• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

If evolution is everything....

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
I'm not saying the following happened, but........

Rather than viewing evolution in terms of element-based life, if we consider it to include essentially everything -every change that has ever been -which led up to the formation of the elements, the universe, physical life forms, our intelligence and creativity (which some view as a continuation of evolution), etc....

And... If the singularity we call the Big Bang is essentially logic (information/law -not necessarily self-intelligent) applied to that which existed prior which arranged it into its present state... which essentially means that logic existed to be applied prior..... Then, if logic -why not intelligence?

If that which existed prior to the Big Bang singularity could become -at least partly -our physical universe....

Would it be impossible for an initial overall intelligence -able to affect all things -all that could affect and all that could be affected -to have developed before all else?
 
Last edited:

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Would it be impossible for an initial overall intelligence -able to affect all things -all that could affect and all that could be affected -to have developed before all else?
Yes, I personally have come to believe that consciousness/God/Brahman is the fundamental and the material is a derivative of the fundamental. Quantum theory starts to point in that direction. Except I don't think God/Brahman developed as you stated, I think God is beyond our normal time experiencing (that has beginning and ends).
 

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
Yes, I personally have come to believe that consciousness/God/Brahman is the fundamental and the material is a derivative of the fundamental. Quantum theory starts to point in that direction. Except I don't think God/Brahman developed as you stated, I think God is beyond our normal time experiencing (that has beginning and ends).

At least part of the fundamental has become the universe, became the earth, became life, became you -that is essentially what I mean by developed.
Even one without beginning or end can become different.
Time is really just a measure of interrelationships -subdivisions of eternity.
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
I'm not saying the following happened, but........

Rather than viewing evolution in terms of element-based life, if we consider it to include essentially everything -every change that has ever been -which led up to the formation of the elements, the universe, physical life forms, our intelligence and creativity (which some view as a continuation of evolution), etc....

And... If the singularity we call the Big Bang is essentially logic (information/law -not necessarily self-intelligent) applied to that which existed prior which arranged it into its present state... which essentially means that logic existed to be applied prior..... Then, if logic -why not intelligence?

If that which existed prior to the Big Bang singularity could become -at least partly -our physical universe....

Would it be impossible for an initial overall intelligence -able to affect all things -all that could affect and all that could be affected -to have developed before all else?
I don't get what you are saying here. How could the Theory of Evolution apply to anything other than speciation when evolution doesn't speak to anything before and including the beginning of life on earth? In other words, evolution only refers to speciation after life began, and it only speaks to speciation of life on earth, so how could it have anything to say or do with non-living objects in the universe?
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
I'm not saying the following happened, but........

I don't get what you are saying here. How could the Theory of Evolution apply to anything other than speciation when evolution doesn't speak to anything before and including the beginning of life on earth? In other words, evolution only refers to speciation after life began, and it only speaks to speciation of life on earth, so how could it have anything to say or do with non-living objects in the universe?
Your spoiling Etritonakin's train of speculation here with elements germane to the issue. Elements that are the unnecessary and troublesome bugaboos of the enterprise. They're not suppose to apply so don't bring them in. Same goes for logic. Leave it at the doorstep when you enter the worlds of what-if?.


.
 

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
I don't get what you are saying here. How could the Theory of Evolution apply to anything other than speciation when evolution doesn't speak to anything before and including the beginning of life on earth? In other words, evolution only refers to speciation after life began, and it only speaks to speciation of life on earth, so how could it have anything to say or do with non-living objects in the universe?

I'm not saying "the theory of evolution" -but evolution/evolving in its broadest possible sense. The singularity evolving into the elements and universe, etc.,

Evolution:
2: the gradual development of something, especially from a simple to a more complex form.

"The theory of evolution" is dependent upon many things which preceded it -which can be called the evolution of the state of reality, etc., etc.

The things described by the theory of evolution are also guided on a basic level by the same laws which govern the components which make up physical life forms.

The evolution of life is dependent on the evolution of that which preceded it -it is all part of the same overall process.

Living things are made of exactly the same stuff as non-living things -but in a different arrangement.
 
Last edited:

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I'm not saying the following happened, but........

Rather than viewing evolution in terms of element-based life, if we consider it to include essentially everything -every change that has ever been -which led up to the formation of the elements, the universe, physical life forms, our intelligence and creativity (which some view as a continuation of evolution), etc....
Whoa there -- So we're not talking about biological evolution, we're just using it as a synonym of "change?"
And... If the singularity we call the Big Bang is essentially logic (information/law -not necessarily self-intelligent) applied to that which existed prior which arranged it into its present state... which essentially means that logic existed to be applied prior..... Then, if logic -why not intelligence?
But a singularity isn't logic, and logic isn't information.

