[MD] Marsha's (s)OL

[markhsmit]

Hi Ham,
On Oct 21, 2009, at 12:23:24 AM, "Ham Priday" <hampday1 at verizon.net> wrote:
Pulling forces and niche filling suggest a "teleology of intelligent design" 
which I have never denied. However, I look at it this way. A design is 
something we recognize as having symmetrical or patterned attributes. 
Intelligence is the capability to perceive or construct designs. Therefore, 
if the physical universe is indeed a construction of cognitive awareness, 
it's not surprising that it is experienced as an intelligently designed 
system. This is true whether the source of intelligence is human or divine 
(i.e., essence-value), and it would apply not only to the physical 
appearance of things but to the dynamics and evolution of the system as a 
whole.
I would agree with what you state about intelligence.  I have no concept
of the divine as being just a larger human brain that thinks in the
same way, but better.  That for me smacks of anthropocentrism.  But if one is to
consider the attributes of intelligence in a reductionist manner (trying to
create a definition that is), I find that there is so called intelligence all around
us.  From the inorganic to the organic.  If evolution works through trial and
error and learns in the process, I would call that intelligent.  

The brain is made up of inorganic material arranged in a certain way.
There is reinforcement of particular synapses that are used a lot
though RNA synthesis and protein expression, through a
feedback system.  Thus our thoughts solidify.  In the same
way, a trail of ants solidifies through feedback once food is found.  Try disrupting
that trail, and it will form again in another way.  For me their is no difference 
between an anthill (and its trails) and the human brain.  The anthill thinks in
an analogous manner.  What is different is that there is an "I" which I believe
to be separate from the mechanics, which experiences those thoughts.  Don't
know if this is mystical or spiritual or what, it doesn't matter.  It is the only
conclusion I can come to with using logic.  Using the analogy above, there
could well be an experiencer of the anthill.

By realizing that this is indeed the case (for me), I am suddenly aware
of much more.  In my opinion, we can be aware of Quality
(for lack of a better word) outside of the objective self and other.
Perhaps without negation of essence.

Cheers,
Willblake2