Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 16921 - 16940 of total 22369 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
MH2

climber
Nov 2, 2013 - 07:29pm PT
^^^^^^^ If it were a working time machine, it would have been the first patent. Before 2006.
MH2

climber
Nov 2, 2013 - 07:31pm PT
What IS religion, as you see it.


Religion as I see it is the light of the heart which grows in the presence of others and shows us that we are the same and should help one another.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 2, 2013 - 07:34pm PT
Before 2006.

The Titor patent was filed through the US patent office in 2004 and published 2006.

What IS religion, as you see it.

It's that thing that John Lennon kept putting down in his songs against putting people down.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 2, 2013 - 09:20pm PT
What IS religion, as you see it.

It's that thing that John Lennon kept putting down in his songs against putting people down.


Lennon also wrote:


don't believe in magic
I don't believe in I-Ching
I don't believe in Bible
I don't believe in tarot
I don't believe in Hitler
I don't believe in Jesus
I don't believe in Kennedy
I don't believe in Buddha
I don't believe in mantra
I don't believe in Gita
I don't believe in yoga
I don't believe in kings
I don't believe in Elvis
I don't believe in Zimmerman
I don't believe in Beatles
I just believe in me
Yoko and me
And that's reality

The dream is over
What can I say?
The dream is over
Yesterday
I was the dream weaver
But now I'm reborn
I was the Walrus
But now I'm John
And so dear friends
You just have to carry on
The dream is over


The dream can be over in many ways. One way is in a belief in nihlism. Another kind of waking up involves no such beliefs.

What does that look like?

JL
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Nov 2, 2013 - 09:40pm PT
If it were a working time machine, it would have been the first patent. Before 2006.
The Titor patent was filed through the US patent office in 2004 and published 2006.
I hope it's obvious to all that he would go back in time to file the patent.
http://www.google.com/patents/US20060073976
FortMentäl

Social climber
Albuquerque, NM
Nov 3, 2013 - 12:37am PT
One of the wonderful things about postmodernism, in comparison to typical science as it is practiced, is that postmodernism is full of fun, humor, whimsy, and wit. Other than being disdainful of what they see as dull incrementalism, postmodernists tend to be as playful as puppies--and challengers of the status-quo.

Oh, for fux sake. You can't be serious. Playful as puppies? Challengers of the Status quo? What CRACK are you on? You think post modernists are the first to say things like "all knowledge is contextual"? Or invent bogus new terms for the sole purpose of re-stating the obvious or splitting hairs? You want examples? Crack open any Google search of "criticisms of postmodern thought" and I'll let you spend the next 20 years of your life reading them all. While you're at it you could, as I did, listen to a 1987 re-broadcast of a FranceCulture interview with Derrida in which he stated that many of his ideas (or 'excercises' as he called them) had been hijacked by anyone with an axe to grind, in particular, American Academics. Even by then, he'd thought everyone had gone too far. You ever wade through Artforum from the 90's? Have a front row seat to the "Tilted Arc" debacle? And for all that effort, Postmodernism has brought us gems like these, for the cubically inclined:

On Lacan and the `Becoming-ness' of Organizations/Selves

Poststructuralist accounts of organizations understand them as flows, as verbs in process of always-becoming. Subjects who work `in' organizations are similarly always in a process of becoming. Organization and members are mutually constitutive, each enfolded within the other. The process by which each is enfolded within and constituted by the other is what is explored in this essai. Its aim is to analyse something of the becoming-ness of organizations-selves, in which the researcher-self is imbricated in this becoming-ness and must therefore be part of that which is studied. To achieve this aim I draw on Lacan's concepts: of the mirror stage, or how I am in an agonistic relationship with the other; Nachträglichkeit or the reliving of the past in the present (deferred action); and identification. I apply these concepts to an interview I, an academic, carried out with a manager, emphasizing the importance of these organizational identities in our encounter with each other. The conclusion I reach is that the organization I am `in' is at the same time `in' me: there is no inside and no outside.


What if the above was talking about physics, and you simply swapped out "measurements" for "jargon." As though in any field, a layman has a chance to simply wrangle all the top end material without special study. The person who wrote that rant never studied logic, which is basically incomprehensible without some serious buckling down. But the language and modlaities have informed computer programming from the start. I don't much care for it, but tossing it away because it has it's own jargon is something we can accuse any field of doing.

