BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 08:57pm PT
|
I've seen it. Obviously, you have not and never will.
SS, that's the difference between u and Christ, He hopes that Bruce will. And will. And will. And.....
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 09:00pm PT
|
I didn't say it for your benefit, BB.
JoGill, back a thousand posts or so, I used to harp on the need for very clear communication when dealing with difficult concepts. It works well for sharing ideas among scientism ridden gross materialists.
Take mathematics. It has a very well developed symbolic language that is intended to eliminate errors in communicating to other mathmeticians.
Geology has a vast vocabulary. It irritates me when people come up with words that mean the same thing, though.
Math is the perfect example of a way to communicate very clearly. The language is symbolic, but it is precise.
When writing a formal paper for publication, science papers are very clearly written. We desperately need the same ability to communicate these ideas.
I asked for three simple definitions of three words. Spirit and two derivitaves of that word. I'm not getting a concensus back. I say that with care and thought this can be done, but the onus is on the spiritual ones.
To pre-empt the inevitable attack, the language doesn't have to be super rigid and precise. Just get your horses lined up and get it together.
There are so many differing spiritual beliefs that it would be nigh impossible to do, but geez, nobody can agree what spiritualism is. At least gross materialists can share ideas readily.
This isn't impossible. I remember watching a PBS show or short series on the early new testament in terms of who wrote what and when, and it was all theologians discussing it. It was great. I understood the whole thing, but they were highly educated theologians, and Christians to boot. I really enjoyed it.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 09:03pm PT
|
Again, I think John's point is it isn't a matter of language and that, if anything, language just gets in the way.
|
|
Psilocyborg
climber
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 09:03pm PT
|
No one needs anything explained to them. It is all right there. If you truely want to follow the thread of your spirit to the scource you just need to open yourself to the experience.
I find psychedelic chemicals to do the trick with ease, when performed in silent darkness. You dont need an old book, you dont need years of perfecting meditation techniques, you just need an afternoon alone, a sufficiant dose, and an inquiering mind.
I havnt traveled those realms for almost 20 years. I just dont need to. But it is easily and freely accessable. What do you have to lose?
Again, it is my opinion that materialist are right in that they live in this world now, as that is why we are here. Spiritualists are right because it is as real as it is unreal. Fundamentalists are just stupid and need a new hobby :)
|
|
Bruce Kay
Gym climber
BC
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 09:27pm PT
|
Lets put it this way.... My judgement is not qualified by certainty. It can be swayed if compelled to do so. Can your judgement be swayed or is it locked in by certainty?
Let me repeat this question as I notice that both Spider and Blue don't seem too keen on it.
In my mind the "certainty" of belief, be it secular, spiritual, scientific ( a contradiction in terms) or whatever is the poison in the broth. I fail to understand the requirement for certainty other than to avoid at all cost the possibility of being wrong about ones understanding of the nature of reality.
This is the antithesis of the process of knowledge. If a person is certain, the need to learn is moot.
Certainty seems more and more like a pact with the devil if you ask me.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 09:32pm PT
|
So it's not really a matter of translation unless John is prepared to translate 'infinite qualities' for us which, thousands of post later, he's made it clear he isn't going to do and that it would defeat the whole purpose even if he could.
Let's see if I have this straight. When Largo writes his script describing something other worldly, he counts it as a successful communication if saying those words reproduces in him a certain feeling. And if he tries harder to describe it better, it destroys his feeling.
Good grief. Even within one individual our states change sufficiently that one time Largo's words may "work" for him, but another time he has to change them. Never mind the chasm between different individuals.
This is not a language for communication between people any more than is
"Hmmmmmmmmmmm".
And it has taken thousands of posts to get even this communication through???????????????????
My gosh!
Some time ago I advanced what I thought was a substantive hypothesis as regards consciousness.
Survival is the basis upon which evolution as a concept is founded and upon which life itself is founded. Survival means that life will continue past the present moment and on to a subsequent moment. The expectation that there will be a subsequent moment has to be embedded in our neurological and other functions at very deep levels. If we would look to see how this is embedded within us I think we might be on the path to understand consciousness.
