The New "Religion Vs Science" Thread

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 1 - 10585 of total 10585 in this topic
ionlyski

Trad climber
Kalispell, Montana
Topic Author's Original Post - Oct 23, 2014 - 09:56pm PT
Pretty hard to argue with Iris Dement. Think I'll just let the mystery be.

So there it is, end of discussion. Everybody wins.
Now let's go climbing.

[Click to View YouTube Video]
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Oct 23, 2014 - 10:15pm PT
Nice song. I hereby pronounce her an agnostic.
Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Oct 23, 2014 - 10:26pm PT
I wouldn't argue with that. I would even go so far as to say she has God-given talent and I bet she would agree with that.

She has a great voice, in my humble opinion. And that is a very clever way to start this mess again. I am really curious to see where this thread goes.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 23, 2014 - 10:40pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]

it's a sleeper... all the good work is done.

plus...

there is no god!
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Oct 23, 2014 - 10:54pm PT
that's some good pick'in & grin'in!!

They'all's be sing'in and talk'in bout life

why shant we do the same

after climb'on
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 23, 2014 - 11:00pm PT
Is this a metathread?

John
mcreel

climber
Barcelona
Oct 23, 2014 - 11:18pm PT
I saw the reincarnation of Jimi Hendrix playing mandolin in that video. It looks like he's still in his sideman phase, hanging out in the back. Get ready for some killer mandolin music in a few years.
Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Oct 23, 2014 - 11:34pm PT
I am ready right now for some killer mandolin music. I could see it now, death by Mandolin musc. What a way to go.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Oct 23, 2014 - 11:51pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Oct 23, 2014 - 11:55pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Oct 24, 2014 - 12:04am PT
who knows what might have been...

[Click to View YouTube Video]
Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Oct 24, 2014 - 12:09am PT
Ed gets it.

Edt- Rilly Groovy?
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Oct 24, 2014 - 12:35am PT
Mandolin?

[Click to View YouTube Video]
Gnome Ofthe Diabase

climber
Out Of Bed
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:53am PT
jingy
you are g.o.d. and also g.o.d. is jingy

if to every one you meet you only ask on question?
what is that question ...think ...

Buddha??

translation : Are you G.O.D.??

??? I HOPE that you feel better that guy I showed The one in yellow shirt R Perch Nearly blind all his days and his nights were terrible.



to all who miss understand I am mad insane that huge swaths of rock on the west coast

Of the Hudson River made of trap rock ...DIABASE ... are not legal to climb ...
GNO Me O(N) that Diabase of course I've put up a few routes there sshh don't tell.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Oct 24, 2014 - 07:23am PT
How about the ukulele by Jake Shimabukuro? That kid does it all.

http://jakeshimabukuro.com/#/bio
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 24, 2014 - 07:44am PT
to all who miss understand I am mad insane that huge swaths of rock on the west coast

Of the Hudson River made of trap rock ...DIABASE ... are not legal to climb ...
GO ON Diabase

 lets call the whaaaaa-mbulance because your wishes are not agreeable to the managers of your special places.

Seems to be a good religious person you must first think of yourself, your soul, your actions....

The instant the believer assures themselves they are in good with their fiction... they branch out to try to infec'... inform everyone around them...

you are infected...

leave me out of your well wishes. they win no favor with me, no matter how normal it is just to say something nice and diplomatic.

donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Oct 24, 2014 - 07:47am PT
Hard for me to see how religion survives the progression of science. "Faith," believing something for no good reason, must be more addictive than crystal meth.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 24, 2014 - 08:02am PT
it's almost like what I imagine dealing with zombies would be like.
WBraun

climber
Oct 24, 2014 - 08:06am PT
Then why are you a zombie.

Everyday you are preaching.

You are as bad and worst then what you are against.

Total fool ......
MH2

climber
Oct 24, 2014 - 08:51am PT
People wonder where they come from?

And where they are going?



I came from West Vancouver to my other home in the sky.


Then I went home again.
WBraun

climber
Oct 24, 2014 - 08:53am PT
Everyone comes from the same place ......
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 24, 2014 - 08:56am PT
Then why are you a zombie.

 see... you are delusional.

What do zombies find as wisdom?

Everyone comes from the same place ......

 Genius!!!


 So profound...
MH2

climber
Oct 24, 2014 - 08:58am PT
Everyone comes from the same place ......


I better check under the bed. And the closet.
rbord

Boulder climber
atlanta
Oct 24, 2014 - 09:01am PT
faith, believing something for no good reason

Sorry, but how depressing. We don't fully understand the good reasons why humans developed the belief forming processes that we have, but we're so addicted to believing in our own omniscience, that we're forced to believe that there's no good reason why humans form the beliefs that we do, instead of accepting that we just don't understand the good reasons :-(
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 24, 2014 - 09:19am PT
We don't fully understand the good reasons why humans developed the belief forming processes that we have,

 Right... I say that the whole thing is made up, and is unnecessary for life...

i.e. invented...

i.e. ... you can make up the rest

i.e. 'humans developed the belief forming processes that we have'
rbord

Boulder climber
atlanta
Oct 24, 2014 - 09:26am PT
you can make up the rest

Thanks Jingy! Perfect example. I make up the belief that there must be some good reason that we make up beliefs, possibly transcending the awesome omnipotence of my own intellect. That whole sciency thing that thee are reasons why we've evolved our capabilities is a bunch of nonsense!
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Oct 24, 2014 - 09:37am PT
Hudson River Valley?

[Click to View Linked Image]

I've climbed on cliffs that look remarkably like those in the painting...
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 24, 2014 - 01:31pm PT
Sorry, y'all...

a new one will not replace the old one in a million years...

I got a breath of fresh air today when I found the old thread...

second repubs thread said something to the tune of...

You will have to pry this thread from my cold dead hands to make me nuke it.



It can be said this has proven to be untrue.
Psilocyborg

climber
Oct 24, 2014 - 04:49pm PT
science meets art

[Click to View YouTube Video]
ionlyski

Trad climber
Kalispell, Montana
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 24, 2014 - 05:55pm PT
Um, Think I'll just let the mystery be.

Have a great weekend everybody and make sure to spread the love.

Arne
MH2

climber
Oct 24, 2014 - 06:04pm PT
Ah, mystery.

What is a 'weekend?'
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 24, 2014 - 06:33pm PT
you can make up the rest

 This is not meant to mean that you can make up sh#t and it become the real to you and me too!!!


You may think it real... don't make it so.
ionlyski

Trad climber
Kalispell, Montana
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 24, 2014 - 08:46pm PT
What is a 'weekend?'

It's whatever you want it to be if you want one in your mind.

For some, maybe a break from school or something. Or maybe you went to Sunday school on a weekend and thought you had something to look forward to. I don't know.
ionlyski

Trad climber
Kalispell, Montana
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 24, 2014 - 08:52pm PT
Where I'm headed for my weekend. Some call it heaven or God's country or nature but I just like it.
ionlyski

Trad climber
Kalispell, Montana
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 24, 2014 - 09:00pm PT
Views into Glacier National Park. Lots of people call that God's country but to me it's always been just as much mine, or ours.

jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Oct 24, 2014 - 09:15pm PT
That is a gorgeous painting, Ed. It may turn out to be the best thing to ever appear on this thread!
Gnome Ofthe Diabase

climber
Out Of Bed
Oct 24, 2014 - 09:46pm PT
That is What the secret places still look like in high summer
some where I Bet that spot exists
to slip back is the place Devine ?
Divinely riven? What about
The quality of the light
The painters eye his perspective
Is skill and talent God given
Or with the increase in translucent
pigments the chemicals that make up
Paint just the forward progress of science ?.....


I should not hit save but some thoughts are fleeting
truth

Ed thank you what is that painting's title
Who is the Hudson valley school artist who
painted it?
Will I see This on the art thread?
I have never opened that.

of course jGill reads and writes and climbs better than me/I that needs grammar check

it is either Real Time w/ Bill Maher or here
I'll be back after some TV

there is no net

bushman Bushman
he's THE MAN
when I started I was
Thinking Edgar ?
what means this cryptic.. Poe
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Oct 24, 2014 - 09:49pm PT
Speaking of science and life's existential questions, I just finished a fascinating book called The Snake Charmer about the life and death of Joe Slowinski at age 38. I originally picked it up because he worked for the California Academy of Sciences and it mentions people I worked with there.

The book lets you know in the first few pages that Joe dies of a poisonous snake bite while on expedition, yet the story is riveting anyway. It goes into great detail about herpetologists, particularly those who handle venomous snakes being a peculiar combination of thrill seeking and rational science. The more the author talked about that, the more parallels I could draw with climbers, especially those in the sciences. Both dangerous climbing and handling poisonous snakes are mysteries to the average person and in the end, one is left wondering about a lot of things, and drawing a lot of parallels.

I was also left wondering if one pursuit made any more sense than the other. Having new species of snakes named by you or after you is probably about as doubtful a pursuit as first ascents. If all is nothingness, does it matter? If you die doing what you love, is that better, and for whom?

Definitely a thought provoking book and you learn a lot about biology along the way.
ß Î Ø T Ç H

Boulder climber
extraordinaire
Oct 24, 2014 - 09:59pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]
MH2

climber
Oct 24, 2014 - 10:18pm PT
Werner was right, Pastor Liz.

There are people under my bed, in my closet, and all over my house.






for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return

Genesis 3:19
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Oct 24, 2014 - 11:00pm PT
Kindred Spirits Asher Brown Durand 1849

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kindred_Spirits

Durand was a member of the Hudson River School.

An exhibition of landscape painting was assembled under the title: American Sublime covered an amazing period of american landscape painting, I saw the exhibition in Philadelphia when it toured... it was astounding.

Gnome Ofthe Diabase

climber
Out Of Bed
Oct 25, 2014 - 08:30am PT
THANK YOU ED
My need for a class in Art History
Has me Piqued.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Oct 25, 2014 - 08:38am PT
Donini: "Faith," believing something for no good reason, . . .


A remarkably stupid and ignorant thing to say.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Oct 25, 2014 - 10:20am PT
that is the definition of 'faith' (in the sense that it is used with regards to religion) belief in the absence of evudence.

English. Cool thing to get to know.
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Oct 25, 2014 - 10:21am PT
'Issues'

Concerning our mother, father, brother, sister, marriage, bedroom, medical, financial, climbing, philosophical, and dying issues;

If issues had tissues,
We'd run to the store,
The problem with pablum?
We'd always want more.

-Bushman

I deleted the 'Poe' poem for now, had to change it some.
Maybe I'll repost it on one of the poetry threads.
Psilocyborg

climber
Oct 25, 2014 - 12:39pm PT
Biotch....Awesome. I have been listening to prarie home companion since I was a child, but really grew to appreciate his storytelling when I started travelling in the early 90's. What a good show all around. Everyone I know now hates it haha.
PhilG

Trad climber
The Circuit, Tonasket WA
Oct 25, 2014 - 02:59pm PT
I thought this was interesting:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2014/10/20/357519777/are-factual-and-religious-belief-the-same
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 25, 2014 - 03:11pm PT
I have been listening to prarie home companion since I was a child, but really grew to appreciate his storytelling when I started travelling in the early 90's. What a good show all around. Everyone I know now hates it haha.

 Since getting my first cart at age 25, I have been a listener to APHC.. I've gone through phases with it over the years..

It never gets old...
Gnome Ofthe Diabase

climber
Out Of Bed
Oct 25, 2014 - 04:10pm PT
I can see truth be that
Bushman sorry that
When I look through
My little bubble seeing
Is turned inside out
It should just be this
Perfect world
It would be that
Vexing over words
Is futile better
Working forward
No back up



no way MikeL will see so here too I will lay a hiss rant
think cross Peter Lory (hss)& Bill maher(rant)
that you can post here any of you reading this
I need three or four words of encouragement
Go to hurricane Hannah and say something nice
four words that is not much to ask if it is then say three

TODD WAS GREAT

If that is to much then woe this thread.
I can tell that it is not the nature of those
here to hear what some one wants four words

YOUR DADDY WAS GREAT

and any thing that a daughter should hear
do not be a Klaus this means a lot read
the posts and post up no need to thank
me I will be scare if the eight of you will not
be scarce over there if not more tincture rhyme
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Oct 25, 2014 - 07:40pm PT
Bushman, i thought that read smooth as Irish butter!

so much i read it twice!

even gave me a good dream
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Oct 26, 2014 - 05:59am PT
Irish butter you say? I'm easy. I thought I would try out a little free form poetry.
It was not intended as a philosophical statement but was only an interpretation of some really dark dramatic classical music I was listening to lately.
I don't remember what piece, but it motivated me to write the poem.
With minor edits.

'Poe'

One night long ago in a land far away the rain pounded the rooftops,
In a village that sat on the top of a gorge at the foot of a mountain,
Whose forests were swayed as the tempest swept through the teetering tree tops,
And the wild river raged in the gorge down below with a thunderous sound,

From the village there led some steep winding steps to an order of monks,
And their abbey was built near caves that traveled deep into the mountain,
As the rains poured down a lone monk ran up the steps to the abbey,
He was only a lad and was late for his prayers as the midnight bells tolled,

His discomfort was nothing to the stinging reproach he was soon to receive,
As he ran through the doors all the monks and the abbot silently spurned him,
So ignored the young monk took leave to the caves deep in the mountain,
And found refuge and rest in a cool but dry alcove beyond cold rains falling,

When sleep finally came it deposited him to a cradling dream world,
Where warming sunbeams did seek him out through a cleft in the rock,
And drawing up through it his spirit wandered in so dreamlike a state,
That the dust motes sparkled as his soul wafted upwards like smoke,

And he followed the cleft to an opening there way up high on the mountain,
Where the view up on high was such contrast to marvelous beauty below,
Where the sunlight in morning reflected rich hues off the cascading dells,
But above him blue skies were pierced by black spires that sparkled and shone,

Seeing far down below as his village awoke to the glistening sunlight,
Sought out by his eye were the monks on the path to their morning prayers,
But shadows now fell and were cast across the whole of the landscape,
As howling winds were ushering forth a gathering storm,

A foreboding crept over him as he awoke from his dreaming,
And he rushed from the caves to seek forgiveness of the abbot,
But the temple was barred and the winds swept the rains down the mountain,
As his portent unfolded uncurling it's coiled scaly id,

Its manifest presence revealed itself slowly but steadfast,
The river had risen now breaching the chasm below,
The gorge was now filled and in places was overflowing,
As all manner of flora and fauna engulfed was swept by,

Now the villagers struggled and worked to save their belongings,
As the young monk was humbled by pity and trembled with fear,
And he turned up his eyes as he stared with intent at the mountain,
Would a stone describe mayhem and to mankind deliver such plight?

And he flew up the path to the caves running deep in the mountain,
And scrambled the cleft and the chimney that ran up the cliff,
Depositing him to a ledge that looked off the abyss,
As the black spires glowered coldly deliberating fate,

There he knelt at the stone and prostrated himself to its altar,
And prayed for reprieve that the village not be swept away,
When a large wedge of shiest from above was dislodged and was falling,
And splintered to chaff as it struck at his prone outstretched feet,

Then he leapt up in shock and he was sure he was mortally wounded,
But he stumbled on wounds that afflicted not one but both feet,
As he awkwardly fell he spread-eagled to catch at the ledge,
But spiraled off into the abyss and bounced as he hit,

And he tumbled and struck as he fell but was caught and left dangling,
O'er the clutch of death's jaws as he snagged on a juniper bough,
Where he hung and passed out from the pain and the fear and the trauma,
To return once again to a world sweetly cloaked by his dreams,

And there the monks found him all tangled and hung up and bloodied,
And waking his tears flowed and ran down his stubbly brown cheeks,
Then they carried him down as he trembled so humbled and whimpering,
And with sobs he cried out to the world, “Look away I'm disgraced!"

So on down through the mountain the monks gently took him to safety,
Where the abbot approached him and quietly whispering he said,
"In these times of strife all men's hearts they are beating as one,
As they fight for their home they will need you now more than you know,"

Then the monk took his silence as rains fell now thrumming in sheets,
With the silence came a stillness compounding his miserable state,
As his mind would rehash his deep and most troubling defects,
As his suffering brought visions of men who tread swirling dark waters,

A vision of men in churning flood waters with millions of rats,
Where none would see their desperate plight nor could they see his grief,
This man child caught up in his self pity and physical suffering,
As he woke now again to stare down at his bound bloodied feet,

So disheartened was he that his state brought with it a new burning thought,
Consuming all else it carried on down to his cold throbbing feet,
Surrounding his limbs the pain was now less though his body felt broken,
As he stretched out all his bruised and swollen tendons and joints,

So he focused his eyes on a point in the room where the window frame split,
To the left of where the light fell a shining star appeared in his eye,
They told him once his mother's name was Norma Falance,
And the orphan in him was still searching for her in the places he kept,

Climbing the steps in the wind and the rain never entered his mind,
To the east he meandered through tumbles of talus and along a dark ledge,
To the face of a tower that shifted in the darkness like black shining glass,
Where his bare feet and hands were chafed by edges and cracks as he climbed,

At the top of the tower all perched on the edge were a jumble of stones,
On the faces below were a series of ledges with rubble and scree,
At the base of the mountain a series of boulders sat balanced in check,
At the top of a canyon upstream from the village and gorge down below,

He never gave thought to the force that was likely to trundle the stone,
As he heaved at the back side the keystone tipped over its balancing point,
He stared at that star as he thought that he saw her for only a glimpse,
As his feet left the edge and he caught at the ledge he could see her again.

In a village that sat on the top of a gorge at the foot of a mountain,
A legend is told of a storm and flood that was nearly the end,
And the miracle of a landslide that damned up the river and saved them,
'Twas an orphan named 'Poe' who was remembering his mother instead.


-bushman
10/24/2014








Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Oct 26, 2014 - 09:10am PT
This one I like enough to post on two threads...

'This Time of Night'

The stars reach out to grab me,
Breaking through the clouds at night,
They warn me of the shadows that fall in the darkness,
Going down to the barking in the light,

The voices that don't care as I walk by,
And the lonely roly racket rail sound of the car tires on the highway,
There are those quiet soft night smells again,
Thats the good wind that comes my way,

It's so right that it's so wrong that it's so right again,
I'm low now where the earth flows,
Those animals on that hill know I'm here,
Breaking now the chatter goes,
They can't block out the cricket near,

But it goes soon enough,
Bird bird bird bird bird,
Screech the cry it tells me,
Like that's its only word,

Turn now turn softly,
I only come to visit the grass,
And the white light to permanent darkness,
When I come back it will last,

Why do I love that song?
The song of the night bird,
It sounds like its happily urgently slowly resting itself,
Step stay bark step stir,

Up it's up ahead,
Those stars are grabbing me my friend,
They take the moments of the night time,
And give them back again.

-Tim Sorenson
10/25/2014


Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 26, 2014 - 11:48am PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]


jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Oct 26, 2014 - 09:03pm PT
Science vs literature & art?

Definition of "emptiness"


Anemic thread.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Oct 26, 2014 - 10:42pm PT
Jgill: Anemic thread.

Yup.

In the end, there is nothing to argue about. It's just THIS. There ain't nuthin else. I'm so amazed at it all everytime I stop and just look.
WBraun

climber
Oct 26, 2014 - 10:46pm PT
This thread is impotent.

When you got guys just pasting youtube videos then you know they're dead .....
Lynne Leichtfuss

Sport climber
moving thru
Oct 26, 2014 - 10:58pm PT
The New "Religion Vs Science" Thread.

Maybe someone has already posted this, BUT why not The Religion AND Science Thread.

Why the Vs? Sure we don't all agree, but even atheists and agnostics don't agree so why the US and THEM mentality on the Title of the Thread.

Please explain so we less gifted can understand.

Thanks so Very, lynnie
Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Oct 26, 2014 - 11:35pm PT
Now you're talking, Lynne. When you add the two and the whole is greater than the sum of the parts then you approach better, true human potential. What is wrong with that?
PhilG

Trad climber
The Circuit, Tonasket WA
Oct 27, 2014 - 07:04am PT
I completely agree with you Lynne. I believe the future of religion (and humankind) will involve a combining of all the religions and science to move us forward.
I offer the following link to give food for thought:
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29753530
ionlyski

Trad climber
Kalispell, Montana
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2014 - 07:15am PT
When you got guys just pasting youtube videos then you know they're dead ....

Completely agree Werner. That's why I wouldn't get too attached. You never know when all those YouTube clips one morning might just go "poof". Divine intervention.

Arne

And Lynn, it was supposed to be Religion AND Science thread; it is worded wrong but nobody got the point anyway. I'm tired of the polarization of people due to their beliefs of origin.
survival

Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
Oct 27, 2014 - 07:29am PT
Proof of ALIENS!!! (For Werner... :)
[Click to View YouTube Video]
MH2

climber
Oct 27, 2014 - 09:12am PT


We who are heirs to three centuries of science can hardly imagine a state of mind in which all material objects were regarded as symbols of spiritual truths or episodes in sacred history.

Sir Kenneth Clark
Landscape into Art


Perhaps. In spite of those three centuries of science, people are still drawn to stories that place our troubling and confusing experiences in a larger spiritual narrative.


And there are those who see science and religion as not only compatible but inseparable:


A superficial glance at at mathematics may give an impression that it is a result of separate individual efforts of many scientists scattered about in continents and in ages. However, the inner logic of its development reminds one much more of a single intellect, developing its thought systematically and consistently using the variety of human individualities only as a means.

In ending, I want to express a hope that mathematics may serve now as a model for the solution of the main problem of our epoch: to reveal a supreme religious goal and to fathom the meaning of the spiritual activity of mankind.


I. R. Shafarevich, mathematician



Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 27, 2014 - 09:47am PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]

JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:32pm PT
Thank you, Lynne, for again posting what I was thinking. Having grown up in a family of physical scientists, all of whom were - and are - Christians to the core, I always bristled at the idea that the two were mutually exclusive.

I think, though, we can't lose sight of the different methodologies. The scientific method rests on skepticism. We are always trying to disprove the conventional scientific wisdom through observation. We have an underlying assumption that our explanation of anything needs refinement.

In contrast, my Christianity - and my life - rests on faith. To my knowledge, no one has been able to devise an experiment or observation to test whether the wages of sin is death, or the free gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ. While I think there are objective reasons to believe the Gospel accounts, our experience as humans gives objective reason to disbelieve as well. Ultimately, I came to faith through grace, not experimentation or personal merit.

To sum up, I don't think there is any contradiction in a person of faith pursuing science through the scientific method. Faith simply recognizes that relaity can exceed when we can observe.

