Existence of God based on the existence of thingsen

[Bahman]

…Substance is what exists fundamentally.

I call accident as nothingness since it can take the proper form as intellect requires.

Please explain what you mean.

I simply mean the world outside that can be affected by intellect and world inside that can be affected by what is outside. The world outside consist of what is left from other intellect affection so our intellects can indirectly understand their existence through the exchange of information which is only possible through the forms. Hence intellects interact through exchange of informations and can construct knowledge.

True but you have to remember that our bodies and their physical functions are realities that can also be sensed and experienced. At least many of them can.

Our bodies is part of objective realities and that is where I think we have slight difference in opinions. Intellect belongs to inner world hence it could experience itself indirectly, whereas body and stuff that can be observe belongs to outer world which constitute of other intellects and forms.

Not correct…

Soul is equal to intellect in my language. That is where I think we should fix language to avoid further misunderstanding, Our knowledge is accumulate within intellect. Our functioning does however depend on our form. A person who is currently mentally disabled because of brain injury has the knowledge but it cannot function properly.

The soul is an objective reality, but we cannot " see " or " touch " it. Although we can infer its existence, and the existence of God as well.

The soul/intellect belongs to inner world so it is objective reality with that realm but not objective withing outer word.

We cannot infer the existence of Angels, we know of their existence only through Divine Revelation.

You can experience them in your dream or when you are awake.

I have no idea what you mean by: " it is an objective reality toward another intellects meaning that has a form from another intellect perspective…" Please explain.

First, two intellect cannot have any contact unless they are immersed within a objective reality which is the the outer world. It is through form that they could interact and reach the awareness that something exist outside there.

…We infer it by examining the behavior and characteristics of the beings external to the mind.

As I mentioned what can be experienced is a part of outer world toward intellect and that is necessity since it can be experienced.

Thomas is not talking about atoms, molecules, protons, neutrons, etc. He is talking about metaphysical compositon. Material beings are composed of matter and form ( which we call an essence or nature ), simple beings are essences or forms which are not composed of matter and form. The soul, and Angels, for example, are essences which have existence. That is they depend for their existence on God. God is an essence or nature which is pure existence, uncaused and perfect in every way…

That is the part that we have a little of difference in opinion. Anything that can get affected and can affect surrounding has to have an intellect whether it is a human, animal, atom,…

…Eventually universal concepts or ideas are hooked together to form propositions and thus we have thinking based on stored knowledge.

Very well said. I think we are in the right page.

… The source of the form, is the agent which has caused the change. The acorn, for example, is the agent causes the oak tree ( or visa versa ). But the original source is God.

So I am in Plato side. I think we therefore have to understand what is the definition of intellect. To me the intellect can be understood by following properties:

1. It has no form since it is simple
2. Intellect can control form.
3. Intellect can be affected from surrounding through the form and can affect surrounding through the form it control.
4. It is immortal since it cannot be decomposed because it is simple

…oak tree cause the acorn, etc., until we come to the universal cause of being, which is God.

That is the part we have problem with and I think I have explained it by now partially. What is left to stress 1) what is composed is more than sum of elements hence it has its own intellect, 2) the new intellect has its own functioning and can be a part of a bigger composition and the bigger composition has its own intellect

…<Atom<molecule<cell<body<society<…<existence

…ristotle proved in his Physics that the nature or essence includes both its matter and its form. It was Thomas who demonstrated that existence to the essence or nature through the form. But that is another topic. I think we have enough on our plate already .
Linus2nd

Things are easier in my framework since there are only intellect and form which is outcome immersing intellect into nothingness.

 

[Bahman]

…And you would be correct . Let’s put it this way, we just don’t know because we have no way of verifying whether it is true or not.

The intellect can never be completely separated from nothingness once it is shaped so it will still could interact with other intellects upon the moment of death. You of course have dreams and of course they don’t happened in this world. Dreams are real since you experience them. Where does your intellect goes at the time you fall in sleep?

… And my intellect sorts this data to make sense of it.

Why not? What is physical properties than intellect interacting with other intellect?

… " Nothingness " is a descriptor that means " no being. "

No being=no intellect in my vocabulary since forms cannot exist without intellect.

The intellect can do nothing to " nothingness " because there is no " there " there. How can the intellect control something that doesn’t exist? That doesn’t make sense.

Well that is the difficult part to explain. Nothingness has two roles, separating intellects and allowing intellect to interact through information that is virtual and has a temporary form. Forms are virtual so they don’t exist permanently from intellect point of view but they don’t exist from their own perspective at all yet they are capable of transferring information caused by one intellect and disappear upon on their arrival to another intellect.

Lets get the example of vision when you are looking at a flower. What you get is only photons coming from atoms of the flower which tells you that there is something there that has a form but in reality there is a intellect there with a mental state which cause emissions of photons then you receive that through your body and your intellect become aware that something does exist there. The photons that carry information do exist from our perspective but not from theirs since X^2-T^2=0 for a photon so they travel no space and they experience no time hence they don’t exist yet they are are able to carry information which is form but they are virtual hence they don’t exist.

When you say, " Just look how you could move your body around…" You have said something that is completely incoherent.

It is completely coherent.

What others would you suggest?

We will know them upon our death.

And I say that this makes no sense at all.

It should make sense by now.

… You cannot equate this to creating something from " nothingness. "

Your body consist of too many intellects in which each intellect is in a given mental state causing virtual particles which inform others about each others mental state and so on and so forth. Your intellect which is outcome of all is dominant and have control upon all. What is its shapes, you don’t know but they know.

… And in his programing he has given the soul the faculties of intellect and will through which man controls his higher functions intentionally.

The soul is the main intellect which control everything and it is outcome of everything.

…I certainly wouldn’t be telling my scientific collegues that inanimate substances had intellects or souls.

That is not correct. If they wouldn’t give rise to what you are if they were not intelligent. Look how they respond to you quickly and swiftly when you move your body. Look at how they affect your intellect in many different ways like, love, hate, pain, pleasure, …

Yes, they exchange information. But that is because they have been programed to do so.

You have scientific point of view which is the result of separating a intellect from its environment and looking at the subject matter closely. Look at the varieties that atoms can forms including your body. How that could be the result of a simple programing?

… faculty of the soul, but most of my bodily functions happen naturally, without thought.

That is not correct. We in fact form our intellect through experiencing life. Our intellect/soul is not programed upon the moment of birth. We learn them through the practicing metal activity simply living our lives.

Yes that is what he is doing. But when you speak of electrons, protons, rocks, stars, etc as having intellects, you are doing the same thing.

Well, then we have different opinion on subject matter.

…The souls of creatures which have no intellectual faculty, we call material souls.

It is simpler than that in my perspective. The nature is simply the result of intellect gathering to show an specific behavior. So the only thing which is left is intellect and nothingness.

… But all are controlled by their particular nature.

Which is the outcome of intellects acting together giving rise to something different from sum of intellect which is you and me.

I think I understand what you mean and I disagree with it.

I think things are more clear by now.

And I would say that each has a nature particular to its " quiddity, " and only man has an intellect…

Well, we are closer .

Yes, composits of form and essence which exist. We call these composits essences or natures or beings. And I disagree with your explanation.
Linus2nd

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Don’t know how soon I will answer, since we are getting very deep into philosophy. You do know that Aristotle demonstrated that Plato was incorrect. Do wish you would tell me what you think about the statment by Thomas in my O.P. That is the point of the whole essay. We can cover all the other things eventually, but I would like to see what your opinion is on the O.P.

Also, where did you get your concept of the higher and the lower intellect and where did you get the idea that even atoms, etc have intellects? Was it something you thought of on your own or did you get it in some class in epistomology or cosmology or did it come from your religious upbring?.

Linus2nd

 

[Bahman]

Don’t know how soon I will answer, since we are getting very deep into philosophy. You do know that Aristotle demonstrated that Plato was incorrect. Do wish you would tell me what you think about the statment by Thomas in my O.P. That is the point of the whole essay. We can cover all the other things eventually, but I would like to see what your opinion is on the O.P.

I will come to that shortly.

Also, where did you get your concept of the higher and the lower intellect and where did you get the idea that even atoms, etc have intellects? Was it something you thought of on your own or did you get it in some class in epistomology or cosmology or did it come from your religious upbring?.
Linus2nd

It is a mix of science, most importantly most field of physics and biology together with philosophy that I have learn andfinally my own religious training so I think it is new. Do you like to write an article about it together?

 

[Bahman]

Thomas Aquinas:

1. Whatever is not of the understood content of an essence or quality is something which comes from without and makes a composition with the essence, because no essence can be understood without the things which are parts of it. Now, every essence or quiddity can be understood without anything being understood about its existence. For I can understand what a man is, or what a phoenix is, and yet not know whether they have existence in the real world. It is clear, therefore, that existence is other than essence or quiddity, unless perhaps there exists a thing whose quiddity is its existence.

I agree that the existence of intellect can be deduced indirectly. Intellect is however the result of composition of other intellects and it is not reducible to composition. This is where reductionism or materialism fails. It has its own existence.
Thomas Aquinas:

1. And there can be but one such thing, the First Thing, because it is impossible to plurify a thing except: (1) by the addition of some difference, as the nature of the genus is multiplied in its species, or (2) by the reception of a form into diverse matters, as the nature of the species is multiplied in diverse individuals, or (3) by this: that one is absolute and the other is received into something; for example, if there were a separated heat, it would by virtue of its very separation be other than heat which is not separated. Now, if we posit a thing which is existence alone, such that this existence is subsistent, this existence will not receive the addition of a difference because it would no longer be existence alone, but existence plus some form. And much less will it receive the addition of matter because it would no longer be a subsistent existence, but a material existence. Whence it remains that such a thing, which is its own existence, cannot be but one.

I think we both know the shortcoming of this part based on discussion we had by now. I however agree with the red part.
Thomas Aquinas:

1. Whence it is necessary, that in every thing other than this one its existence be other than its quiddity, or its nature, or its form. Whence it is necessary that existence in the intelligences be something besides the form, and this is why it was said that an intelligence is form and existence

That we agree. By the difference that there is nothing like nature since what we experience is the result of an intellect.
Thomas Aquinas:

1. Now, whatever belongs to a thing is either caused by the principles of its nature, as the ability to laugh in man, or comes to it from some extrinsic principle, as light in the air from the influence of the sun.

This I have problem with this part. Any intellect can affect you when it is affected or not depending on what its life experiences is so called knowledge which is simple has no form since it is a part of intellect and what is capable to do depending on its body. So it is not nature which cause a man to laugh. And what is extrinsic to an intellect is virtual, namely illusion.
Thomas Aquinas:

But it cannot be that the existence of a thing is caused by the form or quiddity of that thing ─ I say caused as by an efficient cause ─ because then something would be its own cause, and would bring itself into existence, which is impossible.

It is indeed intellect that bring itself into existence. Have you ever wake up naturally without any external intervention like an alarm clock? Do you have the ability to raise your hand unconditionally when you wish? How intellect could have free will then?
Thomas Aquinas:

It is therefore necessary that every such thing, the existence of which is other than its nature, have its existence from some other thing.

That is not correct and a new intellect can be brought out once others intellect are gather together and the necessity is fulfilled. The sufficient condition is when the intellects work together coherently such that a new intellect can emerge and function appropriately. The nature is full of such a example, like when sperm fertilize an egg, hydrogen and oxygen form water, …
Thomas Aquinas:

And because every thing which exists by virtue of another is led back, as to its first cause, to that which exists by virtue of itself, it is necessary that there be some thing which is the cause of the existence of all things because it is existence alone.

Translate this into my language and you get that God is nature or what sit underlying the nature.
Thomas Aquinas:

Otherwise, there would be an infinite regress among causes, since every thing which is not existence alone has a cause of its existence, as has been said. It is clear, therefore, that an intelligence is form and existence, and that it has existence from the First Being, which is existence alone. And this is the First Cause, which is God.

So you either cut the the chain of causality by calling it nature or God, or go deeper. The problem is that we should be able to observe the supreme intellect so called God if there is a cut in causality chain, we haven’t observed it yet or it is what it is but we do persist to deny it so called mother nature.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I will come to that shortly.

It is a mix of science, most importantly most field of physics and biology together with philosophy that I have learn andfinally my own religious training so I think it is new. Do you like to write an article about it together?

No thanks, I’m too old for that sort of stress. Besides we have fundamental disagreements. I am what is known in philosophical circles a Moderate Realist, a Thomist of the old school. I think any form of Idealism or Pantheism or Panpsychicm is irrational. If you ever read Ed Feser’s Aquinas, that is me.

Linus2nd

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I call accident as nothingness since it can take the proper form as intellect requires.

Explain how the color " red " is " nothing " when my shirt is actually red?

I simply mean the world outside that can be affected by intellect

How does our intellect have an effect on the outside world?

and world inside that can be affected by what is outside.

That is clear.

The world outside consist of what is left from other intellect affection

Explain how?

so our intellects can indirectly understand their existence through the exchange of information which is only possible through the forms

We are not giving information to the external world, the outside world gives information to us. The only exception is when we communicate with other people.

Hence intellects interact through exchange of informations and can construct knowledge.

There is only one intellect at work, our own. This kind of thought is entirely foreign to Western thought.

Our bodies is part of objective realities… Intellect belongs to inner world hence it could experience itself indirectly, whereas body and stuff that can be observe belongs to outer world which constitute of other intellects and forms.

We are aware of our own bodies, whether or not an external world exists.

Soul is equal to intellect in my language.

Colloquial usage is not scientific. The human soul has the powers of intellect, will, and memory. But the soul has a governing power over the whole body. Animal souls do not have the powers of intellect and will.

That is where …, Our knowledge is accumulate within intellect. Our functioning does however depend on our form. A person who is currently mentally disabled because of brain injury has the knowledge but it cannot function properly.

That is true but it retains the powers of intellect, will, and memory potentially, the power is there but cannot be used because the body is damaged.

The soul/intellect belongs to inner world so it is objective reality with that realm but not objective withing outer word.

