jump to last post 1-41 of 41 discussions (303 posts)

Which Came first? The Body or the Mind?

  1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago

    It is my opinion that the mind came first.

    It is the mind that wills the formation of a body that will enable it to express itself.

    1. staynegative profile image59
      staynegativeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Defiantly the mind.

    2. 0
      crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The body came first, without it the mind has nothing to manipulate.  It's like a painter trying to paint his ideas without a brush, paints and canvas.

      1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        what made the body?

        1. 0
          crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          In our finiteness we are incapable of comprehending the infinite.  We can image it, but we cannot truly comprehend it.  Just because our reality depends on a time = 0, that doesn't mean it must be so.

          1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
            ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            imagination can access the infinite.

            1. 0
              crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Imagination is not comprehension.  No matter in how many ways we imagine the infinite, when we come back to reality the question "what created it," still exits.

              Nothing had to, even if that feels impossible.

              1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                imagination is integral to comprehension.

                1. 0
                  crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  It really isn't, I disagree.  Often imagination gets in the way of true understanding.

                  1. Shadesbreath profile image89
                    Shadesbreathposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    How could you learn algebra without the ability to imagine a missing element?  How could you learn about black holes without the ability to imagine them?  You darn sure can't see one.  How could you invent anything without imagining it first?

                  2. mythbuster profile image85
                    mythbusterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I hate it when that happens!

              2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                einstein: "imagination is better than knowledge"

                when you predict the consequences of an action, you imagine it first.

                1. 0
                  crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Yes, that's fine - but then you impose your preconceived beliefs on what should happen, and therefore impede on true understanding.

                  1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    all scientific discoveries are based upon a working hypothesis. The hypothesis came from the imagination of the scientist. She will then test it to see if what she imagines to be the reason for the phenomenon is indeed correct.

                    Imagination can access the unknown and is a precursor of knowledge.

    3. SunSeven profile image60
      SunSevenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Funny

      1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I'm sure you think it's hilarious. smile

    4. Beelzedad profile image60
      Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      When we look at the engine of an automobile, we see a collection of metal parts and ask, where does the energy come from to propel the car forward? We observe in this collection of parts an image of "gray matter".

      It is when the engine is functioning properly does it then produce the energy to move the car, just as the brain needs to function to produce the mind, and it is the collection of parts or gray matter that must first be in place working correctly to produce a functioning mind.

      1. 0
        crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        That articulates quite nicely my viewpoint that the mind is a result of the complex biological processes of the brain.

        1. Beelzedad profile image60
          Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Thanks. smile

          I had also hoped that it pointed out the fact that the body and the brain MUST EXIST FIRST in order for the mind to function.

          1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
            ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            body evolved from rudimentary brains, correct?

            1. Beelzedad profile image60
              Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              More correctly, the brain would evolve "along with" the body. smile

              1. skyfire profile image73
                skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                What about Sir Stephen Hawkins ?

                1. Beelzedad profile image60
                  Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I don't think his condition is an example of the brain evolving along with the body, we're talking millions of years here.

                  Stephen is an example of what hard work and rigor will accomplish, despite his bodies condition. smile

            2. 0
              crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Not true, brain activity doesn't exist in a foetus until 25 weeks of gestation - until then it is essentially "a hunk of meat."

              1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                what is making the heart beat? isn't it reflex?

                1. 0
                  crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  "The human heart begins to beat and pump blood through the embryo around day 22 of gestation. The electric stimulus that triggers the muscular portion of the heart, known as the myocardium, to contract is myogenic. This means that the contractions arise spontaneously within the myocardium itself, and propagate from cell to cell. Input from the central nervous system can modify the heart rate (the frequency of heart beats), but it does not initiate beats.

                  The ability of cardiac myocytes (the cells that comprise the myocardium) to beat is an intrinsic property of these cells. In fact, myocytes removed from the early heart and grown in culture will beat sporadically, and if they become connected to each other, will then begin to beat rhythmically, in unison. As a functional organ, the heart begins to beat very early, even before it has assumed its final form. Interestingly, the heart begins to beat even before structures such as valves and septa (singular: septum; the muscular walls that divide the chambers) have formed! The initial contractions are peristaltic--that is, they proceed in a wave-like fashion along the length of the heart. Later, once the heart has matured and the conduction system has developed, the contractions proceed in an orderly, timed sequence through the different chambers."
                  http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/se … .An.r.html

              2. Dmian profile image59
                Dmianposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                interesting, plus does anybody  remembers how we were born if by mind in the question its meant for consciousness i think i didn´t had one till i was like 3 years old becasue anything before that i cannot remember.

    5. andromida profile image75
      andromidaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      If you think evolution has created us,then perhaps body came at first,gradually mind evolved into it.

      1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        So are you saying that a body can be mindless? why then does it need to store data in the form of chemicals to replicate what it knows.

        1. andromida profile image75
          andromidaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          This should be true if and only if you consider theory of evolution. From a creationist or spiritual point of view,it must be mind, which someway get bonded with the body.

      2. Obscure Divine profile image60
        Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Now, that's funny right there...  Ha-ha!

    6. RKHenry profile image81
      RKHenryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I concur.  Its gotta be the mind.  How else do we account for all the extra surges of energy and the unexplained magnetic energy found in the Devil's Triangle?

      Yeah, final answer its the mind.

    7. Shahid Bukhari profile image60
      Shahid Bukhariposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I think, the Egg came first ...

      1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        that's just what i said. smile

      2. Pandoras Box profile image81
        Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Eros. Attraction.

        Fascinating topic.

  2. Jewels profile image81
    Jewelsposted 6 years ago

    Hermetic Philosophy "THE ALL IS MIND: The Universe is Mental."  We manifest everything from the mind.

    1. 0
      Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      or "A mind". I studied a little bit of this years ago.
      the human body in silence expresses the fullness of universal philo, as said to generate from a complete collective of understanding. That the tomb of the body is only expressing a minute instance of it. Something to that effect.

      Though the mind absent of body -at least the human- is an abstract thing, since no human has been known to exist without a body-mind cooperative.

      James

      PS, Hi Jewels.

    2. Obscure Divine profile image60
      Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      This is very plausible.  big_smile

      1. Jewels profile image81
        Jewelsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It is indeed very plausible.   My understanding from mapping states of consciousness is that the human body or human existence gives a standpoint, or a viewpoint.  But the mind is separate from the body, I've no doubt on this and have experienced it many times.

        Mapping consciousness is an amazing body of work to be involved in.  But am also tickled by the fact we, in a human state of consciousness will only ever achieve a minute understanding of THE ALL.  Our mortal minds have the ability of kindergarten kids compared to much broader states.  It is extraordinary to be in states of Bliss for example, even more extraordinary to go into higher states where you have no reference point.

        Leaves one awestruck by how small our minds are.

        1. Obscure Divine profile image60
          Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I totally agree with you, even though the pre-school/Kindergarten folks will rebuke ya, but not me.  Albeit, some minds are way greater than others, due to the higher levels of......   big_smile

          1. Jewels profile image81
            Jewelsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            .........of spiritual evolution perhaps,  Worth pondering. We mere mortals speak allot about human evolution but understand very little of a spiritual evolution.  Often confusion exists between the small mortal mind knowledge and confuse it with a higher knowledge.  And the heaviness of materialistic reductionism masks wanting to know the difference. smile

            Not that small mind knowledge is not important, it is.  But to apply it, know it and see the difference between the limited thinking mind and the higher mind - that's when a person can be extraordinary.

        2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          scale is irrelevant smile

          1. Jewels profile image81
            Jewelsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Scale of the higher mind is irrelevant. smile  It's not fathomable.  The confines of the lower mind are to be transcended, least one continues on a circular treadmill of nonsense. smile

            1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
              ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Well the dim still contains some version of light.

              1. Jewels profile image81
                Jewelsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                There is always light to be found regardless of how dark the mind gets.

                1. Obscure Divine profile image60
                  Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Dark matter does outweigh the light when compared to space, but the light shines through, regardless...

  3. marinealways24 profile image60
    marinealways24posted 6 years ago

    Of course I agree that the mind designed the body. big_smile It's only common sense.

  4. marinealways24 profile image60
    marinealways24posted 6 years ago

    Mind designs all physical changes in evolution.

    1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      and that is the end of this thread lol seems like we all agree.

      1. marinealways24 profile image60
        marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        lol That was quick, now if only the scientists could gain consciousness.

        1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I don't think they're awake yet.

          1. marinealways24 profile image60
            marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Maybe it's just the fact that consciousness is less evolved in mob mentality.

            1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
              ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              They don't want to state belief these scientists, just facts. They're like politicians, anything they say can cause their credibility, hence their grants.

              1. marinealways24 profile image60
                marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                There is logical observable evidence though to support the belief, not just faith. The evidence is that mind designs the physical body. Animals consciously design themselves to hide or appeal to their environment.

                1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                  ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  It only takes one person passionate about it to write it convincingly in a book for it to become accepted knowledge. No one has done it. Or if anybody has done it, it is not heard loud enough.

                  Truths need champions in the earthly realm.

  5. freeeasycoupons profile image60
    freeeasycouponsposted 6 years ago

    According to me mind is come to first and that true.

  6. skyfire profile image73
    skyfireposted 6 years ago

    I'll vote for Body. I don't see Mr. Amoeba being conscious about his life so why should mind be first in all cases ?

    1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      so did a mindless body come first?

      1. skyfire profile image73
        skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I don't see amoeba having a mind anyway.

        1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          define mind

          1. skyfire profile image73
            skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            in this case consciousness

            1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
              ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              there are many definitions of consciousness which ones are you using?

              1. skyfire profile image73
                skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                amoeba being conscious about life & death.

                1. 0
                  crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  That's a question I've been pondering for some time, whether consciousness of one's own mortality is really that important to consciousness.  That implies self-awareness, which obviously implies complex thought.  But does that really matter to call something conscious.  I don't know - right now I'm inclined to say no?

                2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                  ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  amoeba eats. why? it is conscious of the discomfort of not eating and fears it.

                  1. 0
                    crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    That is a really dangerous use of the word conscious.  Anthropomorphism is way too often a tendency of humans.

                  2. skyfire profile image73
                    skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I'm not sure amoeba is even aware of any feeling of not eating.

  7. Will Apse profile image89
    Will Apseposted 6 years ago

    People who want to escape their bodies are probably a little unbalanced. I wouldn't mind a new one though. Preferable young, perky and willing to accommodate my impure imagination.

    1. Obscure Divine profile image60
      Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      LOL!  Your last four words were great:  accommodate my impure imagination.  Ahh, such honesty!  big_smile

  8. Shadesbreath profile image89
    Shadesbreathposted 6 years ago

    Body came first if we're going with what we have some evidence to support.  Amino acids and some lightning, something of that order, single cell creatures with single-celled bodies.  Intelligence evolved down the line, which eventually became self-aware, and asked the question, "Which came first, body or mind?" Debate to ensue endlessly from there.

    1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      If you cannot express yourself through speech nor move, yet you are thinking, predicting, knowing. Does that mean you're not intelligent? Intelligence is separate from the expression of intelligence.

      Is intelligence what mind is?

      1. 0
        crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I don't think so no.  The contribution of language to consciousness is highly debated at present.  In three years when I have to write my dissertation I hope I have more of an answer than - I want to say it doesn't matter, here's why lol

        1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          if intelligence is not mind, do you have mind if you have no intelligence?