John
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Oct 27, 2014 - 01:12pm PT
I tried to make the same point as Lynne and John through 20,000 some posts and the thanks I got for that was people trying every which way to make me admit to believing in an old man with a white beard in the sky and a literal interpretation of the Bible. So good luck with that!
Norton

Social climber
quitcherbellyachin
Oct 27, 2014 - 01:50pm PT

just watched your video, Jingy

it is the single best source of rationality regarding one of mankind's greatest conflict of ideas

thanks for posting it, I urge everyone on this thread to watch it, all the way through
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Oct 27, 2014 - 04:29pm PT
Religion is, by far, the most powerful institution in direct and active opposition to science education and research in the United States- particularly when it comes to evolution. This anti-science campaign negatively affects a host of other areas that have far reaching ramifications - the belief that a fetus is equal, and therefore should have equal rights to its mother, a denial that homosexuality, observed in over 1500 species, is a natural phenomenon of many populations, including our own, a failed campaign to prevent stem cell research, to name a few.

In our past, religion was also used as a justification for slavery.

Science and religion are undeniably adversaries in this country, and that conflict has exacted untold, unnecessary human misery upon its population.

Perhaps religion will reform and get out of the science business entirely at some point in our future.

I'm not holding by breath, however. Given what I know about the upcoming generation, I think religion, at least as its currently practiced, is largely doomed in the United States.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 27, 2014 - 05:50pm PT
a failed campaign to prevent stem cell research, to name a few.

 Can I go out on a limb here and say that we may have a few cures by now if stem cells were just used for research and implemented in medicines and tissue replacement therapies..


Tvash

climber
Seattle
Oct 27, 2014 - 06:10pm PT
Medical researchers found a way around the religiously motivated campaign to ban stem cell availability for research by procuring them from abroad. Still, the resultant cruelty of such a campaign - by throwing up barriers to helping millions of azheimer sufferers, paralytics, and a host of others afflicted with a broad range of maladies, cannot be underestimated.

Scientists do not drop bombs on people. Politicians and the military do, and many of these decision makers are religious.

Both the religious and non-religious can and do kill their fellow human beings. Given that the vast majority of Americans are religious, one can factually state that many of those Americans who kill others are also religious.

I'm not aware of anyone, ever, who has stated that all atheists are also humanist, nor that atheists do not kill their fellow human beings. Unsupported statements like these add nothing to any discussion of morality.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 27, 2014 - 06:13pm PT
How many scientist-atheists have worked on weapons of mass destruction

 How many good Christian and Catholic and Muslim believers have worked on mass destruction?

funny, old anti-free thought lines... it always comes back to "I have nothing else, what about them scientist that made the H-Bomb? They were real meanies....

But doesn't take away any of the negative attention these religions deserve...

Medical researchers found a way around the religiously motivated campaign to ban stem cell availability for research by procuring them from abroad. Still, the resultant cruelty of such a campaign - by throwing up barriers to helping millions of azheimer sufferers, paralytics, and a host of others afflicted with a broad range of maladies, cannot be underestimated.

 Though there is no cure for what ails me... I am one of these things... and I could be helped with stem cells...

But I'm in America... And those lovely religious types would rather that I waste away....

People are not getting treatments and not getting possible cures because of the religious minded people out there in the world.

I will often try to imagine the world without the religious....

Most everything would be cured by now...

Or maybe just a whole lot more than we have now.
WBraun

climber
Oct 27, 2014 - 06:24pm PT
Most everything would be cured by now...

What a deluded fool.

Blames everyone else but himself.

The four defects the material body are birth death disease and old age.

No material science can ever stop those ......
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Oct 27, 2014 - 06:38pm PT

around the religiously motivated campaign to ban stem cell availability for research by procuring them from abroad. Still, the resultant cruelty of such a campaign - by throwing up barriers to helping millions of azheimer sufferers, paralytics, and a host of others afflicted with a broad range of maladies, cannot be underestimated.

Do you know why the religious started their prudent campaign? And to conflate Alzheimer's to stem-cell research is just a way for scientist looking for funding.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Oct 27, 2014 - 06:44pm PT

Both the religious and non-religious can and do kill their fellow human beings. Given that the vast majority of Americans are religious, one can factually state that those Americans who kill others are also religious.

what are you smok'in tonight, The Purple Conflator?
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Oct 27, 2014 - 07:06pm PT
I've edited my statement to 'many of those who kill others are also religious, which is, after all, true.

Thanks for the catch, Blue.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Oct 27, 2014 - 07:27pm PT
Since only 25-30% of the population votes. Ur saying the 15% or there abouts, of Americans that are christian are running the nation. Maybe you jus need to rally ur troops?
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Oct 27, 2014 - 07:33pm PT
FYI:

Voter turnout (of the voting age population) varies between 50 and 65%, actually (wiki)

83% of Americans self identify as religious, with 78% self identifying as Christian. About a 3rd of Americans self identify as evangelical Christian.

Only 16% self identify as religiously unaffiliated, with less than 2% self identifying as atheist.

http://religions.pewforum.org/reports

The religiously unaffiliated are not a voting block. Neither are 'the religious', for that matter.

My civil liberties advocacy work involves working with a variety of partner organizations, both religious and non, on specific issues. For example, to end the death penalty in WA, we have partnered with the Catholic Church - even as we oppose them on other civil liberties issues. I regularly speak to church audiences on a variety of civil liberties topics.

Political progress requires building long term relationships and compromise.

BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Oct 28, 2014 - 07:57am PT
That was pretty good. Rick.
PhilG

Trad climber
The Circuit, Tonasket WA
Oct 29, 2014 - 07:28am PT
Here you go, Lynne:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/10/28/359564982/pope-says-god-not-a-magician-with-a-magic-wand

In a move that could be aimed at healing a rift between science and religion, Pope Francis has said that evolution and the Big Bang are consistent with the notion of a creator. And according to the pontiff, believers should not view God as "a magician, with a magic wand."

Francis made the remarks at an assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, billed as meeting to discuss "Evolving Concepts of Nature."
WBraun

climber
Oct 29, 2014 - 08:18am PT
Oh ......

He is the Supreme magician who surpasses all magicians in One fell swoop.

No mere mortal can fashion such a miraculous mysterious wonder before our eyes.

To say it came from a primordial soup is none other than poor fund of knowledge and poor fund of logic and reason.

The great magician easily manipulates his illusionary energies to bewilder the foolish rascals.

But to those who's hearts are infused with the divine salve of love he will remove the illusionary curtain .......

MH2

climber
Oct 29, 2014 - 08:50am PT

[Click to View Linked Image]


"A medieval missionary tells that he has found the point where heaven and Earth meet..."


unknown artist in
L'Atmosphere: Météorologie Populaire
Camille Flammarion
Paris, 1888
Lynne Leichtfuss

Sport climber
moving thru
Oct 29, 2014 - 01:06pm PT
Thanks much, PhilG. OBTW, did I meet you at a Face Lift in Valley of Wow 3-4 years ago? Werner, thanks for your comments too.

I appreciate what the Pope has to say and I like what Werner says also. I don't know if we can "nail" with words what each of us/them are trying to communicate. I agree with Werner and I agree with the Pope. Either or both theories work for me.

The bottom line for me is that there is a God. The rest of the bottom line for me is found in Matthew Chapters 5-7. If people actually studied jesus and his words and gave it much consideration I think they would no longer simply toss off the whole notion of God.

I have benefited much from the past 7 years on this forum. I try to really analyze and think about some of the Threads and posts and I have changed in my thought processes and reevaluated my own beliefs. This is a good thing.

It's crazy to think one can ever know the entirety of God. I marvel at the human body. The eye is so fantastic and heals itself faster than any other part on us. Everything that inhabits this world, our planet, are designed magnificently. And then there is the universe.......

I think, if as a whole, mankind would have sought after answers from this planet instead of molesting it for greedy purposes we would be way ahead of what this planet has to offer in terms of medicine, healing, energy and much more.

Ok, thanks for listening. Peace mixed with Joy, Lynne



Tvash

climber
Seattle
Oct 29, 2014 - 01:29pm PT
I studied Jesus extensively as a believer (8 years of Catholic school) and have rejected theistic religion wholesale, so there's one data point.

So did all six of my siblings, so there's 6 more.

Can we just drop the proscriptive God talk? "Oh, if you only had the right information...".

It's intellectually insulting for those of us who critically examined our decision to drop religion in a serious manner.

The whole 'intelligent design' thing has been debunked ad nauseum - fortunately in the courts so that it can no longer be forced on a child captive audience in our schools. The only folks who believe that now are those unfamiliar with the science that does that debunking.

As for the Pope, he has no business weighing in on scientific theories, nor does the Catholic Church. They're not scientists. What followers believe with regards to this scientific theory or that is the decision of the individual. The Pope should only speak for what scientific theories he himself believes in - as should we all.

What if the United States had an 'official theory' that everyone was required to believe in? All hell would break loose, yet the Pope proclaims what is true or not true in this regard for his followers and is applauded for it.

Rather than applauding, we should be appalled that it took this long for the Catholic Church to join the 19th century.

Lynne Leichtfuss

Sport climber
moving thru
Oct 29, 2014 - 01:33pm PT
Tvash, did you as a thinking, non biased individual, study the teachings of jesus or did the school you and your siblings went to present to you their curriculum? L.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Oct 29, 2014 - 01:36pm PT
You've responded to my request with yet another round of down talking, Lynne.

Do that to others as you see fit.

Don't do it to me.

The idea that anyone would believe the fantastic claims of the Bible - eternal life, the resurrection, etc...based on a few scraps of contradictory, anonymously authored papyrus translated to a language Christ didn't speak and written decades after Christ's supposed death by people who could not have known him seems somewhat, how shall I put this, less than rigorous with regards to any requirement for credible evidence.

But believe what you will if it makes you feel better.

As for the moral teachings of Christ - the Golden Rule, etc - only action is required for its internalization.

No Christ needed.

I took the good from my religious training and skimmed off the Santa Claus stuff.

Accepting the world for what it is enables me to connect with it more intimately and honestly. It is all the more beautiful that it all happened by accident, and that there still much mystery about how that happened. In other words, the universe deserves better than to be explained away through a god that is so obviously a reflection of man's ego and fear.





Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Oct 29, 2014 - 01:47pm PT
I studied Jesus extensively as a believer (8 years of Catholic school)

I'm not sure what your trying to say here but the way I understand the message that Jesus tried to impart to humanity is that you will not find God in the words or works of men. What I got from the study of Jesus as I have was that we all have equal access to god and that he is there to be found but we must make the effort to find him of our own free will and with the utmost sincerity. Perhaps you were looking in the wrong place or that you were not seeking the actual Jesus, but merely studying stories of his life from a source that has only a historical connection to him. Tvash, please understand that I have no intention to criticize your personal choices in life. I value your perspective. I am only trying to comment on an idea that seems noteworthy.

Peace out.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Oct 29, 2014 - 01:50pm PT
As I mentioned, no Christ is needed to act upon a sound moral footing and attempt to make the world a better place.

If it was discovered that the Christ myth was just that - that Christ never actually existed at all but was invented after the fact, would that make any difference at all in your moral actions today?

No, it would not.

And I wonder how many of you 'see the actual Jesus' - whatever that might be, given the spurious nature of the sources upon which his life and works are based:


22 A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to Him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession.”

23 Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to Him and urged Him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”

24 He answered, “I was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel.”

25 The woman came and knelt before Him. “Lord, help me!” she said.

26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to their dogs.”

27 “Yes, Lord,” she said, “but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”

28 Then Jesus answered, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed from that very hour.


What an as#@&%e. This atheist would never treat a stranger in need like that. Just heal the kid, already, Jesus.

Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Oct 29, 2014 - 02:29pm PT
And I wonder how many of you 'see the actual Jesus' - whatever that might be, given the spurious nature of the sources upon which his life and works are based:

So what I get from this statement is that you are still relying on what other people have to say about Jesus.

Mind you that I have no certainty in such matters, but I think that what jesus was trying to tell us was that the religious institutions of man are wholly inadequate to describe man's true relation with god. It was as true then as it is now. We have to think out of the box, and that means abandoning these old notions of god and the sources that have perpetuated them throughout our history.

O'K. so where does that leave us if we choose not to throw out the baby with the bathwater? Where do we find God? In a book? In nature? Out in the stars somewhere? Riding a donkey in Palestine? The one who claims to be his son says you will find him inside yourself. What does this mean? Does everyone find him there? Is he the same to all? What is he doing in there? Why does my brain hurt? Would he like to share a sandwich with me? Was that wine a little too much last night?
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Oct 29, 2014 - 02:33pm PT
So...where do you get your information about Jesus, given that the only information we have available about him is from the Gospels?

Do you just make it up?

If so - why do you need Jesus at all if he's just your personal invention anyway?

Why is it necessary or desirable to find God at all?

I can tell you from personal experience that the world got no less wonderful without Him. More so, in fact.

I get very uncomfortable when I BS myself.




Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 29, 2014 - 03:22pm PT
Perhaps you were looking in the wrong place or that you were not seeking the actual Jesus, but merely studying stories of his life from a source that has only a historical connection to him.

 It's all the unbelievers fault no matter how you look at it with these religious type....

As if this were reason enough to leap into the believer column....

Tvash

climber
Seattle
Oct 29, 2014 - 03:44pm PT
I know the feeling. When I first started meeting atheists in college, I just couldn't believe they couldn't believe.

It finally sunk in when a young woman told me that, no matter how much she wanted to believe that she'd see her only beloved brother in Heaven after he'd been killed in a rappelling accident, she just couldn't.

That painful honesty was the straw. Desire, not honesty, had been propping up my waning faith.

I turned, looked back at the Church, and thought: "Wow. What a brilliant scam. Hats off."

The Catholics aren't all bad, though. Sure, they systematically rape thousands of kids over many decades and cover it up at the highest levels of power, and deny poor women family planning services, basically condemning them to a life of poverty, but they also push for immigration rights and an end to the death penalty.

I actually had a very good experience in Catholic School and CYO camp. Unfortunately, some kids didn't. The founder of the camp I attended for 3 summers (Camp St. Michael) and 3 of his priest pals wound up going to prison for child molestation. They were literally running a Rape Camp. I had not a clue at the time.
StahlBro

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
Oct 29, 2014 - 03:46pm PT
"The things that we love tell us what we are."

Thomas Aquinas. 13th Century.
Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Oct 29, 2014 - 06:24pm PT
I certainly do not have any answers, Like you, only questions. I'm not a religious type, ask anyone here that knows me. I just like to be able to make my own decisions on how to approach these things and anyone that tells me I'm wrong, based on their experience or thinking, doesn't really care what I think and just wants to be heard. Well, I'm listening and what I hear is that you have already decided that there is no god based on what someone else has told you. You took it on faith and you believed and even tested that belief. It didn't work. You gave up and said there is no god. Fine. I don't have a problem with that . You are completely normal and a nice person. I just think that there are many questions that I would still like to ask about what I think might have happened. I am just curious and willing to suspend any disbelief for a moment just to see where it might take me. Kinda like rock climbing.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Nov 1, 2014 - 04:33pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]

Because a little reality needs to be dropped into this fester sore of a thread


"...results like these do not belong on the resume of a supreme being!"
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 1, 2014 - 09:38pm PT
Tvash: I studied Jesus extensively as a believer (8 years of Catholic school) . . . .

Unfortunately, this doesn’t matter a wit. Nada. Means nothing at all. if that’s where you are looking, you are looking in the wrong place. If there was one thing to have gotten from the “What is Mind thread,” it is that. As Kant suggested, you are making a categorical error. Get into the proper domain, my friend.

There is a common thread, but you can’t find it with only one view. One view cannot reveal The All. Even a conceptual viewpoint should show you that.

It’s like when you see a stop sign. You don’t pay attention to the color or the letters. You see what it means for you to understand, and in almost all important ways, what you are seeing is irrelevant to the import.


DMT: "You're doing it wrong!"

It’s not sex. The doing is being. It’s not an activity, a goal, or an achievement. IT is. You can run around the world and look at everything there is to see and not see anything important.

. . . and I think you know what I’m talking about. How many times have you looked at things and not really seen them? Thousands? Millions? Always?
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 1, 2014 - 09:58pm PT

Nacho: I'm a little concerned right now. About... your salvation and stuff. How come you have not been baptized?
Esqueleto: Because I never got around to it ok? I dunno why you always have to be judging me because I only believe in science.

(From the movie Nacho Libre, 2006)

The movie was pretty stupid, but I can't help the fact that I thought it was funnier than sh#t!
Psilocyborg

climber
Nov 1, 2014 - 10:26pm PT
MikeL, It's the snake that eats its own tail, or the chicken or the egg. Once the view comes full circle, there is nothing to see. Chop wood, carry water.
Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 1, 2014 - 11:07pm PT
No amount of intellectualizing can come close to the experience of approaching spirit realities. It is the ultimate adventure and the birthright of humanity; but the choice is yours, as is the work that must be accomplished.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Nov 1, 2014 - 11:17pm PT

One view cannot reveal The All.

Maybe that's what was so crucial in Jesus's timing? He saw that the world (the spiritual world) was moving in to many directions. So His pronouncement that "I am the only way", is the ONLY way you need..
Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 2, 2014 - 12:45am PT
Maybe that's what was so crucial in Jesus's timing? He saw that the world (the spiritual world) was moving in to many directions. So His pronouncement that "I am the only way", is the ONLY way you need..

Maybe not.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Nov 2, 2014 - 08:58am PT
Everyday you are preaching.

You are as bad and worst then what you are against.

Total fool ......

 Chimp, everyday you are preaching about how stupid everyone else is...

I am as weak and (redundancy edit) as any of your statements...

Thank you

Further review edit:

scrubbing bubbles
Oct 24, 2014 - 09:40pm PT
Supertopo has made this issue quite easy to understand:

Scientists are civilized and highly intelligent....while all religious people are ignorant, savage, and often toothless, inbred morons who practice incest with their daughters

No better words ever spoken!!!


Bwahahaha.... This is a refinement of thought so clear it needs to be mentioned again!
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Nov 3, 2014 - 02:12pm PT
No amount of intellectualizing can come close to the experience of approaching spirit realities


if I see one of those suckers creeping up on me I'll probably run the other way.

Just joking. The Art of Dreaming is a fantastic experience. It rivals emptiness.
Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 3, 2014 - 02:43pm PT
if I see one of those suckers creeping up on me I'll probably run the other way.

Lol! I never read that one by Castenada. I read his first five or six Don Juan books and even wrote a paper in college about some of the controversies that started to pop up around him. Interesting man. Some of the stuff he got up to in his later days are a bit strange but I found a lot of interesting material in his early stuff. Is it worth reading in your opinion, John?

dave729

Trad climber
Western America
Nov 3, 2014 - 02:59pm PT
The fun we used to have with our Bible thumping neighbors.
Challenging them on the chicken and egg circular creation argument
was always entertaining.
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Nov 3, 2014 - 09:16pm PT
Is it worth reading in your opinion, John?

A friend got me interested thirty to forty years ago. I read all his early books and some of the later ones. I never accepted the notion that the characters were real, but enjoyed his works as fiction . . . until he described the Art of Dreaming. That resonated with me and I decided to put it to a test: I had complete success the very first attempt, and had many enjoyable experiences after that for several years. However, I was never able to sense my allies or "see" their egg shapes!

The books were a part of the tapestry of that era. I don't know if they could have noticeable impact today.
Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 3, 2014 - 09:31pm PT
Thanks for your perspective, John. I have a bookshelf full of thoughts from an era not that far away but seemingly distant in grasp of potential. It is always curious to me to try and remember just what it was we were grasping at. Some kind of clue.
Flip Flop

Trad climber
Truckee, CA
Nov 3, 2014 - 10:35pm PT
You were looking for wifi so that you would have google and not be clueless.

Go Science!
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 4, 2014 - 10:27am PT
THEORY: The Philae lander, packed with 13 science instruments, including 7 cameras, will attempt to land on Comet 67P/C-G on Nov 12. The entire science package weighs 59 lbs - you could stuff it into a backpack.

THEORY: First space craft in history to carry a rack of (3) ice screws! And 'ice harpoons' (can I haz sum uv thoze?)

THEORY: That is going to be f*#king awesome. Go ESA!

THEORY: On the home front, I finally flew my new nano-drone for its entire 4 minutes of flight time without crashing it. It made two unsuccessful bids for my face during that time.

madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 4, 2014 - 10:34am PT
It made two unsuccessful bids for my face during that time.

ROFL
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Nov 4, 2014 - 11:44am PT
This is a very exciting time in Cosmology. I remember taking undergrad Astronomy in 1980, and boy were we stupid! So much has changed. This is a golden age of cosmology. We are now furiously observing the Universe, and the closer we observe, the stranger things seem.

With a modest 8 inch Newtonian reflector on a dob mount, you can look through the eyepiece and experience photons hitting your retina that left the stars of their home galaxies over 50 million years ago, using the bright objects that Messier catalogued, mainly to ignore while comet hunting in 1771. Many of Messier's "clouds" were actually galaxies. With a cheapo telescope you can see these big and close galaxies. They look like faint smudges, but if you take a long photograph, you can see far more. Our eyes don't do this, so we have to take long photographs.

Here is a HST photograph of M51, the Whirlpool Galaxy. It is relatively faint for small telescopes, but here is what it looks like through the HST:



Just think. 50 million year old star light is hitting your eyeballs. Not only that, but a little light, less than you notice without a really big light collector like the Hubble Telescope is also hitting your eyes when you look up. We don't notice it with our limited eyeballs, but that light is raining on you whether you know it or not. I was just outside, during the day, and I know that this light is still raining onto me, even if I couldn't see it with my limited eyeballs. And this is only visible light. We now observe the sky throughout the entire spectrum.

A telescope is merely a device to gather and amplify light. As they have gotten bigger through history, each time new observations are made, new things pop up.

We can also tune our AM radios to "static," and part of that static is actually the cosmic microwave background radiation. The echo of the Big Bang. We think.!!

I dunno. I enjoy thinking of this when looking up. The objects and fabric of the Universe are observable. We can indirectly observe dark matter by looking at gravitational lenses.

Gravitational Lens:


Doesn't this seem exciting to any of you spiritists?

MikeL. Are you going to now tell us that these things are not real? That we descend into nihilism? Or do you admit to the existence of entirely different galaxies from our own? Do you admit that the light from these observations is more than twice the accepted age of the Planet? (4.6 Billion Years) To me, it seems as if you have become more remote because you are troubled by existential questions. Is it that hard to believe that humans aren't all that special? That we are just a smart animal?

I wonder what the Bible would say if the writers had access to modern day science data? What do you think, Go-B?