If that which existed prior to the Big Bang singularity could become -at least partly -our physical universe....

Would it be impossible for an initial overall intelligence -able to affect all things -all that could affect and all that could be affected -to have developed before all else?
But there was no "prior" prior to the big bang. Time began with the big bang.
How would an "intelligence" develop, from what would it be made, and how could it "develop" outside of time?
 

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
Whoa there -- So we're not talking about biological evolution, we're just using it as a synonym of "change?"
But a singularity isn't logic, and logic isn't information.

But there was no "prior" prior to the big bang. Time began with the big bang.
How would an "intelligence" develop, from what would it be made, and how could it "develop" outside of time?

Biological evolution is dependent upon -based upon -made up of the same stuff as -that which preceded it.
I am not only talking about bioLOGICAL evolution -which owes its ability to be LOGICal to the laws/LOGIC of PHYSICS.
PHYSICS owes its laws/LOGIC to that which caused the physical to exist as we know it.
Yes -I am herein labeling "everything" evolution -biological evolution being an extension or continuation thereof.

I am definitely using terms extremely loosely.

part of the full definition of logic:
c : interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable

UNIVERSAL TIME began with the big bang. It is only an assumption that there is no external reference for time/interrelationship.
We simply do not tend to think beyond or before the big bang -partly due to that assumption.

Everything that exists is made up of the same stuff which always existed.
If you say the singularity was the beginning of time -or was once everything we now know -was it not something which became what is based on certain parameters?

An intelligence existing before the big bang would be made of the same stuff -but in a different arrangement.
Each individual human intelligence is actually limited by the fact that it resides within and upon a vessel which does not allow greater interaction.
The fact that we are element-based -not based on that from which the elements were formed -is a source of weakness and vulnerability.
We are creating intelligence based on silicon and residing in memory chips, etc.
Intelligence could potentially exist of anything which could be representative of information.

Also -everything is information -loosely, of course -as things are informed of each other when they interact.

ooops - forgot what I was going to say.


Might you provide here -in your own words -a brief description of the singularity/beginning of the universe? If so, I will try to explain what I am talking about based on that.
 

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
Your spoiling Etritonakin's train of speculation here with elements germane to the issue. Elements that are the unnecessary and troublesome bugaboos of the enterprise. They're not suppose to apply so don't bring them in. Same goes for logic. Leave it at the doorstep when you enter the worlds of what-if?.


.
To be honest -I am definitely taking a big ol' wild swag at it. :oops:

There are still unknowns, however -and big ol' wild swags can be a great tool. Going with only the knowns -not so much. ;)
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Well, if we're talking about biological evolution then the big bang is all out. Biological evolution didn't begin till there was a biology to work with.
Now, I understand everything's connected, but too broad a perspective can obfuscate an issue.

If I'm talking about a carpet shampoo, I don't bring up the causes of the last ice age, even though it was responsible for the development of H. sapiens, and related to the migration patterns and climate that allowed the Americas to be populated, which, of course led to the selective cultivation of a grassy weed that was eventually bred to produce a huge seedhead, the seeds of which could be dried and ground to a flour and made into an unleavened flatbread that could be folded into a pocket holding beans, vegetables. &c, which, when dropped in a car, can cause considerable carpet staining
So continental drift, planetary precession and volcanos, responsible for the ice age, directly impact the stock fluctuations of the company manufacturing carpet shampoo....

See? It can get ridiculous.
 

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
Well, if we're talking about biological evolution then the big bang is all out. Biological evolution didn't begin till there was a biology to work with.
Now, I understand everything's connected, but too broad a perspective can obfuscate an issue.

If I'm talking about a carpet shampoo, I don't bring up the causes of the last ice age, even though it was responsible for the development of H. sapiens, and related to the migration patterns and climate that allowed the Americas to be populated, which, of course led to the selective cultivation of a grassy weed that was eventually bred to produce a huge seedhead, the seeds of which could be dried and ground to a flour and made into an unleavened flatbread that could be folded into a pocket holding beans, vegetables. &c, which, when dropped in a car, can cause considerable carpet staining
So continental drift, planetary precession and volcanos, responsible for the ice age, directly impact the stock fluctuations of the company manufacturing carpet shampoo....

See? It can get ridiculous.

"We" (a word which you should use with extreme caution, because it is not often accurate and can include people you don't really know -with motives and ways you really don't understand) are not talking only about biological evolution.