As an example consider that the firing of a neuron dissipates energy. If there is to be the potential for a subsequent firing new energy has to be made available. So on a neurological level the processes for generating that energy are put in play by the organism's expectation there may be need for another firing. Indeed our survival quite probably has revolved around evolution of a chemistry allowing that delay to be minimized.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 09:43pm PT
|
jstan: ...Largo's words...
I think over many thousands of posts I've heard less than a dozen descriptive words from Largo which have attempted to convey anything about his 'proposition' (and I quote that only because I need some kind of nounish placeholder in lieu of no-thing-ness).
|
|
Malemute
Ice climber
the ghost
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 10:11pm PT
|
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 11:06pm PT
|
If a person is certain, the need to learn is moot.
This is never true.
Both material and spiritual have infinite knowledge to learn.
Both originate from the same source ......
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 11:12pm PT
|
i have apologized before if i offended go-G, and i apologize again (and wishing i knew who he is behind the odd avatar name)
my intention was to hear directly from him, rather than endless recitation of Biblical scriptures
i started out being fascinated by this thread, and very much appreciate some people who have posted very thoughtful descriptions of their knowledge and understanding, especially Ed, Jan, Largo, wbraun, jogill, Base, jstan, and others
i don't want to bore people by continued attempts to express my own level of understanding
however this discussion grows quite tiresome, not from any lack of intelligence or education, but because of constant bickering between entrenched myopic positions
the bottom line is reinforcing my own conviction that we don't know much and have much to learn
if this thread is going to progress in any worthwhile fashion, everyone is going to have to abandon their foxholes on the front lines and wander around together in no-mans-land
Certainty seems more and more like a pact with the devil if you ask me.
yes
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 11:39pm PT
|
I agree, it's unfortunate go-b would never come out from behind the bible and actually speak his own mind.
jstan: As an example consider that the firing of a neuron dissipates energy. If there is to be the potential for a subsequent firing new energy has to be made available. So on a neurological level the processes for generating that energy are put in play by the organism's expectation there may be need for another firing. Indeed our survival quite probably has revolved around evolution of a chemistry allowing that delay to be minimized.
The origin of single cell life is still a complete mystery, but I find the leap to multicellular organisms and the evolution of stem cells to be equally fascinating. I agree there has to be an embedded concept of time for any of an number of cellular functions - genetic transcription and the function of RNA polymerase fundamental among them.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 12:34am PT
|
Thanks everyone for your replies. I think I understand better now the frustrations of the left brain science types. And I think they have two valid complaints.
1. The spiritually oriented people have no common vocabulary to discuss their ideas, a legacy I think from the dominance until recently, of religion over spirituality and the vast range of local interpretations.
2. It is genuinely difficult to express experiences of the right brain in any form of language other than symbolic. Normally our common language from the right brain is art or music or in our case on ST, the common pursuit of climbing.
Using the language analogy, trying to translate what the right brain understands is very much like trying to translate Chinese or Tibetan literally. Take the famous first sentence everyone is taught in Mandarin. Ma ma ma ma? To most it sounds like nonsense syllables and confusion only grows when the translation is supplied, "Why is the woman beating the horse?". To contemplate that, is to understand that there are vast differences in the way languages and cultures are constructed.
Now one can argue that English is more precise and logical than Chinese and also that Chinese is more intuitive and economical and lends itself better to word games. They each have their respective strengths and weaknesses and age old cultures behind them. Both seek to put forth their view. The West wants China to be more scientific, legalistic, and democratic while China is funding Chinese language schools all over the globe to explain its unique and ancient culture. Increasingly they need each other.
So too it is I believe, with the left and right brains, the material vs. the subjective, facts vs. insights, logic vs emotion and beauty. Understanding the spiritual is just further along the continuum of the right brain, but the biggest barrier seems to be explaining how to access the right brain in the first place and why anyone would want to.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 01:16am PT
|
Jan: Understanding the spiritual is just further along the continuum of the right brain, but the biggest barrier seems to be explaining how to access the right brain in the first place and why anyone would want to.
One of the benefits of this thread for me has been learning much more about philosophy. My exposure to it before was through compsci and was more on the logic side of things. I didn't realize quite how far such formal thinking stretched in the direction of religion. When you look at the myriad forms of idealism alone and topics such as qualia and emergence you can see attempts to vocalize some of what you construe as 'right brain', but then they appear to come up short and punt which is inherently the problem, particularly the qualia bits. How do you describe 'red[ness]' to someone who is blind or colorblind? What is there to really say about experiencing 'red[ness]' - and why would you need to?
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 01:43am PT
|
material vs. the subjective, facts vs. insights, logic vs emotion and beauty
Here is where I need one of those face palm pics of Capt. Picard that everyone throws up on the political threads.
Sorry, Jan. You seem like a nice person. None of those "vs" qualities are even remotely exclusive of one another.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 02:38am PT
|
Base-
Sorry if I implied they were. Jogill thought I did too a while back. I really do believe that we need to use both sides of our brain whether we think in terms of the spiritual or not. Obviously a lot of people on this thread are pretty good at both. Our society however, rewards left brain pursuits for the most part so we get guys like Dr. F. who obviously uses his right brain to arrange those cacti in the right colors of pots with the right color of gravel, in either symmetrical or asymmetical plantings, at the same time that he insists if you can't measure something, it doesn't exist. My guess is that he doesn't measure all the aesthetic aspects of his cactus plantings, he just eyeballs them and goes with his gut.
This reminds me of my first Japanese flower arranging teacher. Her American students always wanted an explanation for why she did things (always improving them with a snip here and a twist there). She used to say, "I can't explain it to you, you have to feel flowers in your hara". The hara is the Japanese word for abdomen. In other words, you can't explain aesthetics, certainly not efficiently, you have to feel it in your innermost being.
It's also why I can say I have felt the presence of spiritual people even though I have often totally disagreed with their religion. (Hopefully this makes sense)?
|
|
Bruce Kay
Gym climber
BC
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 07:43am PT
|
How do you describe 'red[ness]' to someone who is blind or colorblind?
I dunno but I hope you have more success than having your kid insist that you describe how something tastes so they don't have to try it to find out!
It's also why I can say I have felt the presence of spiritual people even though I have often totally disagreed with their religion.
As have I or similar feelings such as sensing the soul leaving the body (of another, not I) that is inexplicable and profoundly riveting. But is that what I sensed or were my synapses having a little party on my dime? Beats hell out of me, which dosn't in the least seem to diminish the power of the experience due to any lack of certainty.
The certainty thing made me think of climbing on two counts. The obvious one is that if you are certain you will top out half the fun is shot right there - might as well just go open a bag of Cheeto's and see whats on the tube. The other is that topping out is only an attainment of certainty if that is all that matters, which thank god it ain't. Nor is any particular style or for that matter how you chose to climb then is seldom so certain now. Nor is it so important to quantify or record the experience as the more you do, the more it becomes compartmentalized and the less expansively infinite the personal reward, and the more backward in time you look.
In fact the quantifying and recording is mostly a means of communicating the experience.
Weren't we just talking about something like that?
I would suggest that the spiritual is merely a description of the psychological sense of wonder at the unknown elements of our world that intrigue and can even bewitch us. Religion hijacks this powerful "survival" motivator by quantifying and codifying into language for the whole purpose compartmentalizing the process / experience into a commodity of mass consumption. Given humanities tribal proclivities perhaps it is unavoidable but if we could just keep it down to a dull roar, like keeping a few topos and photos but focus on climbing forward instead of backward then the spiritual experience will find its happy place.
Fundamentalism ( certainty ) is our the achilles heel of spirituality
|
|
Dr. F.
Big Wall climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 22, 2013 - 08:32am PT
|
I call BS on this "Right Brain - Left Brain" nonsense
My old boss called me TOO Right Brained
and now Largo is telling me that I don't use my right brain, I live in the left side
one word "Malarkey"
|
|
Dr. F.
Big Wall climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 22, 2013 - 08:45am PT
|
go-b has not been banished
He is still welcome on this thread, or any other thread
All we asked was that he not "cut and paste" scripture, or scans from a book
Numerous people asked him nicely not to post it, and we all encouraged him to write his own thoughts on the subject matter that he chose.
go-b, come back, please
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 08:57am PT
|
I would suggest that the spiritual is merely a description of the psychological sense of wonder at the unknown elements of our world that intrigue and can even bewitch us.
Well in that case it is still an unknown. Why would our psychology work that way and why do some elements of our world have that effect?
Fundamentalism doesn't seem inherently bad to me, not if your fundamentals are good ones. A better thing to question, I think, is religious doctrine. When they write things down, or tell us that God caused things to be written down, we should be sure that we carefully analyze the message, if we are being asked to model our behavior on it. Largo is wise enough to realize that his experiences in out-there-ness with no thing are not going to assemble into writing despite his skill at the craft.
Nevertheless, words are important, and not just to the so-called left brain. I would claim compassion, whichever side of the brain that comes from, as motivation for not dividing people into left-brain types and right-brain types. Doing so can place barriers in the way of simply appreciating people for what they say and do. Even though such attempts to classify may start innocently, like the IQ test did, or may be obvious to casual observation, like skin color, there is a bad tendency for people to take them for more than they are worth, perhaps leading to insidious or even institutionalized discrimination.
Some day left-brain right-brain differences may become better understood and we may get to the point where we can talk about them without letting our preconceptions and prejudices get the upper hand. Until that day, what do they contribute to the discussion that could not be said otherwise? At the moment referring to them only seems to be a way of saying, "That's why you don't understand." Is that helpful?
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 08:59am PT
|
"Ma ma ma ma" is difficult to convey without tonal markings... which make visual the all important distinctions of the pronunciation for the chinese language. actually an interesting contribution to the former "reading wars" in which advocates for teaching english reading insisted that pronouncing each syllable was superior to symbol recognition. as far as I know, chinese written symbols are not read in that manner, they are recognized symbols... and the chinese seem to read just fine.
why all this concern over Largo's musings, what I've seen is that he has not proposed "an answer" to these conundrums because he hasn't one to propose, not for want of a lifetime of trying... his major criticism of the science types is that they purport to have an explanation, "SCIENCE!", but then fail to deliver the goods...
...I find this criticism apt, as science, if it is anything, is a study that makes you put your cards on the table... all your cards. To claim that science will someday explain mind and consciousness, as we currently define those phenomena is somewhat disingenuous. Far more likely is that those "problems" will be redefined in a manner more suited to scientific explanation... (which is a point that MikeL would make, though not as directly, that is, science changes the questions around to those answerable by science).
to just assume that science will explain, to believe that it will, without an ante, is simply reducing science to an "-ism", and appropriately so. One can have a scientism opinion on matters, it is important not to confuse that with science.
science is a process, and I think one that is less a discovery of and more a creation of ideas that are required to pass a very simple but stringent test, that they predict physical phenomena. To the extent that we can define things like "mind" and "consciousness" in physical terms, the science explaining them is likely... many efforts are underway.
to the extent that "mind" and "consciousness" are related to unphysical phenomena, e.g. their subjective content, it is likely that science has little or nothing to say.
my criticism of the "spiritualists" is that they often want the validity of a "physical" existence of their spiritual universe, the fact that it is subjective seems to rank it as something less than the cold hard facts of the physical universe.
the experience of living by sentient beings probably has a very rich description completely independent of the physical explanation of life and the phenomena of sentience, both of which are subjects of scientific enquiry. Many of the results of life and of sentience, are not objects which are addressable by science.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!