Just like ML, you have a hard time distinguishing between "data" and "jargon". A post structuralist could make a career out of your.....difficulty.
FortMentäl

Social climber
Albuquerque, NM
Nov 3, 2013 - 12:46am PT
Show me how mental rational viewpoints (and science) is making the world a better place to be.

Making the world a better place requires ethics. Don't let your ignorant hatred of reason get in the way of understanding that fact.
manemachen

Sport climber
Pinedale, Wyoming
Nov 3, 2013 - 01:14am PT
The best is posting While drinking tequila. As long as there is an IRS, you might as well join my religion- it is pretty similar to Schultz's (hogan's heroes) "I know nothing and kiss my ass..(pass the tequila-sip please..)" it ain't my job to educate anyone-and the older I get, the less I am right..
you all are smart AND funny..just wait.. we're f*#ked,- in general, as a country..time is much better spent climbing or thinking about climbing..or skiing or thinking about skiing..or horses or thinking about horses or..





manemachen

Sport climber
Pinedale, Wyoming
Nov 3, 2013 - 01:29am PT
AND P.S. I forgot until this moment, having read "The only dance there is is" while up on the ledge above the Awahanee-maybe 1973? where the Royal Arches water falls slide down the rock- (oh, please, just once more). Ram Dass's other book was "Be here Now" ..so, climbing, skiing, Horses, Sex..I finally get it..be here now..all the rest is B.S.. and from a Wyoming stand point, that means one ton in and one ton out..

yeah, baby.. pass the tequila..
jstan

climber
Nov 3, 2013 - 01:09am PT
This is Saturday.
MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
Nov 3, 2013 - 11:37am PT
^^^^^^^

Not in my reality.
MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
Nov 3, 2013 - 11:37am PT
So I guess you would say that there is no answer outside of non-answers, MikeL? For your questions?

You're probably going to think that I'm avoiding your question. I'm not. I'm trying to provide a pointer because I can't quite answer your question the way you posed it.

Here's what I end up telling my students (ethics, general management), and oftentimes they don't like it. It frustrates them.

We have a tendency in contemporary society to be ever-oriented to solutions. Let's fix this; let's fix that. But I think if you talk to experts in their fields, they will tell you that the solutions are not what should be focused upon. Solutions are practical matters. What really matters are questions. Get those wrong, and things go spinning off into total irrelevance.

(There's a systems theorist who claims solving the wrong question is "an error of the third kind." As you surely know, a type I error is an incorrect rejection of a null hypothesis, and a type II error is a failure to reject a false null hypothesis--false positives and false negatives.)

However, it's my experience from my contemplative practices that if you look at a question long enough, it tends to disappear. One comes to see that there is no real question. Things are just what they are. They are the result of causes and conditions; all things are the result of a universe in perfect balance. Nothing can be any different than what it is. There is no question about anything. When questions arise, they simply indicate a lack of understanding. When you understand that, you will find there is no reason to think about solutions, or even questions for that matter.

I understand that this will infuriate people who think there are things that need doing in the world. It's my experience and understanding today that it's best to give up on all that kind of thinking. Just find a way to be. Everything takes care of itself. You are not in control. You're in a river of karma floating down to the ocean of awareness. You're getting pushed and pulled this way and that way by all sorts of forces, and it's uncomfortable for you because you're fighting it. There is no fighting the universe. The more you struggle, the more you will cause yourself pain, others pain, and add to the conflict in the world. Just relax.

What you can do is to gently navigate life and its events in the same way you can gently navigate a crowd of people in a piazza. Learn how to go with the flow and sidestep. If you need to, stop and wait when you cannot move. It's a teeming crowd of forces, and when one avenue closes off to you, another will open. Wei-wu-wei.


FM: You can get criticisms on anything on Google. It's a playground.

I have a pretty good thought of what Lacan is saying. So did many other people I know and have read. Just because you don't get it doesn't mean it doesn't constitute a communication. You will have the same problem overhearing a language you don't know. Lacan is much more specific than Berger & Luckmann's (1967) seminal work: "The social construction of reality." He's also taking seeing a political twist to B&L's work.

Your read of postmodernism is typical of someone who hasn't read much of it. Take a look at Cusset's (2008) historical analysis of it: "French Theory." I think you would like it. It's critical.

BTW, the best thing about science and academia are the conversations. It's difficult to have them when anger gets the best of you. You, fruity, and Dr. F. are peas in a pod. Don't take everything so seriously. Relax.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Potemkin Village
Nov 3, 2013 - 11:49am PT
You, fruity, and Dr. F. are peas in a pod. Don't take everything so seriously. Relax.

I'm the only one here, I believe, who actually works in the field of this title. I do so because I'm passionate about it (but it is true more passionate once upon a time than now). You MikeL are a pompous ass remindful (having just watched Blackfish) of some jerk saying don't take it so seriously, relax, when corporate separates offspring from mother for profit sake... or some other. One takes seriously what one loves. Here, in case you missed it: You're a pompous ass who can't control his verbiage making it impossible for many to post (historically, for me, not unlike the electronics thread, so steeped in garbage nonsense). In my view, in a way, youre worse than Splitter (aka Trip7, thaDood) or IllusionDweller or The Chief. It's nothing but a shame.


P.S.

Be well.
Brokedownclimber

Trad climber
Douglas, WY
Nov 3, 2013 - 12:03pm PT
Glad to see you're in your usual cheerful state of mind fructose.

-Jan (hiding out at brokedown's place).
MH2

climber
Nov 3, 2013 - 12:20pm PT
What really matters are questions. Get those wrong, and things go spinning off into total irrelevance.


Is that what happened here?


What could be beyond rationality? What could be beyond space and time? What could be beyond imagination? What could be beyond concepts? What could be beyond consciousness? What could being be beyond the central point of reference (yourself)? What could be beyond materiality?
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Nov 3, 2013 - 01:29pm PT
Sometimes this thread wanders too deeply into pure philosophy, which is a damn mess.

It is easier to discuss actual "things" or actual concrete ideas, if I can somehow say that right.

Even the topic of the soul is physically debatable. When you totally step out of substance, you are now flying in the world of religion, superstition, black magic, voodoo, whatever wha wha.

That's OK if you want to, but it is really hard to understand in a short internet post.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 3, 2013 - 01:45pm PT
Lennon also wrote:

I am the wall-Rus
Ku ku kaju
WBraun

climber
Nov 3, 2013 - 01:48pm PT
Even the topic of the soul is physically debatable.

Nothing religious behind it at all.

Every living entity is a soul.

Watch for the next several months when people say "I" and then point.

They point to the heart which is the seat of "you" the soul which is an individual and has personality.

Everyone has personality and individuality.

Even Twins.

We ride and operate our material bodies.

We say my arm.

We don't ever say I am the arm.

We don't ever say I am the feet, legs etc.

We are not the body and life comes from life.

Most of you the ones stuck in the trench of religion .....
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 3, 2013 - 01:50pm PT
Fortmental - all you are expressing there is scientism, plain and simple. Jargon simply refers to special terms used by a profession which are hard for those outside of the profession to grasp and understand. Jargon is language. Symbols. The language/jargon of science is numbers and stats, which are collected together for reference or analysis. What you are calling data. To you, slaved to the evaluating mind, said data is especially "real," valid, and true. And you believe this emphatically because according to your mental process, it is "so." And the data supports it. Right . . .

What some of us are saying is what is apparently lost to you, and all those welded to scientism, is that so long as you are a human being, numbers and evaluations will always be secondary to your fundamental reality, which is not a number or a stat.

The "work" is delving into that simple fact and waking up to the fact of what that means, not as a mere idea or piece of cognitive data - in which case it is just some notion or irrelevant idea - but at the deepest existential level, which is where you've been living all along, lost as you are in your head, and believing, quite naturally, that the evaluating mind is the guiding and true light on truth.

JL
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 3, 2013 - 02:49pm PT
To you, slaved to the evaluating mind, said data is especially "real," valid, and true. And you believe this emphatically because according to your mental process, it is "so." And the data supports it.

I'm certain you do not want to create the impression that an individual who is preoccupied with
evaluating for the sake of measurements is , ipso facto, a "slave" of some sort because he merely rejects the validity of your position in this matter.

Question:
What is contained within the experience of the non-discursive mind that informs that mind that it is incorrect to consider data gathered about the physical world as " real" and " valid" because such gathering requires a rigorous,predefined method that excludes the relevance of non-quantifiable experience? Even if that data , and the process of its acquisition , results in a worldview that is consistent enough to reject claims to validity that is deemed outside of empirical jurisdiction and scientific validation.

Just assume I am asking the question in a neutral, untendentious way.
Messages 16921 - 16940 of total 22369 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