Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 15681 - 15700 of total 22722 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
Aug 7, 2013 - 12:33am PT
^^^^^

Well, I thought so, but you can never be sure about communication. Very iffy stuff--communication.

And, I liked your post 'bout Nutjob's, BB.
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Aug 7, 2013 - 06:25am PT
Philosophers say a great deal about what is absolutely necessary for science, and it is always, so far as one can see, rather naive, and probably wrong. - Richard Feynman
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Potemkin Village
Aug 7, 2013 - 09:27am PT


Steven Pinker, spot on again...
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114127/science-not-enemy-humanities
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
And every fool knows, a dog needs a home, and...
Aug 7, 2013 - 10:06am PT
There is no comfort in infinity. There is no solace in outer space. There is no majesty in being an infinitesimal bit of a giant spinning machine we call the universe. There is nothing personal in random death.

So if religion is bunk and these mental play games discussed here are simple delusions of emotion and recursive thinking, to where do we turn for comfort, solace, majesty and personal connection? What if we can't summon those things from internal resources?

Answer me that....

I've long held the belief (lol) that the magic of religion is not held within the tapestry of the creation stories. I don't think the 'sticky' part of religion is the mores and parables. No.

I think the sticky part of religion is also the strongest - the personal-emotional connection each person builds to the 'congregation' and a church. How do you dislodge loyalty earned in dark times? WHY would you seek to denigrate it or destroy that bond? Why?

At the most fundamental level of personal freedom, why is it any of your businesses? Keep in mind please I am talking about individual choice to hold and keep a religious belief, in a manner consistent with the laws of the land.

DMT
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Potemkin Village
Aug 7, 2013 - 10:23am PT
Nutjob,

dmt poses some challenging, thought-provoking questions for this brave new world beyond "traditional forms" - care to take a stab at it?
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Potemkin Village
Aug 7, 2013 - 10:27am PT
In the meantime, I'll post this "super-normal stimulus" -
photo not found
Missing photo ID#314861

It's ripped from a TED Dennett lecture. ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzN-uIVkfjg
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Aug 7, 2013 - 12:28pm PT
Jingy,

What you jotted out there is sound advice for the cave man, who's first task was to stay alive. But even he had moments on the sea shore when he looked out at the horizon, beyond his last thought, and sensed something MORE.

Put differently, once you secure your cave, you start looking for things to put in it, to make it more comfortable, more homey, more artistic, more better. It's called quality of life.

The way you have it, grade school should be a series of classes on hand to hand, farming, and other practical concerns. Where you might have it slightly wrong is in believing practical concerns are the sole valid provence of man, and that anything not hooked directly to survival is impractical and needless.

JL
MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
Aug 7, 2013 - 12:34pm PT
Community seems to be what DMT is honoring, HFCS, however one comes to it--be it religion or otherwise. I see no "brave new world beyond traditional forms."

You're trolling and setting up an ambush.

Pinker's essay is the same as it ever is (SOS).

As for your cartoon, clever, but it doesn't make sense. You need to read a bit more closely, my friend. "Mystery" cannot, by its very nature, be explained. Get it? If you take that panel out of the cartoon, it loses its meaning and its comedic content. Rhetorically, it's an example of a sleight-of-hand. Mystery means, can't explain it.

What is it that you think you can explain once and for all? What can you get to the bottom of without equivocation, without uncertainty, without ambiguity, incontrovertibly, incorrigibly?
MH2

climber
Aug 7, 2013 - 12:39pm PT
What is it that you think you can explain once and for all? What can you get to the bottom of without equivocation, without uncertainty, without ambiguity, incontrovertibly, incorrigibly?



Ask a philosopher.

What constitutes an explanation?

The Pythagoreans went over this ground long ago.

Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Aug 7, 2013 - 02:12pm PT
Largo says:

"The amazing ability to deflect answering a question, rather than to frankly and honestly admit that you don't know, is astonishing.

Dear Marlow. Eliminating fancy footwork here: Kindly describe the particulars of your experiential process. NOT the particularts of the content (the qualia), but rather, the particular aspects of your subjective PROCESS that you notice. Your responses suggest that my lack of clarity in asking the qustion makes answering it impilssible. Surely that makes it clear to a three-year old.

Now lets see who does the dancing, because one thing is for sure - none of you punters will take an honest crack at the question. How do you honestly hold down a job in Norg if you cannot even addres a simple inquiry? What about the question fries your circuits?"

Answer:

Upon "Kindly describe the particulars of your experiential process":

By changing your words to "the particulars of the experiental process", you made your statement closer to being possible to understand. But what "particulars" of the process? The flow? The steps of the flow? The connections between the steps? The characteristics of each step? The characteristics of the connections between the steps?

You're still an oracle. And unclear writing is the same as unclear thinking.

There is no need to speculate about the particulars of the process. Science will show us the process - someone dedicating themselves to study the subject with seriousness and integrity using the available scientific methods.

Speculation has in this instance no meaning to me and you are not able to force meaning upon me. Speculation in this instance clearly has no meaning to my 1st person non-discursive mind.

Usually when you ask for something you want no-thing, so let me give you something and see where that leads.

Let me take an example, a story, from my former life:

I'm standing by a river. It's late at night. I'm fishing. I've been walking along the river for a many hours. The last hour I haven't caught a fish. Darkness is approaching. Colours are fading around me. Mist is starting to spread down the river. I can feel a cold breeze softly touching my cheek. The humming sound from the river is growing deeper. I'm standing in some kind of enthrallment. I'm filled with energy, connected, yet calm. I can sense, I can feel, all of this, and still not, since there is no sense of a separate I. The river flows and the river flows in me. I am the river.

Sensing, thinking and feeling is at play in me, but they are not separate entities, they are part of the same flow, aspects of the same flow.

That's some bleak after-thoughts. Poetically spoken. End of story.

There's discursive wisdom and there's discursive non-sense. Choose your way. You have not chosen wisely till now and short is the little time that remains of your life (in the age of the NSA I will have to add that this is not a threat, it's taken from Marcus Aurelius)

If you want to Largo, you can now let the hunger of your discursively driven mind ramble on...

Base

It's obvious even to a newborn goat that Largo is a sack full of third person discursive content, 1% of which gives sense and 99% of which is either non-sense or repetition.


PS: If anybody think I'm being mean to Largo, think one more time...
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Aug 7, 2013 - 02:12pm PT
Ask a philosopher.
---


Epistomology says one thing. What do YOU say?

JL
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Aug 7, 2013 - 02:21pm PT
There is no need to speculate about the particulars of the process. Science will show us the process - someone dedicating themselves to study the subject with seriousness and integrity using the available scientific methods.


I would just point out to you that once again you have avoided venturing into the first person and defaulted out to the third person. Scinece, or the third person, will tell us much about third person issues, but will tell us notinig about 1st person because it is not addressing that realm, rather objective processing.

Once more, what makes you think that forays into the first person perforce involve "speculation?" What experiences have you had that convince you first person expeditions are merely speculative, and that there is "no need" to go there?

You have, dearest Marlow, just blown off the very life that you lead in favour of scientific inquiry about objective functioning.

At the bottom of what you are doing is the illusion that 1st and 3rd person inquiries are the same, or at any rate, 3rd person inquiries can answer all questions about human experience itself.

Short answer: the reason to ply 1st person waters is to find out how your consciousness works from the inside. Simple as that. No need to be frightened. What is lacking here is an honest answer: I don't have any idea how that might work.

What you described on the riverside was a common phenomenon to beginning meditators - the momentary vanishing of the witness. There is wittnessing, but the witness, as a tangible, separate "I," is gone. You are simply there, with no skin boundary so to speak.

You asked, where do you start on the internal investigation? I take this to be an honest question. Start where I suggested starting. Simply notice how your awareness settles on one thing at the exclusion of other things. No speculating here. I am talking about the most tangible thing you have at your immediate disposal: Your actual concsious process. Can you see that much? How your awarenss narrows down to pay attention to a word on the screen and not your car in the driveway.

That's a start. With someone so stubborn, LOL, we must proceed slowly lest we get lost in the discursive tango and you scrambling back to the 3rd person like a man afreaid of the dark.

JL
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Aug 7, 2013 - 02:27pm PT
I'm not talking rigid science, but for sure I'm talking about the use of cognition and method. And for sure there is both cognition and method in parts of zen, even if they might be in denial...

Don't be afraid you say. We've been through this game of your's before.

You first. Be the master you want to be...

Or is the wanna-be master afraid...
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Aug 7, 2013 - 02:47pm PT
You first. Be the master you want to be...


Marlow, I just laid out there for you in plain Englih the first task, adn it involves both method and cognition. But first you have to intake a little from the 1st person, look at your actual life, and notice how your awareness organizes what you pay attention to.

Again, when you decide to pay attention to something - the road, the dog barking, the sandwich in your hand, can you notice that your awareness narrows to the "thing" in mind. Don't worry about no-thing. That's ages away. Just observe and verify for yourself how your awarenesss telescopes in and out on whatever we have decided to pay attention to, at the exclusion of most everything else.

Put differently - If you ever play around with photoshot or some other graphic program, there is a "lasso" function. That is, if you have a photo of a beach and you want to work on the girl laying on the towel, you "lasso" the girl from the rest of the stuff in the photo - throwing a "rope" around her, so to speak, isolating her out of the total beach scene so you can work on her exclusively.

Attention works much the same way. We lasso whatever we want to pay attention to and evaluate.

Can you see for yourself how you do this. It is a process common to all human beings tied to what is called the "orienting response." Every animal with a nervous system does the same.

