Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 13561 - 13580 of total 22787 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Mar 12, 2013 - 05:32pm PT
Rejecting medicine - that's the Christian Scientists. NOT to be confused with Scientologists. Then you have the quaint Amish. They're just anti science, or at least modern science. Riding horses and buggies and limiting their technologies to pre-industrial revolution, for whatever reason. They can sew a mighty quilt, but where did they get that sewing needle anyway? Did they make it? No of course not, they just bought it at Walmart like everyone else. Those guys set a standard in the Supreme Court for child-abuse. Their idea was that God intended them to be farmers and their children should be working the fields at age twelve, not in school.

The Amish are obviously oddballs, but most religions make a special effort to recruit children. Doesn't a minor child, let's say a 5 year old, have any right to their own mind? It's not education, it's anti education and brainwashing. Children are so impressionable, so trusting of their parents, so malleable. Can you imagine what it would be like to grow up home-schooled by born-again parents who wanted to educate you themselves? It's child abuse for sure.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Mar 12, 2013 - 05:35pm PT
Jan,

You just figured out that nobody is changing their minds? Ha ha.

It is good company for the most part, and all of the prodding of each other does force us to actually explain why we believe things.

I guess that is it.

Why DO some people believe things?

Seriously. You name it and somebody believes it. What seems obvious and silly to one person is the cherished belief of others.

I guess that if I am going to actually give some advice, it is that before you devote your life and "soul" to something, try to make sure you are right, and if you aren't right, make sure that it helps others. That last part is the hard one.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Mar 12, 2013 - 06:32pm PT
You know, the astonishing thing about this thread is that someone can know nothing at all about something and still make the wonkiest statements or declarations. I can say till I'm blue in the face that what I'm talking about has nothing to do with beliefs or feelings but people like BASE (no offense intended BASE), who apparently can't read English, continually come back with accusations that the nature of my experience is a limbic (emotional) reaction that leads me to believe in this or that.

What's the value of continually reminded BASE and others that this is in fact an attempt by their rational minds to rope the conversation back onto familiar ground, as opposed to steeping out of the methodology from which they gain no spiritual insight at all - trying to think your way past yourself (conditioning). Never will it work.

The reason I brought up the recovery movement was NOT to laud AA or any other 12 Step movement, but to use that cross section (millions) to demonstrate that those who have approached spiritual matters seeking data and info run into a dead end. Every last time. If you take nothing else away from the millions who have struggled with these issues, take that. Seeking standard data in that realm is like going to the hardware store for milk. It simply ain't there.

What's more, ANY human organization can be viewed in a dysfunctional light because humans are involved. But several things are certain about AA and all the recovery movements.

First, those relying on will power and "manning up" are always the ones who go back to the sauce. Runaway will power is the problem in the first place. Attempts to marshall your inner whatever are bound to fail. Once more, mentalizing is hugely problematic in this regards. "Shut up and do the work." That is how it's done.

Second, for those who have been in the recovery movement for a long time, they will usually put the recovery rate of all addicts (sex, substances, gambling, rage, over thinking, obsessions, etc.) and alcoholics at around 5% regardless of the program.

However, and this is key, of those who actually do the program to the letter, with a sponsor or advisor, the rate of failure or "going out" approaches zero. The problem is that only around 5% of all commers actually do the work. Spirituality is a grueling process and few have the discipline and fortitude to and mental flexibility to give up their standard thinking patterns and go toward the unknown on little or no data. It's a bad bet by any measure, and like wall climbing, few find it to their liking.

You must notice the spectacular resistance of all those evaluating brains out there demanding proofs and data and so forth in this regards. The hard part to accept is that there is no "I" attached to the arguments, it's virtually mechanical and unconscious arguing from the rational mind.

As mentioned ad nauseum, if you are pleased with the progress you have made in spiritual concerns using this approach, more power to you, but to blame the spiritual (NOT religious) for any circling is to sell yourself short.

What was earlier mentioned about Being and Nothingness is worth reviewing. The realm of being is boundless, and trying to reason your way through this terrain is like trying to ice climb in EBs. You simply have the wrong approach, but again, if you're pleased with your success, have at it. We call that "a will gone riot."

JL
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Potemkin Village
Mar 12, 2013 - 06:38pm PT
the astonishing thing about this thread is that someone can know nothing at all about something and still make the wonkiest statements or declarations.

This is true.

Now compare this thread to this other one:

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1a67x4/i_am_steve_pinker_a_cognitive_psychologist_at/

My goodness, when will the internet cease to impress!

IAmA - How cool! Largo and Werner should start such a thread. They will have to present their credentials of course. :)
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 12, 2013 - 06:45pm PT
John Long

in a word, I don't get "it"

I have read every post of yours on this thread and I still don't know just exactly what is the spirituality you refer to, that you claim, infer, that you yourself are knowledgable of and have experienced.

I have asked you twice to please give a specific explanation that a novice like me can understand just what I am missing, seriously it must be a pretty big deal given all the emphasis on this thread

I have not been in the mocking you corner but I feel like everyone else gets what you are saying, everyone else does not, or you are somehow holding back, or you are making it up as you go and there really is nothing to "it" but vaguenesses that make you seem like a knowing guru or something.......

respectfully, can you take a shot at it for me?
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Mar 12, 2013 - 07:05pm PT
Good one Corn Spirit, I am definitely on the same wavelength as Dr Pinker:

It depends on what you mean by "consciousness" -- the word can refer to accessibility of information to reflection, decision-making, and language processes in the brain (sometimes called the "easy problem of consciousness" -- a bit of a joke, because there's nothing easy about it); or it can refer to phenomenal awareness, subjectivity, the fact that it "feels like something" to be awake and aware (the so-called "hard problem of consciousness -- though a better term might be the "strange problem of consciousness). I think we're well on the way to solving the so-called easy problem -- there are neurophysiological phenomena, such as connectivity to the frontal lobes and periodic brain activity in certain frequency bands, that correlate well with accessible information, and there are good functional/evolutionary accounts (related to "blackboard" or "global workspace" computational architectures) that explain why the brain might be organized into two pools of information processing. As for the strange problem of consciousness -- whether the red that I see is the same as the red that you see; whether there could be a "zombie" that is indistinguishable from you and me but not conscious of anything; whether an upload of the state of my brain to the cloud would feel anything -- I suspect the answer is "never," since these conundra may be artifacts of human intuition. Our best science tells us that subjectivity arises from certain kinds of information-processing in the brain, but why, intuitively, that should be the case is as puzzling to us as the paradoxes of quantum mechanics, relativity, and other problems that are far from everyday intuition. [Sorry for the long answer, but that's one of the deepest questions in all of human knowledge!]
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 12, 2013 - 07:19pm PT
Credit: Dr. F.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Mar 12, 2013 - 07:57pm PT

You run out of cactus so your moving on to pineapple?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 12, 2013 - 08:12pm PT
quit bumping my important sh#t(not) off and onto a new page with those big ass cactis pics

my god, how many of them do we have to see anyway

should I post motorcycle pics to show how much I value science and beauty?

yeah, ok, its your thread, I get it
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Mar 12, 2013 - 08:28pm PT
Second, for those who have been in the recovery movement for a long time, they will usually put the recovery rate of all addicts (sex, substances, gambling, rage, over thinking, obsessions, etc.) and alcoholics at around 5% regardless of the program.

You just measured it.

edit: How did you measure it? Somebody got curious about the topic of addiction and put a lot of effort and work into understanding and treating it, you little twit. So they find ways to try to measure it. If you are curious, you are a scientist.

I have no idea how many people study addiction, but it is a lot. A LOT. I assume that you have also read a lot of it.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Mar 12, 2013 - 09:36pm PT
I have read every post of yours on this thread and I still don't know just exactly what is the spirituality you refer to, that you claim, infer, that you yourself are knowledgable of and have experienced.


What I think you are asking for is information that would give you some mental picture or evaluation of a religious experience that you could understand and be able to evaluate as correct or not, or that would give you some cognitive notion of some damn thing.

Let me try another angle to provide a very tangible direct experience about how powerful this stuff can be in the real world.

As many of you know, I recently took a 25 foot fall directly onto my feet and when I rolled up I saw my leg bones jutting from a fist-sized hole in my shin, maybe five inches about my ankle. I immediately knew the whole thing was out of my hands and that I couldn't control anything but my reaction. So I simply went into a being energy, watched my breathing and brought myself down to zero. The injury was so awful that people around me were throwing up and passing out. I pretty much stayed in that energy for the next 30 days and through five surgeries. I can honestly say that with one brief lapse I was never scared.

People who witnessed this said that I was a real man and a stud for not panicking. Or that I used some fancy Zen detachment exercise or relaxation gig and it really worked - but in fact this is to totally miss what happened.

I am no more courageous or manly than anyone on this thread and I never have been. That's a plain fact. I just know from a lot of years of experience that there is a timeless, unborn "being" energy that we can all access and it has nothing to do with beliefs, relaxation, or states. It is the Pure Land equally in this world and it is beyond it. It is every bit as real as a compound fracture. And I know that from direct experience.

Can I quantify or measure what this is, so you too can know it simply by way of a description. Not a chance. I just use this example to underscore the fact that while there certainly are profound insights to a spiritual practice, there is also a HUGE physical/material component and unless you can manifest the practice in the most traumatic times your practice is nothing more than a bunch of ideas and theories and data meaning jack sh#t in the real world.

JL

Rehabing, one-foot/leg rowing will burn you to ashes.
Rehabing, one-foot/leg rowing will burn you to ashes.
Credit: Largo
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Mar 12, 2013 - 09:51pm PT
Largo:
Despite the fact that your injured leg is not getting as much of a workout , have you noticed the muscle tone is probably greater than it would be otherwise, or that the general muscle tone is improving?
Pro body builders and rehab people have noticed for years that even when an injured limb is not intensely worked there is nonetheless a metabolic and anabolic spillover effect provided the uninjured limb is worked intensely.
MH2

climber
Mar 12, 2013 - 10:35pm PT
JL speaks well for himself but that doesn't keep others of us from chipping in.

A lot has been written on philosophy since Plato and his dialogues, but Plato's main subject Socrates did not write things down. A present-day author says that Socrates treated ideas as organic things that could grow in a person's mind, but which would wither and die if planted in the sterile desert of words. Socrates' method was to ask other people questions, to not present himself as an authority, and to help other people discover answers starting from what they already knew.

JL doesn't operate along Socratic lines, the audience here doesn't seem motivated to learn that way, and the written word may not be sufficient. However, if you went and talked to JL so that you could pick up his non-verbal language and he yours, I bet you would have a much better sense of what he is trying to get at.

(Norton)
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Mar 12, 2013 - 10:54pm PT
Socrates' method was to ask other people questions, to not present himself as an authority, and to help other people discover answers starting from what they already knew.

Are you suggesting here that the Socratic method retains an underlying formative influence in current status quo ways of thinking?
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Mar 12, 2013 - 11:33pm PT
Damn! Thats the biggest yo yo I've ever seen.

I mean, thats what I see. Thats what everyone else sees......... right?
Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
Mar 13, 2013 - 12:31am PT
Ed, you weren't paying attention to my sample size. I'm not defending 86% of the world, I'm defending religious moderation on this thread. Anthropologists always work in small groups. If you want numbers and stats, call a sociologist. They're more likely to agree with the secular folks anyway.

:)
WBraun

climber
Mar 13, 2013 - 08:50am PT
I will still defend the material scientific progress.

I always have although due to misunderstand it did not "look" like that.

But that was never true.

Our material body still needs the physical science.

The the East and West, they should cooperate.

For the East, there cannot be a different physical science.

The same science can be taught in the East and the West.

Thus any scientific knowledge, it does not depend on East and West ......
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Mar 13, 2013 - 11:45am PT
I'm embarassed as well...

Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Mar 13, 2013 - 12:02pm PT
Socrates' method was to ask other people questions, to not present himself as an authority, and to help other people discover answers starting from what they already knew.


Not so sure this definition stands up to a close reading on Socrates. The rap against him when I was studying philosophy was that he wasn't asking honest questions, rather questions that he believed he knew the correct answer to in order to corner a person in their falsely reasoned position. And in the process, Socrates provided little to no firm ground for people to stand on with a raft of equivocal "answers."

Listening to Socrates in, say, the Phaedo, however, Socrates asserts that the soul is immortal, and the philosopher should spend his life training it to detach itself from the needs of the body. then comes the Argument from Opposites. Everything, he says, comes to be from out of its opposite.
Death is the opposite of life, and so living things come to be out of dead things and vice versa. This implies that there is a perpetual cycle of life and death, cha cha cha.

Next comes the Theory of Recollection. This theory suggests that all learning is a matter of recollecting what we already know. We forget much of our knowledge at birth, and can be made to recollect this knowledge through proper questioning. That we had such knowledge at birth, and could forget it, suggests that our soul existed before we were born.

The third is the Argument from Affinity. Socrates draws a distinction between those things that are immaterial, invisible, and immortal, and those things which are material, visible, and perishable. The body is of the second kind, whereas the soul is of the first kind.


Lastly, Socrates lays out his fourth argument, positing the unchanging and invisible Forms as the causes of all things in this world. All things possess what qualities they have only through participation in these Forms.
Clearly this became Plato's "forms."

We might not be following the Socratic method here but you can see we are covering much the same ground.

JL
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Mar 13, 2013 - 12:39pm PT
We might not be following the Socratic method here but you can see we are covering much the same ground.

This might be a minor point but that comment offers a good entree into what has become known as the "Socratic Problem":

The Socratic problem is a rat's nest of complexities arising from the fact that various people wrote about Socrates whose accounts differ in crucial respects, leaving us to wonder which, if any, are accurate representations of the historical Socrates. “There is, and always will be, a ‘Socratic problem’. This is inevitable,” said Guthrie (1969, 6), looking back on a gnarled history between ancient and contemporary times that is narrated in detail by Press (1996), but barely touched on below. The difficulties are increased because all those who knew and wrote about Socrates lived before any standardization of modern categories of, or sensibilities about, what constitutes historical accuracy or poetic license.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/socrates/

Socrates ,or his method, may simply be analogous to a McCluhanesque image, that is, the philosophical/historical version of the portion of Homer Simpsons brain labeled "your ad here "
Credit: Ward Trotter

(By "McCluhanesque" I am referring to the point that McCluhan always made about the visual iconic image: it is low -definition , like a television image, or an impressionist painting- it invites the eye of the viewer to 'participate ' in order fill -in,or complete the image.
Socrates, or his method, i like to think of as a sort of 2000year old Rorscharch test)



Messages 13561 - 13580 of total 22787 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