I have heard some lucid explanations for how "infinity became aware"; consider this:
The One Infinite Creator
The Law of One states that there is only one, and that one is the Infinite Creator (4.20), which Ra also calls “Infinite Intelligence” and “Intelligent Infinity.” It is impossible to describe the “one undifferentiated intelligent infinity, unpolarized, full and whole,” but It can be activated or potentiated (28.1). Each portion of the creation contains, paradoxically, the whole (13.13).
Illusion
Since all is one, all manifestation, or appearance of many-ness, is an illusion (1.6, 106.23). According to Ra, it is an illusion carefully engineered in order to give the Creator the opportunity to know Itself (27.17).
http://www.lawofone.info/synopsis.phpPhilosophical Materialism is the philosophy of atheist scientists. I also claim that all rational atheists are humanists and that humanism is false based on readily available evidence.
Those principle come from platonism or neo platonism.
Like plotinus
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plotinus"Materialism" is more or less aristotle metaphysics / natural science / empirism.
"Rationalism" is more or less socratic/platonic/euclidian .
The thing of the illusion of changing appearence vs permanent truth is from parmenides.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ParmenidesAll conceptions of reality are the result of a mental process, no more no less.
Cultivating the mental process of understanding ( aka rationalism ) is more important than cultivating memory of facts ( aka empirism ).
The concept of true or false can be interpreted both in term of factual evidence, or in the context of rational analysis like euclidian axiomatic reasoning.
In the context of axiomatic reasoning, truth is not about "factual evidence" but about logical deduction from axioms.
There is no "factual evidence" that 1+1=2, arithmetics, or to euclidian geometric principle, just logical deduction from axioms.
Riemann show very well the problematics of finding the good axiomatic model or geometry / space to describe physics, as there is no manner to demonstrate which geometry or axioms are true or false in themselves as far as physics is concerned.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemannian_geometryhttp://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783319260402On the Hypotheses Which Lie at the Bases of Geometry.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_universeRelativity is special case of riemannian geometry, and show to be the more accurate model of space that correspond to physics so far.
Before riemann it was assumed euclidian geometry and axioms were more or less same than truth or physics.
Humanism is quite subjective concept, but it would be often considered platonic or socratic model are more humanist, they lead to republic in politics, "science" derived from empirism, aka interpretation of facts lead to oligarchy, as long as this interpretation cannot be demonstrated rationally.
For plato truth is deeply related to good or justice, and concerned with humanism.
"I don’t think the brain came in the Darwinian manner. In fact, it is disprovable. Simple mechanism can’t yield the brain. I think the basic elements of the universe are simple. Life force is a primitive element of the universe and it obeys certain laws of action. These laws are not simple, and they are not mechanical. "
There are some good demonstration of this problematics in this book.
Between Leibniz, Newton, and Kant: Philosophy and Science in the Eighteenth
https://books.google.fr/books?id=D5fcBQAAQBAJ&lpg=PT118&dq=leibniz%20mechanics%20vs%20newton&pg=PT21#v=onepage&q&f=false