JL

Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Aug 7, 2013 - 02:52pm PT
You're still in the third person discursive mode Largo. I expected a better example... If that's where you are, you're not yet at the stage of a motivated novice.

Notice how you're talking about the "you" all the time - "Das Man"...

Examples:
 you have to
 what you pay attention to.
 when you decide to pay attention to something
 can you notice that your awareness narrows to the "thing" in mind
 verify for yourself how your awarenesss telescopes in and out
 If you ever play around with photoshot
 if you have a photo of a beach and you want to work on the girl
 so you can work on her exclusively.
 We lasso whatever we want to pay attention to and evaluate.
 Can you see for yourself how you do this.
MH2

climber
Aug 7, 2013 - 03:12pm PT

Kindly describe the particulars of your experiential process. NOT the particularts of the content (the qualia), but rather, the particular aspects of your subjective PROCESS that you notice.





MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
Aug 7, 2013 - 03:12pm PT
Ask a philosopher.

"Philosophy is not a theory but an activity" (Wittgenstein)

"Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of Nature. And it is because in the last analysis we ourselves are a part of the mystery we are trying to solve" (Planck)

"The mystical is not how the world is, but that it is" (Wittgenstein, again)

What constitutes an explanation?

My point is that there are no final explanations. There are no answers. Even the questions disappear when you sit with them long enough. They just vanish.

Any honest, systematic, direct searching that one does only tends to de-program the programming that started when one was first born. The learning is unlearning the learning. Enlightenment (sic) is untruth-unrealization. That's the spiritual process, metaphorically speaking, and it's unfortunate that it's so clogged with BS and tripe everywhere. 99% of it is pure sh*t.

I blame no one for doubting what is right in front of their face. That includes delusion, which is reality just like the Truth is (paradox).

The riddle of life is that life and the universe appear to be mysteries by all accounts--save one. That one is the same one some of us remember when we were the smallest of children: that we were simply consciousness, and the only consciousness at that. Since then, it's been a bloody conspiracy of biblical proportions to have us think differently. They won.

I have no theories, no beliefs, no agenda here. We're just talking, and there's nothing substantive about any of it. We might as well be moving chairs around on the Titanic. If you're really interested in any of this, you might consider looking at it from No Viewpoint. That's what Largo is attempting to cajole you into, I think. In other words, jump off the ship. It's not going anywhere, anyway.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Aug 7, 2013 - 03:28pm PT
Largo - Point taken. Only, my perspective is, as stated, from a starting point. Once the survival question is resolved, then everything else would be those other things (making pretty, making comfy).

Put another way, is it necessary for our caveman to ponder his existance? Or would his time be better spent on the survival.
Would it be wise to ponder MikeL's list of things that are "important" for mankind, or not?

Just wondering outloud, becuase as long as we all understand that all the talk about higher experiences, higher planes, higher religious events, existential anything does nothing to further mankind (except in regard to the individual which applys little to anyone else but them) then its kind of pointless to think on these things.

Don't ge tme wrong, these are interesting things to consider for arguement... but moves us no closer to a common understanding of what is.

MikeL - More later, thanks
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Aug 7, 2013 - 03:55pm PT
You're still in the third person discursive mode Largo. I expected a better example... If that's where you are, you're not yet at the stage of a motivated novice.


Marlow, you simply cannot follow directions. You have demonstrated a total inability to do even the simpliest task, and instead keep harping on the method. The entire thng could be made clear to you if you could just go this first step and follow it out. But instead you keep harping on points you don't understnad, but lack the confidence to actually admit.

As I have said, and which you apparently don't bother to read, we get to the non-discursive by way of the discusive. This is the first step. Seeing how the discursive actually works, and discursively and methodically following a set progression.

So try it once more. I am using "you" langurage beause I am, at your request or your challenge, breaking this down for "you," so you can verify it for yourself.

So we start very simply WITH THE DISCURSIVE, and how it is called to bear. Nothing fancy. Nothing amporphous. Just some simple observations of your own internal process.

Can you get your head off the means of delivery and focus on the simple question: How your awareness isolates out one thing from all else?

I am certain that you can do this, Marlow. You are acually doing it already, we just need to bring your awareness to it.

Then we can forge on. But this is where we must start. This is the beginning stage. You can't even think of moving to deeper issues till you get straight about how you pay attention, and the actual perceptual mechanics of it in purly discursive terms. That's the task. Dig it. It's straight 4/4.

And just so you might get clear on this: Writing, communicating verbally IS a third person discursive exercise. If your were working on a koan and were here, I could communicate with you differently but we're just getting started so there's time.


JL
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Aug 7, 2013 - 04:22pm PT
Largo

Don't get stuck with Marlow. Marlow is not important. He is only balancing you out...or giving you balance...when you're too drunk on yourself...and write like a drunken sailor... inbetween... well rather often... Lol...
Messages 15681 - 15700 of total 22722 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 Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews