ramanan50

Mind Not A Fluke And Is

In Indian Philosophy on May 21, 2013 at 12:04

I read an interesting article,excerpts I am providing below.

Mind Quantum Mechanics.

Mind and Quantum Theory

Indian Philosophy states that the universe, let alone mind is ‘Leela’

Lila (Sanskrit: लीला, IAST līlā), or Leela is a concept within Hinduism literally meaning “pastime”, “sport” or “play(wiki)

According to Religious texts, As different from Philosophical Texts, th universe is God’s Leela or pastime ,play.

But the word ‘leela’ conveys more , that can not be expressed in English.

It is more than a pastime, though unintended as we can perceive.

The Sankhya Philosophy lists the two fundamental principles, Purusha and Prakriti.

The world of Names and Forms evolved out of the ‘sprasa matra’ by their ‘touching’ each other, here again ‘sparsa is more than touching.

As the root causes are Principles we can no bet attribute Motives, so in this sense ,Mind is either or neither intended or unintended.

The Non Dualism of Advaita states the whole world is not real, has only transitory existence and as such is both real and unreal, depends on one’s stand point.

So Mind is a Fluke and not a Fluke at the same time.

The term inevitability is purely subjective and it depends , again on one’s perception.

Story:

According to atheist and University of Chicago biologist Jerry Coyneprobably:

As for mind being nothing but a fluke of nature, well, that’s probably true, at least the human mind, since I don’t see our evolution as inevitable (it may have depended on mutations that are based on quantum effects).

Coyne doesn’t elaborate on what he means by the relation of the human mind’s evolution to “quantum effects,” but bringing quantum physics into the issue of the mind’s relation to matter, my question then becomes the following: Why start with the axiomatic assumption that matter is prior to mind and must be responsible for accidentally causing human consciousness? Doesn’t quantum physics (via Schrödinger’s famous kitty), imply that matter requires mind (an observer) for a particle to move from a possible state to an actual state–that matter is in some manner inextricably bound up with the mind?

For example, physicists Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner, both at the University of California at Santa Cruz, call the mind’s relation to matter a “quantum enigma”—indeed, the central quantum enigma—and ask rhetorically in their book of the same title, the following:

[D]oes it not go without saying that there is a real world ‘out there,’ whether or not we look at it? (4)

But according to Rosenblum and Kuttner, quantum physics suggests that our intuitive ‘yes’ to that question may be spectacularly wrong. Likewise, I would suggest that the intuition among materialists that human minds and purposes must be generated by determinate matter first, and thus cannot really be necessary to matter or impact the direction of otherwise determinate particles, may also be spectacularly wrong.”

http://santitafarella.wordpress.com/2013/05/13/is-mind-a-fluke-of-nature/

 

About these ads
  1. Reblogged this on itfollower.

    Like

  2. “in this sense ,Mind is either or neither intended or unintended”

    Do you mean
    The Mind is not intended
    The Mind is not unintended
    The Mind is not both intended and unintended
    The Mind is not (neither intended nor unintended)?

    Who needs the law of the excluded middle anyway ;) ?
    I love Indian philosophy.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,035 other followers

%d bloggers like this: