Actually.........I pity you for not being able to understand a 400 year old accepted by some of the greatest minds to ever exist on this planet fundemental 'LAW' of the physical plane we exist in.....

Man, what are you talking about?

I admitted you are correct when you call it order, I completely understand your point of view. What I didnt admit that it wasnt chaos. It can be both order and chaos at the same time. I feel sorry for you, because you are stuck. You pick a side and run yourself into the ground. I've already been convinced there is order in the universe, so what are you arguing about? Do you want to beat out every single inkling of opposite view to yours thats in me? What then?

I feel sorry for you, because you can't transcend duality.

You know my view throughout this has been that there is no chaos..

I'm sorry that you feel sorry for me.. Because I've still yet to see any argument from you that equates to proving any form of randomness in this universe.

Well then you're not looking at it in the right way.

what do you mean by "universe" are you speaking for the inky black fluid that is space, or do you mean planets, asteroids, blackholes etc?

Universe as in everything... Earth, Sun, Space, trees, animals, rocks, etc... Everything.

your question is unanswerable since obviously a static planet does not have the awareness that an animal has.

But a static planet isnt static at all, its constantly moving and has the potential to produce conciousness.

^^producing conciousness and being concious are two completely seperate things

OK, say I set up an experiment that mimics the conditions of the eart billions of years ago... Water, bit of methane and shit... Electricity. Cant exactly remember what it was.

Through potentiality, I would consider the apparatus intelligent.

^so because it has a high potential, you would consider it intellegent?


would you consider a container full of mold intellegent as well?

Not only would I consider that intelligent, I would consider a rock intelligent.

^and you would also consider a dead body full of maggots and bacteria intellegent as well?

Yeah...........

^on what grounds? the dead body has no conciousness nor control of anything at all. the life forces consuming it do

so how do you deem a hollowed out corpse as intellegent?

Because its part of the universe, and there's maggots and bacteria in it.

^^so what do you consider "intellegent" then, cuz so far nothing you named classifies as "intellegent" according to my good buddy Webster

in‧tel‧li‧gence  /ɪnˈtɛlɪdʒəns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-tel-i-juhns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.
2. manifestation of a high mental capacity: He writes with intelligence and wit.
3. the faculty of understanding.
4. knowledge of an event, circumstance, etc., received or imparted; news; information.


^that pretty much rules out planets, dead bodies, containers of mold, a rock, and pretty much everything else you've said over the last 4 pages

Like I said, intelligent through potentiality. Just like inside you there are bilions upon billions of people.

so in your world, potential for what equals intellegence? anything that's a vessel?

Potential for life equals intelligence.

so my feces to you are intelligent.

alrighty...

You bet they are... So full of nutrients.

all hail Apexx's fecies.

Your fecies are worth just as much praise as anything else.

I agree

Yo ive got an idea...

Describe intelligence without referring to something that you would consider unintelligent.

^so talk about intellegence while reffering to something intelligent?

ok, an animal is an example of something intellegent.

No, describe intelligence itself without referring to something you would consider unintelligent. The definition of intelligence before that you gave would mean animals are not intelligent.

what are you talking about? by the definition animals are unintelligent?

1. capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc. <------yup, animals def have that
2. manifestation of a high mental capacity <------ yup animals have that too
3. the faculty of understanding. <------this one's obviously true
4. knowledge of an event, circumstance, etc., received or imparted; news; information. <------ and this one's obviously true as well

are you sure you know what you're talking about man???


cuz it sure as hell doesn't sound like it.

Well yeah I guess animals have all of those, if you were talking about humans when you said animals... And some if you werent. Maybe?

But you still havent done what I said... Describe intelligence without reference to something unintelligent.

are you even listening to your self? i mean really.



i think you need to ask a more direct question other than the equivilant of "describe something hot without talking about something cold"

You cant, because its impossible... Maybe we got a bit off track here.

What are we talking about again? I cant remember.

I said the universe = intelligent through potentiality. Are you arguing against that or arguing against the universe being intelligent in general?

I'm not arguing against jack. i'm trying to determine the foundation of your question as a whole, but the more i dig the more i see that you flat out don't have a foundation. just saying any ol shit that sounds even remotely deep or introspective. if anything I'm arguing that you aren't aware of the meaning of "intelligent". either that or created your own meaning for it that no one else in the world validates.

i mean cmon man, you consider my testicles intelligent. now don't get me wrong, I've gotten lots of compliments about my nuts, but intelligent is def a new one

The foundation of my statement is this...

Commonly accepted view: Intelligence is an advanced form of the universe.
My proposal: The universe is a primitive form of intellgience.

If you condense time, a rock has the same capacity of intelligence as we do, it just hasnt found it yet. If you consider everything part of the universe, this makes sense.

^a rock has the same capacity for intelligence as we do - how? what organs and senses does a rock use to gather information? what organs does a rock use to store it's knowledge? what fuel does a rock consume to keep it aware and alive?

what you're saying is flat out illogical man.

A rock when combined with the other things that make up the universe... Has the capacity to produce life over a long span of time.

What im saying is completely stupid. If you dont look at it in a certain way. Its like wtf, a rock does nothing, its not concious has no systems or anything. You have to be looking at it from the right perspective, disregarding time and standards.

Which might be a pretty dumb thing to do. Oh well. You're right in what youre saying, depending on the way you look at it.

cmon man now you're tryin to mke it sound like "youre right but..mmm..on certain conditions", you say a rock is intelligent because it can carry life but something has to happen to that rock, something living attaches it self to that rock the rock doesn't go out and make those things happen on its own. therefore it's not intelligent. even by your own definition!

there's no circumstances or situations to that man, its pretty black and white. we're not on different pagesman we're on the same page, it just soundslike you're trying to stretch it.

But you can see where im coming from right?

Im not really saying anything far out or hard to believe... I just switched around a common conception.

You mistook my last post. I wasnt saying "Youre right, I guess, on certain conditions." I was saying "You're right. But if you look at what im saying from a certain point of view, im also right (on certain conditions)."

Maybe rock was a bad example... Im talking universe. Its like saying a single muscle fibre twitching is a primitive form of advanced movement, instead of saying advanced movement is a complex form of muscle fibres twitching.

man you sound liek you're just doubletalking and backpeddling.

I've been saying the same thing since the start of the thread, ive just had to explain it in a lot of different ways.