Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 10261 - 10280 of total 22763 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 22, 2012 - 03:22pm PT
Credit: Dr. F.
This cactus grows in my greenhouse, I have had it since it was a little baby cactus.
I pick it up, and put it on the photo bench.
I can see the cactus, I can touch it's spines, I can predict what would happen if I touch the spines.


What am I missing??
(Werner, don't bother)
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Oct 22, 2012 - 03:39pm PT
Largo has as much chance of grokking Perl as Larry Wall does of making an onsight solo of Astroman.


Malamute, how many times do we have to tell you to quite eating that rat poison. It's making you downright cranky.

And by the way, what's the difference between said "pearl" and verifiable data?

JL
MH2

climber
Oct 22, 2012 - 03:47pm PT
Supper is my fundamental lived reality.
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 22, 2012 - 03:49pm PT
So Largo
What am I missing?
Isn't the objective cactus the same as my subjective experience, in the sense that I my subjective experience can define the objective reality to an extent that there is very little missing in the objective reality

The shape is the same if I use my hands, calipers, or my eyes
And is exactly the same as the image that came out of my camera and appeared on any computer screen in the world!!!

Where is the great divide?
Please
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Oct 22, 2012 - 04:16pm PT
healyje: And,in 10k posts, neither have you and you clearly haven't developed any good way of conveying the results of what you're 'investigating' at 6:45 or why you'd bother doing it again tomorrow. Ah, right, I forgot - it's 'subjective'. So far, about the only thing that can be gleaned from from this thread is that at 6:45 you become an non-projecting vessel available and open to what you can't say, but whatever that is, it's "real[ity]", open to 'investigation', and isn't just a figment of your imagination (because you aren't imagining at the time). And you have questions for me?
Largo: At the core of Healyj’s rant above is his insistence that the purpose of “investigating at 6:45” is to glean “results” in the normal sense of the word, that these non-results are not open to measurements (his version of investigating) and in fact the fruit are “things” that are “imagined.”


Well, for starters, those are all your words, not mine:

Largo: For starters, every morning at 6:45 I investigate the subjective realm. I do not investigate the objective realm as you do, and I don't make any claims that my method of investigating is the best or only way to look at reality.

In that statement I see the words "investigate", "realm", "method", and "reality" - your words, not mine.

in·ves·ti·gate   [in-ves-ti-geyt], in·ves·ti·gat·ed, in·ves·ti·gat·ing. verb

1. to examine, study, or inquire into systematically; search or examine into the particulars of; examine in detail.

2. to search out and examine the particulars of in an attempt to learn the facts about something hidden, unique, or complex, especially in an attempt to find a motive, cause, or culprit: The police are investigating the murder.

--

meth·od [meth-uhd] noun

1. a procedure, technique, or way of doing something, especially in accordance with a definite plan: There are three possible methods of repairing this motor.

2. a manner or mode of procedure, especially an orderly, logical, or systematic way of instruction, inquiry, investigation, experiment, presentation, etc.: the empirical method of inquiry.

Possibly you use a different, more subjective, dictionary, but when most folks hear those words they do tend to assume a reportable, verbalizable result.

I have commented many times that subjective experience is not a thing that we can measure in the normal way but a geysering and ephemeral flow.

"A geysering and ephemeral flow", now we're getting somewhere - an actual verbalization. That's progress by any accord.

Largo: Note that Healyj looks at subjective experience solely in terms of the qualia, the things that rush though, the “figure” not the ground, the foreground, not the background.

Also, “knowing,” to Healyj, is the ability to grab something. These are the only “pearls” that he imagines are out there which are not imagined. And “getting” those pearls are, to Healyj, the only thing that’s going to “get us there.”

That is a lot of projection on your part.

Largo: I’m still interested in hearing how healyj experiences his subjective life, what he believes is happening and how he experiences both the figure and the ground. And if he ever “got there,” where would that be?

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for "investigating" and have a long history of doing so on any number of fronts. I also recommend and advocate meditation and skydiving for everyone. In fact, my wife meditates every day and my daughter did three and ten day Vipassana retreats throughout college on breaks instead of partying (her idea, not ours).

Possibly the difference is where you seem to have gone out of your way to separate meditation from religion, I simply do the same a step further for mysticism.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Oct 22, 2012 - 06:17pm PT
Largo: At the core of Healyj’s rant above is his insistence that the purpose of “investigating at 6:45” is to glean “results” in the normal sense of the word, that these non-results are not open to measurements (his version of investigating) and in fact the fruit are “things” that are “imagined.”


Well, for starters, those are all your words, not mine:
-

Okay, Healyj, time to pony up. You deflect wonderfully while providing noting, then accuse me of doing that.

When you said we would never surface with any pearls, what, specifically did you mean, symbolically, by "pearl." I'm almost certain that you mean some "thing" that has recognizible data by which you can "know" and quantify and qualify. If not, if this is indeed NOT what you are saying, kindly fill us in.

Per mysticism, the word usually relates to the knowledge of, and especially the personal experience of, states of consciousness, or levels of being, or aspects of reality, beyond normal human perception.

In science, we attain the same thing with microscopes and instruments and atom smashers that give us data that's totally beyond (usually much smaller) that our normal human perceptions can appreciate. I can't see an electron, but an electron microscope can - and we don't think any think about it.

Moving onto Craig - he sees his subjective experience totally different than the person I sited earlier, who sees his experience as how he "feels" about some external object, like a dog. For Craig, the dog - or in this instance, the cactus - IS his experience. He sees no "divide" at all between what he perceives and perception itself. His perception, he believes, is hard wired into external reality and feeds him back an objective model of the cactus. The question to Craig is - what is the difference between how you perceive and how a zombie might perceive?

JL
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 22, 2012 - 08:02pm PT
The question to Craig is - what is the difference between how you perceive and how a zombie might perceive?
No, that is not the question

The objective reality is off about 1/millionth of what the subjective experience experiences
so is basically insignificant to even consider when discussing science or the validity of facts

Roughster

Sport climber
Vacaville, CA
Oct 22, 2012 - 08:04pm PT
Credit: Roughster

That about says all that needs to be said about religion.
MH2

climber
Oct 22, 2012 - 08:18pm PT
In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.
 Carl Sagan, 1987 CSICOP keynote address



(Sagan overstates as usual, but he has a point.}
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 22, 2012 - 08:36pm PT
I went from Philosophical New Age Spiritual guru Believer, to atheist in a matter of days

It was easy, just change your beliefs, and admit that you were wrong
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Oct 22, 2012 - 09:23pm PT
That's one step in a better direction >

Keep it up ^

Jus Walk'in
BB
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Oct 22, 2012 - 09:26pm PT
It was easy, just change your beliefs, and admit that you were wrong

This is an interesting statement, coming on he heels of MH2 mentioning how entrenched we are per our beliefs - that even scientists change up if given different data or in the case of boundary experiences.

But we must wonder if "wrong" is much useful in the pure subjective arena, which has noting to do with beliefs. For instance, picture yourself hanging at the last hanging belay on the Shield headwall, just riding the wave of experience as it surges through you, at a level much more basic and profound than interpretation - there hardly is a wrong or right here, and that person's direct knowing of that moment is beyond doubt.

Interesting to ponder all of this stuff - at least for me.

JL
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 22, 2012 - 09:39pm PT
MH2 said that Politics and Religions are entrenched, and science isn't

And my experience shows how Unentrenched I am, that I can change my beliefs when the data says I must change to be consistent with the data

and If God ever appears, or is proven to My satisfaction, I will change again

Largo, if you could convince me that you're right, (I'm not sure what that would be though), I would change to my mind to say "God Heavens, Largo, You're Right!"
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Oct 22, 2012 - 10:21pm PT

You won't ever see God from a man proving it to you
Only the holy spirit can convict your heart.
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Oct 23, 2012 - 12:54am PT
Largo: You deflect wonderfully...

Wait, we're over 10k posts and "a geysering and ephemeral flow" is about the most substantial verbalization we've heard about what happens for you at 6:45 every day and you accuse me of deflecting? In 10k posts you've been deliberately and inscrutably obfusticating at every turn while at the same time tilting at our language (though teaching us a bit of metaphysical philosophy and zen practice in the process).

My comment on mysticism is a good example; your response was about as oblique and ambiguous as they come:

Per mysticism, the word usually relates to the knowledge of, and especially the personal experience of, states of consciousness, or levels of being, or aspects of reality, beyond normal human perception.

What exactly does that mean and what was your intent? Did you decide we needed a definition? I have dictionary.com for that:

mys·ti·cism [mis-tuh-siz-uhm] noun

1. the beliefs, ideas, or mode of thought of mystics.

2. a doctrine of an immediate spiritual intuition of truths believed to transcend ordinary understanding, or of a direct, intimate union of the soul with God through contemplation or ecstasy.

3. obscure thought or speculation.

Or are you telling me what you believe in some form of #2 above? If so, why not simply come out and say it clearly in simple terms and own it?

When we get down to it (if ever), I suspect you don't like the label - or any label for that matter - but at some point, no matter how careful the wording or how cleverly oblique the language, at some point it would seem way simpler to just own it. But hey, that's just me, though I think the conversation might be able to move in a less circular trajectory if you did and it seems a little hard to disown it this far down the road of the thread.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Oct 23, 2012 - 09:44am PT
Healyj, I'm too busy with work to binge on this today, but yours is common and probably valid gripe. The problem is that in investigating the subjective, you're not doing math, you're not plunging in and trying to surface with a "pearl" because you're not working small (pearl) to large, but trying to linger with "the large," the context, not the content. Normally you are trying to get hold of something, to define and quantify. But here that keeps us fused on the small, the things, the stuff.

In this subjective adventure mode, the most important thing is to just keep forging ahead, boring in, not so much looking for what is "true" as letting the false drop away - beliefs, the definitions, the biases, the preconceived. It's the opposite of how we normally go about investigating or probing material things - but the only way to see past them.

Actually, there have been some very insightful things brought up on this subject over the last day or two and if I get a chance over lunch I'll jot out my thoughts.

JL
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 23, 2012 - 09:48am PT
Like the cactus spine not being an illusion
Very insightful, yes
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Oct 23, 2012 - 09:55am PT
Hubble Ultra Deep Field

Discuss.

Credit: BASE104
MH2

climber
Oct 23, 2012 - 09:55am PT
And Perl being pearl.


edit:

BASE,

Suppose there are beings in one of those systems looking back in our direction. What do they see? If we could detect a distant civilization, and they had the same technology as we had, does that mean they could detect us, too?
WBraun

climber
Oct 23, 2012 - 10:07am PT
When we thoroughly study ourselves then we will thoroughly understand the cosmic manifestation outside of ourselves.

The first step is completely knowing thyself.

Here everyone is trying to know everything outside of themselves thru their defective senses and has no clue of their own real self .....

Messages 10261 - 10280 of total 22763 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews