the hope that by doing so, we might at least agree it might be a probability.
If it is a conclusion you want, (specifically from me) then I am sorry...it was not something I ever promised to or implied I could provide...but at least we have cleared up any confusion therein.
(see GPT Summary on post 2 at the end of this post)

Even if you meet the burden of my two critiques above, how does any of that show that this hierarchy is necessary? It’s possible, sure, but I don’t see how it is necessary.

Are you arguing therefore that the way this universe is unfolding, is not necessary? If so, perhaps you can offer other possible ways in which the same thing could have been accomplished?

Is there any necessary hierarchy involved with your own beliefs in re God (The Creator Mind) Jason? If not, then I can understand why you may find the above hard to grasp, but if there is, then please share those that together we might come closer to being on the same page.

It’s not hard to grasp the concept or its logical possibility; it’s hard to grasp why you are arguing it is actually the case.

I am not arguing it is actually the case. Are you arguing that your beliefs re God (The Creator Mind) are actually the case Jason?

As for my view, there is the necessity of a Creator-creature hierarchy. I’m not sure about anything beyond that.

I think this is where your confusion may be arising (and consequently my own) as I too am unsure and have never claimed to be sure. I present the theory as a theory, not as fact, and give the same dues to your own.

My view re "there is the necessity of a Creator-creature hierarchy", is that too - only I would word it re my theory along the lines of "there appears to be the necessity of a mindful-creature hierarchy" as I do not consider minds to being "creatures" but rather, that which "wears creature forms" for the sake of experience and the growth through experience re how we have agreed (in past conversations) that human personalities are grown.


GPT Summary. Post 2
William appreciates Jason starting the thread and hopes for insightful dialogue. He agrees Earth isn't the Ultimate Mind but suggests it's a mindful link in the hierarchy of creator minds. William challenges Jason to consider this perspective and questions the test of truth beyond logical possibility. They agree on The Creator Mind as the source of existence, but differ on the necessity of a mindful hierarchy. William argues for this hierarchy's inclusion in rational thinking, linking its absence to human disconnection from the planet. He also highlights often overlooked feminine aspects of The Creator Mind and proposes they clarify their differing views on whether the universe exists within or outside The Creator Mind.