Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
May 31, 2015 - 01:07pm PT
|
Yeaaaa, Truthdweller's back! Missed ya Brother : )
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
May 31, 2015 - 01:52pm PT
|
DMT: Just because one holds scientific knowledge over mythological knowledge doesn't mean one has to apply the scientific method to everything.
And just WHY would that be . . . ?
|
|
Truthdweller
Trad climber
San Diego, CA (stuck in Jersey)
|
|
|
May 31, 2015 - 02:39pm PT
|
DMT...address the next question, if you would:
Is the Word of God foolishness to you?
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
May 31, 2015 - 02:45pm PT
|
DMT, you shoot off your mouth without having your brain loaded.
|
|
cintune
climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
|
|
|
May 31, 2015 - 03:28pm PT
|
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
May 31, 2015 - 06:44pm PT
|
DMT, you shoot off your mouth without having your brain loaded.
Are you showing us what you meant when you accused some of taking potshots?
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
MH2: Are you showing us what you meant when you accused some of taking potshots?
I don’t think so. I'm a little surprised you don't see an issue with writing something that one is not willing to explain in a conversation.
I think I’m agreeing with Werner’s frequent criticism. Making errant or cryptic comments without explaining what they mean to others here who cannot decipher what the writer meant by them is . . . “just making sh*t up.” I should assume that people post here to have conversations, to take part in a dialogue. You might consider it a form of discipline and courtesy: think about what you’re writing, and try to communicate your ideas as best you can. At a minimum, try to communicate.
Some people are especially difficult to understand not because they can’t communicate but because they really have nothing to say.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
Mike, you don't converse, you pontificate.
... perhaps an issue of disagreement rather than conversation. We're usually disagreeing with those we see as pontificating.
|
|
Ward Trotter
Trad climber
|
|
Some people are especially difficult to understand not because they can’t communicate but because they really have nothing to say.
The point being advanced here I think is like the example of a basketball or football game, for instance ,in which more than just the players show up.There are all sorts of folks who love the game but can't really play.This limitation, of whatever origin, doesn't stop such people from an occasional fling of the ball from time to time.
Everyone has something to say,but not all have the ability or the confidence to say it.
This is true of practically all human pursuits.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
Here's a thought: Those of you who are dedicated Christians wanting to discuss beliefs might start a new thread, something like Evangelical Commentary. Otherwise, perhaps you would associate your comments with science in some manner.
But we're in the Wild West here so almost anything goes.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
Is the Word of God foolishness to you?
Now that's an interesting question because of what's implied. I don't think any one would dismiss the word of God. But so much in this discussion revolves around the definitions that are too often missing: what is God and what is/are his/her/its word(s)?
Regarding science, another issue that seems unresolvable, problematic is the notion of two divergent worlds, the quantum microcosm and the mechanical macrocosm and an inability to reconcile the two. I think the complementary nature of these realms suggests much that may be seen from one side or the other as at least strange. Here, one man's woo may be another's eventually resolvable and explainable physical reality.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
Here, one man's woo may be another's eventually resolvable and explainable physical reality
A possibility. I'm keeping track of JL's metaphysical investigations.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Is the Word of God foolishness to you?
Hmmm. Well for starters, I don't believe for a minute that it is the 'word of god' versus the words of [many] men, so right out of the gate, and without even going into the content of those words, I find the question questionable.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
I should assume that people post here to have conversations, to take part in a dialogue. You might consider it a form of discipline and courtesy: think about what you’re writing
If this were the case you might have courteously asked DMT to have a conversation and a dialogue instead of telling him he had shot his mouth of without thinking.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
Regarding science, another issue that seems unresolvable, problematic is the notion of two divergent worlds, the quantum microcosm and the mechanical macrocosm and an inability to reconcile the two. I think the complementary nature of these realms suggests much that may be seen from one side or the other as at least strange. Here, one man's woo may be another's eventually resolvable and explainable physical reality.
Lucidly phrased.
The thorny place is the threshold between the two "divergent worlds." The new experiment out of Australia might suggest that this threshold is bridged by a sentient observer, though some would say that any measuring stick can accomplish same.