I would disagree. I know I have a soul and I know you have one. The first I know from personal experience, the second I know through my experience with you, my efforts at communicating with you. .

You can experience them in your dream or when you are awake.

I never have.

First, two intellect cannot have any contact unless they are immersed within a objective reality which is the the outer world. It is through form that they could interact and reach the awareness that something exist outside there.

What two intellects are you talking about? The forms of external realities exist in them, we know them through a process of mental abatraction, not because they are communicating with us. They are not souls that have intellects.,

As I mentioned what can be experienced is a part of outer world toward intellect and that is necessity since it can be experienced.

We experience the external world because the external world gives off waves and other objective matter which we pick up through our senses. That does not mean the external world has a soul. Does a T.V. or a radio have a soul?

That is the part that we have a little of difference in opinion. Anything that can get affected and can affect surrounding has to have an intellect whether it is a human, animal, atom,…

To repeat your recent comment to me on another thread, " Do you really believe that ? " Like I said before, don’t repeate it in front of your porfessional collegues.

Very well said. I think we are in the right page.

One a few things.

So I am in Plato side. I think we therefore have to understand what is the definition of intellect. To me the intellect can be understood by following properties:

1. It has no form since it is simple
2. Intellect can control form.
3. Intellect can be affected from surrounding through the form and can affect surrounding through the form it control.
4. It is immortal since it cannot be decomposed because it is simple

1.The intellect is one of the properties of a form called the human soul.
2.No. The soul gives operating power to the intellect. The soul is the nature which gives rise to intellec, will, and memory. God has given the soul this nature.
3.No, as I have explained above.
4.Yes, in part. It is immortal in the case of man because he has intellecutal activities which do not depend on the body, activities which are non-material, which are therefore spiritual and eternal. Thus, his soul is eternal. But the souls af animals and plants are material souls, they do not have any activities which are independent of their bodies…

That is the part we have problem … What is left to stress 1) what is composed is more than sum of elements hence it has its own intellect, 2) the new intellect has its own functioning and can be a part of a bigger composition and the bigger composition has its own intellect

1. No. They have forms which are not intellectual, except for man.
2. What " new intellect? " What " bigger composition?

…<Atom<molecule<cell<body<society<…<existence

How does society fit in here? Atoms, molecules, cells, bodies exist. Society is not an objective reality like atoms, cells, soul, etc. It is an intellectual contrivance.

Things are easier in my framework since there are only intellect and form which is outcome immersing intellect into nothingness.

I disagree, it is not simpler because it is contrived, it is not objectively true.

As I have said before, " since there are only intellect and form which is outcome immersing intellect into nothingness. " is incomprehensible.

Linus2nd

 

[Linusthe2nd]

The intellect can never be completely separated from nothingness once it is shaped so it will still could interact with other intellects upon the moment of death. You of course have dreams and of course they don’t happened in this world. Dreams are real since you experience them. Where does your intellect goes at the time you fall in sleep?

It goes to sleep as well.

Why not? What is physical properties than intellect interacting with other intellect?

My intellect sorts out the data it receives from the external world. No other intellect is involved.

No being=no intellect in my vocabulary since forms cannot exist without intellect.

No-being means no existing thing. It means the same in every vocabulary. Forms can and do exist without intellect. They existed before man came on the scene. Every thing has a form, not every thing has a soul, not every soul has an intellect.

Well that is the difficult part to explain. Nothingness has two roles, separating intellects and allowing intellect to interact through information that is virtual and has a temporary form. Forms are virtual so they don’t exist permanently from intellect point of view but they don’t exist from their own perspective at all yet they are capable of transferring information caused by one intellect and disappear upon on their arrival to another intellect

Forms which the intellect constructs from the data received from the external world are merely universal concepts. For example the concept/form " horse " is a universal concept or idea or form which the intellect has constructed from a number of horses we have seen in the external world. We have observed their common characteristics and behaviors and the intellect has collated this data into the idea/concept/form/universal form of a horse.

This universal form has no actual concrete existance because there is no " universal horse, " that embodies the perfect idea of a horse. But individual instantiations of this universal idea do exist in actually existing horses, but each instantiation approaches the perfect idea only to a limited degree. So the form exists in concrete reality, but not as it exists in the mind. In the mind it is a concept, in the horse it is a concrete reality, it is the nature of a horse from which flows all its observable and characteristic behaviors and actions.

These universal concepts/forms the intellect has formed are stored in memory for future reference. They do not " disappear. "

Lets get the example of vision when you are looking at a flower. What you get is only photons coming from atoms of the flower which tells you that there is something there that has a form but in reality there is a intellect there with a mental state which cause emissions of photons

No. There is no mental state which causes these emissions. What causes them is the natural action of the flower’s form. God programmed its nature to act and react in a certain way under certain given conditions. If you can program a computer to do certain things on cue, why can’t God do the same with the natures/forms he creates? There is no need to posit an intellect in the flower. That is completely gratuitous. And there is no " nothingness " which separates me from these emissions.

then you receive that through your body and your intellect become aware that something does exist there. The photons that carry information do exist from our perspective but not from theirs since X^2-T^2=0 for a photon so they travel no space and they experience no time hence they don’t exist yet they are are able to carry information which is form but they are virtual hence they don’t exist.

If they don’t exist we wouldn’t see anything, the world would be dark. Of course they exist. Prove that they don’t.

End Part 1

Linus2nd

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Part 2 cont.

It is completely coherent.

Here is your first comment on this point: " In my framework everything is intellect and nothingness. Intellect can control and give shapes to nothingness. So for example you can move your body and think of a subject matter because your intellect has control on certain things. You move all matter which build your body. What is matter? Simple electron and proton. What they are, simple intellect who have their own body and can interact with each other the same way we do through exchanging information. You can control them since your intellect has the ability to do so, hence it higher than them. "

You have to go back to my post #19. I was responding to what you said above. I was responding to that context, not just one line. Your intellect does not give shape to " nothingness. " Yes, I can move my body, I can think of some subject, topic, etc. because my intellect is alive and working the way it should, it is always searching, thinking, analysing, comparing, reaching out to the external world. But that is not " giving shape to nothingness." That is forming new ideas from old ones or from new data.

And yes, my intellect does direct my body to do some things, it can give the command for my body to move ( actually it is the will that does this, the will gives all commands). But it is the soul which carries out the commands, it is the soul that moves the body in all its activities. But it does most of them without a command of the will. It does them naturally - breathing, digesting, etc.

What is matter? You mean the matter of the body, its ultimate physical constituents, the electrons, cells, molecules, neurons, etc? Well they are not little " intellects, " or we should say, they do not have tiny " intellects. " That is absurd. They each have a nature given to them by God, and while they are in the body, the soul directs their " overt " activity, their teological activity to preserve and benefit the body.

Then you said, "
That I know. But all 9 qualities are the result of embedding intellect in an objective reality with certain restriction enforced by body. I also believe that substance is nothingness formed and controlled by intellect. My framework is simple, there are only nothingness and intellect where intellect has the power to control and give shapes to nothingness. Just look how you could move your body around. "

And I said, that is incoherent. As I have just explained, my intellect does not give shape to " nothingness. " God can, but you and I can’t.

