Why such a roundabout, thus detracting way, of just answering honestly and admitting that you have been talking about one or the other here?arjand wrote: ↑March 13th, 2021, 8:44 amWhat is indicated is the concept causality and its (potential) applicability to reality. When it is indicated that causality can only derive significance by the idea of a begin that is introduced by the mind, this is not done to address the concept causality within the limited scope of a mental concept, but relative to how causality can actually find applicability to reality.evolution wrote: ↑March 13th, 2021, 4:53 am Are you here talking about the 'concept' of causality, and that that can only have a beginning, which can only be and is introduced by an observer?
Or, are you talking about the actual action/reaction process of 'causality', itself, which obviously had to be in existence before the observers known as human beings came into existence?
So, for the record, 'you', "arjand", are stating and claiming that the actions, which have caused the observers known as 'human beings' to have come into existence, through an evolutionary process, could NOT have happened and occurred because these observers HAD TO have existed FIRST, correct?arjand wrote: ↑March 13th, 2021, 8:44 am My logic has shown that an action (i.e. value) cannot precede an observer because a pattern can only derive significance by observation, i.e. a pattern is 'bound' by observation. Therefor, your argument that the action/reaction process necessarily precedes the observer is invalid.
Also, and by the way, the fact that ONLY observers can RECOGNIZE 'patterns', and thus ANY actual, or alleged, 'significance' derived of a 'pattern' by observation has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING WHATSOEVER on what came first. OBVIOUSLY, what CAUSED and CREATED the observer came BEFORE the observer. This goes WITHOUT speaking.
If a pattern is 'bound' by observation, then this does NOT mean the 'things', which eventually evolved to come to recognize and see patterns, came BEFORE what caused 'them' to come to exist. In other words the fact that human beings have evolved to recognize and see 'patterns' within the Universe, Itself, does NOT mean that human beings were here BEFORE thee Universe, Itself.
If you REALLY BELIEVE that the Universe and Its action/reaction process did NOT necessarily precede the observer, 'human being', then that is one thing, but to declare that 'invalid' because of and through 'your' OWN, so called "logic", then I think you might find some difficulty in expressing 'your' "logic" to "others" and having them agree with and accept 'your' "logic" here.
If you REALLY want to BELIEVE that the observer, human being, was created and thus came into existence without ANY prior 'action', then so be it. You are completely and utterly FREE to BELIEVE whatever you want to BELIEVE. But just do NOT expect to have 'your' OWN BELIEFS understood nor accepted.
When I mention an observer, I do not indicate an individual human, but the observer as a principle (observer per se).[/quote]
Which is 'what', EXACTLY?
As I have alluded to previously. What EVERY one in this forum has as, and at, their deepest, underlying view/motive, which they are here 'trying to' fight and/or argue for, is ABSOLUTELY True, Right, and Correct. But until 'we' work TOGETHER to better understand each "other", then what this final and/or ultimate Truth, or True answer, IS, which is wanting to EXPRESSED and SHOWN, will NOT come to light and be SEEN.
Until we work TOGETHER to find the RIGHT words, which we ALL agree with and accept, then 'you', human beings, will continue on in that lost and confused state, which you are in now, when this is written and have been in since 'you' came to exist.
What I found as the BEST WAY to understand "each other" in order to FULLY understand "each other" and thus discover thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things' is to just ask for CLARITY to, and then RECEIVE CLARITY from, "each other".
So, when you can put a name to what this 'thing' ACTUALLY IS, which has the ability to observe, from what 'you' CLAIM is BEFORE absolutely ANY 'action' could even take place, then I can logically, and literally, LISTEN to 'you' and what you HAVE TO SAY. Until then, 'you' are NOT giving 'us' all that much to LOOK AT and SEE, really.
No.
Look, what I actually agree with will come to light, soon enough. I am just 'trying to' get 'you', human beings, to find, and to use, your OWN words, which 'you' ALL will agree with and accept, voluntarily.
It is in the process of FINDING your OWN words, which you ALL agree with and accept, WHERE thee ACTUAL Truth is HIDING, and thus WHERE thee Truth will BE FOUND.
Oh, and by the way, could it be possible that the action/reaction process does not precede thee 'Observer' but actually exists WITH and because of thee 'Observer', ALWAYS?
Could it be a possibility that thee 'Observer' and the action/reaction process just co-exist TOGETHER, ALWAYS?
In other words, could it be possible that there could just not be one WITHOUT the other?
Or, does the 'observer' HAVE TO exist prior to the action/reaction process?