          1. 0
            crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            That depends highly on how you choose to define intelligence. I  choose to define it as the ability to learn, manipulate what you've learned, and apply it differently depending on the circumstances.

            In that case, anything with a brain can be said to have a certain degree of intelligence, and as I believe a brain is a prerequisite to consciousness, then I'd have to say no intelligence means no mind.  Logically this is where I am at present - I don't like it though.

            1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
              ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              it is an uncomfortable world view, which means you need to challenge it.

              1. 0
                crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I do on a daily basis.  I have yet however to find a cohesive argument to sway me otherwise.  In time I will either grow more comfortable or change my worldview.  My worldview is highly dynamic, it is and always will be in a state of change.

                1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                  ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  if you are compelled to participate in this forum, what you're doing is exploring the limits of what you know.

                  1. 0
                    crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Always smile

                2. Pandoras Box profile image81
                  Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Excellent!

          2. mythbuster profile image85
            mythbusterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I don't mind if I don't have intelligence, but it bothers the people around me when I'm acting/speaking without intelligence.

            smile

        2. Pandoras Box profile image81
          Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          The relationship between language and consciousness, that's what it was! I was trying to remember what thread it was on, when I read someone saying something about that and offering information on it through email.

          I knew someone had said something very interesting that i wanted to follow up on, but couldn't remember who, what or where exactly. (Gotta start taking Gingko Biloba.)

          So here I found you again, and checked out your profile and hub titles, and read the one specifically on this subject. Fascinating. Really great stuff, I look forward to reading more, and thanks for sharing your explorations here.

          Definitely earned a fan!

      2. Shadesbreath profile image89
        Shadesbreathposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Not at all.  In fact, I would call that the nightmare of quadriplegia.

        Mind is born of intelligence. I don't think they are inseperable. I think it is easier to see intelligence without "mind" as we seem to be saying here, than it is to see "mind" without intelligence. 

        There's some great stuff that's been done on this stuff.  John Searle's Chinese Room experiment, and the idea of the Turing Machine, are two examples of where this plays out (some of it anyway) in philosophy if you are interested.  It's great stuff.

        1. 0
          crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I've written paper's on both of those, definitely very interesting stuff indeed.  The last paper I wrote on the subject was the contribution of mental imagery to intelligence, perhaps I'll post it as a hub.

        2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          thanks for that, I would like to explore that.

  9. lorlie6 profile image86
    lorlie6posted 6 years ago

    The mind has to have the body as it's carrying case.  lol

    1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      who decided to have a mind, the body? so was it moving mindlessly without a mind? How did it move?

  10. ceciliabeltran profile image86
    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago

    Yahoo answers:

    How Does Amoeba Obtain Its Food?
    In Amoeba, the pseudopedia extend out and wrap around a food particle in a process called phagocytocis. The food is then engulfed into the amoeba and digested by the enzymes contained in the amoeba's lysosomes. As the food is digested it exists in a structure called a food vacuole.

    this was a learned process that was passed on through the genes.

    Genes, why did it evolve genes? to repeat itself. It desires to store what it knows. that's why it evolved to fish.

    it wants to eat better and swim faster. it became more complex, why it remembered what it knows in each generation of evolution. the genes are its memory outside of its body.

    If DNA chemicals are memory agents that are deliberately aligned to store information, isn't it reasonable to say that the life form remembered something in its life and valued it enough to pass it on.

    You could say its an accident of nature, but that too has no proof.

    1. 0
      crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I think you are overreaching here.  I don't think it desired to do anything, it is a dangerous place to be to project human emotions in such a way.

      1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I am using human language to communicate intent.

        1. 0
          crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          There are limits of human language, and understanding.  That is the problem really, the only way we can truly understand something is how we understand it - projection is dangerous.

          I don't think the amoeba has intent, I think it just is.

          1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
            ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Well, how else are we going to communicate things that can only be described subjectively like hungry, remember and intend.

            These are things we cannot know through observations of life-forms from outside. The only clue is the result of the action.

            A monkey foraging another monkeys hair is random until you see it put something its mouth...it is eating lice!

            1. 0
              crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              lol, and this is why I plan never to leave academia by becoming a professor and paying graduate students with my grant money to contribute to my research in this area tongue

      2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        the point is to challenge limits of understanding.

  11. ceciliabeltran profile image86
    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago

    Amino acids formed nanosnakes that wriggled. Proteins move in order to balance itself. Then it became more complex. It became a membrane that protected a gene. Why would a chemical desire/acquire the ability to store chemical information, if it does not intend to store that information and protect it from being unbalanced?

    1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      these nanosnakes are like vertebrates.

  12. Obscure Divine profile image60
    Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago

    There is no "College Degree" that can answer this silly question...  Only a warped mind via textbooks will think the body made the mind.  LOL!

  13. ceciliabeltran profile image86
    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago

    "The ability of cardiac myocytes (the cells that comprise the myocardium) to beat is an intrinsic property of these cells. In fact, myocytes removed from the early heart and grown in culture will beat sporadically, and if they become connected to each other, will then begin to beat rhythmically, in unison."

    the cells make it beat in unison, it has information in the dna to do so. It "remembers" how to make a complex brain.

    1. 0
      crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You really are overreaching, at this point I don't know how much more we have to discuss.  You are playing with reductionism.  I disagree with you, to apply human emotions on biological machines is projection, not explanation really.  It can be said, but it can't be proved, and as such this mental experiment will go nowhere.  That's why I don't really like philosophy, it runs itself in circles.

      1. Obscure Divine profile image60
        Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Rid yourself from the haze, fall back to the root; I'm moving, but yet, I'm not moving at all; the only limitation is limitation of one's self.  Art reveals itself in psychic understanding of the inner essence of things and gives form to the relation of man with nothing, with the nature of the absolute.

      2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        well, biological machines originated from dawkins. He himself then later explained that he did not mean for this to be the conclusion.