We will know them upon our death.

Since this follows your comment immediately above which I have placed on quotes, please explain what you are alluding to . I have no idea.

It should make sense by now.

Well, I understand what you are saying, but it is incoherent.

Your body consist of too many intellects…

No. My soul controls all my functions, physical and mental, as I have just explained above. I am not a composit of millions of tiny " intellects, " compounded to make my soul. I wouldn’t repeat such ideas around the office.

The soul is the main intellect which control everything and it is outcome of everything.

The soul is is-not-the-intellect. The intellect is only one of the soul’s powers, there are also the will, the memory, and the part which directs all the bodies physical activities and functions, even directing all those little electrons, cells, moleculrs, heurons, etc.

That is not correct. If they wouldn’t give rise to what you are if they were not intelligent. Look how they respond to you quickly and swiftly when you move your body. Look at how they affect your intellect in many different ways like, love, hate, pain, pleasure, …

I have already answered that. You did not respond to my remark, which I have made several times. I give you some friendly advice, do not repeat your personal ideas on these matters to your professional collegues. .

You have scientific point of view which is the result of separating a intellect from its environment and looking at the subject matter closely. Look at the varieties that atoms can forms including your body. How that could be the result of a simple programing?

My word man, God created the whole universe and eveything in it and keeps it running, keeps it all in order and directed toward its proper end. He has programmed every electron that has ever existed or ever will exist, he has given each its proper " programmed " nature. And they all do naturally what they have been programmed to do - and right on up the chain of existence to man and angels.

That is not correct. We in fact form our intellect through experiencing life. Our intellect/soul is not programed upon the moment of birth. We learn them through the practicing metal activity simply living our lives.

You didn’t read what I have said in my previous posts very carefully. God has programmed our souls to function as they do, but he has programmed the intellect, will, and memory to be free in their activities. So we indeed learn from our experiences, because that is what God programmed us to do.

Well, then we have different opinion on subject matter.

We certainly do.

It is simpler than that in my perspective. The nature is simply the result of intellect gathering to show an specific behavior. So the only thing which is left is intellect and nothingness.

That is not the point, the point is to be correct.

Which is the outcome of intellects acting together giving rise to something different from sum of intellect which is you and me.

I have already discussed that.

I think things are more clear by now.

?

[Well, we are closer .

Not on essentials. There we are universes apart.

Linus2nd
[/quote]

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I agree that the existence of intellect can be deduced indirectly. Intellect is however the result of composition of other intellects and it is not reducible to composition. This is where reductionism or materialism fails. It has its own existence.

All Thomas is saying is that I can have knowledge of an essence whithout knowing that it exists. So existence is not a part of the essence but comes to it from without. In other words every substance is a composit of essence and existence, except for God whose essence is existence. This is not a reduction to materialism.

I think we both know the shortcoming of this part based on discussion we had by now. I however agree with the red part.

Thomas is saying here that there is and can be only one thing which smiply is existence, an essence that is existence. And there can only be one such being.

That we agree. By the difference that there is nothing like nature since what we experience is the result of an intellect.

He is saying that for all forms except the one simple essence of God, intelligence is a part of the form or a power of a form or essence which has intelligence and that existence comes to it from without, from God.

This I have problem with this part. Any intellect can affect you when it is affected or not depending on what its life experiences is so called knowledge which is simple has no form since it is a part of intellect and what is capable to do depending on its body. So it is not nature which cause a man to laugh. And what is extrinsic to an intellect is virtual, namely illusion.

Wrong. Man’s nature or form is his soul. And from man’s soul or nature come all his operations and activities, including thinking and willing as I have explained elsewhere.

It is indeed intellect that bring itself into existence. Have you ever wake up naturally without any external intervention like an alarm clock? Do you have the ability to raise your hand unconditionally when you wish? How intellect could have free will then?

Thomas is saying that existence cannot come from a thing’s essence or form otherwise it would be causing its own exsistence, which is impossible. It has nothing to do with free will. What Thomas is driving at is that in everything except God, existence is not a part of its nature, therefore, there must exist some thing, God, who causes a thing to exist by giving it an act of existence.

That is not correct and a new intellect can be brought out once others intellect are gather together and the necessity is fulfilled. The sufficient condition is when the intellects work together coherently such that a new intellect can emerge and function appropriately. The nature is full of such a example, like when sperm fertilize an egg, hydrogen and oxygen form water, …

…

You need to reread all of paragraph 80 again without inserting your preconceived notions. If existence is not a part of the nature of a thing, then there must exist a being capable of causing existence in all these others who do not have exsistence by necessity.

Translate this into my language and you get that God is nature or what sit underlying the nature.

No, God is a perfect essence or nature because his nature is existence necessarily. And it is he who causes the existence of every other nature/essence/form because they cannot cause their own existence.

So you either cut the the chain of causality by calling it nature or God, or go deeper. The problem is that we should be able to observe the supreme intellect so called God if there is a cut in causality chain, we haven’t observed it yet or it is what it is but we do persist to deny it so called mother nature.

If we cut the chain of causality, nothing now would exist in the universe. Therefore God must exist, for he is the only one who has no cause for his existence because he is pure existence and therefore must cause the existence of every other thing.

Linus2nd

 

[Bahman]

…shirt is actually red?

In reality there is no redness. It is just a virtual particle with specific frequency, so called photon. What makes photons different is just frequency and in reality there is no color. It is duty of sensory system to deliver a redness to intellect once a specific photon is experienced. One could be color blind which means that his/her sensory system lack the ability to deliver certain quality to intellect. Most animal and insects are color blind. We are blind to echo whereas bat is not.

How does our intellect have an effect on the outside world?

Our intellects are the outcome of existence other intellects, such as atoms, molecule, cell, etc, knowing the fact that the collection of intellects is more than sum of intellects. This extra thing is simply me and you. This extra thing, intellect, is aware of current state matter and can interact with other intellects, simply your body, because they are one. Our body is the door to interact with external world. In reality body is needed to perceive and act. Each intellect has its own body.

That is clear.

Cool.

Explain how?

What we are doing right now. What an intellect leaves is simply information that another one can perceive because they have appropriate tools. Information is dead and need brain process to take form of knowledge which is conceivable for intellect. What I am writing now is simply play the role of color to intellect. It has a meaning when it is processed by our sensory system but without that it is completely meaningless.

We are not giving information to the external world, the outside world gives information to us. The only exception is when we communicate with other people.

We do it right now when we are sitting on our chair and typing. Don’t you feel the chair that you are sitting on? Two simple beings so called electron and proton interact with each other through exchange of photons, namely information, which is exactly similar to what we are doing. Please read this.

There is only one intellect at work, our own. This kind of thought is entirely foreign to Western thought.

Well, we can work on it.

We are aware of our own bodies, whether or not an external world exists.

Our bodies is objective to intellect, very similar to other objects with the difference that intellect can directly interact with it. Our body is like a door that separate internal world from external. It allows to perceive and act so it is different from other objects but it is a part of external world.

… Animal souls do not have the powers of intellect and will.