Nature is very beautiful, and right now we are answering old problems while new problems such as dark matter pop up. The Hubble Space Telescope was built, in part, to solve the Hubble Constant, the rate of expansion of the Universe. What we got back answered that question, but observations raised many other questions.

Doesn't anyone find this exciting?

This picture was taken by a Chinese spacecraft last week:


When I look at that picture, it somehow makes our human squabbles silly. You look at that little blue marble and all of these nations and militaries and killing seem incomprehensible.

BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Nov 4, 2014 - 11:54am PT
I visited the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum a couple of months ago, and they have original mockups of a lot of spacecraft. They had one of the Hubble Space Telescope, and it is HUGE. It is bigger than an entire Minuteman 3 ICBM.


I am pretty sure that this one is a Minuteman III ICBM:

Norton

Social climber
quitcherbellyachin
Nov 4, 2014 - 12:18pm PT
Doesn't anyone find this exciting?

I sure do.

I am fascinated with Cosmology.

And right now in about five days the little cruiser Rosetta, which has been boogying through space for the past 12 years, is hovering just a few miles over an asteroid and will cut loose a small craft that will descent to the asteroid and fire harpoons into the rock to hold it it place while it drills and conducts experiments for a while.

Rosetta was launched over a decade ago and had to sling shot around around solar system to pick up speed to make contact with this asteroid. I'll take science over totalitarianism, mythology, mysticism, and voodoo any time.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 4, 2014 - 12:56pm PT
Science actually delivers something - mostly more questions slathered in wonder and beauty.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Nov 4, 2014 - 12:58pm PT
Yeah, the Science Channel is advertising the Rosetta Landing bit time. It is kind of like watching the moon landing on live TV, but not quite so exciting.

The complicated path that the spacecraft took made the mission possible without having to use a much larger rocket. It is interesting reading if you are curious how the "slingshot" method works.

That path was all possible with Newton's laws of motion and gravity. I don't think that the velocity was high enough for relativity to matter very much.

This is a very exciting time to be a human being. Ignoring it all seems a little silly.

I mean, guys like Go-B still believe that the earth is less than ten thousand years old. Take a little telescope and observe M51, 50 million light years away. That light has either been traveling for 50 million years or God made this amazingly complicated universe, with Earth a tiny speck in the big picture, just to toy with us.

Astronomy, Geology, Chemistry, Physics, they all agree. Earth is old, and 4 billion year old zircons aren't even that rare if you know where to look.

U-Pb Zircon dating is the most precise dating method for old rocks. Zircons are incredibly tough chemically, and fluid inclusions in them harbor a small amount of Uranium. Uranium decays into Lead at a known rate.

Other dating methods are good, but Zircons are extremely good. You need a granitic igneous rock for a host, though. Zircons are super rare in basaltic oceanic crust.

I just don't see why people can't ever so slightly alter their faith to allow for what we see in nature. Objective evidence.

When I look at what religion is giving us, and by that I am referring to the super fundamentalists, you get ISIS.

The Hubble Space Telescope didn't kill anybody.

If the protestant reformation hadn't happened, and Christianity was still a single church with a pope, would that pope have executed the people who built and worked on Hubble?

I would argue that yes, right now in the Middle East, if you gave a natural history lesson to ISIS, they would probably cut off your head.

I read today that Hezbollah was fighting ISIS. ISIS is a bunch of fundamentalist Sunni's. Does anyone here know the difference between a Sunni and a Shia? They both believe every word of the Koran. They just differ on the importance of Mohammed's various descendants. That is all. And they cut off heads over this.

I for one am happy that Christians no longer follow the laws given in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. You know. Get killed for not following the Sabbath. Somehow Islam is stuck in that part of the world. I suppose bombing them for the last twenty years didn't help.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 4, 2014 - 01:23pm PT
Some people just stick with the comfort food they grew up with. They know what feels good; end of story.

You can serve them all the sushi you want - zircons, HST photos, fossils, but they'll just push it around the plate and tuck back into the casserole.

Not everyone is curious or comfortable with the unknown.

Well, no one is comfortable with the unknown, actually, but some accept it is part of the deal better than others.

In the end, it's probably more of a genetic wiring thing than anything else.

Make no mistake, though - science is closing in on the religiously mythology. The latter is forced to fit into a tighter than tighter space as the years pass and the newer generations grow up more comfortable with and fluent in science and technology. A century from now, creationism will seem like just another medieval curiosity. In fact, few will probably realize that such nonsense survived the Age of Enlightenment.
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 4, 2014 - 01:35pm PT
Good stuff! I particularly enjoy seeing pictures from the HST. Even though I've seen untold amozing shots in Sky & Telescope and Astronomy, I never tire of seeing more. Maybe it's because I have to work so hard to see the Wonders of the Universe in my little 95mm Meade refractor.

Thanks to all.

John
WBraun

climber
Nov 4, 2014 - 02:33pm PT
In the old days they could interplanetary travel just by mantra sound vibration.

Now a days these puffed up cavemen scientists have to tax their citizens trillions of dollars for some metal junk called rocket to go nowhere fast ......
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 4, 2014 - 04:27pm PT
In space, no one can hear you chant.
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 4, 2014 - 05:52pm PT
I posted this comment on a science and philosophy forum at a Christian University a few years back and got blasted for it by the regulars there. It's when I got started writing again after finally settling on science as belief system, after being an agnostic for thirty years and being pretty angry and confused about the merits of it. The comment here is a bit grandiose but I always liked it. I lost the text for awhile before finally finding it again to serve up at the appropriate time. Notice the alias Hans Bjelke? My wife thought some religious crazy might blow us up if they knew who posted it so she insisted I use the alias. I'm hoping the regulars here are more open minded. Still, do I need to lock and load, and check my locks after reposting it?

'The Truth Concerning the Untruth'

Every human who has looked out at the night sky and who understands what a star is has also admitted to themselves that the universe is immense, possibly without end, and that in all the cosmos there could never exist a magic mythical being that created everything. The idea in and of itself is preposterous. To believe in a theory or concept that could never be proven is beyond unethical, but is at its core, a diabolical contrivance and a perversion of the thought processes, medieval and primitive, and ignorantly dismissive of all modern, developed, and logic based thinking.

To deny the truth is in itself a lie. We who have ever claimed faith in god at all know in our deepest thoughts that we only do so primarily to please our families and piers, fearful and sometimes self righteous, we dare not admit our true feelings to those we trust and love or those we believe we need for sustenance and validation. We know to do so would expose us to ridicule, pious judgment, and condemnation.

As we observe the cosmos through a telescope and our sense of wonder and amazement awakens, we cannot deny the innermost instinct of knowing we humans are not alone in this the Stelliferous Age, armed with the secure knowledge that the existence of intelligent life is mathematically and axiomatically assured, we are sure to feel self consciously foolish for ever doubting science at all, and sheepish for not giving credit where credit is due.

To those we owe true reverence and gratitude; the scholars of science and engineering, the aviators, the global explorers, the adventurers, the social revolutionaries, and astronauts who paved our way to the knowledge, democracy, and technology of our world today. If you think you need a martyr to justify and make worthy a yoke to bear for yourself and all the world, choose instead to learn from these exceptionally aware folk, who have sacrificed with all their passion and energy, to bring light, prosperity, and scientific enlightenment to our planet. Acknowledge and invest in these intelligent and dedicated stewards, who have at times burned with inspiration as hot and as bright as the stars that illuminate our world.

-Hans Bjelke
(bushman)
01-30-2012
Norton

Social climber
quitcherbellyachin
Nov 4, 2014 - 06:05pm PT
I just don't see why people can't ever so slightly alter their faith to allow for what we see in nature. Objective evidence.


they cannot ever so slightly alter their faith

because they know that like a cheap suit, it unravels quickly thread by thread if one is pulled out
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 4, 2014 - 06:28pm PT
Full rant and diatribe mode engaged:

'The Truth Concerning Our Ignorance'

To whom it may concern,

It has taken a lifetime of amateur research and unanswered philosophical questions to finally cast off the chains of religious bondage that stifled the journey of scientific discovery I so longed to embark upon since early childhood. Albert Einstein said, "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Scientists today are now discovering that the universe might after all be limitless and of course Einstein’s assessment of our folly has already been accepted as known fact. The following statements are what I now believe to be a true and incontrovertible picture of our current predicament, and if these statements are not even close to the truth about religion, politics, science, and our civilization today, then I profess to know nothing and I am as clueless as one could ever be about our place within the cosmos.

Greetings Earthlings,

Because of the current holy war in which religious peoples have proven they will never evolve and have set numerous examples of their zealotry and willingness to die because they believe god is on their side, and because of their refusal to fully embrace science, I have come to the conclusion that the human species is now in the throes of an evolutionary downslide. Narrow minded political and religious dogma have replaced good common sense, and have been accepted as normal by many in this nation and by many in other nations around the world. Mankind might have succeeded in sending astronauts to Mars and would possibly have achieved much more by now, including a technological revolution that even our brightest minds have not yet conceived, were it not for the errors of our ethically inept political leaders, the miscalculations of our greedy and corrupted corporate entities, and the self imposed ignorance of our citizenry during the past forty years.

Why would we advance our achievements to the pinnacle of walking on the moon, only to allow ourselves to once again be bogged down with worldwide ethnic cleansing, ideological bickering, and financial enslavement? This planet might nurture a race of beings that could transcend war, eliminate pestilence and disease, and grow wise beyond the limits of our arrogant self absorbed intellects. Astronomy and Mathematics have revealed to us that we are not the only intelligent life in the universe or multiverse. How long will it take before we frightened homo-sapiens cast off hope based philosophies and embrace the fact that souls, spirits, deities, promises of eternal life, heavenly rewards, eternal damnation, and retribution do not exist. Is it so hard to accept the arrow of time, that we all fall victim to entropy, and that there is no physical or spiritual reincarnation of any life form? This is it; we have one life to live; to make a difference with, to determine our future with, to breach the limits we have so often set for ourselves, to experience and explore our colossal universe, and to fully expand our human potential.

Disasters such as tsunamis, hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, volcanoes, and asteroid strikes will continue to happen. The sun will die and take the earth with it. Galaxies will collide and time will end. These are not moral judgments against us by some unseen deity. These are just naturally occurring phenomenon and irrefutable facts. The questions are; what are we willing to do to further the advancement of intelligent life on this planet, what do we do to convince people that the planet is a lifeboat, how do we salvage our remaining resources, when will people recognize that all resources and life forms that are known and are discovered might be essential to our continued existence, how responsible and intelligent will we need to be to travel to other planets and stars, are we willing to fully embrace such a challenge? We must first be willing to try and understand reality as it is presented to us by the natural world before we can achieve these and other advancements.

Hans Bjelke
(Bushman)
October 4th, 2011
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Nov 4, 2014 - 08:20pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]

 Introspection

Is it even possible for the completely ignorant ones like me?
Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 5, 2014 - 08:46am PT
In the old days they could interplanetary travel just by mantra sound vibration.

Yeah, those were great times. Werner, remember that time you hot-wired that vimana and did donuts around Jupiter? Arjuna was pissed.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 5, 2014 - 09:08am PT
What, no 'sample return mission from Uranus' jokes?
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 5, 2014 - 10:33am PT
MikeL. Are you going to now tell us that these things are not real?


What do you mean by real?

As we have seen over and over, A) science and discjursive thought is reductionistic, and B) when we reduce down to particles all the stuff that seems real to our senses, stuff we can actually see and weight and so forth (with instrumentation, granted), said stuff "has no physical extent."

So while science has itself admitted that "real" does not translate to Newtonial "stuff," the arguments for real things is apparently a discussion of what happens on the meta level where life actually takes place, far above the quantum threshold, where the apparent "things" we relate to operate under their own set of rules, and in doing so underscore the limits of reductionism.

JL
limpingcrab

Trad climber
the middle of CA
Nov 5, 2014 - 02:44pm PT
Why is the title "vs" instead of "and" ?
MH2

climber
Nov 5, 2014 - 03:01pm PT
when we reduce down to particles all the stuff that seems real to our senses, stuff we can actually see and weight and so forth (with instrumentation, granted), said stuff "has no physical extent."




And yet at Brookhaven they manage to collide gold ions at 99.995% of lightspeed. How is that possible if gold atoms have no physical extent?
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 5, 2014 - 03:26pm PT
How is that possible if gold atoms have no physical extent?


That's a question for a quantum engineer. They are the ones saying this is so. Don't confuse this for my opinion, which has nothing do with it.

I would point out the fact that people often have a kind of panic response to the idea that what we believe is solid stuff just ain't so in any ultimate way. It leaves us no thing to hang onto. It also means that reality cannot be explained exclusively by physical events, since at the most fundamental level physicality is not present in the way our sense organs tell us it is.

JL

MH2

climber
Nov 5, 2014 - 03:35pm PT
Get a grip, JL.

People do have things they panic about. Whether reality is solid or not is not one of them.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 5, 2014 - 03:40pm PT
DMT -in case you missed it the first 50 times around. I'll admit, giving up our real stuff is a tough one.

From "Discover."

"Niels Bohr, a Danish Physicist who made significant contributions to understanding atomic structure and quantum theory once said: “if quantum mechanics hasn’t profoundly shocked you, you haven’t understood it yet.” Quantum physics has left scientists all over the world baffled, especially with the discovery that our physical material reality, isn’t really physical at all. “Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real.” It seems philosophers of our ancient past were right, our senses really do deceive us.

Again, our physical material reality really ISN’T physical at all. The meaning, significance and implications of these findings within our quantum world have led to a plethora of ideas and theories, some of which lay inside the label of “pseudo-science.”

Scientific understandings change continuously throughout human history. Old “knowings” are constantly dismissed as we come across new ones. Even with our current understanding about the laws of physics, it could have some loopholes, especially with the recent disclosure of the black budget. Other phenomenon, like zero-point energy, extracting energy and heat from electromagnetic zero-point radiation via the Casimir force, also raise expectations. Some of these ideas threaten our current understanding of physics, but how can we even have an understanding of physics when what we call ‘matter’ isn’t even real? How can we understand it if when we observe an atom at its tiniest level the behavior of that atom changes? The quantum world is definitely a weird one, and it’s safe to say that we don’t understand it, but we are starting to recognize that non-physical properties govern the universe.

The notion that the atom was the smallest particle in the universe fell with the discovery that the atom itself is made up of even smaller, subatomic elements. What was even more shocking was the revelation that these subatomic particles emit various “strange energies.” Proponents would argue that the findings within quantum physics only apply and are significant at the subatomic level, but to those I say, are we not all existing at the subatomic level? When we observe ourselves and our physical environment at the smallest level, are we not made up of atoms? Are we not made up of subatomic particles? Are we not what we observe?

At the turn of the ninetieth century, physicists started to explore the relationship between energy and the structure of matter. In doing so, the belief that a physical, Newtonian material universe that was at the very heart of scientific knowing was dropped, and the realization that matter is nothing but an illusion replaced it. Scientists began to recognize that everything in the Universe is made out of energy.

Quantum physicists discovered that physical atoms are made up of vortices of energy that are constantly spinning and vibrating, each one radiating its own unique energy signature. Therefore, if we really want to observe ourselves and find out what we are, we are really beings of energy and vibration, radiating our own unique energy signature -this is fact and is what quantum physics has shown us time and time again. We are much more than what we perceive ourselves to be, and it’s time we begin to see ourselves in that light. If you observed the composition of an atom with a microscope, you would see a small, invisible tornado like vortex, with a number of infinitely small energy vortices called quarks and photons. These are what make up the structure of the atom. As you focused in closer and closer on the structure of the atom, you would see nothing, you would observe a physical void.(0) The atom has no physical structure, we have no physical structure, physical things really don’t have any physical structure! Atoms are made out of invisible energy, not tangible matter.

It’s quite the conundrum, isn’t it? Our experience tells us that our reality is made up of physical material things, and that our world is an independently existing objective one. Again, what quantum mechanics reveals is that there is no true “physicality” in the universe, that atoms are made of focused vorticies of energy-miniature tornadoes that are constantly popping into and out of existence. The revelation that the universe is not an assembly of physical parts, suggested by Newtonian physics, and instead comes from a holistic entanglement of immaterial energy waves stems from the work of Albert Einstein, Max Planck, and Werner Heisenberg, among others.

Despite the findings of quantum physics many scientists today still cling onto the prevailing matter-oriented worldview, for no good reason at all. As mentioned earlier, these scientists restrict quantum theory’s validity to the subatomic world. If we know that matter isn’t physical, how can we further our scientific discovery by treating it as physical?

Despite the unrivaled empirical success of quantum theory, the very suggestion that it may be literally true as a description of nature is still greeted with cynicism, incomprehension and even anger. (T. Folger, “Quantum Shmantum”; Discover 22:37-43, 2013)
WBraun

climber
Nov 5, 2014 - 04:45pm PT
The intelligent class knows that material science is the relative platform of knowledge.

The intelligent class knows that the spiritual science is the absolute platform of knowledge.

The gross materialists are always incomplete.

This why their foolish theories always change over "TIME".

Time is absolute truth and is an impersonal feature of God himself ......
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 5, 2014 - 05:06pm PT
This is about as good as it gets with a 100 word vocabulary.
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Nov 5, 2014 - 05:09pm PT
Here's a translation:

http://vaniquotes.org/wiki/Intelligent_class_means

The duck is really a parrot.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 5, 2014 - 05:15pm PT
I've heard the same spirit babble all my life. Same 'power words', all pregnant with deep, deep meaning. Or something. Northern Cali upbringing, doncha know. We've got plenty of it up here, too. In the end, it's all the same tired crap, but it does make the wearer feel 'awakened' or, more to the point, it makes the wearer feel that everyone else is a spiritual zombie.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Nov 5, 2014 - 06:13pm PT
Largo posted thusly:

As we have seen over and over, A) science and discjursive thought is reductionistic, and B) when we reduce down to particles all the stuff that seems real to our senses, stuff we can actually see and weight and so forth (with instrumentation, granted), said stuff "has no physical extent."

Boy, have I been waiting for Largo to bring this up again. Near the death of the old science vs. religion thread, he made a long post about particle physics and the nature of matter. That its real form was emptiness and verified that this somehow proved his whole Zen approach to knowing.

I believe he said, "Form is emptiness and emptiness is form...exactly." or something pretty close to that. He pretty much crowed that the physicists had proved the no-thing-ness of the Universe that he believes in, through his "experiential" activities. I say that he cannot, in any way, sit, meditate, and directly experience the action of a particular electron.

Sure, if you shock him with a car battery, he will understand electrons a little more directly, but his experiential adventures do not consist of traditional scientific thought, or at least methods.

For years, he has been crowing about the limited nature of the "meat brain." I assume that this refers to the physical brain in itself, which is made up of many molecules, atoms, and subatomic particles.

If you want to break down atoms and get at the most fundamental particles that we know of, matter in the conventional sense really does get odd. It does not break down, but in an atom, which can be physically observed now, most of that atom is empty space.

John went on parroting things that I really don't understand much myself..subatomoic physics. He liked this website, for those of you who would like to check it out:

http://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/mass-energy-matter-etc/matter-and-energy-a-false-dichotomy/

Now, most of us know at least a little about this from a lay perspective. You have "classical" mechanics, which all works quite well in Chemistry, Relativistic Physics, plain old engineering (of something like the LHC itself) and what most of us are familiar with when we describe matter in that classic sense.

Largo using the work of the most reductionist observationists in all of science to prove his notion of no-thing is a joke. I believe that some popular books came about back in the seventies about the most fundamental particles of matter and relating them to philosophy, such as "The Dancing Wu Li Masters" and others. His total world view of Buddhist emptiness has nothing to do with particle physics and enlightenment. I haven't read of a single prediction made by Sidhartha or any of what MikeL calls "fully realized" Buddhists about physics that were later experimentally proved.

OK. So accept that the occupants and area within a neutron are indeed mostly empty space. That does not mean that you fire all of the engineers who built the various measuring devices from Ed's Scroungatron to the LHC itself aren't physical, and perform in precise physical ways.

Even John's beloved website says this:

“Matter” can refer to atoms, the basic building blocks of what we think of as “material”: tables, air, rocks, skin, orange juice — and by extension, to the particles out of which atoms are made, including electrons and the protons and neutrons that make up the nucleus of an atom.
◾OR it can refer to what are sometimes called the elementary “matter particles” of nature: electrons, muons, taus, the three types of neutrinos, the six types of quarks — all of the types of particles which are not the force particles (the photon, gluons, graviton and the W and Z particles.) Read here about the known apparently-elementary particles of nature. [The Higgs particle, by the way, doesn't neatly fit into the classification of particles as matter particles and force particles, which was somewhat artificial to start with; I have a whole section about this classification below.]
◾OR it can refer to classes of particles that are found out there, in the wider universe, and that on average move much more slowly than the speed of light.

Hmmm. Things. Stuff.

For most of us we can do perfectly good work without having to know much about particle physics. The classical physics of Newton was sufficient to navigate the Rosetta probe to next week's landing on a comet. It didn't go fast enough to require significant correction using relativity, I assume, but Relativity is acceptable when discussing the large stuff in the universe. Relativity and Quantum physics are still, I guess, at their famous impasse.

This impasse hasn't stopped us from building bigger particle accelerators any more than cosmology questions haven't stopped us from furiously building new telescopes and instruments to observe the Very Large.

So Largo's claim that the fundamental, and strange, Very Small somehow verifies any notion that he has put forth over the past few years is total bullsh#t.

He writes stories about the Stonemasters and books about anchors. All of which can be considered using the first definition of matter that the linked website fits.

So are you writing a book about this, JL? Will they be made of paper and cardboard? Man, for your sake, I hope not.

These things are of course very important, like DMT says, but the nature of subatomic particles and Largo's meditation are so far apart from each other that it is laughable. Is he saying that he meditated his way into an understanding of matter? I don't see why he took off on this dangerous tangent. Railing against all of the reductionist-discursive efforts as not being the way to understanding, and then zero-ing in on the ultimate reductionist discursive part of science as proving your notion of emptiness is a little bizarre if you consider your writings as a whole.

So John, does the LHC exist? If all matter is nothingness, as you seem to be saying, then does the tree outside your Zendo exist? I suggest that John swallow a hundred aspirin and then see what the emptiness of matter does to him.

Shoplifting from a popular physics website, and then concluding that it is the same thing as his Zen notion of emptiness, is stepping into a huge pile of sh#t.

I can guarantee you that he will never admit that his shoe stinks, though.

