Self-Explaining Universe (SRH)

More on SRH I will get here one day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

There is definitely a strong connection between the Mind and the Universe. With enough examination we can convince ourselves of this. The idea of the universe existing independent of some intelligence does not make sense.

This is definitely the ancient religious sense that the world was not that old, and Humans had been a critical part of it from the start, and before humans there was the intelligence of God.

Today we have the alternative idea that really the Universe has had almost all its existence with no sentient life at all. It is as though sentience has no place it the world, a side effect of the processes of universe history.

In this view there is no need for sentience and we must explain the world without reference to sentience at all. But isn't there a contradiction there. Sentient beings are trying to understand a universe in which sentience is not a real part, and yet it is a part of it.

We have to resolve this issue before we can make any more progress. Is sentience a fundamental part of the universe or is it not. If it is not, then one has to wonder how the universe can be fundamentally  understood by something that is only superficial. And if sentience is fundamental then we have the SRH problem of eventually we will need to understand Sentience itself.

We can't escape the fact that eventually we need to understand our place in the universe. So far Science has just kicked the tin can down the alley. And of course Science itself will have to change. The scientific method began with the clear distinction between Subject and Object, and the method is designed so that the Subject is as best as possible removed from the experiment. Various levels of "blind" can be used to ensure that the data is not effected by "sentient" responses. But obviously any experiment that requires sentience has a subjective component. The very meaning of the results is a bias introduced and the hypothesis that is being tested is pure subjectivity. If the Universe really was Objective we wouldn't need sentient beings and science at all. As our enquiring of the universe develop we will eventually have to face this contradiction in science, that it tries to remove from the picture the very foundations of its process, and the Universe we try to study we try to see from teh perspective that we never existed. What is the sound of a a tree falling in a universe with no-one to hear? What are the laws of physics in a Universe with no-one to discover them? The answer is that you cannot have one without the other. To already be talking of Laws of Physics is to imply an ontology of sentience: we are assuming that sentient beings exist.

And so the Anthropic principle is an important one. Its not so much a physical principle stating that no eyes will ever look out over a universe unsuitable for light. It is more general stating that the very conception of a Universe implies sentience.

We are back to the beginning again as though no science had ever happened. And this will always happen because science begins in data. And we knew the universe existed from the start, when we first asked the questions that began investigation. The seeds of science were always already there, and science can only grow from that root. When Adam first opened his eyes he already had the root deeply embedded in the soil of the universe from which everything we have learned has come. That inspiration and spark was always there, that sentience, was a bright now as it was with cavemen sitting around a fire telling stories on a dark Ice Age winter night. We always already understood the fundamentals, we just needed to flesh them out. The universe and sentience are intimately connected. That is clear, and always has been, with each photon that we see.