Note the huge threshold issues with other key phenomenon, such as nothing or nigh nothing to something at the Big Bang, from inanimate to biological, from objective to subjective.
JL
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
The new experiment out of Australia might suggest that this threshold is bridged by a sentient . . .
"Professor Truscott's team first trapped a collection of helium atoms in a suspended state known as a Bose-Einstein condensate, and then ejected them until there was only a single atom left.
The single atom was then dropped through a pair of counter-propagating laser beams, which formed a grating pattern that acted as crossroads in the same way a solid grating would scatter light.
A second light grating to recombine the paths was randomly added, which led to constructive or destructive interference as if the atom had travelled both paths. When the second light grating was not added, no interference was observed as if the atom chose only one path.
However, the random number determining whether the grating was added was only generated after the atom had passed through the crossroads.
If one chooses to believe that the atom really did take a particular path or paths then one has to accept that a future measurement is affecting the atom's past, said Truscott.
"The atoms did not travel from A to B. It was only when they were measured at the end of the journey that their wave-like or particle-like behavior was brought into existence," he said."
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
Hmmm. Well for starters, I don't believe for a minute that it is the 'word of god' versus the words of [many] men ... I find the question questionable. As did St Augustine in about 380 CE in "City of God". One of the great founders of The Church.
Too bad The Church let the monsters of the Inquisition drag them back 1600 years. The current Pope is the first one since the inquisition to try to drag The Church into the modern times. He'll be lucky if he's not assassinated.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
The current Pope is the first one since the inquisition to try to drag The Church into the modern times
Pope John XXIII
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
Jun 1, 2015 - 11:49am PT
Here's a thought: Those of you who are dedicated Christians wanting to discuss beliefs might start a new thread, something like Evangelical Commentary. Otherwise, perhaps you would associate your comments with science in some manner.
But we're in the Wild West here so almost anything goes.
JGill
Ho Now! Sounds like there's a new Sheriff in town.
Is it JUST Christians you want to runout of town. Or do the Jewsh, Islamist, Hindus, Quakers, and Budhist need to pack it up and get off this RELIGION V SCIENCE thread??
I thought this was a continuation of Mr. Frys thread, which BTW I don't remember you posting
on once? There was 40,000 posts of all types of spiritual inputs comparing to science with the proximity to politics, and I don't remember anyone ever asked to leave.
Maybe you think we need a sheriff to post what's wanted and not wanted on this world wide web?
Edit; or maybe it's ok with you to promote negative aspects of Christianity opposed to positive ones?
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
‘Change’
In my view, the difficulty in continually posting and even reading this thread is that we are each adamantly adhere to our beliefs and opinions. We have our own mantras, ideologies, schools of thought, religions, philosophies, whatever those may be. While each of us tries to find new ways to contribute to the conversations and arguments, we all fall back into voicing our core beliefs.
One thing I have tried to do when I post here is, and I may have failed in this endeavor, is to resist trying to persuade (through direct online confrontational arguments) others into believing what I believe, or to dissuade someone from their respective beliefs. I simply try to state whatever I think or believe through a poem or opinion, and just leave it at that. Even when someone with a contrary opinion tries to pick it apart, I usually avoid allowing myself to become overly engaged. Most of my posts are ignored but that’s ok too, for I have been married too long to let that bother me, and I can be ignored quite excellently by my friends as well.
I fervently believe that this will be my only rodeo (this one lifetime) and life is way too short to expend too much energy on trying ‘change’ other people’s minds about such unimportant things as to what they may or may not believe.
In a world where people are still finding their feet in the area of human rights and free speech, ‘Free Thought’ should be held at a premium. If you have ever tried to change an old persons mind about such things as religion, politics, and what their favorite brand of toothpaste is then you will understand the futility I see in how it’s nearly impossible for us to try and change each other’s minds here.
So, that being my opinion and nothing more I would only like to add that we might ask ourselves another question;
Who here among us has had or not had multiple changes in their philosophies, religion, belief system, or type of scientific understanding of the world throughout their lifetime? (I have had several, although my basic personality is that of a skeptic in respect to everything I have tried to believe in thus far). And, as an extension to that question, how do you know if and when you will not change your ideas about what you believe again in the future?
-bushman
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!