Remember this part of the page that you quoted from:

[quote]“Matter” can refer to atoms, the basic building blocks of what we think of as “material”: tables, air, rocks, skin, orange juice — and by extension, to the particles out of which atoms are made, including electrons and the protons and neutrons that make up the nucleus of an atom.
This is the most useful description of matter in all but the most reductionist ways, and is perfectly useful scientifically in almost all fields. Engineers who build bridges don't worry about subatomic particles. They worry about the physical characteristics of classical matter.

A dimensionless point is easy to contemplate if you go read a little about singularities. They are just really big dimensionless points.



jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Nov 5, 2014 - 08:30pm PT
It's good having John L back to liven things up a bit. The fact that he chooses the "religion vs science" thread upon which to post clearly shows his position is one of religious conviction.


;>)
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 6, 2014 - 03:01am PT
'Dogma or Dharma'

I read my dogs some writing from this thread,
They rolled their eyes then yawned and went to bed,
But thus in passing this I heard was said,
They groaned, "whatever," as my face turned red,

It really hurt to see them act this way,
That dogs in all their apathy should say,
My interests so bored them on this day,
But food arrives they're hardly kept at bay,

For dogs and I have much more to compare,
When mastering one thousand yards our stare,
We both find common ground the saying goes,
When finding there what's right under our nose,

So all is all in success and defeat,
That we might thrive on different types of meat,
For meat is meat be chopped or finely ground,
Regardless if the argument is sound.

-bushman
11/06/2014

BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Nov 6, 2014 - 09:45am PT
Don't you see John Gill? He is now a scientist, threw his hat in the ring with Ed.

I sure wish Ed was around. Particle Physics is so alien to me.

I spent a few hours reading about singularities last night. I wasn't aware of how important quantum physics was in regards to BIG objects. It helps to predict the odd material of Black Holes and Neutron Stars. Exotic stuff. Very interesting.

I spend most of my time interpreting geophysical logs, and many of the instruments that you use to log deep well bores are based on subatomic physics.

We might send down 15 instruments on a single run, and I have spent many long nights watching the monitors in the logging truck. We use the photoelectric effect to determine lithology for example.

Field work is mainly being the well doctor. Look at the squiggly lines to see what kind of a well you will have. After thirty years I rarely need to pull out a calculator. I can look and see .
WBraun

climber
Nov 6, 2014 - 09:53am PT
Modern man spends all his time trying understand all things outside of himself.

And thus never understands his own self.

One who fully understands his own self will understand all things outside of himself .....
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 6, 2014 - 09:58am PT
his position is one of religious conviction.
---


As mentioned 100 times, "religion" deals with beliefs, doctrine, faith, devotion, "God," and so forth. Kindly find where I have used any such language or terms in my discussions.

BASE, you sould old and furious. Ask a question.

JL
PSP also PP

Trad climber
Berkeley
Nov 6, 2014 - 10:28am PT
Base , doing a lot of fishing lately; there aren't any fish in the zen pond. There is no conflict with zen and science. Except for the one you are trying to create.
WBraun

climber
Nov 6, 2014 - 11:14am PT
This is exactly it.

99.9999999999999999% is what these so called scientists are trying to do here.

Create a conflict where there is none.

This why they are foolish mental speculators and theorists ......
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 6, 2014 - 11:36am PT
I started doing yoga 5 weeks ago. I've been thinking about it for years, but this seems to be the year for pulling the trigger. Surfing is up next.

Yeah, it's just for personal benefit, so I know it doesn't count towards my enlightenment points.

The instructor is a small, quiet guy named Ryan. Your pulse rate goes down just being in the same room with him.

Ryan puts on calming, ethereal music, but the Zumba class upstairs drowns it out with Michael Jackson and "Go Hard!"s. Ryan just looks up and says "let the sounds and sensations wash over you".

It's hard. I feel like a 55 gallon drum with 2 x 4s duct taped to it. But I feel great afterwards. Sometimes I swim for an hour following the class. That feels even better.

The class is a mix of hotties and old farts like me who steal an occasional appreciative peek between sweat wipes.

Everyone has a certain beauty to them. My friend Eric looks like a viking - he's all beautiful - a gentle, if troubled, giant. The old woman next to me has a face like a Chinese lion - a real bruiser, but her feet are exquisite - muscular, with smooth, tanned skin that belies her age. The same-age geezer in the front of me has an incredibly flexible lower back - like a bow.

I knew I was serious when I bought a yoga mat at Big 5. They were all a bit girly, with floral patterns and such. The geezer in front has a manly mat - dark grey, with an imposing, black Chinese geometric pattern that looks like it could be stamped on a vial of powdered rhino horn. I have a feeling it cost more than 14.95, though. Anyway, I left my 14.94 mat at the gym after using it once, so I guess I'll stick with the mats provided. They're more comfy and sticky anyway. Forced detachment.

I've been going once a week, but I'm going to up that to 2 this week.

This week, for the first time, our instructor Ryan cracked a couple of wry jokes. I've gotta say, they were pretty good. I was surprised he broke character, but I suppose that character was my invention, not his.

You never know what you'll experience in a yoga class.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 6, 2014 - 01:14pm PT
When the man said, "There ain't any fish in the Zen pond," another way of saying this is nothing has any physical extent. Neither observation has anything to do with enlightenment, proving this or that, beliefs, or whatever else you can project onto it. It simply is the way things are, as opposed to our mental pictures of same. Of course we all use mental pictures metaphorically to express our ideas, but we understand that the picture and the subject are not the same - that is, the map is not the territory.

But how easy it is to get fixated on the map/mental picture. It can be all we ever talk about, evidence by this thread.

JL
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Nov 6, 2014 - 01:32pm PT
That's a nice mental picture...
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 6, 2014 - 03:08pm PT
Mental pictures are what we do.

That's just the way things are.
MH2

climber
Nov 6, 2014 - 04:29pm PT
the map is not the territory.


Sound of wheel spinning.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 6, 2014 - 04:55pm PT
Mental pictures are what we do.

That's just the way things are.



I would encourage you to explore the notion that the fact that the brain generates mental pictures is the way the brain is, not necessarily the way things "are."

Another thing most obvious on this thread is that we all tend to grab onto some notion per the way things really and truly "are." It is challenging to move past what our sense organs tell us what things are. Instruments, or introspection, will disclose that nothing "is" in the sense that our bodies tell us. For example, several years ago I blew up my left leg. My experience certainly told me that the leg was "real" as was the pain and money and time spent and so forth.

And that's really the stepping off point into the entire "what is real" discussion. Like it or not there apparently are various levels or stratas of existence each with their own "real" perspectives. But if we look for the existential equal of scientific constants, operating at all levels and in all things, we must wonder . . .

JL
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 7, 2014 - 06:30am PT
'Empty Spaces'

To prove that I am nothing,
What have I to lose,
So let me take my leave,
If it would so amuse,
To chum the ocean full and rife,

The proposition that I go,
Would leave no empty space,
Void to fill the void,
How then the disgrace?
And what then of my family life?

Where trinkets and spare change,
With pet hair, lint, and green,
The yellowed photographs,
Aging brittle and unseen,
Are hiding out with my old knife,

The leaves that crunch and rustle,
As the autumn winds do blow,
Empty stepping spaces are what's left,
Where memories once did go,
And failing this my only strife,

Now all is stripped away,
There's nothing left to hide,
What dignity I'd hoped for,
In this short and frail reside,
Has been imparted to my wife.

-bushman
11/07/2014

MH2

climber
Nov 7, 2014 - 07:57am PT
"Though inland far we be,
 
Our souls have sight of that immortal sea
 
        Which brought us hither,
 
    Can in a moment travel thither,
 
And see the children sport upon the shore,
 
And hear the mighty waters rolling evermore."


Ode on Intimations of Immortality
Wordsworth



MH2

climber
Nov 7, 2014 - 09:44am PT
Though realism may be a tempting viewpoint



I'm more tempted by surrealism.
WBraun

climber
Nov 7, 2014 - 09:45am PT
The consciousness of the scientist is at one level and manipulates words in some order to reveal his meaning.

The consciousness of the theist is at one level and manipulates words in some order to reveal his meaning.

The consciousness of the atheist is at one level and manipulates words in some order to reveal his meaning.

The consciousness of the agnostic is at one level and manipulates words in some order to reveal his meaning.

Consciousness is what drives all of them and is the center.

Consciousness is eternal and another impersonal feature of God ......


Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 7, 2014 - 10:02am PT
It's 42
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Nov 7, 2014 - 10:07am PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]

But no religious person wants to hear it...

It's in their faces...

But it will not be seen by a single one of them


And then there is this...
[Click to View YouTube Video]
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Nov 8, 2014 - 11:03am PT
A model is a good model if it
1. Is elegant

Elegance is a desirable quality in any number of activities. We certainly admire it when we see it in a climber, or a ballerina, or a wide receiver, . . . It is sought in the formulations of mathematical theory and in the proofs supporting such theory - but there one has to be very knowledgable in the subject ( as is the case in physics, also), whereas watching a beautiful pass reception requires little background. In physical feats elegance does not necessarily imply efficiency.

As for "levels" of reality, during my adventures in the Art of Dreaming many years ago, the environment in which I found myself seemed even more real than normal reality - but actions in the former had no effect on the latter. What counts in "reality" is how the physical environment is affected. When John L visits no-thingness nothing changes in normal reality. And the scientific fact that the ground I fall toward is mostly empty space does not mitigate the injury I receive when I hit.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Nov 12, 2014 - 08:26pm PT
By Sang Tan, AP

Magician Penn Jillette outlines his atheist version of The Ten Commandments in his new book.

"I wanted to see how many of the ideas that many people think are handed down from (G)od really make sense to someone who says, 'I don't know.'"

Here's his list:

STORY: Magicians say craft makes them see faith as hocus-pocus

1. The highest ideals are human intelligence, creativity and love. Respect these above all.

2. Do not put things or even ideas above other human beings. (Let's scream at each other about Kindle versus iPad, solar versus nuclear, Republican versus Libertarian, Garth Brooks versus Sun Ra— but when your house is on fire, I'll be there to help.)

3. Say what you mean, even when talking to yourself. (What used to be an oath to (G)od is now quite simply respecting yourself.)

4. Put aside some time to rest and think. (If you're religious, that might be the Sabbath; if you're a Vegas magician, that'll be the day with the lowest grosses.)

5. Be there for your family. Love your parents, your partner, and your children. (Love is deeper than honor, and parents matter, but so do spouse and children.)

6. Respect and protect all human life. (Many believe that "Thou shalt not kill" only refers to people in the same tribe. I say it's all human life.)

7. Keep your promises. (If you can't be sexually exclusive to your spouse, don't make that deal.)

8. Don't steal. (This includes magic tricks and jokes — you know who you are!)

9. Don't lie. (You know, unless you're doing magic tricks and it's part of your job. Does that make it OK for politicians, too?)

10. Don't waste too much time wishing, hoping, and being envious; it'll make you bugnutty.




Something makes me wish there were a couple of people had read this before some of us arrived in this world.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 12, 2014 - 11:04pm PT
Jingy: Magician Penn Jillette outlines his atheist version of The Ten Commandments in his new book.

Yeah, those are false, too. Don’t get excited.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 12, 2014 - 11:10pm PT
Base 104: Near the death of the old science vs. religion thread, . . . .

You should know, that it was never really about the death or the uselessness of science vs. anything. That label or characterization is on you.

The point is that science should not be considered special, as dominant over any other means of awareness. The conflict comes from holding a single viewpoint. Not closure but openness. Nothing is anything in particlular.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Nov 13, 2014 - 08:00am PT
Were you registering excitement from my post?

This is nothing new... It's all made up... even the so called god one's...

Penn just gave his a little more thought before putting them in print.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Nov 13, 2014 - 04:20pm PT
The point is that science should not be considered special, as dominant over any other means of awareness.

 That's just a weird statement to make...

I'm not totally sure what you mean...with this statement?

Science is the most reliable means of verifying/confirming the reality around us.

I'm not totally confident we can use any of my personal telepathic means of awareness to paint any kind of picture about the world around us...

It's just more natural to choose science when science is needed for any number of things...

Even the fears of getting through the night can be sciences away... thought about rationally..

or one can choose to prey, or use telepathy to acquire the same knowledge one can certainly obtain via science...


Its not that science is better, or anything...
It's just more reliable...
Not so much changing with the tide of human emotion...
But rather falling always toward truth.

MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 13, 2014 - 08:51pm PT
Narrow views.

Would you believe science before your body when you feel hunger pangs, the natural attraction to your children, the rhythm of a sonnet, or what “The Ode to Joy” brings to some of us? What does science have to say about values, what it means to be human, or morals?

Narrow views.
MH2

climber
Nov 13, 2014 - 09:49pm PT
For some, Spock or Kirk seem to be the only choices. That would be a narrow view.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 13, 2014 - 10:50pm PT
DMT:

Expound.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 13, 2014 - 10:51pm PT
MH2:

Exactly. They all are. Every single one of them--by definition.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 14, 2014 - 05:42am PT
Would you believe a watermelon before smashing it?

WOULD YOU?
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Nov 14, 2014 - 06:24am PT
"Science has never distanced me from my children. I've never seen a scientific suggestion that such should be the case. Ever. Even though, horror of horrors, science seeks to understand the physical mechanisms of life, and one of these mechanisms is love. What does the Ode tell us about the love of a scientific discovery? Are scientists and techies allowed to have feelings too? Science has a lot to say about the rhythms of nature, especially those only visible to the eye of analysis. Science has revealed what human senses cannot discern, does that really diminish your pleasure with sonnets?

You talk of narrow views and use strawmen to illustrate them."

Perfect. :)
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 14, 2014 - 07:22am PT
'The Cunundrum Equation'

Metaphysical analysis of Science = Scientific analysis of Meraphysics =
Grey Area x Emotion ÷ Logic = Grey Area

Source:
(Brain + Education x Experience = Opinion)
WBraun

climber
Nov 14, 2014 - 07:37am PT
The gross materialists can only barely quantify the inferior gross material energies and what to speak of even coming close to the superior energies.

The gross material scientists can not understand the superior energies with their gross material senses
and what to speak their inferior limited instruments created by manipulating the gross physical elements.

The puffed up material atheistic lab coats are always in poor fund of knowledge of the Superior energies which they know exist but are always out of their reach .......
MH2

climber
Nov 14, 2014 - 08:56am PT
Superior energies which they know exist but are always out of their reach .......


[Click to View Linked Image]
crankster

Trad climber
Nov 14, 2014 - 09:58am PT
The gross materialists can only barely quantify the inferior gross material energies and what to speak of even coming close to the superior energies.
??????????
PSP also PP

Trad climber
Berkeley
Nov 14, 2014 - 10:40am PT
Cute dog ! it is thinking "I fu##ing love science!
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Nov 14, 2014 - 10:51am PT
You can find the source of all the duck's wisdom here:

http://harekrishnaquotes.com/category/prabhupada-quotes/
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Nov 14, 2014 - 01:12pm PT

An American pastor visiting the Nordic countries: What do people believe in?
[Click to View YouTube Video]
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 14, 2014 - 01:47pm PT
Heaven is a finding a Norwegian hutte in a driving blizzard.

That's not a concept a Georgia preacher is going to be able to easily wrap his mind around.

Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Nov 14, 2014 - 02:08pm PT
WBraun

climber

Nov 14, 2014 - 07:37am PT
The gross materialists can only barely quantify the inferior gross material energies and what to speak of even coming close to the superior energies.

The gross material scientists can not understand the superior energies with their gross material senses
and what to speak their inferior limited instruments created by manipulating the gross physical elements.

The puffed up material atheistic lab coats are always in poor fund of knowledge of the Superior energies which they know exist but are always out of their reach .......

 Gross Count - 5.
 Conclusions Draw - Unremarkable drivel



crankster

Trad climber

Nov 14, 2014 - 09:58am PT
The gross materialists can only barely quantify the inferior gross material energies and what to speak of even coming close to the superior energies.
?????


Translation from Weiner to English needed.
Translation from Weiner to English needed.
Credit: crankster


?????

 Classic!!! Clever, cunning Crankster LMAO


So... With humans landing instrumentation on a comet... How long before we humans get the information we so desperately seek...

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Rosetta/Rosetta_media_briefing_replay

[Click to View YouTube Video]


Hang on to your hats... your worlds are about to change.
Good luck bending yourselves into pretzels to get out of answering this one...
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Nov 15, 2014 - 08:03pm PT
You can't quantify the awe, pity or fear that great literature exacts in a human being (sullly)

Well, you probably could, but I'd rather not.


Marlow: When I was attending a math conference at Trondheim in the summer of 1997 we were taken into the countryside to a small church where the pastor awaited our arrival. He walked to the wall behind the pulpit and pulled aside a tapestry to reveal a large drawing done hundreds of years ago depicting the devil cavorting about with a huge erection.

It put all those Southern Baptist services I attended in my youth in perspective.
PSP also PP

Trad climber
Berkeley
Nov 15, 2014 - 08:09pm PT
to reveal a large drawing done hundreds of years ago depicting the devil cavorting about with a huge erection.

LMAO!
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 15, 2014 - 11:43pm PT
DMT:

I must be a terrible writer. My apologies.

The point is not whether science can come up with an explanation (a theory) of any of the things I made reference to. The point is that you KNOW them through structures of awareness that are not mental-rational (science). They just don’t need any explanation; they stand on their own experientially.

Of course science can say many things, but you can be aware in almost innumerable ways without it.

The things in life I pointed to are not strawmen, by the way. They constitute the core of day-to-day living. I mean your life isn’t really all quarks and intergalactic forces to you, is it? If it isn’t—but it’s the base of your argument—then you’re really just pulling my leg, aren’t you?
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Nov 15, 2014 - 11:56pm PT

Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 16, 2014 - 03:43am PT
That was a fun video Marlowe, a great cross cultural exchange. I was surprised that the fundamentalist minister from Georgia handled the whole situation so well, a tribute to his humanity if not his theology.

The even more interesting program I watched which popped up on the screen afterward was a BBC debate titled, "Is it time for religions to accept evolution?" There were a couple of Christian fundamentalists there but British style, which was interesting, and a number of scientists who were atheists but giving the religious people ways to believe in both evolution and God, though they themselves did not (Dawkins was criticized by the scientists for his unhelpful attitude).

For me though, the most fascinating debate was between the Muslim scholars, some of whom believed in evolution and others who did not and all of them quoting the Koran. It's a real tribute to the British that they would put Muslims and Christians on an equal footing on a program like that, and even more interesting that the scientists agreed that the Muslim religious position on the issue made more sense than the fundamentalist Christians (there were liberal, evolution believing Christians represented as well).

Above all, the high level of education and discourse on display compared to most of their American counterparts, was impressive. PBS on steroids. Well worth watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOPJXCDsMLI
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 16, 2014 - 04:46am PT
“In the history of human thought science has often come out of superstition.
Astronomy came out of astrology.
Chemistry came out of alchemy.
What will come out of economics?”
Bernard Lewis
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 16, 2014 - 07:34am PT
Dawkins bombast broke the taboo and got this much needed conversation going. He was one of the provocative icebreakers that rattled the publics interest enough to ensure sufficient viewership for tamer treatments. Programs like this are a reaction to New Atheism, bit Dawkins focus on the damage religion has done remains invaluable, however bitter the pill
WBraun

climber
Nov 16, 2014 - 08:06am PT
Dawkins hasn't said sh!t.

Same bullsh!t atheists said thousands of years ago.

Nothing new ......
PhilG

Trad climber
The Circuit, Tonasket WA
Nov 16, 2014 - 08:11am PT
Jan, thanks for a very educational and interesting link.

I learned a long time ago that it is usually pointless and a waste of time to argue with someone about there beliefs. The ability to believe is a strong force in homo sapiens.

In the spirit of one day we'll all get along, I offer the following Sunday morning spiritual:



[Click to View YouTube Video]
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 16, 2014 - 08:58am PT
???

Debating belief is precisely how change happens.

And change does happen.

It's happening right now with regards to religion in a huge why, precisely because people are now arguing, discussing, debating, and questioning.

Once an idea is seeded, it may be rejected at first to be considered later, or just lie there sewing the tiniest bit of doubt which may or may not come to anything, but there's no removing it.
WBraun

climber
Nov 16, 2014 - 09:42am PT
Yes you can waste your time for millions of lifetimes debating "Beliefs".

Belief is worthless ultimately without scientific proof.

So go on for your many many incarnations of lifetimes to waste your time debating beliefs .....
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 16, 2014 - 10:59am PT
What I found interesting about the Nordic video is not so much the religious subject treated therein ; but what the video and other examples of recent examinations have revealed about the Nordic countries.

It's not surprising to me that Nordic peoples are typically anti-Christian in the broadest sense. Because of their traditional remoteness ,these cultures had been allowed to flourish as pagan strongholds in some cases well into the 18th century. The various transformations that gripped the rest of Europe from the decline of pagan Rome to medieval times then to the Renaissance and then the Reformation, the Enlightenment and so on---did not occur there ; nor did these historical developments have an concurrent transformative effect on a relatively insulated traditional culture--- a culture rich in beautiful, transcendent folklore --- as our Norwegian chaperone, Marlow, has often attested.

As a matter of fact --- it is not much of a stretch to imagine marauding Vikings scoping out church spires in places like Ireland, or along the coast of France or England---as choice killing and looting grounds. The local peoples went to great lengths to tone down the salient aspects of these communities, such as scaling back the height of spires---in order to evade detection from Norse mariners on the prowl for rape and plunder.
Moreover, these invaders must have returned to their native fiords with detailed reports of the effete weakness and grovelling stupidity of these Early Christian communities ,ripe for the plucking. Nordic campfires must have been routinely regaled by hearty descriptions of obsequious monks and huddled villagers alternately praying and then meekly accepting their grisly fate---much like their strange 'savior' who once willingly submitted to a similar fate some thousand years before.


Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 16, 2014 - 03:32pm PT
So now you're espousing rape and pillage as heroic manly virtues?

And how does this correspond to the present day pacifism of the Nordic countries?

Secularism has made them effete and obsequious perhaps?
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 16, 2014 - 03:50pm PT
So now you're espousing rape and pillage as heroic manly virtues? Does this mean we should get reinvolved in the middle east or is that only for past times? What about dueling? Better than praying?

What?
I'm not espousing anything of the sort.
The Middle East?
LOL

My remarks above are nothing more or less than disinterested historical observations intended to illustrate aspects of the subject at hand. I am not espousing any particular contentious viewpoint in this case.

Pretty rude comments of yours. You need to read my post with the same disinterested intent in which I meant them and not let your grudge or chip-on-the shoulder or whatever it is get the best of you.

I could walk you through the post in question but I don't think you would get it the second time either.

Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Nov 16, 2014 - 04:09pm PT
It's not surprising to me that Nordic peoples are typically anti-Christian in the broadest sense.