So lets stick to word from now on. What I call it intellect in the past it soul. I will use soul from now on.

That is true but it retains the powers of intellect, will, and memory potentially, the power is there but cannot be used because the body is damaged.

Cool.

I would disagree. I know I have a soul and I know you have one. The first I know from personal experience, the second I know through my experience with you, my efforts at communicating with you. .

I would disagree. You are aware of your being because you have a body. In another word you are aware of your being indirectly. Soul can be aware of objective reality which are represented as subjective reality to the soul. Soul cannot be objective to itself at the same time experience subjective reality of its being.

I never have.

I wish you could. But anyhow you experience beings in your dream which means that your intellect is aware of subject matter. Who they are? It couldn’t be you interacting with yourself.

… not because they are communicating with us. They are not souls that have intellects.,

Anything that has a form has a soul and that is why they could interact with each other including us.

We experience the external world because the external world gives off waves and other objective matter which we pick up through our senses. That does not mean the external world has a soul. Does a T.V. or a radio have a soul?

Yes they could if the accumulation of those elements that build X is more than simple sum of elements unless otherwise is proven.

… But the souls af animals and plants are material souls, they do not have any activities which are independent of their bodies…

Ok, I think we can agree on that since my old intellect is equal to your soul.

1. No. They have forms which are not intellectual, except for man.
2. What " new intellect? " What " bigger composition?

That is called complexity. Please read this. The idea is a simple as what I said though that a system of interacting being is more than sum of its beings.

How does society fit in here? Atoms, molecules, cells, bodies exist. Society is not an objective reality like atoms, cells, soul, etc. It is an intellectual contrivance.

Could we understand the behavior of a society? Is the behavior of a society is based on sole individuals behavior or it has its own dynamics?

… " is incomprehensible.

Linus2nd

Lets keep going.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

In reality there is no redness. It is just a virtual particle with specific frequency, so called photon. What makes photons different is just frequency and in reality there is no color. It is duty of sensory system to deliver a redness to intellect once a specific photon is experienced. One could be color blind which means that his/her sensory system lack the ability to deliver certain quality to intellect. Most animal and insects are color blind. We are blind to echo whereas bat is not.

Our intellects are the outcome of existence other intellects, such as atoms, molecule, cell, etc, knowing the fact that the collection of intellects is more than sum of intellects. This extra thing is simply me and you. This extra thing, intellect, is aware of current state matter and can interact with other intellects, simply your body, because they are one. Our body is the door to interact with external world. In reality body is needed to perceive and act. Each intellect has its own body.

Cool.

What we are doing right now. What an intellect leaves is simply information that another one can perceive because they have appropriate tools. Information is dead and need brain process to take form of knowledge which is conceivable for intellect. What I am writing now is simply play the role of color to intellect. It has a meaning when it is processed by our sensory system but without that it is completely meaningless.

We do it right now when we are sitting on our chair and typing. Don’t you feel the chair that you are sitting on? Two simple beings so called electron and proton interact with each other through exchange of photons, namely information, which is exactly similar to what we are doing. Please read this.

Well, we can work on it.

Our bodies is objective to intellect, very similar to other objects with the difference that intellect can directly interact with it. Our body is like a door that separate internal world from external. It allows to perceive and act so it is different from other objects but it is a part of external world.

So lets stick to word from now on. What I call it intellect in the past it soul. I will use soul from now on.

Cool.

I would disagree. You are aware of your being because you have a body. In another word you are aware of your being indirectly. Soul can be aware of objective reality which are represented as subjective reality to the soul. Soul cannot be objective to itself at the same time experience subjective reality of its being.

I wish you could. But anyhow you experience beings in your dream which means that your intellect is aware of subject matter. Who they are? It couldn’t be you interacting with yourself.

Anything that has a form has a soul and that is why they could interact with each other including us.

Yes they could if the accumulation of those elements that build X is more than simple sum of elements unless otherwise is proven.

Ok, I think we can agree on that since my old intellect is equal to your soul.

That is called complexity. Please read this. The idea is a simple as what I said though that a system of interacting being is more than sum of its beings.

Could we understand the behavior of a society? Is the behavior of a society is based on sole individuals behavior or it has its own dynamics?

Lets keep going.

I’m going to be busy most of the day, I may be too beat to comment today.

Linus2nd

 

[Bahman]

It goes to sleep as well.

Soul/intellect doesn’t go to sleep as it could experience things which you remember when you dream. It just goes to another world, so called dream world.

My intellect sorts out the data it receives from the external world. No other intellect is involved.

What you receive is either randomness which no knowledge can be constructed from it or it is not which means that you are perceiving some sort of coherent information that a knowledge can be constructed from. I argue that there must be an intellect behind the second since you get pure randomness from nothingness.

No-being means no existing thing. It means the same in every vocabulary. Forms can and do exist without intellect. They existed before man came on the scene. Every thing has a form, not every thing has a soul, not every soul has an intellect.

Any how man come to the world without presence an intellect?

Please watch this video and tell me how an intellect being can come to our world if what the intellect is made of does not have any intellect?

Moreover, how an intellect can interact with body which is not more that a set of particles which are insentient? You see that my picture can explain the subject matter better.

Forms which the intellect constructs from the data received from the external world are merely universal concepts. For example the concept/form " horse " is a universal concept or idea or form which the intellect has constructed from a number of horses we have seen in the external world. We have observed their common characteristics and behaviors and the intellect has collated this data into the idea/concept/form/universal form of a horse.

What is data? Data is a package of information, which is virtual, transfered from one being to another one to inform, create subjectivity, from the current objective state of matter which is the result of intellect subjective state.

This universal form has no actual concrete existance because there is no " universal horse, " that embodies the perfect idea of a horse. But individual instantiations of this universal idea do exist in actually existing horses, but each instantiation approaches the perfect idea only to a limited degree. So the form exists in concrete reality, but not as it exists in the mind. In the mind it is a concept, in the horse it is a concrete reality, it is the nature of a horse from which flows all its observable and characteristic behaviors and actions.

Form does not exist in real world since it is virtual. It just carry information from current state of intellects beings.

These universal concepts/forms the intellect has formed are stored in memory for future reference. They do not " disappear. "

They do disappear from objective reality because they are virtual unless an intellect constantly produce them. The remembrance is the result of re-representation of knowledge to intellect through a form.

No. There is no mental state which causes these emissions. What causes them is the natural action of the flower’s form. God programmed its nature to act and react in a certain way under certain given conditions. If you can program a computer to do certain things on cue, why can’t God do the same with the natures/forms he creates? There is no need to posit an intellect in the flower. That is completely gratuitous. And there is no " nothingness " which separates me from these emissions.

Why God should do so? They either have an intellect or not meaning that there exist something which is not sum of the whole or not. Take a flower and grain it. Is what it left is a flower? That is what I mean that the cumulation of elements always is different from simple sum of elements. We cannot go far unless we could agree on this.

If they don’t exist we wouldn’t see anything, the world would be dark. Of course they exist. Prove that they don’t.
Linus2nd

Where do they go after they are absorbed by a cell? How they could disappear if they have a pure existence? Their existence is virtual in another word temporal. Temporality
is subjective as time is. The only real thing which is not temporal is intellect hence it does exist. Our intellects are embedded in a virtual world, objective reality, which is the outcome of intellect itself.

 

[Bahman]

…" That is forming new ideas from old ones or from new data.

And how your intellect is able to move your body? The cells within your body are instantiate in your picture so how they could respond to you properly?

it is the soul that moves the body in all its activities. But it does most of them without a command of the will. It does them naturally - breathing, digesting, etc.

How soul can do that? How soul could interact with something which is different from it?

What is matter? You mean the matter of the body, its ultimate physical constituents, the electrons, cells, molecules, neurons, etc? Well they are not little " intellects, " or we should say, they do not have tiny " intellects. " That is absurd. They each have a nature given to them by God, and while they are in the body, the soul directs their " overt " activity, their teological activity to preserve and benefit the body.

What is their nature and how they could interact with soul which is immaterial?

And I said, that is incoherent. As I have just explained, my intellect does not give shape to " nothingness. " God can, but you and I can’t.

But that is exactly what you do. Just move your arm. Did your arm exist in previous place? No. So you as whole, are shaping nothingness.

Since this follows your comment immediately above which I have placed on quotes, please explain what you are alluding to . I have no idea.

I mean that intellect in reality can be exposed to unlimited forms. That is our body which limit us from being cognitively open to other form as a flower is cognitively closed to what you are exposed to etc.

Well, I understand what you are saying, but it is incoherent.

Which part? Can you please elaborate?

No. My soul controls all my functions, physical and mental, as I have just explained above. I am not a composit of millions of tiny " intellects, " compounded to make my soul. I wouldn’t repeat such ideas around the office.

You didn’t explain how your soul does its job. I have my own explanation which is very clear and coherent: There exist a set of intellects that they inform and work coherently with each other and makes things possible to do.

The soul is is-not-the-intellect. The intellect is only one of the soul’s powers, there are also the will, the memory, and the part which directs all the bodies physical activities and functions, even directing all those little electrons, cells, moleculrs, heurons, etc.

Please read previous comment.

My word man, God created the whole universe and eveything in it and keeps it running, keeps it all in order and directed toward its proper end. He has programmed every electron that has ever existed or ever will exist, he has given each its proper " programmed " nature. And they all do naturally what they have been programmed to do - and right on up the chain of existence to man and angels.

That is your God. My God does need to program anything and sustain anything since everything has an intellect and does its job accordingly.

You didn’t read what I have said in my previous posts very carefully. God has programmed our souls to function as they do, but he has programmed the intellect, will, and memory to be free in their activities. So we indeed learn from our experiences, because that is what God programmed us to do.

If God even programed our soul then what we are left to do.

That is not the point, the point is to be correct.

Things are correct in my framework.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

In reality there is no redness…

Right, photons. But God, in his goodness, has programmed our sense perceptors to " see " colors, he made human beings not machines.

Our intellects are the outcome of existence other intellects, such as atoms, molecule, cell, etc, knowing the fact that the collection of intellects is more than sum of intellects

We have beat that horse to death. Atoms, etc. do not have intellects. And nothing you have said proves that they do. I don’t know what you mean by the rest of your statement.

This extra thing is simply me and you. This extra thing, intellect, is aware of current state matter and can interact with other intellects,

It is not an extra thing. My intellect is receiving data from the extra mental world. This data, the photons, etc, do not interact with my intellect. My intellect interprets their meaning, that’s all.

simply your body, because they are one.

What?

Our body is the door to interact with external world. In reality body is needed to perceive and act. Each intellect has its own body

Of course.

What we are doing right now. What an intellect leaves is simply information that another one can perceive because they have appropriate tools. Information is dead and need brain process to take form of knowledge which is conceivable for intellect. What I am writing now is simply play the role of color to intellect. It has a meaning when it is processed by our sensory system but without that it is completely meaningless.

Agreed.

We do it right now when we are sitting on our chair and typing. Don’t you feel the chair that you are sitting on? Two simple beings so called electron and proton interact with each other through exchange of photons, namely information, which is exactly similar to what we are doing. Please read this.

Oh, come on. There is no need to bring that in. It has nothing to do with my normal, every day perception of the world or with my communication with you. I agree that what we are doing is processing information. I fail to see where quantum mechanics has anything to do with it, unless I am in the lab working on some quantum study.

Our bodies is objective to intellect, very similar to other objects with the difference that intellect can directly interact with it. Our body is like a door that separate internal world from external. It allows to perceive and act so it is different from other objects but it is a part of external world.

Yes, we know it as an object. And we would know it even if nothing else existed. We will just have to agree to disagree here.

So lets stick to word from now on. What I call it intellect in the past it soul. I will use soul from now on.

It is O.K. to use " intellect " as long as you know that it is only one of a number of powers the soul has. Now Angels are different, they are pure intellect, but limited intellects. But God is unlimited Intellect, pure mind.l

I would disagree. You are aware of your being because you have a body. In another word you are aware of your being indirectly.

Sounds O.K. to me.

Soul can be aware of objective reality which are represented as subjective reality to the soul.

Why subjective?

Soul cannot be objective to itself at the same time experience subjective reality of its being.

Doesn’t make sense to me. I know my self, I am a composit of body and soul, that is my being and there is nothing " subjective " about that. It is a reality my intellect recognizes as true. I think we are trolling in tall weeds.

I wish you could. But anyhow you experience beings in your dream which means that your intellect is aware of subject matter. Who they are? It couldn’t be you interacting with yourself.

It is dangerous to think every dream of a person is an Angel or a Devil. If it is either one or you suspect that it is, you should talk to a Catholic Priest. It would be very rare for either. Dreaming is a normal part of our psychological make up. Don’t make a big deal out of it.

Anything that has a form has a soul and that is why they could interact with each other including us.

No. Everything has a form but not all forms are souls. Souls are always the form of living things, not rocks, electrons, etc.

Yes they could if the accumulation of those elements that build X is more than simple sum of elements unless otherwise is proven.

No. And I won’t even debate the point. If you want to continue this discussion you will have to drop these ideas.

Ok, I think we can agree on that since my old intellect is equal to your soul.

Good.

That is called complexity. Please read this. The idea is a simple as what I said though that a system of interacting being is more than sum of its beings.

" Complexity " does not give rist to life or intellect. I won’t even discuss it.

Could we understand the behavior of a society? Is the behavior of a society is based on sole individuals behavior or it has its own dynamics?

To a certain extent but that does not mean that society has a " soul." Your Mother did not give birth to a " society, " she gave birth to you.

Linus2nd

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Soul/intellect doesn’t go to sleep as it could experience things which you remember when you dream. It just goes to another world, so called dream world.

O.K., it goes into " rest " mode, not because it needs to but because our bodies require it.

What you receive is either randomness which no knowledge can be constructed from it or it is not which means that you are perceiving some sort of coherent information that a knowledge can be constructed from. I argue that there must be an intellect behind the second since you get pure randomness from nothingness.