If you stop making things ridiculous, you might actually get the point.

If science folk want a theory of everything, perhaps they should start by considering everything.
 

First Baseman

Retired athlete
I'm not saying the following happened, but........

Rather than viewing evolution in terms of element-based life, if we consider it to include essentially everything -every change that has ever been -which led up to the formation of the elements, the universe, physical life forms, our intelligence and creativity (which some view as a continuation of evolution), etc....

And... If the singularity we call the Big Bang is essentially logic (information/law -not necessarily self-intelligent) applied to that which existed prior which arranged it into its present state... which essentially means that logic existed to be applied prior..... Then, if logic -why not intelligence?

If that which existed prior to the Big Bang singularity could become -at least partly -our physical universe....

Would it be impossible for an initial overall intelligence -able to affect all things -all that could affect and all that could be affected -to have developed before all else?

Assuming that all of your assumptions are true - which I do not - then no, it wouldn't be impossible for an initial overall intelligence -able to affect all things -all that could affect and all that could be affected -to have developed before all else.

What would make it impossible?
 

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
Assuming that all of your assumptions are true - which I do not - then no, it wouldn't be impossible for an initial overall intelligence -able to affect all things -all that could affect and all that could be affected -to have developed before all else.

What would make it impossible?
Which of my assumptions do you disagree with or do not know to be true?
 

First Baseman

Retired athlete
Which of my assumptions do you disagree with or do not know to be true?

Big Bang theory contradicts Genesis 1, 2. Therefore I don't believe it. I prefer the Bible over the wisdom of men. Men change their views every so often, the Bible does not change.

Anyway, I've been in this creationism vs. evolution debate so many times that I am tired of it. I don't wish to argue it again. But you asked me so I answered you.
 
Last edited:

Yerda

Veteran Member
I'm not saying the following happened, but........

Rather than viewing evolution in terms of element-based life, if we consider it to include essentially everything -every change that has ever been -which led up to the formation of the elements, the universe, physical life forms, our intelligence and creativity (which some view as a continuation of evolution), etc....

And... If the singularity we call the Big Bang is essentially logic (information/law -not necessarily self-intelligent) applied to that which existed prior which arranged it into its present state... which essentially means that logic existed to be applied prior..... Then, if logic -why not intelligence?

If that which existed prior to the Big Bang singularity could become -at least partly -our physical universe....

Would it be impossible for an initial overall intelligence -able to affect all things -all that could affect and all that could be affected -to have developed before all else?
I've no idea how to start answering that.

Concerning the use of the word evolution I agree that we don't have to limit it to any specific usage but we do have to know what you mean by it. Reading through the thread it's kinda hard to make out your meaning. It sounds like you're using it as a replacement for the word nature or natural law.

Whatever it is that drives the evolution of the universe couldn't really be said to drive biological evolution which depends on descent with modification. Though I would be one of the few atheists here that don't hold that evolution is limited to living systems and that the tendency of matter to find a stable equilibrium is perhaps underneath the whole story.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I'm not saying the following happened, but........

Rather than viewing evolution in terms of element-based life, if we consider it to include essentially everything -every change that has ever been -which led up to the formation of the elements, the universe, physical life forms, our intelligence and creativity (which some view as a continuation of evolution), etc....

And... If the singularity we call the Big Bang is essentially logic (information/law -not necessarily self-intelligent) applied to that which existed prior which arranged it into its present state... which essentially means that logic existed to be applied prior..... Then, if logic -why not intelligence?

If that which existed prior to the Big Bang singularity could become -at least partly -our physical universe....

Would it be impossible for an initial overall intelligence -able to affect all things -all that could affect and all that could be affected -to have developed before all else?
We all see the processes clearly enough to determine no intelligence is overseeing or manipulating any outcomes.

There's no reason to think any intelligence is behind anything in the way it's put forward.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
UNIVERSAL TIME began with the big bang. It is only an assumption that there is no external reference for time/interrelationship.
The Big Bang is not the only useful model, and there are still many unanswered questions about it. The only thing that would completely kill the Big Bang theory would be to discover that the universe absolutely did not come from a point or could not have, but it could continue to live on without any assumption about time. It just would change the theory. The main assumption is not about Time but about the origin of Space, and then Time gets tacked on. Anyway...space is expanding. That's what has been reported about red shifting and measuring the distances between stars, so that expansion is what they are trying to study. Have you heard of the Infinite Universes theory? Its possible that Time did not begin with the Big Bang and that the Big Bang is only useful as a model rather than as an absolute certainty.
 
Top