 Not sure if this is meant to be a joke but on the face it is blatantly wrong... anybody else see that?
Nordic people at typically "anti-christian" in any sense is ridiculous...

Anti - a person opposed to a particular policy, activity, or idea.

I can't say that I've heard of any Nordic people are being much "anti" anything...
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 16, 2014 - 04:21pm PT
Did you watch the video and note the graph illustration indicating the religiosity of Nordic countries as compared to the U.S. ? As well as the observation by the American who went about asking with a microphone that most of the people he encountered were bluntly anti-religious, meaning by implication " anti-Christian". All these indications jibe fairly tightly with contemporary Scandanavians own self-characterizations in this regard as being extroidinarily anti-religious as compared to most other nations and cultures.

In my previous post I openly hinted partially at why this could be true. I did so because I believe that few people are appreciative of the sometimes intricate history of why these things could be true---preferring instead to see these matters as the most recent manifestations of their own particular axe to grind.( "ice axe" to grind ,that is)
donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Nov 16, 2014 - 04:39pm PT
I wish that Galileo could speak from the grave on this topic.
WBraun

climber
Nov 16, 2014 - 04:43pm PT
Galileo is still here.

You have to use the right tuning instrument.

The modern lab coats have no clue how to do ......
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Nov 16, 2014 - 05:21pm PT
And how does this correspond to the present day pacifism of the Nordic countries?

It's a pretty common idea there that they managed to get rid of their hooligans by sending them all out a-viking, leaving behind the more reasonable, subdued and introverted types to carry on.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Nov 16, 2014 - 06:15pm PT

Once an idea is seeded, it may be rejected at first to be considered later, or just lie there sewing the tiniest bit of doubt which may or may not come to anything, but there's no removing it.

This sounds close to the christian vangelical model. To plant the seed of "Jesus" and allow God to nurture it. Either way, "considering it later", then maybe the act to change One's mind, drop the Id, put a bridle to the halter of one's own Ego. Can i dare say,,, is empirical proof to the elusive so-called "Free-Will"! Science shows us everwhere we look when there's an Effect,there was a determined Cause. But where in Nature, besides "Life" have we ever seen an "Effect" happen from its own ordinance? Has an Electron ever changed direction because "It wanted to"? Does the Universe, does our Solar Sytem, (without Earth and her inhabitants) have the ability to consciously change direction from the determined Cause justified by the Laws of Nature inorder to change the destined determined Effect? An example being; can we change the direction of the en-evadable over heating of the planet by going in a different direction than the one we're headed on now? We could just not consider Change. Or, we could just say,"Fuc It!", and build bigger rockets, and trucks and burn more and all the "Fossil Fuel" and not "give a Damn" to the future or the weak that die from pollution. OR we could come clean and admit that making up a Law that says you must pay a fine if you emit to much pollution, does NOT heal the planet. And ONLY bumps the Electron out of its trajectory momentarily. And is not a Change-By-Will! The term "Experience" could almost be substituted for "Effect", if your expecting a determined Effect/Experience from a determined Cause, how many ways are out there for a deflection? 2? Free-Will, and "Chance"? "Chance" being a lot of time allowing for a lot of bouncing back-an-forth. Only being interrupted by an alien UFO. Whereas Free-Will as the power to Veto!
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 16, 2014 - 06:21pm PT
"It's a pretty common idea there that they managed to get rid of their hooligans by sending them all out a-viking, leaving behind the more reasonable, subdued and introverted types to carry on".

This is a common European theme. The Scandinavians sent the bad Vikings away to other countries and the British, French, and Germans have all told me that they sent their religious fanatics to the New World and thus are more sensible about the subject. And I was just reading about Benjamin Franklin complaining bitterly about the British dumping their convicts on our shores.

Some of these ideas can now be tested by DNA. It has in fact been discovered that a number of the early colonial settlers to Virginia have descendants who test as Haplogroup I1 which is Viking DNA when found in Britain. Apparently the descendants of those who raided and settled the coasts of Britain, were also among the first to move on to the New World.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 16, 2014 - 06:22pm PT
Tvash: Debating belief is precisely how change happens.

Exactly right, and I’m all for it--as long as you are not going to restrict how arguments can be made or supported.



For those arguing about Scandinavian culture characteristics and comparisons, you might have an interest in this research:

http://www.novsu.ru/file/1092483

(Please note how much of this is considered mental “programming.”)
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 16, 2014 - 06:57pm PT
Fascinating paper Mike. I have encountered all those ideas in Anthropology and Asian Studies research but from a social and cultural point of view rather than a business oriented one. It is always interesting to see familiar ideas applied in a new context - and vice versa.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Nov 16, 2014 - 08:23pm PT

cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen

Nov 16, 2014 - 05:21pm PT
And how does this correspond to the present day pacifism of the Nordic countries?

It's a pretty common idea there that they managed to get rid of their hooligans by sending them all out a-viking, leaving behind the more reasonable, subdued and introverted types to carry on.

but maybe, the earliest Neanderthal Nords(the red-head ones) didn't hear from god for a couple days(or a couple million years) and he knew-not of sacrifice, or forgiveness, or Love? And they did act like animals. Back then. But now days, all the Nords i know, including my family, came to the US to be more Christian.( which seems silly, but everyone has their own Zion.) Most prospered well with a fighting hard-working lineage. But many of those missed the mark in Spirituality because of being consoled under the Law of the old testament. Prolly why we're waring over Law today?
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 16, 2014 - 11:31pm PT
Secular people believe things for no good reason all the time. Politics and social policy are two examples.
Our secular social "scientists" have created a modern society where the weak and dumb are outbreeding the strong and smart.

I am agnostic but I don't see a contradiction in science and religion.
to paraphrase JEleazarian:
"Faith starts where the observable reality ends".

I only object to religion when it has the power to coerce me into anything.
Religion in America doesn't have that power.
Religion in much of the Middle East does.

BASE104's posts on cosmology are awesome. Great thoughts from Largo as well. I enjoy pondering the excellent points made.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 16, 2014 - 11:43pm PT
Secular people believe things for no good reason all the time. Politics and social policy are two examples.

This is a point I have been making for quite some time on threads like this. Simply because one is atheistic does not automatically confer a magical immunity from creation and indulgence in the pernicious foibles and follies of mankind and faith in convenient mythologies. They simply take a different rationalized form but the result is often the same. Malcolm Muggeridge satirically illustrated this point when he famously said that: "Liberalism is Christ without the cross"

As egregious as some Christian or religionist spokesmen can be ---at the end of the day their collective negative effect is much less than many in government and elsewhere in the popular culture who do not claim a religious mentality or motivation for their core beliefs and the inevitable outcomes.

Of course this same thing cannot be said as regards those areas of the world under the dark pall of psychopathic jihadists.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 17, 2014 - 07:33am PT
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 17, 2014 - 09:21am PT
Jan:

On the last page of the document that I pointed to (Hoststede’s research) that I posted just above, it presents these models of organization (social and economic) based upon the research. The models and references are intuitively appealing.

• The contest model (`winner takes all´)
Competitive Anglo-Saxon cultures with low power distance, high individualism and masculinity, and fairly low scores on uncertainty avoidance. Examples: Australia, New Zealand, UK and USA.

• The network model (consensus)
Highly individualistic, `feminine´ societies with low power distance like Scandinavia and the Netherlands. Everyone is supposed to be involved in decision-making.

• The organization as a family (loyalty and hierarchy)
Found in societies that score high on power distance and collectivism and have powerful in-groups and paternalistic leaders. Examples: China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines and Singapore.

• The pyramidal organization (loyalty, hierarchy and implicit order)
Found in collective societies with large power distance and uncertainty avoidance. Examples: much of Latin America (especially Brazil), Greece, Portugal, Russia and Thailand.

• The solar system (hierarchy and an impersonal bureaucracy)
Similar to the pyramid structure, but with greater individualism. Examples: Belgium, France, Northern Italy, Spain and French speaking Switzerland.

• The well-oiled machine (order)
Found in societies with low power distance and high uncertainty avoidance, carefully balanced procedures and rules, not much hierarchy. Examples: Austria, Germany, Czech Republic, Hungary, German speaking Switzerland.

Now that everyone is nodding their head up and down in agreement with these characterizations, i’d like to note the following:

1. Hofstede’s research is based upon a very large sample of survey data that he got from IBM. He was fortunate to find and develop that base of data. These kinds of data bases are not things that one can casually go out and find. The luck of finding data can lead one to think that they have discovered the right data base. “Interesting data” might be only that.

2. The model (and dimensions) that Hofstede and his colleagues developed are not causal. They are based upon intuition, large data sets, and simple correlation. Some of us would call it “dustbowl empiricism.” That is, there is no explanation for whether the dimensions are causally or referentially important. They “sound right” to many. Perhaps it might be appropriate to say that their work is a “loose characterization” about culture. But it surely is not complete or accurate. Everything in science is like this.

3. Hofstede and his colleagues are one of the few researchers who recognized their own biases with readers. They were self-reflective (and post-modern) about what they were, as well as regarding what they had done. They wrote on page 28 of the document I pointed to:

MANAGEMENT PROFESSORS ARE HUMAN. Not only organizations are culture bound; theories about organizations are equally culture bound. The professors who wrote the theories are children of a culture: they grew up in families, went to schools, worked for employers. Their experiences represent the material on which their thinking and writing have been based. Scholars are as human and as culturally biased as other mortals.

(See also some of the controversy that Geertz’s writings provoked a number of years ago in anthropology.)

It is almost impossible to see outside of one’s own biases, and that includes even those who work in the hard sciences. In the last analysis, almost everything that we “know,” is socially constructed.

WBraun

climber
Nov 17, 2014 - 09:27am PT
In the last analysis, almost everything that we “know,” is socially constructed.

Yes

But there are 2 different systems.

One is in illusion

And one is in truth

The illusionary system is based on the the material understanding of the self.

The truth system is based on the understanding of the self in relation to the the entire cosmic manifestation ......
crankster

Trad climber
Nov 17, 2014 - 09:45am PT
^^^^
MH2

climber
Nov 17, 2014 - 09:47am PT
It is almost impossible to see outside of one’s own biases,



Is this why I sometimes bang my head into things? Would society kindly consider constructing those things of softer stuff?
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 17, 2014 - 10:21am PT
The question becomes what is meant by a social construction? If "social constructions" are a function of the evolutionary success of cooperation then we can ask, again, why is that?

Where does the potential for cooperation come from? What is its source?

Empathy for the "other" seems just as ubiquitous in human interaction as disregard and hate for the other. Where do these emotions ultimately reside? Are they simply constructions of a biology interested in its own survival?

Can we say that emotions like love for the other are part and parcel to the structure of the universe? Certainly human existence and emotion where written into the very potential of material nature at the big bang.

The first question is why is there anything and the second question is why is there what is?

In the metaphors of religion and mythology there is a wisdom that offers solace to our relationship to mystery. Dismissing myth as simply fakery and charlatanism ignores that wisdom.

Science can tell us much, but ultimately we are left with how to deal with that knowledge. We're left with how to understand and employ love, beauty, virtue, honor; we are left with the question of how to live a "good" life.

"But where shall wisdom be found? and where is the place of understanding?"
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 17, 2014 - 10:37am PT
No, religion in America cant harm you if you're an old white straight man.

If you're gay and want to get married, or a poor young pregnant women who doesnt want to damn herself to a life of poverty, or a child who wants to learn some science , a murdered family planning doctor, or a black person 150 years ago in the South, however, the view is pretty different. But hey, no beheadings here, so its all good, right?

Bubble Children. Christ.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Nov 17, 2014 - 10:40am PT
But there are 2 different systems.
 ok... lets hear this out...
One is in illusion
 huh?
Illusion is a "system"? Is it something that is "at work" in the world? All around us? Really Werner? Can you show me any? Oh, wait... you are correct... communicating with you is illusory (the world you were looking for)

And one is in truth
 ah yes, there it is... the only "system" I know to be real... ok, what's the scoop...?

The illusionary system is based on the the material understanding of the self.
 wait, wait, what? You want me to believe that the illusion is the thinking that one can understand the material world all around, including inside ourselves... Can you show me any of that? Can you take a picture of any of it? Is it real, or have you imagined it?

The truth system is based on the understanding of the self in relation to the the entire cosmic manifestation ......
 I see, you flip the script.... like rock accepting rap through "Walk this way!"

So that I understand...

The real is an illusion... and things we imagine make us a better thing for the universe...

A stark demonstration of exceptional exceptional-ism, sir.

WBraun

climber
Nov 17, 2014 - 10:42am PT
Tvash

What you just described is not religion.

It's rubber stamped religion.

It's pure bullsh!t masquerading as religion.

There's so much of it that it's mainstream.

But that is the baseboard foundation of so called religion that you fools all focus on.

Thus you have no real clue what religion really is .....

As for jingus he's never even near the ball park ....
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 17, 2014 - 10:46am PT
Its a cozmik thang.

If cliches could power our cities and drive our cars....Braunian motion?

Tell it to the televangelists, W. We agree that America's so called religions are bullshit - yours included.

Aint no religion at all in the tvashiverse - a place where you cant swing a schroedingers cat without hitting some jaggoff proclaiming Der Truth.

Pick mine! Pick mine!

Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 17, 2014 - 10:58am PT
Good points everyone, but especially Ward, MikeL, DMT, and Paul and Werner's last statement. And my apologies to Ward for previously misinterpreting his comments about the Vikings and British Christians.

What struck me reading Paul's comments about everything that exists being part of the potential of the Big Bang and therefore one might conclude that the capacity for both good and evil were built into the structure of the universe, was how close that comes to Hindu thought on the subject.

Their explanation for their Trinity is that the universe results from Brahma the creator, Shiva, the power and energy source, and Vishnu, the structural basis of it all. That structure (including the physical laws of this universe) according to them, is held together by love. Later on, that love is stepped down to a form we can understand by the incarnations of Vishnu represented by Krishna, Buddha, and many Indians say, Jesus also. But before the evolution of humans and human incarnations, Vishnu interacted with this planet in the form of the dominant life at the time. Hence Vishnu has also appeared as a fish, amphibian, mammal, and previous forms of humans. Vishnu's relationship to this planet includes all of the ecology and life forms, not just an anthropcentric model as in the West.

Among the world's symbol systems then, some are closer to science than others or perhaps all of them are merely a reflection of the human mind, some more complex and sophisticated than others? Or perhaps the new paradigm is to see the similarities of science to at least some of the symbol systems and maybe even come up with a new symbolism, incorporating the best of the past and more in keeping with the times?
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 17, 2014 - 11:54am PT
"That structure (including the physical laws of this universe) according to them, is held together by love. Later on, that love is stepped down to a form we can understand by the incarnations of Vishnu"

Watch for a cameo appearance of this concept in the movie "Interstellar" - delivered by Anne Hathaway.

One can always state that the potential for what exists now was included in the beginning, about anything at all. It is a meaningless statement on its face that belongs in the same heap as statements like "I know there's something out there, but we can't know what it is". All the profundity of an empty swimming pool. I could get behind this kind of philosophical balloon bouquet more if free donuts were involved.

Had earth never formed, there would be no one here to state such a thing, or anything at all. There would be no potential or manifestation of good nor evil, which are, after all, wholly human constructs that did not exist before we invented them.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 17, 2014 - 12:09pm PT
"Had earth never formed, there would be no one here to state such a thing, or anything at all. There would be no potential or manifestation of good nor evil, which are, after all, wholly human constructs that did not exist before we invented them."

If the universe had never formed there would be nothing... but it did, as well the earth, as well life. Humanity is not apart from nature but a part of nature and wholly human constructs are as well the constructs of nature. When you separate humanity from nature you display a lapsed Christianity.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 17, 2014 - 12:12pm PT
Nope, no cigar, and no such separation, either. And no good nor evil without humans, given that we invented both.

Causation and all that rot.

Nice try on the "you're still religious" thang, though. I get that a lot. Kind of like a cop gets "where's the nearest donut shop" jokes from the general public. Freshness is definitely in the eye of the beholder - particularly when donuts are involved.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 17, 2014 - 12:25pm PT
No humans without nature... ultimately no good and no evil without nature. You can't separate human activity, thought, being from the nature that brought it forth. So I'll just smoke my cigar...
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 17, 2014 - 12:29pm PT
I do believe in the power of love - but there's not universal 'love field' we tap into. It's more like a contagious virus, a ripple, that begins with a single act, which begets more acts that radiate outward. Some of us are more susceptible to 'catching it' than others, and that varies for all of us moment by moment. We can train our 'immune systems' to lower its defenses or raise them. Love is the actions of individuals. It's an inherent power we as individuals either wield nor not.

Standard, garden variety karma, basically.

Oh, and Paul, you can separate human activity from nature if there are no humans and therefore no good nor evil. Good and evil are condiments we, as humans, spread over nature, which does, in fact, include us (THE REVELATION!!!). They don't exist at all anywhere without humans to do the spreading, however.

A poor attempt at a dodge, really. Like watching a monkey try to f*#k a football.

My original point with regards to the inherent ridiculousness of your original "profound surround" statement stands.

This might shed some light on things. Love in action:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2014/11/17/364136732/in-a-dutch-town-a-glowing-bike-path-inspired-by-van-gogh?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=2042
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 17, 2014 - 12:48pm PT
"They don't exist at all anywhere without humans to do the spreading, however."

Yes, and humans don't exist anywhere without nature to do the spreading.

Monkeys and footballs? Perhaps best if you lay off the porn for awhile.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 17, 2014 - 12:51pm PT
Another pour from the word blender.

Anyhoo -

More love...

Picked up one of these after a trail run yesterday. The three of us agreed it was the best ice cream bar any of us had ever tucked into.

Studly

Trad climber
WA
Nov 17, 2014 - 12:52pm PT
I doubt humans invented good and evil. Same as I doubt they invented black and white.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 17, 2014 - 12:55pm PT
As an exercise - define good and evil in a universe without us. What would that look like to an alien observer, exactly?

For example, what wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation, or temperature, or gravitational field strength/geometry, constitutes 'good'?

We should strap a Blue Bunny Turtle Bar to all future interstellar probes to let potential finders know that we're a species worth befriending rather than annihilating. They should keep just fine in deep space.
WBraun

climber
Nov 17, 2014 - 12:59pm PT
The only humans inventing stuff they know nothing about is the Tvashes and Jinguses.

They just make up sh!t as they go along hoping against all hope it sticks on something.

The word jugglers, mental speculators, theorists, along with the total clueless are always at the forefront to lead each other down the path.

All paths never lead to the same point like the so called fools always proclaim ......
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 17, 2014 - 01:02pm PT
That would be Jingies, no? I think you're word blending with Dingus.

Since we're all apparently 'a type', in need of pluralization, might I suggest the following convention:

Jingy - Jingies
Dingus - Dingi
MikeL - MikeLians
Jan - The Jan
Largo - Largons
Ward Trotter - Trotterskyites
Ed Hartouni - Hartounae
Bushman - Bush Persons
Marlow - Marløwer
WBraun - Unique alien/human hybrid. No plural necessary
Tvash - Inner Sanctum of the Most Wise and Awesome

Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Nov 17, 2014 - 01:06pm PT

Three King Fishers
[Click to View YouTube Video]
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Nov 17, 2014 - 01:37pm PT
A stark demonstration of exceptional exceptional-ism, sir.

 Oh... wait....


I said that.

Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 17, 2014 - 10:07pm PT
I just found another great video called "The History of God". It focuses on the three big monotheistic religions and how they have evolved over time. It's a crash course on the Old Testament from a spiritual point of view, especially the prophets, and it gave quite a lot of time over to discussing the religious ferment in the early centuries of Christianity and how we got to the formulas of today. It also included a lot of Eastern Orthodox theology which is different than what developed in the West. Last up was Islam, explained by non fundamentalists. Well worth watching if you are at all interested in religion, spirituality, or just the cultural evolution of humans in the Middle East and West during the past 4,000 years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx4m1SeQqmE
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 17, 2014 - 10:26pm PT
WB: All paths never lead to the same point like the so called fools always proclaim ......

This is wrong and right on so many different levels.

One thing, it is the so-called fools who tend to see things as they are. It makes them appear like clowns, nihilists, sophists, unreasonable, and completely out-of-touch.

I’ve come to realize that I like being around people who are plugged-in spiritually, but don’t really need to talk about it all the time. But, . . . “regular things” . . . they all seem a bit absurd when looked at closely. And, good grief, what doesn’t?
MH2

climber
Nov 18, 2014 - 07:59am PT
But, . . . “regular things” . . . they all seem a bit absurd when looked at closely. And, good grief, what doesn’t?



I remember saying words over and over to myself and being fascinated how they lost meaning. That was when I was 5 years old. I'm not sure I outgrew that phase.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 18, 2014 - 10:47am PT
Say Barky Marky over and over and report back.

jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Nov 18, 2014 - 11:23am PT
I remember saying words over and over to myself and being fascinated how they lost meaning (MH2)

om mani padme hum

The meditators should chime in on this.
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 18, 2014 - 10:46pm PT
I don't think a mantra ever loses its meaning in a universal sense but if it does its jobs, it enables the individual discursive mind to be shut down so the unconscious mind can be accessed.

Meanwhile, I've found another interesting video. This is one blueblocr and gobee in particular should watch.

It's about all the early Christian books which were not included in the New Testament when it was put together. Definitely an interesting survey of competing symbol systems.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkn6q40Sb-o
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 19, 2014 - 07:03am PT


Since we're all apparently 'a type', in need of pluralization, might I suggest the following convention:

Jingy - Jingies
Dingus - Dingi
MikeL - MikeLians
Jan - The Jan
Largo - Largons
Ward Trotter - Trotterskyites
Ed Hartouni - Hartounae
Bushman - Bush Persons
Marlow - Marløwer
WBraun - Unique alien/human hybrid. No plural necessary
Tvash - Inner Sanctum of the Most Wise and Awesome

LMAO
MH2

climber
Nov 19, 2014 - 07:17am PT
In what sense can the unconscious mind be accessed? If you become aware of it, is it still unconscious?




I like the Wikipedia entry on Om Mani Padme Hum.


On meaning:

"Mantras may be interpreted by practitioners in many ways, or even as mere sequences of sound whose effects lie beyond strict meaning."


Attributed to the 14th Dalai Lama:

"It is very good to recite the mantra Om mani padme hum, but while you are doing it, you should be thinking on its meaning, for the meaning of the six syllables is great and vast..."





These issues are not easy to find agreement on.
PSP also PP

Trad climber
Berkeley
Nov 19, 2014 - 07:53am PT
http://sweepingzen.com/equalizing-self-and-others/

Interesting article on suffering and "I" evolution etc.
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 19, 2014 - 12:49pm PT
The Unconscious mind is so vast, that even when you access it, there's still plenty of mystery left. Only when you reach the state of emptiness has it all been revealed and dealt with.