There is nothing random about it, and it is certainly isn’t nothingness. God made our intellect so it could interpret and coordinate and collate the data it receives and organize it into meaningful concepts. No other intellect is required for that job other than our own.

Any how man come to the world without presence an intellect?

I told you before, God gave you a soul at conception and your soul has an intellect and a will and a memory.

God made us that way, that is the purpose of our intellect, to collect data and interpret that data, and arrive at knowledge…

Please watch this video and tell me how an intellect being can come to our world if what the intellect is made of does not have any intellect?

You will have to ask God, because the soul is a spiritual substance without parts but having powers, which God gave it…

Moreover, how an intellect can interact with body which is not more that a set of particles which are insentient? You see that my picture can explain the subject matter better.

Yes, another great mystery. Something else we will have to ask God, when we get to heaven. Of course, if we go to hell, we will get no answer, I doubt if we would be interested in asking.

What is data? Data is a package of information, which is virtual, transfered from one being to another one to inform, create subjectivity, from the current objective state of matter which is the result of intellect subjective state.

We are not talking about computers here. We are talking about the real data coming to me from the external world. There is nothing " virtual " about it, it is real. photons, etc. can be detected. And why " subjective. " It is objective coming in and I know the external world as an objective reality through this data.

Form does not exist in real world since it is virtual. It just carry information from current state of intellects beings.

Form does exist in the real world. Horses are real aren’t they and it is their form that makes them real - as you will see if you ever stop debating and start reading Thomas Aquinas’ Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics and Metaphysics like I suggested.

They do disappear from objective reality because they are virtual unless an intellect constantly produce them. The remembrance is the result of re-representation of knowledge to intellect through a form.

Nonesense, they are there whether or not anyone is there to receive them. And you are right about rememberance. Both are true. The form as rememberd is what Thomas calls a " being of the mind, " it does not exist in reality. But that form actually exists in a number of similar individuals in the real world. And there, the form is a concrete reality.

Why God should do so? They either have an intellect or not meaning that there exist something which is not sum of the whole or not. Take a flower and grain it. Is what it left is a flower? That is what I mean that the cumulation of elements always is different from simple sum of elements. We cannot go far unless we could agree on this.

Well, if you " grain it, " you have killed the flower, it no longer exists. You have caused a substantial change. As you would know if you read the things I suggested. As long as the flower lives, all its composing parts function for the good of the plant. Once you kill the flower the composing elements decompose into their natural state and become basic, inanimate elements of one sort or another. Each now goes its own way, so to speak.

I think God did something rather God, why are you complaining?

Where do they go after they are absorbed by a cell? How they could disappear if they have a pure existence? Their existence is virtual in another word temporal. Temporality
is subjective as time is. The only real thing which is not temporal is intellect hence it does exist. Our intellects are embedded in a virtual world, objective reality, which is the outcome of intellect itself.

They probably go right on through us into outer space. Who knows, who cares. They have served their purpose for us.

We live in a real world not a virtual one and it is not the outcome of " intellect itself. "
It exists whether or not I do.

Linus2nd

 

[Linusthe2nd]

And how your intellect is able to move your body? The cells within your body are instantiate in your picture so how they could respond to you properly?

Yes, one of the great mysteries of life.

How soul can do that? How soul could interact with something which is different from it?

God gave it the power to do so.

What is their nature and how they could interact with soul which is immaterial?

Any scientist should be able to tell you that or at least give you an idea. Their nature is the inner principle whereby they are what they are and behave the way they do ( Aristotle’s Physics.

But that is exactly what you do. Just move your arm. Did your arm exist in previous place? No. So you as whole, are shaping nothingness.

I did not create my arm. Be sensible. If I wave a wand, I am not creating something from nothingness.

I mean that intellect in reality can be exposed to unlimited forms. That is our body which limit us from being cognitively open to other form as a flower is cognitively closed to what you are exposed to etc.

O.K. I agree. But a flower has no mind, no intellect. It doesn’t know anything.

Which part? Can you please elaborate?

Well, go back and sort it out. I’m too tired and it wouldn’t do any good.

You didn’t explain how your soul does its job. I have my own explanation which is very clear and coherent: There exist a set of intellects that they inform and work coherently with each other and makes things possible to do.

Only God can explain how the sould does itsf job completely, though I have explained how we acquire knowledge. And your explanation is incoherent. I can’t take it seriously at all.

That is your God. My God does need to program anything and sustain anything since everything has an intellect and does its job accordingly.

Each to his own then. So why are you here then?.

If God even programed our soul then what we are left to do.

As I have explained several times before, the soul has a number of powers. Some of the powers govern the physical things of the body, God programmed the soul to take care of these things automatically. He programmed the sould to **have/ B] an intellect and a will. The intellect functions as he programmed it, but he left the will free to judge everything and act as the intellect saw fit. Yes we have to act, we have to think, we have to learn, we have to judge, we have to love God, etc. There is plenty to do.

Things are correct in my framework.

If it is fixed in stone, why are you here? Anyway, I don’t see any point in going on.

Linus2nd**

 

[Bahman]

Right, photons. But God, in his goodness, has programmed our sense perceptors to " see " colors, he made human beings not machines.

What God is and what he did is subject of later discussion.

We have beat that horse to death. Atoms, etc. do not have intellects. And nothing you have said proves that they do. I don’t know what you mean by the rest of your statement.

I have a simple argument for that. What an intellect does except experiencing an objective reality and act accordingly? Could we agree that this is a correct definition of intellect?

It is not an extra thing. My intellect is receiving data from the extra mental world. This data, the photons, etc, do not interact with my intellect. My intellect interprets their meaning, that’s all.

There is extra thing which is the result of gathering being and obtaining a new configuration. Is the property of water is more than property of single Hydrogen and Oxygen? You cannot see snowflakes when they crystallize and many other properties.

What?

I meant the form one being when I said they are one.

Oh, come on. There is no need to bring that in. It has nothing to do with my normal, every day perception of the world or with my communication with you. I agree that what we are doing is processing information. I fail to see where quantum mechanics has anything to do with it, unless I am in the lab working on some quantum study.

Photon which is an quantum entity is what we receive and carry information. So our brain simply process the information that photon carries which this has to do with everyday perception of our lives.

Yes, we know it as an object. And we would know it even if nothing else existed. We will just have to agree to disagree here.

So we agree here on the fact that body is an object.

It is O.K. to use " intellect " as long as you know that it is only one of a number of powers the soul has. Now Angels are different, they are pure intellect, but limited intellects. But God is unlimited Intellect, pure mind.l

I have problem to comprehend pure intellect since I don’t understand how they could perceive things since they don’t have any body. Do you have any explanation? This is beyond this topic so we can drop it if you wish so we can proceed with the rest of proof.

Sounds O.K. to me.

Good.

Why subjective?

I meant the experience of your body is subjective. Your body is of course is objective to your intellect.

Doesn’t make sense to me. I know my self, I am a composit of body and soul, that is my being and there is nothing " subjective " about that. It is a reality my intellect recognizes as true. I think we are trolling in tall weeds.

Again, have you ever experience your soul? What I am questioning is whether soul can become objective to itself so it could experience itself. This sounds kinda of contrary to me.

It is dangerous to think every dream of a person is an Angel or a Devil. If it is either one or you suspect that it is, you should talk to a Catholic Priest. It would be very rare for either. Dreaming is a normal part of our psychological make up. Don’t make a big deal out of it.

They are quite friendly. There are not dangerous. I can ask them to come to you if you wish, they are very shy though.

No. Everything has a form but not all forms are souls. Souls are always the form of living things, not rocks, electrons, etc.

Lets skip that as I comment on this on this reply. Question again: What is your definition of intellect?

No. And I won’t even debate the point. If you want to continue this discussion you will have to drop these ideas.

Ok, lets drop this.

Good.

" Complexity " does not give rist to life or intellect. I won’t even discuss it.

Ok, lets drop this. But you didn’t provide any argument against it.

To a certain extent but that does not mean that society has a " soul." Your Mother did not give birth to a " society, " she gave birth to you.
Linus2nd

Ok, lets drop this either.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

What God is and what he did is subject of later discussion.

Until you agree that God exists, a pure spirit, all powerful, knowing, good, and absolutely other than and outside this universe, you cannot arrive at the true cause of anything. That is the whole point of my O.P. - which you still have not addressed.

I have a simple argument for that. What an intellect does except experiencing an objective reality and act accordingly? Could we agree that this is a correct definition of intellect?

I have tried to explain to you a number of times what the intellect is and how it functions but you have a fixation on your own idea ( which I suspect is religious based ). If you are really interested in a complete discussion on what the intellect is you will have to read the following link, it is deep - but given your professional status, you should be able to handle it.

newadvent.org/summa/1.htm Questions 75-89

There is extra thing which is the result of gathering being and obtaining a new configuration. Is the property of water is more than property of single Hydrogen and Oxygen? You cannot see snowflakes when they crystallize and many other properties.

What has that got to do with what I perceive through my senses? I perceive data which my intellect sorts out into ideas/images of the real world. When I see water, that is what I see, I could care less what its constituents are. Of course I know what water is made of. But water has a different nature than either oxygen or hydrogen. What point are you making?

I meant the form one being when I said they are one.

I lost track of your original comment. Don’t feel like tracing it down.

Photon which is an quantum entity is what we receive and carry information. So our brain simply process the information that photon carries which this has to do with everyday perception of our lives.

Now that is a real can of worms. First we are not computers. All the data we receive from the outside world impacts our sensory organs ( all five ) and is transferred to the brain through a chain of bio/chemical, nerve reactions until they finally reach the neurons of the brain. No photons are involved even in sight, once the photons have impacted my optical nerves. And what kind of data do I receive through the ear, the nose, the skin, the tongue? They are not photons. Our soul, through the intellect interprets these physical reactions of the neurons.

So we agree here on the fact that body is an object.

I think that is correct.

I have problem to comprehend pure intellect since I don’t understand how they could perceive things since they don’t have any body. Do you have any explanation? This is beyond this topic so we can drop it if you wish so we can proceed with the rest of proof.

Angels are spirits have no matter, they are not composed, they are pure intellects, so is God. Our souls are spirits too, they have no matter, yet our souls have the powers of intellect and will and memory, they also have other powers which goven all our physical, life functions.

The difference between our soul and an Angel and God, is that our soul is the substantial form of a material body. Angels and God do not have matrial bodies. They are pure intellects. Their spirits are their form/essence.

I meant the experience of your body is subjective. Your body is of course is objective to your intellect.

But in what sense is it subjective?

Again, have you ever experience your soul? What I am questioning is whether soul can become objective to itself so it could experience itself. This sounds kinda of contrary to me.

You think, you know, you remember. You experience that don’t you? That is your soul in action. So you experience your soul in the act of doing this things and by experiencing the souls activities, you experience your soul.

They are quite friendly. There are not dangerous. I can ask them to come to you if you wish, they are very shy though.

No thanks. It is a dangerous game you play.

Lets skip that as I comment on this on this reply. Question again: What is your definition of intellect?

Refer to the link I gave you above. In short it is the spiritual power by which I know, judge, and remember, love, hate.

Linus2nd

 

[Bahman]

O.K., it goes into " rest " mode, not because it needs to but because our bodies require it.

Agree.

There is nothing random about it, and it is certainly isn’t nothingness. God made our intellect so it could interpret and coordinate and collate the data it receives and organize it into meaningful concepts. No other intellect is required for that job other than our own.

This means that objective reality is insentient. Are you really 100% sure about this statement. Your body is a part of objective reality.

I told you before, God gave you a soul at conception and your soul has an intellect and a will and a memory.

God made us that way, that is the purpose of our intellect, to collect data and interpret that data, and arrive at knowledge…

Could we please leave the concept of God beside? We have to reach to this conclusion at the very end of argument otherwise our argument is biased unless you have a solid argument that can be stated right now about the role of God in conception hence we don’t need to follow the rest of argument.

You will have to ask God, because the soul is a spiritual substance without parts but having powers, which God gave it…

If it is so, then Tomas argument is a flaw unless you or he could provide an argument about this situation.

Yes, another great mystery. Something else we will have to ask God, when we get to heaven. Of course, if we go to hell, we will get no answer, I doubt if we would be interested in asking.

So does his argument is flaw at this point or you want to continue.

We are not talking about computers here. We are talking about the real data coming to me from the external world. There is nothing " virtual " about it, it is real. photons, etc. can be detected. And why " subjective. " It is objective coming in and I know the external world as an objective reality through this data.

Photon etc are virtual. They just carry insentient information and they don’t live.

Form does exist in the real world. Horses are real aren’t they and it is their form that makes them real - as you will see if you ever stop debating and start reading Thomas Aquinas’ Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics and Metaphysics like I suggested.

That I understand and I don’t need to read a book to comprehend it. We experience an objective reality and what is there is real yet what carries information is insentient and virtual.

Nonesense, they are there whether or not anyone is there to receive them. And you are right about rememberance. Both are true. The form as rememberd is what Thomas calls a " being of the mind, " it does not exist in reality. But that form actually exists in a number of similar individuals in the real world. And there, the form is a concrete reality.

How they could exist when they become a part of our being namely after informing us?
That is the meaning of a virtual being. Information is dead and knowledge not the first can cause and the second is mute.

Well, if you " grain it, " you have killed the flower, it no longer exists. You have caused a substantial change. As you would know if you read the things I suggested. As long as the flower lives, all its composing parts function for the good of the plant. Once you kill the flower the composing elements decompose into their natural state and become basic, inanimate elements of one sort or another. Each now goes its own way, so to speak.

So my question is whether we are dealing with a dead flower or flower was dead before graining?

They probably go right on through us into outer space. Who knows, who cares. They have served their purpose for us.

We live in a real world not a virtual one and it is not the outcome of " intellect itself. "
It exists whether or not I do.

Linus2nd

What I meant that our knowledge of what exist out there as a objective reality is mediated by virtual beings. So we live in virtual world unless you know a form of communication which does not depend on virtual beings. In other word we cannot directly know what is behind the door of an intellect and thats the requirement of communications namely striving to virtual world.