Duane Elgin

Ed,   Thanks for these thoughtful comments. They spark many reflections and questions for me. I am not a physicist, so I bring wonder to these questions.  Importantly, I do not view the universe as a “biological system.” Life seems to  be nested within life–and biological systems  seem (to me) to be a subset of the unique aliveness of our univ…[Read more]

Ursula – this is a great list to apply to the universe as a unified and living system: 

1) Ability to capture and utilize energy from the environment. — The universe appears to emerge and then maintain itself by capturing energy from non-visible/trans-visible sources. Both atomic structures of matter-energy and the fabric of space-time appear to…

[Read more]

Wise words Elisabet:  “My choice, like yours Duane, is for life, AND I have no need to convince those making the other choice that they are wrong. Why don’t we just take a straw vote of how many in this dialogue make each choice and get on with defining the other terms?”   This seems like a productive approach to me Elisabet as I have never s…[Read more]

Wise words Elisabet:  “My choice, like yours Duane, is for life, AND I have no need to convince those making the other choice that they are wrong. Why don’t we just take a straw vote of how many in this dialogue make each choice and get on with defining the other terms?” This seems like a productive approach to me Elisabet as I have never sought…[Read more]

Elisabet, Thank you for this valuable expansion to our discussion of fundamental assumptions and their cultural sources.

Ursula and Jon, We have the foundations for an interesting discussion! I’m just heading out the door for several days of traveling and speaking and won’t be able to reply immediately. However, for various “flavors” of materialism, I find the discussion in Wikipedia interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism (although I realize that f…[Read more]

Ursula, No disparagement of scientists is intended. My understanding of a “materialist” view of the universe is summarized in the following propositions (which I understand may not reflect your own): 

• Measurable matter is the only reality and is essentially mechanical in its workings. • At the foundations of existence, matter is without con…

[Read more]

Karen and Ed, I’d like to respond to your conversation regarding scientists as story tellers. A big part of the challenge is not the story telling ability of scientists but rather the story they are telling. If the perceived story is shallow and restricted then it will be reflected in the story that is told. If the universe is regarded as…[Read more]

Ursula, You write that, “Consciousness, however defined, is still a mystery. But, of course, all of these brain-based processes occur only in animals and aren’t general properties of life.” If consciousness is “still a mystery,” I am puzzled how, in the very next sentence, you can say with certainty that, “. . .of course, all these  brain-based pr…[Read more]

Ursula and Ed,It seems to me that “the reduction of biological life to mechanical systems” does not go deep enough into the underlying nature of what are described as “mechanical systems.” At the quantum levels, mechanical systems dissolve into energetic systems that seem to have an informing life-force or, as Ed writes, “biology will appear more…[Read more]

Ed, Thanks for launching this new thread! I look forward to tuning in as I can and learning as I go.   

Ed, Thanks for your “Thoughts on Quantum Consciousness and its Implications.” You are moving the conversation into a very interesting realm. I look forward to having the time to explore the resources that you present.

Thanks for the comments Ed,   I’ll take a quick break from family tasks to say that I definitely do not see the universe as “alive” in the same way that biological organisms are alive.  However, I do see the universe as a unique kind of unified and living system nested within the unique aliveness of a larger multiverse. At a micro-scale, I do not…[Read more]

Thanks for the comments Ed, I’ll take a quick break from family tasks to say that I definitely do not see the universe as “alive” in the same way that biological organisms are alive.  However, I do see the universe as a unique kind of unified and living system nested within the unique aliveness of a larger multiverse. At a micro-scale, I do not se…[Read more]

Dear Contributors, This makes post number 80 and it seems like the conversation has scarcely begun. However, I am now in the process of moving (finding another rental and then going through all the details of setting up a household in a new location), so I will have to sign off from this fascinating inquiry for the time being. I’ve learned a great…[Read more]

James, Thanks for your observations. A brief question emerges for me: If the cell is considered the “minimal unit of self” then how did RNA “self-emerge”? If there now is consensus among origin-of-life researchers that RNA chains are too specialized to have been created as a product of random chemical reactions, then where did the life-forming…[Read more]

Ursula–   No I have not watched this video (“Through the Wormhole”). Looks interesting. I’ll try to take a look at it in the next few days.

Ursula– No I have not watched this video. Looks interesting. I’ll try to take a look at it in the next few days.

Ursula— If something is happening “spontaneously,” then it means that it is happening without any apparent external cause. Yet, in your description you say that “. . . all the prefabbed constraints in the system . . . are externally caused.”  If the constraints are “externally caused” as you say, then it is not, by definition, “happening sp…[Read more]

Ursula— If something is happening “spontaneously,” then it means that it is happening without any apparent external cause. Yet, in your description you say that “. . . all the prefabbed constraints in the system . . . are externally caused.”  If the constraints are “externally caused” as you say, then it is not, by definition, “happening sp…[Read more]