As for mantras, why does it have to be either / or ?
Why can't we have a better understanding of the discursive religious, cultural and historical context and use it as a meditation device as well? For a lot of people chanting it is also a way of refraining from idle talk. In Tibetan Buddhism everything exists in at least three levels.
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 19, 2014 - 12:57pm PT
Interesting article in the New York Times yesterday about a woman helped finally by touch therapy after years of fairly fruitless talk therapy. The comments which followed were even more interesting. From them came the idea that below, deeper than, or foundational to, the conscious and unconscious minds is the "somatic" mind, or brain stem or reptilian part of the brain in evolution which controls the body.

The author talked about knots in her connective tissue from old injuries both physical and psychological, which were released by touch therapy and crying "body tears" of relief which were quite different than the emotional tears of release emanating from the unconscious mind. Many reader's comments verified similar experiences, including those of a couple of combat veterans suffering from PTSD who also experienced relief through that method.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 19, 2014 - 03:35pm PT
Interesting those aspects of the fundamental interactive nature of the various parts of the triune brain,and the peripheral nervous system.
Not long ago I read several anecdotal reports on the effectiveness of cold showers and/or ice immersions---of all things. One woman reported that during her entire life she suffered from being painfully shy, lacking the minimum of assertiveness, as well as depression and a child-like emotional dependence on others. After she started cold immersions all that changed and she began to look people straight in the eyes ,and for the first time express herself with confidence.

Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 19, 2014 - 03:41pm PT
That's Pro Surfer Laird Hamilton.

Hamilton in action:

[Click to View YouTube Video]
WBraun

climber
Nov 19, 2014 - 04:14pm PT
The Unconscious mind is so vast .....

Mind is never unconscious, even not for a second.
MH2

climber
Nov 19, 2014 - 06:37pm PT
'Curiouser and curiouser!'


'Oh, my poor little feet, I wonder who will put on your shoes and stockings for you now, dears? I'm sure I shan't be able! I shall be a great deal too far off to trouble myself about you: you must manage the best way you can; - but I must be kind to them,'



(Everything MH2 says also means 3 different things. At least.)
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 19, 2014 - 10:12pm PT
So I've noticed Mh2.

As for mind never being unconscious this side of death, that's probably true at a certain level. Perhaps better to say that then that the discurxive ego is often unconscious of the deeper levels of mind.
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 20, 2014 - 04:38am PT
'Save the Jewel in the Lotus'

Om mani padme hum,
If a woodchuck could chuck wood,
Om mani padme hum,
How much wood could a woodchuck chuck?
Om mani padme hum,
How much wood does a wood chuck chuck?
Om mani padme hum,
A peck of pickled wood he'd chuck,
Om mani padme hum,
Save the jewel in the lotus,
Om mani padme hum,
I have to scratch that itch on my,
Om mani padme hum,
If I fall here I'm gonna deck,
Om mani padme hum,
I'm gonna die so what the heck,
Om mani padme hum,
Peter Piper picked a peck,
Om mani padme hum,
A peck of pickles he did pick,
Om mani padme hum,
How many peppers did he pick?
Om mani padme hum,
A peck of pickled wood he'd pick,
Om mani padme hum,
In this human infestation,
Om mani padme hum,
It's easy to assume,
Om mani padme hum,
In every rapt manifestation,
Om mani padme hum,
I think I'm seeing god,
Om mani padme hum,
Fill in god name here,
Om mani padme hum,
Then drink another beer,
Om mani padme hum,
All my distinguished guests,
Om mani padme hum,
Your wish is my command,
Om mani padme hum,
Colonel Mustard used the knife,
Om mani padme hum,
And foiled my evil plan,
Om mani padme hum.
By mixing all my metaphors,
Om mani padme hum.

(Repeat seventy five million times then begin again).

-bushman
11/20/2014
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 20, 2014 - 05:32am PT
'The Hairy Knuckle Dragger'

To drag his knuckles was his dearth,
Where birds would fly he spied and could not go,
But from the ground he gathered earth,
And flung it high for all his worth,

And struck not fowl and then he wept,
The loneliness and sleepless nights did weary him where in the darkness demons crept,
Since she had left him long ago,
Where she had gone he did not know,
Sometimes he dragged her by the hair,
She drugged and smote and left him there,
In cups he'd loved her to be fair,

Now he could not remember her round curves her touch so soft and sweet,
The eyes of brown reproaching or approving him,
Her memory a fading gem,

He looked to sky and watched the moon,
It too would leave him all too soon,
But watched it as it hanging there was like her face her cheeks so fair and round,
But then he turned his back and walked away,
His knuckles dragging on the ground.

-bushman
11/20/2014
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 20, 2014 - 07:15am PT
Bushman-

I like your last poem. It immediately made me think of the Crass Sexism in Route Names thread.

Of your first poem, you wouldn't have written that one if you had ever lived with Tibetan people and observed how it works in real life. It's really pleasant to walk along a path and hear people walk by chanting softly rather than engaging in their usual gossip and mindless chatter. It changes the whole social atmosphere which of course is one of the purposes.

My sister worked in a neonatal ward and one of the preemies had Canadian parents who were Tibetan Buddhists. The parents would chant to the child for an hour a day and during that time the nurses could objectively measure (each baby is hooked up to 11 different alarm systems) that the baby's heart rate slowed down and its breathing became much deeper and calmer.

What we see as stoicism and good humor among Sherpas and Tibetans is what they see as the positive effects of chanting mantras.

Nevertheless, they did have a hilarious time when I taught them Peter Piper. Sherpas and Tibetans in particular love puns and plays on words.
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 20, 2014 - 08:51am PT
Jan,
You're probably right. My crude attempt at poetic satire sometimes smacks of stooge grade humor or worse it can be sometimes downright insulting, besides that fact I'm rarely inside or outside my own head. Please forgive the insensitivity of my post.

Thank you for your compliment on the other.

WBraun

climber
Nov 20, 2014 - 09:27am PT
It's really pleasant to walk along a path and hear people walk by chanting softly
rather than engaging in their usual gossip and mindless chatter.

Yes it infuses a very profound sublime atmosphere.

Those transcendental sound vibrations are above the three modes of material nature, which being, ignorance, passion and goodness.

They are in "Pure Goodness"

Modern gross materialist will never understand this with their gross physical senses.

Only the living entity itself the soul can understand the transcendental sound vibrations.

The mistake modern scientific gross materialists make is to try to understand the transcendental properties with only their gross physical coats (material Body).

MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 20, 2014 - 09:28am PT
Chanting “Peter Piper.” Hilarious, and wonderful. Thx, Jan!

We are far too sophisticated for our own good.


I’d say Werner is right about mind not being unconscious. But, what does “unconscious” point to or refer to? (Ha-ha.)


It would perhaps be better to view our experiences as Alice in Wonderland. All experiences are unexplainable. Explanations are illusions. There is only spontaneous “suchness,” “that-is-ness,” noumenon, Tathata—all the result of “the play,” vikalpa, discrimination. What is behind [sic] that is the pure infinite potentiality of empty spaciousness, absolute openness, absence, the a priori of a priori. :-) You guys keep laughing at the notion of “emptiness,” but so much of what is bandied about here is truly impossible, unintelligible, conceptually constructed, dualistic, full of striving effort, and filled with all sorts of values. It’s a kind of disease.

Just be well.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 20, 2014 - 09:35am PT
Just for fun . . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GN-vMMpja30&feature=youtu.be
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Nov 21, 2014 - 01:34pm PT
All experiences are unexplainable (MikeL)

Difference in the cardinalities of the set of finite expressions in the English language and the set of possible experiences, perhaps.

Oh, you mean any experience is unexplainable!

;>)

Where's your colleague Largo? He can make these threads sizzle.
Psilocyborg

climber
Nov 21, 2014 - 05:00pm PT
^^^the video mike L posted says f*#k science, f*#k religion, f*#k everyone. It is your experience. Build it.
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 21, 2014 - 06:25pm PT
Bushman-

You misunderstood me. I liked your second poem and my thought was that it would be good to post it on the crass climbing name thread as a subtle hint to the guys over there. Come to think of it though, it's probably way too subtle for them anyway.

It was the first poem that I didn't much care for given my pleasant experiences with mantras which I feel sure are more than meaningless words.I can see your point though from the western point of view.

As for chanting Peter Piper as MikeL suggests, they could barely say it after much practice, let alone chant it. Hard to recite when you're laughing that much.
Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Nov 22, 2014 - 05:48pm PT
What about a "science And Religion" thread?

Must they be opposed at all levels, as the title suggests? The new pope seems to value science...
MH2

climber
Nov 22, 2014 - 06:05pm PT
From he who began the thread:

it was supposed to be Religion AND Science thread
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Nov 22, 2014 - 06:30pm PT
The original intent of the original thread actually got very little traction, viz: fundie-influenced government mandating despite science.

Instead it just brought out proponents of the two mindsets, and then got further hijacked by the whole "mind" thing.
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Nov 22, 2014 - 08:53pm PT
When the topic of discussion is the title of the topic of discussion then woe be the thread.

I also believe that everything I say has at least three different meanings. That makes me a philosopher.

Speaking of which a professor in the philosophy department at CU Boulder is being awarded $180,000 to leave the campus after nationwide publicity of unsavory behavior in that academic entity. Oh, the humanity . . .

;>\
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 23, 2014 - 06:22am PT
'The Failure of the Species'

The species Homo Sapiens flourished on the land,

Every conquest and discovery foretold a bright new future for these engineering denizens with their brains and able hands,
Who built towers, roads, and bridges and who harnessed raging waters with monumental dams,
And with science, math, and industry built all manner of vessels to navigate the waters and the sky and the land,
They built their sprawling cities and they powered up their world with the power from their furnaces to supply all of their gadgetry at the peak of their demand,
And their mighty warring armies raged their constant bloody battles with the fire and destruction of a million huge explosions killing billions at the touch of a button by the few who sought impatiently to brandish all their power and command,
Or just for oil under the sand,
Where religion and philosophy and affluence and poverty and violence and peacefulness and tyranny and liberty and reason and insanity and hatefulness and tenderness and learnedness and ignorance would not go hand in hand,
And then a comet hit the planet and clouded up the atmosphere with clouds of choking ash and carbon dioxide which blocked out all the sunlight and killed off all the plant life along with all the animals and of course for Homo Sapiens things turned out not so grand,

And for this they had not planned,
The end.

-bushman
11/23/2014

Norton

Social climber
quitcherbellyachin
Nov 23, 2014 - 06:46am PT
Hey Bushman,

you really live on Tristan, the most remote island on Earth?

recently I was reading the wiki page about Tristan and how there are various controls in place
to prevent excess profit from being accumulated by individual families

would you mind writing here about life on your island? I am very curious
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 23, 2014 - 07:09am PT
Sorry Norton,
I live in rural Elk Grove.
The island of Tristan da Cunha sounds so much more exotic than California.
Norton

Social climber
quitcherbellyachin
Nov 23, 2014 - 07:33am PT
well anyway, i like your essay on this specie
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Nov 23, 2014 - 08:03am PT
Community support is one thing, truth-claims is another.

When it comes to truth-claims, it is... Science vs. Religion. Just as it needs to be. At least till (Abrahamic) religion is out of the truth-claims business.

.....

"We are usually compared to candy or pearls. Now, ladies, we are told to cover up because we are iPads."

[Click to View Linked Image]

http://twitter.com/RaquelEvita/status/536532524986793984/photo/1

.....

150,000 men and women everyday... Like Romeo and Juliet...
Another 150,000 coming everyday... We'll be like they are...

Refuse to believe myth and deception need to be a part of one's belief system in order to flourish. That is Old Establishment thinking.

In the words of Neil deGrasse Tyson... "Get over it."
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 23, 2014 - 09:14am PT
^^^^^^^^^

(You should get over it, too.)
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 23, 2014 - 10:02am PT
"I had not a dispute but a disquisition with Dilke, upon various subjects; several things dove-tailed in my mind, and at once it struck me what quality went to form a Man of Achievement, especially in Literature, and which Shakespeare possessed so enormously - I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason - Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. This pursued through volumes would perhaps take us no further than this, that with a great poet the sense of Beauty overcomes every other consideration, or rather obliterates all consideration."

J. Keats
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Nov 23, 2014 - 01:15pm PT
Karen Armstrong (sorry ekat) is apologizing for religion everywhere, and it's not pretty...

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/11/23/reza-aslan-and-karen-armstrong-are-everywhere-and-its-not-pretty/

re: Karen Armstrong (a former nun) - and her deluded response to Sam Harris and Bill Maher.

.....

Many posts here make me think of IQ. Any estimates of this woman's IQ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32mxZxv3dYM#t=170
Norton

Social climber
quitcherbellyachin
Nov 23, 2014 - 01:58pm PT
nice read, Fructose
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 23, 2014 - 03:34pm PT
^^^^^^

Preaching to the converted.
MH2

climber
Nov 23, 2014 - 06:05pm PT
I would prefer a peace that is not glooming.
Norton

Social climber
quitcherbellyachin
Nov 23, 2014 - 06:32pm PT
preaching to the converted

beats singing in an empty church

BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Nov 23, 2014 - 07:53pm PT

When it comes to truth-claims, it is... Science vs. Religion. Just as it needs to be. At least till (Abrahamic) religion is out of the truth-claims business

i bet you a double double cheeseburger you can't prove ANYTHING in the (Abrahamic) writings to be not true. For that matter, anything out of the entire Bible. i'll even up the stakes with fries and a shake that i can prove TWO so-called "truths" in science to be false for every ONE you can come up with. Come'on humor me Mr Knowledge, lets see ur list of lies. Should be easy for you every sentence is numbered in the bible. Jus give me a number.

unless your scared of course

i hope you watched Jan's links. Both you and Tvash could right many misnomers you posses.
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Nov 23, 2014 - 08:32pm PT
I would prefer a peace that is not glooming (MH2)

Ditto.
PhilG

Trad climber
The Circuit, Tonasket WA
Nov 24, 2014 - 07:20am PT
Some of you may find this interesting:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2014/11/23/366104014/exploring-the-religious-naturalist-option
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Nov 25, 2014 - 07:00am PT
"i can prove TWO so-called "truths" in science to be false..."

Here you go, blu, your kindred spirit...

[Click to View YouTube Video]

Ugnosis and hauteur, two sides of the same coin: trouble.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32mxZxv3dYM#t=170
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 25, 2014 - 08:46am PT
Thanks Cragman! That reference is the most positive idea that I've come across in a long time. I personally feel that religious naturalism is the direction we are headed though it make take a couple of centuries for the average person to get there.

The biggest problem I see is that the scientists who understand nature are not capable of developing a philosophy that can be understood and applied by the average person. The breakthrough to my mind will come not when people become scientists but when our artists and moralists become capable of inspring people to a new worldview based on science.Just as most people could care less about the intricacies of theology as their basis for belief, most people will never care about the details of science either.

Here's a synopsis of this new way of thinking.

Who is a religious naturalist?


A religious naturalist is a naturalist who has adopted the epic as a core narrative and goes on to explore its religious potential, developing interpretive, spiritual and moral/ethical responses to the story.

Importantly, these responses are not front-loaded into the story as they are in the traditions. Therefore, the religious naturalist engages in a process, both individually and in the company of fellow explorers, to discover and experience them. These explorations are informed and guided by the mindful understandings inherent in our human traditions, including art, literature, philosophy and the religions of the world.

What is meant by interpretive, spiritual and moral?


The interpretive axis entails asking the big questions along philosophical/existential axes. How do our science-based understandings inform our experience of self? What do they tell us about free will? Death? Love? The search for the meaning of life? Why there is anything at all rather than nothing?

The spiritual axis entails exploring inward religious responses to the epic, including awe and wonder, gratitude, assent, commitment, humility, reverence, joy and the astonishment of being alive at all.

The moral axis entails outward communal responses to the epic, where our deepening understandings of the animal/primate antecedents of our social sensibilities offer important resources for furthering social justice and human cooperation.

It also entails an orientation that can be called "ecomorality," seeking right relations between the earth and its creatures, absorbing our interrelatedness, interdependence and responsibilities.


Importantly, all of these projects are proposals. At this stage in the journey, our core text is nature.


http://religious-naturalist-association.org/
http://religiousnaturalism.org
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 25, 2014 - 08:50am PT
And here's a chart to think about where one stands on the issue of God. Clearly blublocr is on one end of the spectrum and fructose on another. I'm guessing most of us are somewhere in the middle, and quite possibly not sure of where exactly we stand.

High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Nov 25, 2014 - 09:51am PT
"The biggest problem I see is that the scientists who understand nature are not capable of developing a philosophy that can be understood and applied by the average person."

Nor is it their job.

You've done this since the start, taking this angle against scientists. It's the equivalent of criticizing the author of Volcanoes in Hawaii for not having ("developing") any acct of earthquakes in Mongolia.

You can rest assured though, as I've stated many times now, that creative folks, mindful of science, ARE working on an "alternative context" to religion / theism when it comes to belief (systems) in terms of not only "what is" but also "what matters" and "what works" regarding life guidance, community support, inspiring core narrative, etc... Like the building of Rome, these things take time, tho. Where's your patience? :)

In the meantime, Neil deGrasse Tyson, EO Wilson and Bill Nye, as egs, offer a light and breezy inviting approach to science and beyond - if the likes of Dawkins or Harris are too harsh or somehow too strident either for you personally or all those avg joes you so often reference.

Last I checked, Tyson had 2M-plus followers on Twitter, Dawkins 1M-plus - hardly small change; so (a) something must be getting through; (b) some of these "science types" must be striking sympathetic chords.
WBraun

climber
Nov 25, 2014 - 10:05am PT
scientists who understand nature

Are you sure that the material scientists actually fully understand the inferior energies as they really are?

They only have a very limited basic idea that ultimately completely bewilders them.

Then the illusion is created by them that they are in the know.

Their mantra always is "In the future we will know"

All while it's all right there in front of them all along without any theory or spending billions of dollars needed.

That was the point that largo and MikeL were trying to make.

It's so simple we just can't "See it".

We make it complex .......
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Nov 25, 2014 - 10:10am PT
"The breakthrough to my mind will come ...when our artists and moralists [et al?] become capable of inspring people to a new worldview based on science."

There you go. So what exactly are you criticizing then?

Is this very thing not underway in our world at large right now? Cultural evolution regarding post-religious belief and practice has never been hotter. So if this is what you - like so many of us - look forward to, you can relax.

It's on the way. :)
WBraun

climber
Nov 25, 2014 - 10:13am PT
Well they did a piss poor job of it.

No .... you did.

They pointed in the direction.

You never walked ......
MH2

climber
Nov 25, 2014 - 10:47am PT
Oh, THAT kind of point.
WBraun

climber
Nov 25, 2014 - 10:53am PT
Yes

Even the material scientist after making his theory has to do the work.

Not just waving hands around and making claims ......
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Nov 25, 2014 - 11:29am PT
The biggest problem I see is that the scientists who understand nature are not capable of developing a philosophy that can be understood and applied by the average person.

Right on the money. I have nigh given up trying to explain fracking to any lay person. They can scour Google and the NYT, and get wrong answers. The simple physics of it are beyond almost everyone, it seems, but it is actually a very simple topic. Far simpler than most of the science that we discuss here. At least here we don't have a dis-information machine running, though. Most everyone here is interested in the truth, and even though they seem far apart at times, the concepts are usually understood by all.

Technically wrong answers have so infested the internet and much of popular media that I've given up on it. I won't even post on the fracking thread here. It might take me a couple of hours to write a cogent post, and it will be forgotten after 20 more posts. It is a huge waste of time.

Do any of you remember Young's Modulus? Poisson's Ratio? They aren't based on belief. They quantify brittleness and elastic properties of a material, properties that can be felt by your hands in many circumstances.

There is so much bad information out there that I don't blame people for gobbling it up. However, that fact, that what is wrong is popular belief, makes for an interesting case history.

I watched the movie "Network" the other night. It was decades ahead of its time. Good movie, too.

Look over there at the Climate Change thread. Absolutely no new information has been posted there for thousands of posts. The deniers have access to so much bad data, that those guys play dueling charts with Ed. Why Ed wastes his time on them is beyond me. (He did just write a good article about how climbers damage micro flora)

If you look at how often certain people post each day on this place, you can find some people with seriously messed up priorities. I was posting too much myself, so I've cut down on my time here to work, play, and read books.

I am going to take off for the desert after Thanksgiving if I can finish a project. I'll try to stay off of roads for a month. Man, I need it.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 25, 2014 - 07:43pm PT
My Dear Jan:

You really try to be a conciliator, you stick your head up, and it gets shot off. I honor your good heart.

I think it was Billy Preston who said, “everything is everything” (or was it Laura Hill?). In any event, leave it to our urban brothers (now up in arms) who recognized that “it is what it is.” IT can be nothing else.

I think the Duck said that, too.

Just take a look at the notion of a singularity.

We think that "individuality" exists as separate entities. But for anything to be an absolute unit, (a singularity), it would have to be non-dimensional and beyond designation, since anything capable of occupying space or time is itself divisible into parts. In the end, a metaphysical singularity cannot have existence.

Certain scientific thinkers have concluded that wholes, though divisible into microscopic parts, must be constituted of ultimate elements. All things must owe their reality and solidity to the fact that they are composed of irreducible part-less atoms (elementary particles). Even if conventional atoms of least perceptible magnitude were divisible into smaller parts, there is the assumption that ultimately irreducible particles must exist. These would be true singularities—and the final actualities out of which the whole universe would be constructed.

But that idea is not intelligible.

Unity and diversity are givens in (accepted) empirical experience. Yet both assumptions are impossible to confirm scientifically, and with the collapse of one the other collapses.

An ultimate unity is impossible to locate. The least intelligible magnitude, since being intelligible it must have extension, would be made of parts. If the smallest extension thereof were to be defined as the smallest conceivable unit, that extension would still be definable in terms of what are mathematical units of yet a smaller size. It does’t matter if it is an atom or a star, the 'whole' which is reduced to a singularity (where the density and curvature of space-time are infinite) shrinks to zero-radius.

Units with zero-radius are literally zero. (Buddhists refer to that as sunyata, emptiness.)

The logic of an atomism is that whatever is gross must have parts which have further parts and so on, until we reach the elementary particle, which atomists believe is not made up of anything smaller and that cannot be subdivided. It is precisely THAT which cannot be made intelligible.

Infinite numbers of zero-radius singularities cannot produce objects of measurable size, either.

Some arguments suggest qualities can combine to create quantity through a critical mass (like as if a certain quantity of zeros could reach critical mass). But that too is invalid.

Any differences presupposes a physical measurement. But a singularity must be partless and unitary. (There cannot be an other.)

Reality is pure and absolute brahman only. The world is maya. It is beyond judgment or discernment. It is beyond intelligent elaboration.

(With a nod to Nagarjuna, and a scripture entitled, "The Cuckoo of Awareness: The 6 diamond stanzas." In the end, much of this is simply meant to challenge the mind's beliefs in its own sense of power.)


*Mind is a tool; it is not the source of self.
*A thought is just a thought; it has no truthfulness to it; most thoughts are about other thoughts.
*Since thoughts don't have any intrinsic reality; the world perceived through thoughts can't have any either.


Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 25, 2014 - 11:41pm PT
Thanks for your empathy Mike but I am a survivor of an American graduate school so it's not the first time I've encountered criticism. :)

As for fructose,let me remind him again, that I have been on the front lines teaching human evolution in college anthropology classes for 35 years. He can't honestly accuse me of not doing my part for science. And yes, since most of my students were average joes in terms of academics, I do think a lot about what works with them and what doesn't. For sure, average people who are 18-30 years old are much more open to new ideas than those, including the well educated, in late middle age.

This brings me to DMT's query.Other than teaching biological anthropology, I've also taught Asian religion and culture in a Humanities Department, so mainly I have been learning and teaching the traditions of the past. When people live and travel in Asia, what interests them for the most part is the past, not the crowded modern cities with all the technology and pollution we have and more.

The need for a new western paradigm only becomes obvious when dealing with Americans back in the motherland. The new atheism with all its criticism of western tradition and the religious mirror held up to ourselves by Islamic fundamentalists since 9/11, have changed things forever.

I also sense that a new ethic is arising in regard to how we view animals and their rights. This to me is significant progress in understanding ourselves as part of the natural world. I see it as evolution creeping in the back door. It is also familiar to me from Asian religions.

Meanwhile, I encounter new ideas from time to time and throw ideas out there. This is what people with academic backgrounds do. Too bad, these are immediately assumed to be my personal dogma fixed in stone and a critique of others. They're just ideas which as Mike says, come and go. We can't live without them but we needn't take them as inflexible truth either.

And yes, I hope to do some writing in the future that contributes to the new paradigm, but I have the same problem as most educated people, but especially scientists. After dealing with the documented and referenced minutiea in professional academic publications most of my life, it's difficult to write something musical, artistic or poetic that will truly inspire people.
WBraun

climber
Nov 26, 2014 - 08:50am PT
philosophies evolve of their own accord, by blood and chaos

You can't invent religion period.

Real religion is eternal.

Real philosophy is eternal.

All the rest are sectarian and relative according to how close they come to the top.

Most people view or see the top thru their binoculars from far away or licking the jar from the outside to taste the inside,
then start mental speculating about what that top or in the jar is like.

Only the rare bird ever goes to that very top to never return to the non dual mental speculative interpretative material plane.

To find such a soul is very very rare for the searcher who must also be very very sincere.

The searcher will be tested to the ultimate end for their sincerity.

Most all fall away to suffer repeated birth and death.

Who here is willing to dive to the bottom where there is no more air of their own false egotism.

It's the most difficult and the most easiest simultaneously.

No material work ever comes close, none, zero.

It transcends all material qualities and work.

Only the topmost succeed.

The living already has all the qualities but not the quantity of the supreme truth within.

This how they know when they meet that truth.

Just as a thief will recognize another thief when they meet ....
MH2

climber
Nov 26, 2014 - 10:30am PT
Impressive points.
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Nov 26, 2014 - 11:06am PT

That's a quite dogmatic position, WBraun. Are the dogmas from a sect? Or are you seeing it all from Your top?
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Nov 26, 2014 - 12:15pm PT
You can't invent religion period.

Seriously? Religion, as an act of man, changes with the wind. What would you think of that Heaven's Gate cult who committed mass suicide so that there souls would hitch a ride on that spacecraft which was hiding in the tail of comet Hale-Bopp?

As an aside, I bet that the valley was incredible when that huge comet was in the sky

Real religion is eternal.

OK. I will grant you that. What is "real" religion, and what is not?

Real philosophy is eternal.

Perhaps, but there are many conflicting philosophies, and many conflicting beliefs. The Big Question which always bothered me, when I was a youngster in the Methodist Church, was how could I possibly pick the true religion? I had just realized that people around the world believed with all of their heart in totally different religions.

Honestly, perhaps you can answer that question which nagged me:

How is a person supposed to pick their religion? We have already covered the ground that a person is highly likely to practice the religion of their family or geographic area. They pick it blindly. How does a person solve this dilemma?

This really bothered me. Hindus will not eat meat. Muslims and Christians and Jews happily devour meat. Except for pork. Only Christians eat pork. If you have ever been around pigs, you will understand why it is considered a dirty animal by Jews and Muslims. Pig sh#t is about the stickiest, stinkiest, and most foul substance imaginable. And pigs roll around in their own feces.

With such conflict between religions, how did you answer that question, Werner? You aren't a typical American Christian, so I assume that you found the correct religion as an adult, and a rare one (for California) to boot.

I'm being serious here. That was a big one for me. All of the Abrahamic Religions say that non-believers can be killed, yet God told Moses that you should not kill. I need a clarification please, God.
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 26, 2014 - 12:21pm PT
Well I have to respectfully disagree with DMT although as a child of the '60's I thought like he did at one time. My generation proved very good at tearing down decrepit and corrupt edifices of what had worked in the past. Now 50 years later, I can't see that much of it has been replaced with anything better and some of it is worse. So my conclusion is that you need ideas and a vision of where you're going, not just a dislike of where you're from.

In the past, the ideas that worked for people maybe slowly evolved. The earliest belief systems came about in preliterate cultures so we don't have a record of that. The great teachers of the axial age who changed peoples' thinking to a more universal set of values beyond the tribe one was born into - Jesus, Buddha, and Mohammed - did so as individuals. I suspect you are right that we may be past the age when the majority of people follow single individuals, though we have plenty of contrary evidence for small sects where such devotion still exists.

It may be that technology and the ability to spread ideas at an emotional level as well as intellectual, will create a new group consciousness. When I started teaching evolution 35 years ago, most of my students had never been exposed to it. Later, I came to realize that they had, but they didn't know it. Every Discovery Channel show about Chimps and Gorillas, every National Geographic show about fossils in Africa had prepared them for the idea. All I had to do in most cases was provide the intellectual framework for what they had seen before and do it in such a way that I didn't demean their cultural, social, and religious connections. In the past ten years or so, I began telling them that how they reconcile the great traditions of the past with the new knowledge is their responsibility, that's what being alive at this moment in history means and they liked that idea.

So maybe we're both right at some level. We need a vision my style and things are evolving on their own your style?
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 26, 2014 - 12:49pm PT
DMT, I'd like to hear an elaboration on your last idea. That sounds very interesting.

As we watch Ferguson burn, I think all of us who lived through summers of cities burning in the '60's and thought the Great society would end all that, have to wonder now. We did buy ourselves time from the destruction and negative image (pretty hard to police the world when you can't control your own society) and we did uplift a whole lot of smart and hardworking minority people to the middle and higher classes. Obviously though, we did not stop systematic racism and racial profiling, police brutality or mindless, self destructive mob violence. We helped the talented but not so much the really down and out.

At the same time, to see this happening again, I think every person who supported the Great Society and the upheaval of the '60's has to question whether it was entirely the right approach and where do we go from here? Personally, one of the lessons learned is how hard it is to change people and values. I ask myself if I will end up twice in my life supporting voting rights for Black people in the south? That's kind of discouraging but what's the alternative? One step forward, two steps back? Two steps forward, one step back? Who knows?

paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 26, 2014 - 01:02pm PT
I have to agree with Jan when she deals with the relationship of "Science" and "myth".
One of the current cultural difficulties is that our nature knowledge or "science" is seen as discrediting all mythologies/religions. And, no doubt, myth and religion need to keep up with what we can say with certainty about the universe.

However the problem here is a real misunderstanding with regard to:

1. The notion of the incredible similarity found in all mythological thinking both in terms of geography and historically. Why is this? Why is there a near universal understanding/belief in the notion/awareness of god if that belief isn't a profound element in human psychology?

2. The idea that understood as metaphors of the human psyche mythological symbols CAN be brought up to date and CAN communicate wisdom in conjunction with scientific thought and that the validity of mythological wisdom as metaphor is not undermined by the facts of science.

3. That both the pursuit of science and the understanding and wisdom of myth properly read can coexist.

4. That ultimately epistemological understanding, complete knowledge, doesn't bestow upon us a means of relationship, a device for reconciliation. That to simply say "deal with it" with regard to an existential universe will never satisfy the human psyche.
Psilocyborg

climber
Nov 26, 2014 - 02:17pm PT
How is a person supposed to pick their religion? We have already covered the ground that a person is highly likely to practice the religion of their family or geographic area. They pick it blindly. How does a person solve this dilemma?

Only lazy people pick a religion. And they don't pick a religion, they pick a hobby. Spiritual truth is only found within. To me that spiritual quest is just an aside though. It is like quitting mid-season to study the history of baseball. Just play the damn game, play by the rules, finish out your season, and enjoy it.
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 26, 2014 - 02:20pm PT
Individual World Views

The process of people utilizing the scientific method has produced a large percent of the tools and materials we utilize to survive with, enjoy, and prosper with in today's world. Granted, the scientific method has also provided humans with the means to create or cause ecological disasters, genocide, weapons of mass destruction, and possibly the destruction of our species and many others species of life here on earth. Regardless of the latter, I would prefer to have had all my vaccinations, that the Nazis did not win WWII, that there might be a treatment for cancer, and I that am able to find shelter, nutrition, and security for myself and my family.

I attribute most of the necessities and conveniences of today's life to scientific advancement and scientific achievement. I respect and honor the pioneers of these fields. Most people work with science and scientific formulas in some capacity. The many jobs requiring an advanced knowledge of science, math, engineering, or technology with all of their various specialties in these fields make up a majority of the workforce in most countries today. We all utilize science in our everyday lives and cannot argue effectively that an unseen deity has provided the technology of our modern day lifestyle to us, or that it was portent in the ancient scripture of any religion. But, my Smartphone does not create voices in my head nor does it also point the way for me to formulate a new world philosophy which will give direction and moral guidance to myself or civilization into the future.

I also understand that most people formulate or incorporate a personal belief system early in life and are rarely budged from those beliefs except by some adjustments along the way or by some form of trauma, or life changing epiphany, or through a deep dissatisfaction with the religion, philosophy, or other belief system they once held. Many, like myself, have experienced most if not all of these types of adjustments to their personal philosophy and world view throughout their lives. I do not claim to have vast and intricate knowledge or to have been given special instruction in all of the nuances and traditional practices of the many religions of the world, but even as a child in the church where my father gave sermons on the virtues of a Christian life, no other voices outside of my family or that congregation spoke to me. I repented and surrendered at a tender age out of peer pressure, guilt, shame, fear, and a desire to please my parents and the people in their congregation.

But there were voices. The voices I heard were the voices of the men and women of our history books and of today's world. Thomas Jefferson, Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, Robert Kennedy, John Glenn, Mahatma Gandhi, Bob Dylan, Martin Luther King Jr., John Lennon, Jack Kerouac, Neil Armstrong, and Nelson Mandela to name but a few. Their words were words of inspiration, their strengths were in their convictions, their passion and their dedication was their driving force, and they gave life and meaning to ideas of which they spoke. The voices I heard were not so much voices, but championing of ideas, ideas about fighting tyranny, democracy, pacifism, standing against racial and social injustice, artistic expression, space exploration, and scientific discovery.

I have learned that most of us follow our own intuition. If we are lucky we find what peace and simple joys that life affords, or other passions of the hands, the mind, and the heart. What we believe is the meaning of life, or what is god, or what is our true purpose here in earth are personal choices and discoveries. They are choices and/or ideas, and they are journeys along which some of us will not be swayed from in our chosen philosophy, religion, or conviction. Others of a more pragmatic bent might be less rigidly dogmatic in holding to a permanent world view.

Personally, I believe it's our responsibility to help our progeny prepare for a world requiring advanced skills in science and technology and that our way as a civilization lies like the arrow of time, towards the future. I tell my grown kids that according to theoretical physicist, Michio Kaku, that the next 100 years are the most dangerous years ahead for human civilization, and I tell my grandchildren that with the right ingenuity, hard work, and luck, that anything is possible. Of course, that too is open to speculation. One thing is for certain, according entropy and the second law of thermodynamics, nothing stays the same.

-Bushman
11/26/2014
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 27, 2014 - 09:20am PT
Superb posts by everyone. Terrific. I am grateful to be here.

Jan, really heartfelt and intelligent writing.
Great points DMT. Honest, as always.
Werner, you rule. I nodded my head throughout. Yes, yes, yes.
Paul, I love your views. As always open and considerate, but keen.
Base, you always provide a consistent world view.
Bushman, you’re a poet, even when writing prose. I love your list of voices.
Psilocyborg, perhaps a religion choose you. It’s funny (interesting) how we “find” what we want; we may have the causality backwards. :-)


Hey, before I forget . . . Happy Thanksgiving to Everyone!

I know there are some things going on in the world these days that some folks might not like, but I am happy for our little corner here.

For the first time in years, my wife and I be spending the day home rather than at family’s, and it feels very warm to us doing so.

Be well.

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Nov 27, 2014 - 11:35am PT

Look over there at the Climate Change thread. Absolutely no new information has been posted there for thousands of posts. The deniers have access to so much bad data, that those guys play dueling charts with Ed. Why Ed wastes his time on them is beyond me. (He did just write a good article about how climbers damage micro flora)


Thanks for the compliment on the article, the connection between the contributions on the Climate Change thread and the philosophical basis of the Alpinist article are born in science skepticism.

I'll explain how.

The Climate Change thread presents a number of passionate arguments contrary to the prevailing mainstream explanation of the 20th century climate. This mainstream view is relatively recent, probably not quite 30 years old. The implications of the explanation are potentially significant, and the consequences of changing the Earth's climate is not absolutely known. The root cause is the energy use of an increasing human population as it makes its way into "modernity" but when you think about it, evolution is all about an organism's use of energy.

The ability for humans to puzzle this out and understand it is awesome, the inability for humans to overcome their biology to avoid the consequences is horrific. We have a real sense on what to do, but we cannot agree (and I'd say we will not agree) on a course of action. We will let nature play out its hand even as we know the likely outcome.

The Climate Change thread provides a skeptical viewpoint whose thread can be pulled to see how the mainstream view explains the challenge. In so doing, the veracity of that mainstream view can be tested. I take the arguments of the "denialists" more seriously than they take them themselves. It is worth my time (I'm not a practicing climate scientist) to actually work through the arguments and see if they have any validity at all, and if the climate science mainstream has the power to explain. Where it cannot do so there is generally a lot of research surrounding the question, trying to resolve the issues. This activity usually has defined the issues, part of the much maligned "reductionist" approach to doing science, but an approach that has been hugely successful (I'm all for alternatives to "reductionist" science, there have been none presented that have demonstrated success).

As for the Alpinist article, it is about the same issues, though "microscoped" down to a human level and deeper. In that article I take the reader's deep love of climbing outdoors, and the profound experiences that they have, and point out the simple fact that we are active in that environment, and that that activity is not all good, though we do not know what it is we are doing. In analogy to the 20th century climate, it wasn't until the end of the century that we had clues that human activity would change the environment.

Many of the older climbers have witnessed the huge increases in people participating in climbing. Many of us marvel at the idea of being home on one day, usually in some major suburban, civilized region, and traveling, in one day, to a place that very few people have ever been to. While a cliche, our modern life has reduced the size of the Earth, and provided that access to those of us with the means to engage in that travel, which is most of the "modern" world.

The inclusion of humans in environments where humans never dominated has vastly altered the Earth. Among the last places to feel the boot of humankind were those inaccessible, as the vertical realms that we as climbers so cherish.

That vertical wilderness has also been understudied. We are faced with the dilemma of acting with little or no knowledge of how our actions are affecting the very place we desire to be. In another cliche, we are "loving the place to death."

Now the "objectification" of subjects is a consequence of the scientific methodology that allows us to separate our preconceptions of those subjects from what is "really happening." It is a way of excluding human experience from understanding, and by understanding I mean the ability to predict the outcome of situations in some precise manner, a quantitative manner being the "best."

"Subjectification" seems to be ultimate aim of religion, in relatively modern Christian thinking (the result of the Reformation) it is the existence of a "personal God" that is sought, the idea being that we have a personal relationship with God that is not qualified by some religious orthodoxy. Jan has spoken about the inability of science to provide guidance to people who need it to resolve the very personal needs.

My criticism of this "subjectification" has to do largely with the difficulty in separating what part of our experience is "individual" and what part is due to our biological similarities. It is an important issue, and ultimately an existential issue.

Taking on a subject like "love" might be hubris, but it is not one that hasn't seen a huge written literature in practical "philosophy." But what parts of the "emotion" are individual and what parts a consequence of biology. The hormonal "reward system" that drives us to reproduce is strong, and that is a logical consequence of evolution. We interpret many parts of this behavior in some mystical manner, and throughout history have parsed the elements of those confused emotions into different types of "love." But whatever we have concluded, we recognize these behaviors as essential, subjective and given them the status of a "right."

We must all have mixed emotions over the modern Chinese policy of one-child families. We are two minds, and this illustrates the problem. One mind sees the absolute logic of limiting population size to match the ability of that population to provide for itself. Instead of letting nature take its course, through limiting the population by starvation, disease and warfare, the "logical" step was taken to limit the birth rate to manage the population size.

The "right" to reproduce seems so fundamental, however, that such a policy is hugely difficult to accept on a personal level, and not only that, enforcing such a policy represents a societal intrusion at a literally intimate level of our lives.

In this particular clash of "objective" and "subjective" spheres we see the difficulties that face the species.

It is the same, writ small, for us climbers.

When the absolute details of the objective consequences cannot be absolutely and definitively stated with unanimous agreement, we allow our subjective desires to rule our actions.

When I defend myself to Debbie at the dinner table, "those plants I 'gardened' out of the cracks today are probably common" she replies that "we don't know" what those plants are.

I'm still gardening, because I justify to myself that maybe they really are common, and maybe I'm not really significantly changing things. It is the fulfillment of my subjective desire, and its priority over my objective knowledge, and the objective understanding of the limits of that knowledge.



In the end my conclusion is that humans can't overcome this dilemma, and will suffer the consequences of it. That's my objective view. It's not just an opinion, we know, empirically, that all species have limited lifetimes, so Homo sapiens sapiens will someday cease to be. Given that we cannot discuss our own deaths objectively, the death of our species is a grander taboo topic. But it will happen.

So why not "party to the end"? if whatever we do doesn't matter, ultimately, why not do whatever?

And of course if comes down to the subjective, our reverence for this place, the Earth, and the feeling that we should be good stewards of it.

I am sure, but cannot prove, that such feelings are a part of our biological makeup and an evolutionary adaptation. We cannot escape that, but while I am writing this, it is awesome to contemplate that astounding consequence of evolution and the purely material origins of it, and the ultimate consequences of it. It is beautiful in my personal aesthetic and it is a philosophy to me, and one that does inform my daily life in all aspects.

But if science has taught me anything, it has taught me to be patient in the face of seemingly unresolvable paradox. I understand that most people want and need certainty, it is a gift to be liberated from such a burdensome desire.



happy thanksgiving to you all
MH2

climber
Nov 27, 2014 - 01:34pm PT
And of course if comes down to the subjective, our reverence for this place, the Earth, and the feeling that we should be good stewards of it.


A toast to living with uncertainty and to this feeling that we should be good stewards, perhaps connected to our feelings for our children. Humans are an odd mix of the selfish and the unselfish.
WBraun

climber
Nov 27, 2014 - 04:18pm PT
I understand that most people want and need certainty,

Nobody wants or needs certainty.

It's already built into every single living entity.

There's absolutely no need to manufacture certainty that's already there .....
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Nov 27, 2014 - 10:38pm PT
MkeL's urs i always love reading cause mostly i agree, which = a we.

Although agreeing with the teacher IS mostly what i've learned from all my teachers in all the space of time that i have been taught. So i'm not sure if this is a compliment to you personally. Or Atom ally

Reality is pure and absolute brahman only. The world is maya. It is beyond judgment or discernment. It is beyond intelligent elaboration.

sometimes i'm not sure if ur thinking past me, or before me? The last part of this, Yea, it's as easy as "what came first,the chicken or the egg?". The first part,,, well, i'm not familiar with the verbiage.. but the middle part, isn't "beyond judgement or discernment" giving in to cause-n-effect?

i wish i were watching you write an answer on a chalkboard..
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Nov 27, 2014 - 10:47pm PT
Man/Woman, i wishh i could catch up on the rest of this page tonig...

but i worked all day and am quickly drf.iting offfffff

i can muster/

A Happy Thanksgiving to All, and To All, A Happy THanksgiving!!!
jstan

climber
Nov 28, 2014 - 09:17am PT
But if science has taught me anything, it has taught me to be patient in the face of seemingly unresolvable paradox. I understand that most people want and need certainty, it is a gift to be liberated from such a burdensome desire.
E/H

I don't know why Ed spends the time on really important contributions like this, when the site allows the contents of whole threads to be deleted, on a whim.

ST is vaporware.
Bushman

Social climber
The island of Tristan da Cunha
Nov 28, 2014 - 10:22am PT
For myself, posting here is a form of mental exercise. Others might consider it otherwise.
Hopefully, we are saving and preserving what is important to us somewhere else.
I save most of what I write whether I think it's any good or not and periodically archive it at
Writers Guild of America, West, for a modest fee. A lot of stuff I write doesn't get posted here if it's long or doesn't fit, with some exceptions.

'Uncertainty Dog'

In swirling mountain mists the eyes that see my thoughts unveiled apprise,
They looking on with a knowing glance I plagiarized myself the chuckling mind shows no surprise,
Unexacting how the work must be,
"Move along sir, please, there's nothing here for you to see,"

That all the dots don't seem connected here it's not an absent fact,
The skills so mustered thrift and spare a maladjustment least of which my lack of tact,
Finding on this road to chaos thinking I'm here to direct,

What knits morosely this my furrowed brow,
Never too far out of his zone uncertainly dog is at his best,
Ordering here and ordering there with a tick for the worst,
At a loss for the answer I'm seeking out my angry heart to counsel the disquietude and show respect,
What harm to air my foolishness to the wind?
Where the dots don't connect,

Most of which I fear,
To leave this world in such a lawless and disordered state,
What difference it then where I go?
This diet of uncertainty well known and founded sure and tested set and cast in proven fact so laughingly I hope to grasp,
What matters it what chaos reigns when certainly nowhere I'd be?
Where there is such uncertainty.

