Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 10361 - 10380 of total 22779 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 25, 2012 - 06:59pm PT
Credit: Dr. F.
My mundane materialist just plain projecting my own mundane duality onto the miraculous

WTF?
Jennie

Trad climber
Elk Creek, Idaho
Oct 25, 2012 - 07:34pm PT
Every moment is a miracle, along with every instant.

Yes!

… do materialists genuinely look for divine miracles to contemplate…or merely summon God to effect a magic show?
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Oct 25, 2012 - 07:40pm PT
Have any of you believers in heaven ever considered how you're are going to enjoy everlasting life without bodies? How ya gonna enjoy food? booze? dope? sex? climbing? Sunsets?
Nope, there won't be any of that. You won't have a body. You won't even have any hardware for a brain. You will be vapourware. If you have any existence at all, it will be a virtual existence. Just like the virtual particles that flicker in & out of existence in the darkest emptiest reaches of spacetime. You know, the stuff that existed before the big bang. The stuff you don't believe in.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Oct 25, 2012 - 07:42pm PT
Well Jennie, it is generally the religious faithful who are constantly yelling "look a
Miracle!"

The rest of us ( we are materialists I take it?) are just in the habit of saying "No sh#t? where?"


MH2

climber
Oct 25, 2012 - 07:48pm PT
Every moment is a miracle, along with every instant.


That's why I can't spare the time to go to the dentist.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Oct 25, 2012 - 07:52pm PT
If every moment was a miracle you wouldn't have to go to the dentist

Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 25, 2012 - 08:54pm PT
Yes
we are waiting for a miracle by God to contemplate

We are materialists, we need something other than
"it gave me a warm fuzzy feeling"

It's got to be more than that
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Oct 25, 2012 - 10:16pm PT
"it gave me a warm fuzzy feeling"

It's got to be more than that
--

Isn't that what they were looking for with that atom smasher in Cern - a fuzzy feeling? Isn't that the goal of science and spiritual practices, or is the statement disingenuous and juvenile?

JL

WBraun

climber
Oct 25, 2012 - 10:27pm PT
Just see how crazy the gross materialists is.

A simple thing they can't see right in front of them.

Instead they chant all day neti neti neti.

Not this, not this, not this.



healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Oct 26, 2012 - 01:15am PT
You want a mircale? Fire ants. Fire ants are miraculous in almost every respect. The best scifi/fantasy/horror authors on Earth got nothing on fire ants in terms of the raw creative and nightmarish behavior embedded in their DNA. That behavior is also a good example of an emergent property of a material (DNA).
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Oct 26, 2012 - 01:28am PT
healyje: My personal take on it is there is a physical world open to quantitative study, but in the "subjective / spiritual / experiential" realm - if you embrace panpsychism - your options for 'investigating' it are entirely qualitative and, in my opinion, quite limited. Why limited? Because you have the same problem as the fish in the oft quoted 'fish-contemplating-water' conundrum. At best you can experience 'flow states', but those are devoid of 'content' in our usual contextual meaning of that word. My own opinion is that while in these flow states all experiential perceptions (quale) related to the 'flow' itself are essentially [internally] generated projections - god isn't talking to you, you are talking to god.

Largo: Well thought out reply. This would take more time than I have to sort out, but I would point out that your thinking is still fused to content, thinking that is what spiritual practices are about, and that what come up in practice is (quale), and that we are creating (projecting) said content, and that the focus is on what that content “God” is saying or how were are responding (“talking to God”). This is a materialists take on the prctice since they only see or can imagine what they can get hold of and grasp, then project that process globally.

In fact, one of the first thresholds of eyes-open meditation is the acknowledgement that all content is impermanent ergo “unreal,” and that all “states” flow or otherwise are themselves so much content and need to be given up.

Over time the focus itself opens up and the fish stops contemplating water and what is IN the water and realizes that it IS water, that the fish body is just a momentary embodiment. As far-out as this may sound, it is the very opposite of wu wu supernaturalism once experienced. That’s mainly because the subjective/spiritual/experiential realm is not simply a qualitative phenomenon or sum of geysering quale. It is not only more than its parts (quale), it is not an "it" or a part at all.

The main difference is that mind is not a static, quantifiable thing, but a process. This changes everything, IMO, and the results are nothing one can ever have imagined at the outset – sort of like going up on a big wall that never ends.

Largo, sorry about that - the 'god' comment tacked on the end was a somewhat feeble attempt at humor, not a statement that I thought the point of meditation is a content exchange of some sort. I would, however, disagree on the idea of flow states as 'content' however. And we'll probably also have to agree to disagree on your characterization of meditative states vis-a-vis the 'subjective/spiritual/experiential realm'. The distinction being you seem to be expressing a belief in a subjective [non-qualian] background 'ether' in which quale arise that one can become 'aware' of and 'experience' (without quale?) - please correct that notion if it is wrong.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Oct 26, 2012 - 09:30am PT
Largo, sorry about that - the 'god' comment tacked on the end was a somewhat feeble attempt at humor, not at statement that I thought the point of meditation is a content exchange of some sort. I would, however, disagree on the idea of flow states as 'content' however. And we'll probably also have to agree to disagree on your characterization of meditative states vis-a-vis the 'subjective/spiritual/experiential realm'. The distinction being you seem to be expressing a belief in a subjective [non-qualian] background 'ether' in which quale arise that one can become 'aware' of and 'experience' (without quale?) - please correct that notion if it is wrong.


None of my honest comments - when I'm not flaming or screwing around - are based on "beliefs," feelings, and so forth.

Flow states, or any states are considered content is so far as they are qualitatively different than, say, depressive or obsessive states. That is, a state is a brain created phenomenon and phenomenons are in this sense content because they too come and go, morph into this and that, and if we have a preference with one over the other, we cling, and then suffer because we can't get back there. So called spiritual states are the biggest traps because people want to get in them and stay there - we can easily see why.

"You seem to be expressing a belief in a subjective [non-qualian] background 'ether' in which quale arise that one can become 'aware' of and 'experience' (without quale?) - please correct that notion if it is wrong."

It is very doubtful that anyone with much experience doing eyes open meditation will agree with the notions that A) the idea of "emptiness" or "no-mind" is subjective, and B) that it has anything to do with a belief.

I'd also point out that your reference to "ether" is simply your mind trying to quantify the empty, no-thing background in which all quale arise.
But there will always be figure and ground, foreground and background, something and no-thing. It was Less Fehmi formally of the Brain Center at UCLA that showed we can have the same intimate connecting with nothing as we can with things - and that's when life catches fire.

It is interesting to take a quick peek at the medieval science notion of "aether." They were actually onto something, but stumbled in trying to make no-thing into a quality (ether). In Homeric Greek, ether meant "pure, fresh air" or "clear sky," basically the essence where the gods lived and which they breathed. Plato took it further and in the Timaeus cooked up the idea of ether being "that which God used in the delineation of the universe." Aristotle included ether in the system of the classical elements of Ionian philosophy as the "fifth element" (the quintessence), on the principle that the four terrestrial elements were subject to change while no change had been observed in the celestial regions.

"Mind" doesn't change because it is unborn and is not a thing with qualities (subjective); quale changes moment to moment.

JL
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2012 - 09:47am PT
Isn't that what they were looking for with that atom smasher in Cern - a fuzzy feeling? Isn't that the goal of science and spiritual practices, or is the statement disingenuous and juvenile?

JL

No, they were not looking for a warm fuzzy feeling at CERN
Is that your understanding of how the CERN detectors work?
If so, your claim is disingenuous and juvenile
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Oct 26, 2012 - 10:03am PT

A miracle is sometimes thought of as a perceptible interruption of the laws of nature. Others suggest that God may work with the laws of nature to perform what people see as miracles.[1] Some theologians say that, with divine providence, God regularly works through created nature yet is free to work without, above, or against it as well.[2]

Supernatural acts

A miracle is a phenomenon not fully explained by known laws of nature, or an act by some supernatural entity or unknown, outside force. Some scientist-theologians suggest that miracles are not violations of the laws of nature but "exploration of a new regime of physical experience".[citation needed]

Jus Look'in
BB
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2012 - 10:09am PT
BB
As far as science is concerned
A miracle by God or any spirit, has never happened
Not a single miracle ever.
splitter

Trad climber
Cali Hodad, surfing the galactic plane
Oct 26, 2012 - 10:09am PT
Malmute - Have any of you believers in heaven considered how your going to enjoy everlasting life without bodies?

We don't have to wonder/consider it, because it is described throughout the Bible.

FWIW ... "Believers" are going to have/be given new resurection bodies, just like JC had. He also ate food. You obviously haven't studied/read the Bible at any length/depth. As a matter of fact, "believers" are going to return with JC and reign with Him here on earth for 1,000 years (The Millennium). And, as you may (or may not) have heard/read, if He doesn't intervene at Armageddon mankind will annihilate itself (made possible by a lil' scientific discovery involving nuclear fission/fusion). Some will survive Armageddon and repopulate much of the earth. Also, unbelievers will also be resurrected at that time for the Great White Throne judgement.

In other words, they ("believers") will not be floating around on a cloud with a harp, etc, somewhere (as you suggest).
MH2

climber
Oct 26, 2012 - 10:13am PT
healyje,

A journey into the mind of a leafcutter ant:

http://hootingyard.org/archives/10404
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Oct 26, 2012 - 10:14am PT
Some scientist-theologians


a mutually exclusive construct.

the explanations you present are what are known as ideas or notions. In other words the notion that at one time the sun was thought to revolve around the earth was a miracle, until it was proven that in fact it was no such thing. It was somebodies stupid idea.

When you or any of your brethren come up with a truly compelling theory, materially proven or otherwise, please get back to us.

Now that will be a miracle!
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Oct 26, 2012 - 10:30am PT
Also, unbelievers will also be resurrected at that time for the Great White Throne judgement.

I'm pretty sure that was Beckey and Rowell. Is that in dispute? Or is it to be disallowed due to use of drugs?
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2012 - 10:47am PT
"Believers" are going to have/be given new resurection bodies, just like JC had. He also ate food. You obviously haven't studied/read the Bible at any length/depth. As a matter of fact, "believers" are going to return with JC and reign with Him here on earth for 1,000 years

OH, Yea, Santa is coming

and when I die, I get a new resurection Body, and can eat food, and have sex.
Are there rocks to climb?
Maybe like a great new bouldering areas of 100s of new problems!!!

And Largo is giving me grief for what I post, I guess he is just harder on the Materialists here for some reason.
Messages 10361 - 10380 of total 22779 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