Doesn't "learning" require/imply some level of intelligence. If it is like most things, intelligence is probably a spectrum. At the lowest levels call it "the ability to retain the results of trial and error" or somesuch maybe.
It has to start at -infinity (not living/unable to learn), to neutral (0) (simple instructions acquired but unable to process information) to
Living(+infinity)(able to adapt, process, analyse, store and reproduce information)
Ps: I just made this up. ;-)
I have a hard time putting much credence in a belief for which there is no evidence.
Same here. Not only that their is no evidence but belief systems do not correspond at all with reality. It is highly flawed which is why doctrines relating to a belief system change over time.
I can think of NO real-world examples of something (intelligence) coming from nothing.
Intellgence started from nothing , built from scratch, like a computer programmed to follow instruction and now have evolved (not on their own ofcourse) to self-learning.
The words you use: "learning", "ability", "information", "storage" (memory), all imply (at least to me :-) some level of what I am referring to as "intelligence".
They are the building block of intelligence ;-)
90% of Everything I said above is mostly theoretical and should not be taken as factual ;-)
@cryptonfused wrote:
IMO, the key in what you said is; "not on their own of course" :-)
Further, how do you know (why do you think) "intelligence started from nothing"? Where is the evidence? Can you think of any other real world instance of something irrefutably coming from nothing?
Check my disclaimer above which states:
90% of Everything I said above is mostly theoretical and should not be taken as factual ;-)
Honestly it is hard to understand how something can come from nothing. But for this to not be possible, there should no beginning nor end. The creators of things need to be created by something which was created by something else,....... which was created by something else ........ ....... ........ ....... .....
..... ..... ..... ...... ..... ..... ..... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ..... .... .... ..... ..... ...... ....... .
I understand these are just your opinions, same here. I am interested in that upon which folks base their opinions - that is how I learn of new thoughts/ideas/reasons and adjust my own.
To a reasoning person, someone's bare opinion without the reasoning behind it does them little good. In my opinion :-)
Yeah, some teachings call It (the Source of existence, "god", Universe, etc) the uncreate or the causeless (or prime) cause, unmoved mover, cause of cause, etc.
Even the experts dunno how the big bang banged itself ;-)
But I am unable, thus far, to think of anything REAL that definitively came from nothing. Nor can I think of any REAL that has beginning/end but no end/beginning.
Doesn't mean to me that it can't happen, just that there is NO good experiential evidence to support it.
IMO
We may find some answers in the future; though I am unable to see how answers or explanations can even exist or how we can even reach to comprehend such.
The less we know, the more we wonder. ;-) .
"If something exists, whether it be visible or invisible, perceptible to the senses or not, it can be discovered and verified." - https://steemit.com/metaphysics/@n1mr0d/can-i-know-the-truth-of-things-beyond-the-physical