        He said of his wildly successful book "The Selfish Gene" I should have called it "The Altruistic Vehicle".

        That said, this is only a philosophical debate if it has no logic-based proof. But that is not the case here.

        Cells acquires data (learn) through the membrane and stores data (remembers) through the genes.

        (by the way, you don't have to go on...it's just to further a premise)


        electrochemicals flow through our brain causing it to think. But what are electrochemicals? they are charged fluids. what is making it course through our brain, is it not thought?

        Thought is making the brain move to connect dendrites, you think first and recognize similarity before they attach.

        1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          If memory and learning is not intelligence then what is? If you can't learn or remember, do you have a mind. NO. If you have memory and you learn does that mean you're intelligent....that is the big question.

          IS a computer intelligent?  No, the programmer is.

          1. marinealways24 profile image60
            marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Excellent, clear point showing intelligence at the cellular level. Consciousness is the programmer, higher consciousness is higher intelligence.

            1. 0
              Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              wouldn't consciousness be the program and instinct the boot disk of it? The entire operating system would crash if consciousness was the programmer, no?

              human consciousness is an applied instance.

              1. marinealways24 profile image60
                marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I think consciousness is the only thing that enables life to survive new experiences in the environment they have never previously experienced. I don't think it's already programed, I think it designs the program as it goes by consciousness.

                1. 0
                  Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  are they 'new' only because we are not actively engaging them or purely genuine? meaning, aware/active of that instance within the consciousness?

                  1. marinealways24 profile image60
                    marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    lol I don't know, I was thinking of new as something never previously consciously conceived before. But new could also be something we have seen or thought about before, just not in depth. Also meaning aware and active to make conscious decisions.

        2. Obscure Divine profile image60
          Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          You should have listened to me; you're bonkers!  Maybe you should just support the future of androids, with that limited way of thinking.  big_smile

          1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
            ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Just focusing to fit the entire landscape into a pot, Obscure...wink

  14. richardheft profile image60
    richardheftposted 6 years ago

    If you define the mind as intelligence, then the source of all intelligence is God. Of course the body, each individual cell is also intelligent, smartly defined, perfectly functional just as every atom, planet, sun, etc. is intelligently designed, constructed. Everything is a manifesttion fo God's thought. God's thought precedes the body, mind, ice cream, good, evil, etc.

    1. Shadesbreath profile image89
      Shadesbreathposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Who created God's intelligence?

      1. Obscure Divine profile image60
        Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        LOL!  It all has to be unified, without that "God theory" stuff.  ...All & everything as one entity along with the woo-woo, and all that other hoopla & ballyhoo...  Fun-fun!

      2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        well that presupposes that G-d can be defined outside of myth.

  15. andromida profile image75
    andromidaposted 6 years ago

    The truth is even the greatest minds of world get puzzled thinking about which came first.But I can say no one can answer this question perfectly,you will get only speculative answer.Do you know why?Any guess smile

    1. Obscure Divine profile image60
      Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Some of the so-called "greatest minds" also get perplexed by a bologna sandwich; do you know why?  Any conjectures?   big_smile

      1. andromida profile image75
        andromidaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Because they have no answer or concrete evidence smile

        1. Obscure Divine profile image60
          Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          They must lack feeling, I suppose.  How unaware can people get, one may ask.  The need for concrete evidence is a hindrance in its own right of ignorance.  If you actually have to think about this, you are way behind on things...  But, luckily, there are different levels of awareness.  ...Find that in ya science books.  Ha-ha!

          1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
            ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            you know your goddess worship is not understood by many here. wink

            1. Obscure Divine profile image60
              Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Bawahtachahihikadontauntudi!

              1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                feelings are ruled by the goddess archetype. Mercurial types worship the feminine form. I bet my cold coffee you are female body worshiper!

                1. Obscure Divine profile image60
                  Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I like the female body, especially if they have big bubble butts & huge silicon breasts, if that's what ya mean?

                  1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    u-huh...

          2. andromida profile image75
            andromidaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            You get the real point now-feeling.I can feel whatever I like smile

            1. Obscure Divine profile image60
              Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              It doesn't sound like it.  It sounds more like "you can read whatever you like."  big_smile

              1. andromida profile image75
                andromidaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                It sounds like you write whatever your consciousness telling to you to feel smile

                1. 0
                  Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  ah, the overlap:

                  sensation (instinct) collectively floods the expressive (reason);
                  completely changing the playground of the parallel. good times.

                2. Obscure Divine profile image60
                  Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I hope so, it is better than "copy & paste" type thoughts that stem from fabricated BS via random outside sources.

                  1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    If you were a neuron, you would have died a long time ago. Knowledge needs to connect in order to grow my dear goddess worshiper.

                  2. andromida profile image75
                    andromidaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Glad to know that you got all the knowledge from inside source smile

        2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          they have evidence. what they don't have is the right measure. Current consensus is, consciousness is an accurate model of reality hence it is no longer a question of whether life is conscious, rather what level of consciousness it is.

          this is current science opinion. so a lot of people here saying that an amoeba is not conscious is using arguments that was true 30 years ago.

          1. andromida profile image75
            andromidaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I agree with you.Level of consciousness is the key point-all living creatures are conscious,level of consciousness is the difference maker.

            1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
              ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              (I wish marine were here. He would kiss you on the nose)

              It's true, self-awareness is difficult to measure because it is subjective. But response to environment is a good clue that something has an awareness of an external model of reality. smile

              1. 0
                Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                ( whispers quietly: it is absorptive, not subjective; subjective is the reflect. x collide y dispense z. ; but you didn't hear it from me )

                1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                  ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  (oh ok)

                  TWENTY ONE SAYS ITS ABSORPTIVE, NOT SUBJECTIVE. SUBJECTIVE IS THE REFLEX.

                  1. 0
                    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    lol Pipe down woman, they'll hear you!


                    all knowledge is inclusive to the human condition, Andromida.
                    humans -like all living things- are born with complete information to sustain their existence. Humans are the only creatures 'aware' of that ability/consciousness and thus end up in the Need To Know Factory oiling the gears of something they already dominate.
                    The mind is the tool -a really fancy one and often a needy child-bully, but nonetheless a tool. But that's just my bit.

                2. Obscure Divine profile image60
                  Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  It's already all there for the taking...

        3. Obscure Divine profile image60
          Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          By the way, do you need evidence for a bologna sandwich?  ...Just curious.

    2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      it's true what you say. It doesn't stop me from having an opinion. smile I'm not going to say I won't go there just because a great mind hasn't

      1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        and by the way a great man has...rene descartes  (it is actually in the backwater for a long time because there is no adequate brain theory. There is one in the works today. Not yet concluded. My opinion is influenced by that.

      2. andromida profile image75
        andromidaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Absolutely,soon you too become one of the greatest minds,at least to me smile

        1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          thank you, but that's too much for me to actually agree with. Let's just say I come from the creative business. smile

  16. 0
    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago

    seems like there are two options at work then, Cecilia darling:

    the bootstrap consciousness -instinct (non human)
    the expressive consciousness -reason (human only)

    in that view, all things have consciousness.
    As said many times, the expressions of the parallel deemed levels are those instances where the tres priori 'play'.

    1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      there is ofcourse a hierarchy of mind in terms of model of reality in relation to self. So that being the case...

      before the first life-form, was there mind?

      1. marinealways24 profile image60
        marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Could the first life-form develop and multiply without mind and conscious reactions? I think it may be impossible to get a second life designed by consciousness if the first wasn't.

  17. Jerami profile image79
    Jeramiposted 6 years ago

    I know that I'm late....  Just read the first coupla pages and then ran right over.

       All of the post on the first pages seem to be correct  and  then  it occured to me that I agree that the mind was reffering to "Intelegent design. 
       I know very little but did watch a film that showed the development of  a baby beginning with fertalization.  There were all kinds of shinney little things in the egg  AND  then something triggered theem to rapidly and simultaniously line up in a streight line to form the spinal cord.
    knowledge came first in the formation of the baby's spinal cord.
      Again I'm only thinking out loud here,
    But I think that; I think ; it goes something like this.
    Fertalization came first. Wisdom was soon made evident when spinal cord assembled, Brain stim became evident producing a brain that then took over???   I think; but know nothing

    1. Obscure Divine profile image60
      Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Your last sentence makes a lot of sense when it comes to people being dumbfounded by ignorance, when you say "I think; but know nothing."  Yep, you should have got more in touch with the interstellar matrix of things by way of sensory, universal tacts - that way, you'll never have to say such things again.  big_smile

      1. Jerami profile image79
        Jeramiposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Some times I find the opportunity to dumb down a bit and I take it every chance I get.   Don't wanta be a smarty pants.

        1. Obscure Divine profile image60
          Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Ahh, there is no true glory in humbleness; please, shine your light upon us.  big_smile

          1. Jerami profile image79
            Jeramiposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I wouldn't wanta to show all my cards. 
            Especially when in all probably they will all be trumped.

            1. Obscure Divine profile image60
              Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Ha-ha!  Okay, whatever works for you.   I used to believe in that humble modest crap, but after a while, a person learns that it is BS to limit one's self to such restraints.  LOL!  Have fun with it; enjoy & explore in this chaotic, galactic galore.  big_smile

  18. aware profile image69
    awareposted 6 years ago

    the male came first. get it?

    1. Obscure Divine profile image60
      Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      This is the wrong forum for that..., try the relationship section!  Ha-ha!

    2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      totally! the female fragmented and then one part of is lost in Obscure. lol GET IT OBSCURE?

      1. Obscure Divine profile image60
        Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        No, he was talking about ejaculation (came versus cum); get it?  You just screwed up a perfectly fine joke by the hubber 'aware', but oh well.  Ha-ha!

  19. aware profile image69
    awareposted 6 years ago

    relax folks it was a joke .

  20. aware profile image69
    awareposted 6 years ago

    single celled organisms came first

    1. Obscure Divine profile image60
      Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yeah, but that may only apply to this planet's origin; I doubt if we fall in sync with that, no matter what Cicilia says.  We are like foreign ants that represent a plague to the harmony, and we are damn good at it.  LOL!

    2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      and protein snakes came before that...it's just made of chemicals that gathered from elements spewed out by stars.

      1. aware profile image69
        awareposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        and you sure of that ? the creation of earth?

        1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          pretty much. stars created the elements and the elements created chemicals, chemicals created matter that gathered (or fell) into each other.

          Epic of Evolution, chaisson (MIT astrophysicist)

          1. 0
            Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            That guy needs a hobby. LOL. MIT...

            1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
              ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              the book was his hobby, his job was consultant and dean of three universities. smile

              1. 0
                Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                figures. no 'time' to enjoy it.
                my good friend is like that. Ever faithful to the cause yet lacking the fruitful engagement of the cause.

                1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                  ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  That is of course a judgment.  Sometimes you see it and it takes a hold of you and then, it owns you and you cannot stop.

    3. 0
      Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      single cell invites multiple elements of that cell and perhaps a consciousness of those elements to infinite point(s) [meaning, again, x collide y appear z] and those instances 3³ domi, equi, subi as needed].

      hence, reality (consciousness = 3³ (n) ad infinitum )

  21. aware profile image69
    awareposted 6 years ago

    i think we will go down as the life form that had potential but failed to realize it.   reason being? we simply thought to much.

    1. Obscure Divine profile image60
      Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      On this planet, perhaps.  There are many other places for our universal awareness to spawn, and Earth is not the only place that this happens.  In fact, I often look at this place like I would elementary school - just another level, but I will say, it does get tiresome for select few 3rd graders to be setting amid a giant Kindergarten class.   big_smile

    2. marinealways24 profile image60
      marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      We should just be happy with what we have and stop exploring and asking questions? Ridiculous. Exploration is what gives many motivation to keep living. The obvious and answered is boring. We have a higher consciousness with greater abilities than other life to explore, why waste it?

    3. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      thought to much...what? or did you mean too much, apparently the sentence needs re-thinking. lol

      1. aware profile image69
        awareposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        chicken or egg?

        1. marinealways24 profile image60
          marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          consciousness

  22. aware profile image69
    awareposted 6 years ago

    to too two 2 dos nei

  23. aware profile image69
    awareposted 6 years ago

    egg dinos laid eggs  long before chickens

    1. Obscure Divine profile image60
      Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yeah-yeah, dino-dung before BS... Woot-woot!

  24. aware profile image69
    awareposted 6 years ago

    i read that divine  knows how to make a mean hash brown. which came first the french fry or the tatter tot? when we know this all will be well . and ob will pocket 50 cents from ad sense.  and sleep like a baby.

    1. Obscure Divine profile image60
      Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Actually, I used to be in affiliation with tha big-big "adult entertainment" biz, ya!  This was a few years ago, and I also used to make mega-cash promoting online gambling, before it became illegal in the U.S.A.  So, yeah, AdSense is queer to me.  Ha-ha!  Besides, I was also a content writer and I do have this poor trait called 'awareness' that is laced with a heightened sense of intellect!  Hurray & woot-woot!  big_smile

  25. ceciliabeltran profile image86
    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago

    Since we all operate in emotion, (aka forces of energy to motivate as to move,) at that level we are all alike.

    there are those who are disorderly in their handling of this energy and there are those who are stable.

    Cosmic Truth
    In order to create stars, atoms must peel off their electrons. It takes a great amount of energy to do this, but when it happens the result is plasma. An endless resource of light.

    Human truth
    Is it higher mind? It is not. It is just mind. When it has removed its negativity, it becomes a source of understanding. Nothing is inaccessible to one who has transcended his own darkness.

    All possess this mind, the problem is, the feelings of lack, the "i need" prevent them from expressing this light because they are busy filling their darkness with light. The result is an endless cycle of patching up.

    And so become pushed away from light spewed out as non-radiate substance, the way matter is spewed out from the sun.

    Better is an illusion. It is just clear or unclear. free or imprisoned. scale is irrelevant.

    To me what this means is once you remove perceptions of lack, you will see that you already have all that you need.

    1. Obscure Divine profile image60
      Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      That was a load of BS.  There ARE different levels out there; not that permeation of poppycock that you just proclaimed!  Geez!  neutral

      1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        why is it important to have a concept of superiority?

        1. Obscure Divine profile image60
          Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Superiority is just the fun turf in which higher awareness sits.  yikes

          1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
            ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            don't make me go there, obscure you're not going to like it smile

            1. Obscure Divine profile image60
              Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              ...Bring it!  I like almost everything, even the stuff I detest!  hmm

      2. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        you seriously have to look at fractal images to have the "level" of understanding this requires.

        1. Obscure Divine profile image60
          Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Ha-ha!  I did that, in the '80s.  You still seem to fail the fact of branches, levels, and irregularities of life/existence.  Interesting...  big_smile

          1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
            ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            You were in high school in the 80s. Read the book, don't just look at the pictures. Maybe you'll pick up something new.

            New discoveries are mostly founded upon discarded knowledge of the past.

            1. Obscure Divine profile image60
              Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I was in High-School in the late '90s.  There was nothing in your last reply, that is true.  Yikes!

    2. Jewels profile image81
      Jewelsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Depends on your level of self awareness as to whether you are swayed unconsciously by your psychological shortcomings.  If a person unconsciously is subject to reactions then their is a lack of awareness and there will be great difficulty in having free will as a result.

      Best become super aware to ensure when you strip away the electrons your star can actually shine and doesn't get snuffed out!

      It's best to understand your subtle layers to really get the grasp of what animates the body.  Emotions have fuel, it's not just emotions that drive the body.   You would do well to involute deeply inside your anatomic structures to understand the workings of not only the organic levels but the influence of thought as a substance outside of the body and it's interaction within the body.  Separate Emotions from Feelings.  Energy is such an all encompassing word for separate forms of sensation.  So using the work Emotion is misleading, and using the term energy is not satisfying when mapping consciousness.

      There are certainly different levels 'out there', paradoxically it's "in here" where you find them.  You can only ever find answers to Absolute Truths by going inside self.  Everything else is a mind circus which is why forums are so popular. smile

  26. marinealways24 profile image60
    marinealways24posted 6 years ago

    87ceciliabeltranposted 4 minutes agoin reply to this
    I sure acted like those guys in Zechariah Sitchin's ancient illustrations, looking at it like a monkey who saw a tractor for the first time. As a matter of fact, I followed it but it was very fast.

    it was super weird.


    I don't know why, but it only let's me reply to a certain extent before I have to copy and paste while I see others able to keep replying. It is kinda irritating. lol
    So you did have new thoughts and were stunned in how to react or what to think?
    I think we make new connections in our minds when seeing something for the first time. I think the new connections raise our consciousness. The more we observe, the more we are conscious of.

    1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      my point was, whatever it is the connected in my brain is not unique. It has been felt again and again. The individual expression changes and colors it. When I say nothing is new, what I mean is we are really playing with basic emotions that are universal. The only difference it how we color it with the palette of the unique situation we are in.

      A monkey seeing a tractor for the first time would be equivalent to a human being who cannot even dry a car who sees an alien spaceship fly in front of her.

      Originality comes from perspective, but the mind, the mind has a basic language that transcends culture and the individual.

      1. Obscure Divine profile image60
        Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        So, you don't believe in uniqueness?  Tell Webster's dictionary, as they are going to be pissed that you scratched their dictions of unique.  Hmm...

        1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I am not attached to uniqueness but I believe that since everyone is unique that kind of evens out the playing field.

          Who would you save a child or Obama?

          At the level of life both of them are equal in value.

          The basis for transcendence is to see value at its basic essence.
          Humanitarian ideals are founded upon essence. All men are created equal, yeah?

          Now not all men are equal in value to you, because ofcourse you love your girlfriends more than the doorman. (or is that an assumption) The individual is the one that assigns value based on his perspective.

          1. Obscure Divine profile image60
            Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Ahh, you totally screwed the reason for levels.  Why does Obama have to come into things (on your last comment), plus, the child that you speak of, may have a higher age of existence, so to speak - in universal terms.  Sometimes, you just can't find Earth-bound reference via textbooks to the things that ARE in ACTUALITY.  big_smile

            1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
              ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              sometimes a person who does not want to entertain an idea and yet engages it is trying to tackle something more personal than it seems.

              you're not interested, you're not interested. You dignify it by saying its wrong or stupid...something personal is going on.

              Just because you're no better than your brother doesn't mean your mom will love your less...ofcourse (that is just an example of how personal issues can get in the way of seeing reason when its presented).

              the point is, who is to say that the child or Obama is more valuable, when their value is relative to who values them?

              1. Obscure Divine profile image60
                Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                You're the one who speaks of value, dear.  Personal problem, ya say?  Hmm...  I thought this conversation was more universal.  By the way, define demise, while you're at it.  What is that, in universal terms...  Ha-ha!

                1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                  ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  is better not a word that assigns value?

                  1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    my point is the insistence of being better is a delusion of a mind who fears being worse.

                    smile (that is an argument not an attack.)

                  2. Obscure Divine profile image60
                    Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    The term 'better' is what you try to defy.  Speaking of such matters, I sure hope I'm "better" than I was before, since my level of awareness has increased greatly, over the aeons of time.  Duh!

  27. susanlang profile image60
    susanlangposted 6 years ago

    I think they both arrived at the same time. One can-not function without the other.

    1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      there is merit in this argument...hmmm...

  28. susanlang profile image60
    susanlangposted 6 years ago

    Right?

    1. susanlang profile image60
      susanlangposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      opps,  this-------> !   ?  <-------- not that  lol

  29. 0
    kimberlyslyricsposted 6 years ago

    I believe it's an even split for humans, so many poor souls still waiting for their minds, unaware to know what to do with their body.... you get what I mean, ya hmm:

    1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      but its so varied. When you look at children, some are slow and some are fast. If you measure them in some ways some would have an advantage, but then you measure them in other ways the ones who were ahead start to lose out.

      In the same way, you'll say rich people are better off...until you meet someone who has no concept of wealth. And to this person, a bunch of bananas is wealth in the same way your cousin feels about his Benz.

      The mundane requires hierarchy but essence, essence transcends it.

      In the same way, the different forms of life forms and matter manifestations though they vary in complexity are actually equal to its simpler counterparts in proportion.

      100 is ten making ten rounds round the same block. In the end it's all about 1s and 0s. Is it there or is it not there?

    2. Pandoras Box profile image81
      Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No brain needed!

  30. waynet profile image45
    waynetposted 6 years ago

    Er.... the chicken!??

    1. Obscure Divine profile image60
      Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hmm... breakfast time yet?  No, we are not talking about laying eggs.  Geez!  Ha-ha!

      1. waynet profile image45
        waynetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        oh.... ok eggs it is then!

        The body became the chicken when the egg hatched and started to break wind on the dance floor, then the mind got tired and reverted back to a pile of pig slop....hmmm I love these intelligent discussions!

        1. Obscure Divine profile image60
          Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Like I basically said before:  Break out the swine!  It's breakfast time!
          Waynet has just cast down some culinary knowledge for that arse...  Oh well, we all got to die somehow.  wink

  31. ceciliabeltran profile image86
    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago

    Going back to body and mind.

    a chicken's life may seem to not have value than another human, but to the chicken that's its wife versus the hick that's going to eat it.

    Just saying hierarchy is relative.

  32. ceciliabeltran profile image86
    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago

    things in actuality are also relative to the observer. big_smile

    for instance human rights are things in actuality but in your reasoning (as in some hypothetical child that "may" possibly more valuable than Obama) it is not so.

  33. Rayalternately profile image60
    Rayalternatelyposted 6 years ago

    Is this a trick question, or does biology not exist? big_smile

  34. ceciliabeltran profile image86
    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago

    as I was saying, it depends on your world view. wink


    This debate has existed for a loooong time. Thought it would be interesting to find out where we are now in this topic.

    1. Jewels profile image81
      Jewelsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Absolutely nowhere.

      1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        no forum goes anywhere smile but it fuels some thoughts for future hubs. wink

        1. Obscure Divine profile image60
          Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          "Hubs," at times, are like an organized forum in its own autocratic right, with the ability to approve or unapprove comments to keep the 'comment field' in order - as opposed to a free-4-all forum with random comments...  I know, because I have made several so-called "unapproved" comments throughout this site (on my other account) during my short stay here.  Ha-ha!  ...So, you believe the forum goes nowhere but your hubs do? hmm

          1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
            ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I have a lot of google hits from all over the world, so yeah totally. I have people who contact me through facebook to ask for advice, clarifications and help with their research. So ofcourse it does. It also drives traffic to my website. smile

            1. Obscure Divine profile image60
              Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I was speaking about the message in a forum versus a hub, not SEO properties upon a dub.  Dang, girl!  smile

              1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                so?

                1. Obscure Divine profile image60
                  Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  What?  Or, was that:  "So what?"

                  1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
                    ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    the thread is dead...big_smile

  35. susanlang profile image60
    susanlangposted 6 years ago

    Interesting thoughts abound here.

  36. Obscure Divine profile image60
    Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago

    Reply to (as you say) Which Came First?  ...The particles or the mass?  The randomness or the organization?  The cellular life from something or the consciousness via nothingness?  The peace or the chaos? The One or the Zero?  big_smile

    1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      define zero, bet you'll say nothing.

      1. Obscure Divine profile image60
        Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Zero divides infinity...and/or 1 divided by zero......

        1. ceciliabeltran profile image86
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          which means what in english...

          1. Obscure Divine profile image60
            Obscure Divineposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            To some, it simply means "it's party time!"

            I searched for 3 or four minutes before posting this reply, to see if there are any other screwballs discussing the meaning of zero.  I didn't find anything, but I did find a funny quote.
            Okay, I rarely ever do the "quote thing," unlike you, but I like this quote about zero:

            "Dividing by zero...allows you to prove, mathematically, anything in the universe. You can prove that 1+1=42, and from there you can prove that J. Edgar Hoover is a space alien, that William Shakespeare came from Uzbekistan, or even that the sky is polka-dotted.”
              — Charles Seife, Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea

            Ha-ha!  big_smile

  37. Shil1978 profile image88
    Shil1978posted 6 years ago

    To answer the question - I would think it has to be the body that came first. I am not sure if the smallest of living creatures at the cellular level have a mind? Of course, you can't prove it, but that would be the popular consensus.

    So, I'd say the mind evolved at a later stage. Without the body, there would have been no scope for the evolution of the mind. Now, if you bring the "soul" into it, then that's another question!

    Interesting question!!

    1. marinealways24 profile image60
      marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      How do the smallest lifeforms stay alive and adapt to the environment without mind? The proof is that they wouldn't. In evolution, body parts evolve due to conscious reactions to the environment. If the mind build parts in evolving, why wouldn't it be the mind that began?

  38. Shil1978 profile image88
    Shil1978posted 6 years ago

    Question is if mind came first, and so if indeed the mind came first, where did it exist? In vacuum? And also, how did the "mind" find the "body?"

    Btw, here's the definition of "mind" --- that which is responsible for one's thoughts and feelings; the seat of the faculty of reason!!

    1. marinealways24 profile image60
      marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I don't know where or when mind originated or even where it's located, but I think it was easy for the mind to find body when mind designed the body according to evolution. If body designed mind, I think this would contradict evolution.
      Definitions with mind and consciousness are wide open. There are no absolute definitions of them, hell, no one even knows where or what they are for the most part. lol
      I do agree mind is responsible for thoughts and feelings or lack of. I think thoughts, feelings, and reason are all simply levels of having a higher mind and consciousness, while not ruling out mind at the simplest level of life. Mind at the simplest level is not defined much less the most complex level.

  39. THE Butterscotch profile image60
    THE Butterscotchposted 6 years ago

    hhhmmm. I believe the mind,hidden away somewhere, though I have no Idea where. then again, the mind could've developed throughout various lifetimes...but the soul is always there before mind and body.

  40. Shil1978 profile image88
    Shil1978posted 6 years ago

    I think you are getting confused with the 'evolution' analogy. We are talking about the "first" - i.e. the absolute first thing that came to be.

    Now, I cannot imagine how the "mind" could have existed in and of itself, as the first thing that came into being!! And remember, by "mind" we are talking about something relatively advanced - as described in the definition of mind in my previous post.

    If you take that into account, surely, it had to be body, and for a primitive organism to have lived, it didn't really require the "mind" - as you would define it. All it needed was to respond to its environment, which it could have done without really needing the "mind" - as the definition would have it.

    1. marinealways24 profile image60
      marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I am talking about the first life that came to be also. If you believe evolution that we all started from one cell, how could the cell have evolved without mind to evolve? Your definition is not correct as the only defintion of mind, there are many and hardly any are agreed as correct. It takes mind at the smallest level, even at cell level, communication, survival, selection all happen, the same things we attribute to consciousness. You can find some information based on things you can rule out, I think life surviving without mind or consciousness to survive is impossible. Also, they physical changes such as sexual selection in evolution would also be impossible if mind didn't design the physical traits.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image61
        Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Interesting religion you have there. Good luck.

        1. marinealways24 profile image60
          marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          lol You should be the one to talk about religion being the religious non believer you are of either life having intelligence or design. If you would understand the theory you have so much faith in, maybe this would be observational to you as well. Good luck understanding your faith.

          1. Mark Knowles profile image61
            Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Ah - still didn't get around to reading anything. K - don't blame you. This is easier. wink

            1. marinealways24 profile image60
              marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              How about....you quote Dawkins last statement of the book. big_smile

              1. Mark Knowles profile image61
                Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I have never quoted Dawkins. Oh wait - that does not work for you........

                Great religion. Everything is conscious. Conscious evolution. All a design. Love it. No need to back it up or anything.

                Prove me wrong!

                1. marinealways24 profile image60
                  marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  lol I have backed it multiple times and you have failed to pose reasons for why i'm wrong accept for faith that you think i'm wrong. I am asking you to quote his last statement of the book you recommended to me so we can discuss it.

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image61
                    Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Repeating your religious beliefs is not backing it up. Yes - we get it - you believe and do not read anything. I know. Good for u.

  41. Shil1978 profile image88
    Shil1978posted 6 years ago

    Marinealways, by "mind" are you referring to God? Because, I am not bringing God into this discussion.

    1. marinealways24 profile image60
      marinealways24posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No, I don't have a belief of a god, maybe a designer/designers, but none I can define and none that I believe absolute. Simplified, mind that drives thoughts. I don't know what or where is the origin of mind. I think mind is at the simplest level of life, cells must display many attributes of mind to survive and multiply including working memory.

 
working