-bushman
11/28/2014
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Nov 28, 2014 - 11:19am PT
Modern science...

[Click to View Linked Image]
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Nov 28, 2014 - 11:21am PT
Badass kukris.

We come equipped, thanks to evolution, with the capacity to love, share meaningful relationships, adapt to others, and forgive, regardless of the depth of our knowledge of science, art, or myth, for that matter. Our mind body systems are literally built for it.

To proscribe a need for believe in myth to 'complete' another's psyche is as ridiculous as it sounds.

Pure projection.
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Nov 28, 2014 - 12:20pm PT
For myself, posting here is a form of mental exercise. Others might consider it otherwise

A perceptive comment, Bushman. Very few if any posters here will change their minds. It seems that JL has given up in this regard, and who can blame him. However, sometimes it feels good to put in writing ideas that come to us, and then post them somewhere in the internet galaxy, even if no one responds. I do this with my continuing interest in mathematics, exploring, then writing and programming elementary, fairly trivial material. It's the doing that counts. Jstan, in his wisdom, has stated we are what we do, to which I subscribe. If we stop doing - even trivial things we enjoy- we lose our perceived identities, which I suppose the meditators will judge as appropriate and necessary.

They may have a very practical point in some instances: to be locked into that perceived identity may have serious consequences in potentially dangerous activities like solo climbing.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 28, 2014 - 01:44pm PT
I haven't given up. But sometimes I find it necessary to do more of the work than talk about it. I'll have a few things to add some time around Christmas.

Happy Thanksgiving ya'all.

JL
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 29, 2014 - 12:28pm PT
The idea that understood as metaphors of the human psyche mythological symbols CAN be brought up to date and CAN communicate wisdom in conjunction with scientific thought and that the valid

Far and away the foremost leader in the exploration of the meaning of mythological symbols was Carl Jung. As Jung stated a century ago:

“My thesis then, is as follows: in addition to our immediate consciousness, which is of a thoroughly personal nature and which we believe to be the only empirical psyche (even if we tack on the personal unconscious as an appendix), there exists a second psychic system of a collective, universal, and impersonal nature which is identical in all individuals. This collective unconscious does not develop individually but is inherited. It consists of pre-existent forms, the archetypes, which can only become conscious secondarily and which give definite form to certain psychic contents.”[1]

So ,the above remains a general outline of the function and central nature of archetypal symbols and Jung's theory of the Collective Unconscious. He thought of this monopsychic unconscious as being universal; much like anatomical structures---your arm is unique and different from my arm and yet the general structure and function is the same. Jung in this way sought to ,as it were, import the methods of comparative morphology into psychological inquiry.
Jung often hinted at a possible genetic component operating as the indispensable foundations of collective archetypes, or mythological symbols.

I pointed out on another thread that the theory of the collective unconscious, while having tremendous formative influence during the early and mid-20th century (Joseph Campbell,et al)
nevertheless failed to be ,in any substantive way , advanced forward on the level of hard scientific inquiry.

I took this state of affairs as being more or less indicative of what I've long suspected: the collective unconscious only existed or exists as primarily a transient cultural form ; as a means of organizing and extending experience in the same way that any given technology functions. If a number of widely dispersed cultures seem to spontaneously evolve the "the hero archetype" independent of each other ,this does not necessarily mean that the hero narrative is therefore a fundamental constituent of the universal human psyche, or even that such a generalized unconscious psyche exists at all.

The hero narrative,for example, grew organically from an early hunterer/gatherer technology that accompanied a certain developmental phase in human cultural evolution --- and consequently has been somewhat discarded in modern times, like the spear .People no longer need the hero archetype as expressed in any kind of universalistic unconscious format. Today these distributed archetypes have been relegated to entertainment status because they still invoke a recognizing response from the general public---having long inhabited the tales of youth in literature and cinema.
Heroes,serpents, and Shangri-las no longer infest the dreamscapes of the human race as they once did--- nor have they morphed into radically varying and newer forms. There is no specific genetic component to archetypal forms or mythological symbols, per se. They are not,in and of themselves, the master key to the unlocking of transcendental truths about the human experience. They must be appreciated and seriously studied as signposts along the way.



paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 29, 2014 - 12:39pm PT
"To proscribe a need for believe in myth to 'complete' another's psyche is as ridiculous as it sounds."

Perhaps unintended, but I would have to agree...Ha.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 29, 2014 - 12:58pm PT
"I took this state of affairs as being more or less indicative of what I long suspected: the collective unconscious only existed or exists as primarily a transient cultural form ; as a means of organizing and extending experience in the same way that any given technology functions. If a number of widely dispersed cultures seem to spontaneously evolve the "the hero archetype" independent of each other ,this does not necessarily mean that the hero narrative is therefore a fundamental constituent of the universal human psyche, or even that such a generalized unconscious psyche exists at all."

I think this ignores the uniform nature of human anatomy and activity. I would never postulate that a generalized unconscious psyche exists except insofar as it is a function of the similarity and being of all humanity: each of us is born helpless and must be nurtured into at least adolescence, we become adults and seek to procreate, we seek to survive, we begin to loose our abilities, we reach old age and then we die. The similarity of experience over vast periods of time yields an undeniable syncrety in mythological thought as described by Jung. Human experience at its base transcends "transient cultural forms." Virtually all cultures recognize a notion of something beyond the forms of sensibility, something beyond death, a god. There is the ubiquitous nature of unusual births, sacred places... the question is why are these ideas so common and what do they do for the individual psyche?

"They are not,in and of themselves, the central key to the unlocking of transcendental truths about the human experience."

I think this just assumes too much. Central key? I don't know, but these myths have affected the lives of most of the human beings who've ever lived and who've held to them even in the face of death.
Why?
My own sense is that there is a wisdom in these myths that offers something science can never make clear or ultimately give us. In the final analysis a revelation of all possible knowledge through science leaves us with only our continued unreconciled being.




Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 29, 2014 - 01:25pm PT
Change "central key" to " master key" or better yet "skeleton key"

Time forces me to address your points later on.

A skeleton key (also known as a passingkey) is either a key that has been altered in such a way as to bypass the wards placed inside a warded lock, or a card ...

This is Ward...over and out...
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 29, 2014 - 02:10pm PT
I pointed out on another thread that the theory of the collective unconscious, while having tremendous formative influence during the early and mid-20th century (Joseph Campbell,et al) nevertheless failed to be, in any substantive way, advanced forward on the level of hard scientific inquiry.


Explain what you mean by "substantive." And specifically what scientist failed in his/her "hard scientific inquiry" of the collective unconscious? In fact, what scientific inquiry has ever proven or defined what consciousness actually is, collective or otherwise?

By what empirical methods do you think Jung ever arrived at his theory about the collective unconscious? Were those methods "substantive" in your opinion?

How do you contrast Jung's collective unconscious to Platonic forms?

What aspect of consciousness, if any, do you consider to be "universal," or is consciousness itself - like archetypes, and other content - a cultural gizmo.

JL
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 30, 2014 - 09:36am PT
Go see "The Imitation Game," about Alan Turing, Britain’s Code-Breaking WWII Hero, long distance runner, and computer genius who's own country tried to “cure” him of homosexuality (a minor/weak part of the movie). Benedict Cumberbatch, as Turing, should get an academy nomination for his role. Well done.

JL
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Nov 30, 2014 - 11:13am PT
...and consequently has been somewhat discarded in modern times, like the spear...
[Click to View Linked Image]
Jessica Ennis discarding a spear...
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Nov 30, 2014 - 11:26am PT
Turing has only achieved "hero" status relatively recently, and largely because his contributions to the mathematics of computation is central to many of the modern technological innovations that are central to our modern cultural experience (e.g. search algorithms on Google).

His very deep thoughts which are easily accessible (or apparently so) also help make him a popular figure, and that he applied this to the important code breaking work in WWII which was, arguably, the major technological contribution to the Allies winning that war.

The extent to which the code breaking aided in the war effort was unreported for a very long time. There are probably a lot of reasons for this, many of them the cultural affinity for recognizing valor, honor, courage and bravery in actual combat. Those were important, but the intelligence gained by breaking the code of the opponent was decisive. However, code breaking is considered a cheat... who couldn't win if you knew what move your opponent was going to make? Gentlemen do not read each other's mail.

To add to this repression, Turing repressed his very personal feelings, and had to at a cultural time when homosexuality was still considered illegal. That is hard to imagine today, but it happened.

I am not sure I consider him a "hero," he was an exceptional person who made a major contribution to the 20th century, both in helping to resolve the last major military conflict and in being one of the founders of modern computational mathematics.

It is a long over due popular recognition of his contributions. It is something that has been known for a long time in the science community.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 30, 2014 - 11:33am PT
Based solely on what I saw in the movie - which might be an unreliable source - Turing at least appeared heroic for the great resistance he faced and for the fact that he soldiered on.

War is more than hand to hand combat. It's also strategy, and code breaking is a standard and key aspect of intelligence gathering. Turing was apparently exceptinally gifted at it, and he is credited with shortening the war by as much as 18 months and saving millions of lives in the bargain. Sounds pretty heroic to me.

JL
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 30, 2014 - 12:07pm PT
The similarity of experience over vast periods of time yields an undeniable syncrety in mythological thought as described by Jung. Human experience at its base transcends "transient cultural forms."

To be clear here, Jung understood the cultural and historical manifestations of his archetypes,as described by Stevens:

Strictly speaking, Jungian archetypes refer to unclear underlying forms or the archetypes-as-such from which emerge images and motifs such as the mother, the child, the trickster and the flood amongst others. It is history, culture and personal context that shape these manifest representations giving them their specific content. These images and motifs are more precisely called archetypal images. However it is common for the term archetype to be used interchangeably to refer to both archetypes-as-such and archetypal images.[2]

I am saying that not only are the archetypes shaped by "history, culture, and personal context..." But as I indicated in my earlier post ,put simply, that is all they are shaped by. Jung himself understood that culture played an indispensible role in the manifestation of these archetypes. I disagree that the archetypes, or the collective unconscious ,represent essential structural forms superimposed a priori upon human experience; either by a genetic or a transcendental component.

It should come as no surprise that mythological constructions over the millennia would track those innate mainstays of human experience such as birth and death and developmental phases. It is quite another matter to suggest , as Jung often did, that the archetypes were an autonomous dynamic that through unconscious mechanisms displayed the function of ordering human life along predetermined courses. And further, that the archetypes might represent innate and elaborate transcendental motifs which expressed themselves through unconscious manifestations.

Jung was a very creative and brilliant scholar who was largely working in the dark. His period was the very earliest in psychology/psychiatry and lacked the empirical foundations of the depth that characterized the other sciences. Jung's era was one of theory alone---based upon very little experimentation or discovery. The leading theorists of the time were Jung and Freud and both sought to lay the seminal foundations of psychology with complex theories --based less upon clinical observation or experiments and more upon the intellectual and personal nature of the theorists themselves.
The influences evident in Freud and Jung's work were similar --- many western intellectuals during this period were generally captivated by the theories of Einstein and Darwin and the underlying discoveries within the sciences. A entire cosmos was revealed driven by hidden innate mechanisms and structures--- not accessible to the common senses.
It should therefore come as no surprise that Freud and Jung's theories would be of a 'gnostic' type. The human psyche in both theoretical frameworks was fundamentally explained by forces and structures operating behind a veil --- much like atoms and molecules and radiation. In the case of psychology at that time ,there was no instrumentation to detect the ego or the Id or the collective unconscious. The only instruments available on the frontier of psychology were Freud, Jung, and their colleagues.




paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 30, 2014 - 12:28pm PT
“I am saying that not only are the archetypes shaped by "history, culture, and personal context..." But as I indicated in my earlier post ,put simply, that is all they are shaped by.”

“It should come as no surprise that mythological constructions over the millennia would track those innate mainstays of human experience such as birth and death and developmental phases.”

These statements seem a bit contradictory. I don’t disagree that Jung’s “collective unconsciousness” as a “cloud” of human construction is problematic, however, the notion of similarities of experience yielding remarkable similarities in both myth and ritual still stands… and these can reasonably be called archetypes. These remarkable similarities should give rise to the question, why? Why the human proclivity to myth?

Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 30, 2014 - 12:33pm PT
Explain to me why you think those two statements are contradictory?
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 30, 2014 - 12:34pm PT
There is a pretty fine documentary about Turing on netflix... check it out. Hard not to call him a hero after watching. I'm hardly a member of the science community but I've known about Turing since I don't know when. I think most have.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 30, 2014 - 12:38pm PT
In the sense that basic physical structure and what it is to be human in terms of experience are related to history and social context in the same way that myth is: separate in a sense.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 30, 2014 - 12:45pm PT
Look, I think we are at cross purposes here because I am involved in a critique of Jung's concepts of the collective unconscious/archetypes and how his theoretical framework has come to be known.
You have a personalized version of the general idea of 'archetypes' based upon your understanding. Which is fine, but a different thing.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 30, 2014 - 12:52pm PT
Yeah, I think that's correct. However, I think you could agree also that there's validity to the notion of the archetype, not necessarily in the Jungian sense but in the sense of a near universal similarity particularly in myth.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 30, 2014 - 12:55pm PT
Oh yeah , without question. As long as humans undergo common experience there will be expressions of commonality. Those expression from time to time may even be revelatory.

Thus 'one could as easily speak of the "collective arm" - meaning the basic pattern of bones and muscles which all human arms share in common'.[6]
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Nov 30, 2014 - 01:11pm PT
Jung went off the rails when he made the collective unconscious mystical. It is difficult to be serious and accept that.

IMO, he was correct in a sociological and evolutionary sense. If he had stopped there, we would still be taking him seriously.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 30, 2014 - 01:23pm PT
Ward, you have a tendency to dodge the hard questions that are put to you.

You said: "I am saying that not only are the archetypes shaped by "history, culture, and personal context..." But as I indicated in my earlier post ,put simply, that is all they are shaped by. Jung himself understood that culture played an indispensible role in the manifestation of these archetypes. I disagree that the archetypes, or the collective unconscious ,represent essential structural forms superimposed a priori upon human experience; either by a genetic or a transcendental component."

What Stevens tried to make clear was the difference between the basic archetypes, what Plato called "forms," and the specific shape the archetype appeared as, culture to culture. That is, The Trickster is an archeptype, and it manifestd as Coyote in American Indian lore, and as Ali Baba, etc, in Persia lore (Arabian Nights). If you are saying that both the arcetype AND the particular manifestation are cultural inventions, I through what "substantive" means of investigation did you arrive at this conclusion? My sense of this is you are mentally speculating, and perhaps have done litto to no empirical work at all to back up your dismissal.

You used the word "substantive" in your first assay. What do you mean by this word? You also suggested that Jung and Freud - who interviewed thousands of people between them - were basically projecting their own internal content on their findings, and that at bottom, that's ALL that was there.

If Freud and Jung were to have done things diferently - or "substantively" - by what specific methods would they (both MDs) have proceeded, and what might their findings have been?

And BASE, what do you mean by "mystical?" Materially based? But we have already seen that material itself, when reduced to the most basic levels, "has no physical extent." If that isn't mystical, what is?

JL
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Nov 30, 2014 - 02:06pm PT
Explain what you mean by "substantive." And specifically what scientist failed in his/her "hard scientific inquiry" of the collective unconscious? In fact, what scientific inquiry has ever proven or defined what consciousness actually is, collective or oth

First the easier one: No individual scientist needs to be identified as having failed ---in order to establish the fact that Jung's theory went nowhere fast (empirically ) since he unveiled it a century ago. No proof or validation has ever emerged . Part of this was Jung's attitude which itself either grew out of his frustration or unwillingness to have his theory challenged in the normal scientific ways.As one writer correctly put it:

Unlike many modern psychologists, Jung did not feel that experimenting using natural science was the only means to understand the human psyche. For him, he saw as empirical evidence the world of dream, myth, and folklore as the promising road to its deeper understanding and meaning. That method's choice is related with his choice of the object of his science. As Jung said, "The beauty about the unconscious is that it is really unconscious".[2] Hence, the unconscious is 'untouchable' by experimental researches, or indeed any possible kind of scientific or philosophical reach, precisely because it is unconscious.[c

When I said "substantive" I meant ,among other things, that no genetic foundation for the collective unconscious has been determined. There has been a scarcity of supporting work by other psychologists . Both Freud and Jung had always hoped that their theories would one day be vindicated by concrete physical evidence. None has been forthcoming. Although Freud's idea of 'unconscious' or 'subconscious' has been determined to exist ,after a fashion---he got all the details wrong but the general idea suffices. Unfortunately this does not atone for all that he got so egregiously wrong.
Many of Jung's concepts have endured and have been quite useful, such as the analytical tool of "introvert/extrovert" of which we're all familiar.

By what empirical methods do you think Jung ever arrived at his theory about the collective unconscious? Were those methods "substantive" in your opinion?

I can't say for sure on that one, but I don't think either could you. If Jung left a body of tantalizing evidentiary descriptions of the archetypes/collective unconscious clearly at work in the lives of his patients (in sessions at Kunsnacht) then that would be news to a lot of people.
Fact of the matter ---is that Jung's theories did not largely grow out of those sessions or his clinical work---me thinks they were pedagogical and the result of some very astounding creative scholarship.

I'll address your remaining questions a little later, my IPad needs rechargin'


paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 30, 2014 - 04:36pm PT
The structure of the universe is mediated by what we call the laws of physics. The basis of science is the deliberate and reasoned analysis of what is and what is not possible and what is and is not “real.” The laws of the physical universe are just that: mediations of what might otherwise be pure chaos and therefore unknowable.

Within that structure of mediated possibilities we find life and consciousness. We know this to be true by virtue of their existence and our experience. We can say that in the beginning consciousness was a potential within a universe mediated by physical laws allowing for the existence of some things and the proscription of others. In the language of evolution, given the lavish nature of time and the immensity of opportunity, life and consciousness seem likely to have been inevitable. And from what do they come if not the very structure of what is.

Where is the composition of consciousness, which is ubiquitous in life on this planet, to be found if not within the mediated universe itself? What is the model of self- awareness, experience, being? How easy to envision consciousness, through which the universe comes to know itself, as a kind of final term or necessity.

Science views consciousness as evolutionary accident.
What needs exploration here is the very notion of accident. What is really accidental in a universe so rigidly governed and so extravagant with time?

As the universe unfolds over incomprehensible eons won’t all possibilities manifest themselves as inevitabilities? The mediated structure of the universe will allow A and not allow B. And so possibilities are not infinite but limited and within that peculiar set of limitations we find ourselves… thinking.

That science will explain emotion and reason as complex chemical processes and electrical charges leaves us with nothing but a brain in a vat. Science will find a much more difficult time dealing with the experiences of emotion and reason as well as the experiencer and what he has come to know as virtue, how to live a good life and the human need for love. If these things are the products of evolutionary necessity they are nevertheless born of a mediated universe, which through its structure, has determined their existence.

Archetypal ideas/dependencies are modeled after the very physical experiences of living and are then collective in the broadest sense to human experience where they take on local social inflections. The form of an experience shared by nearly all lies in the genetic make up of the individual in the sense that that genetic makeup is human. There may be no genetic marker for the trickster or hero but our genetic makeup as human beings leads us to certain experiences that then lead us to that archetype.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 30, 2014 - 04:50pm PT
As Jung said, "The beauty about the unconscious is that it is really unconscious".[2] Hence, the unconscious is 'untouchable' by experimental researches, or indeed any possible kind of scientific or philosophical reach, precisely because it is unconscious.
---


What this means, Ward, is exactly what it says. The unconscious is untouchable with instrumentation. That this is incontrovertibly true is no fault of the unconscious. Even Liebnitz realized centuries ago that you were not going to find "mind" or sentience in the cells, any more than you were going to find the unconscious in the brain.

What you have done, imo, is once more found yourself trapped by reductionistic materialism. if you can't reduce something down to a genetic "cause," or driver, or source, then that something must be imagined, or is merely a cultural artifact. Only when that something is "vindicated" (proven) by way of a material source is it then "real." So what you've done is simply dragged us back into quaint old materialism, which has been done away with because material, when reduced down far enough, "has no physical extent." Just notice how people cling to this Newtonian substance-as-real belief like a life raft. But verily, it done sank.

Of course none of us actually believe gross materialism, as seen in our actual lives. A feuding man and wife don't go to an MD for a genetic cure, believing that all real things (their problems) are real only when "vindicated" with material sources. The couple wisely seek couples therapy, knowing that one, there really is a problem, and two, the problem is not likely biological. It i a meta-level problem.

If the psyche was really so simple we could vindicate all manifestations by way of purely genetic drivers, psychology would be biology.

As has been said many times by many people, objective studies of the brain would eventually have betrayed processes that were not known to the conscious mind, but the unconscious was only found and could only be found not in a biological study, but at the meta level in which Freud and Jung worked. They didn't have it all correct. Who does. But the idea of archetypes, which dates back to Plato and before, has by no means been disproven by science. Show me one scientist who has actually studied archetypes whatsoever.

JL
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Nov 30, 2014 - 04:51pm PT
The structure of the universe is mediated by what we call the laws of physics. The basis of science is the deliberate and reasoned analysis of what is and what is not possible and what is and is not “real.” The laws of the physical universe are just that: mediations of what might otherwise be pure chaos and therefore unknowable.

I think this misses being an explanation by a long shot. "Deliberate and reasoned analysis" is used to predict the outcome of experiment or observation, and when the results of those experiments and observations are in, we learn whether or not the analysis agrees. Where it does not agree, we know that the analysis was flawed, and we go back to the chalk board (or white board).

The "reality" of it all is not an issue, rather, it is the ability to predict the outcome of the behavior of the universe. Given the successes (and the failures) it is irrelevant what the "nature of the universe is" as implied by the statement that these are "meditations on what might otherwise be pure chaos and unknowable."

The priority that science has over, say philosophy, is its predictive capability. And in the discussions of consciousness, we know when we have a scientific theory and when we do not. Philosophy, on the other hand, has no idea whether it has or has not anything relevant to say on the matter, there is no way to establish philosophical "truth."

It is the very basis of science, this empirical manner in which we observe the universe, make our measurements and observations and then analyze those to create a set of synthetic principles with predictive power that sets it a apart.

The criteria of predictability and the rigor with which it is applied, makes doing science very difficult, you can't prevaricate in science. And while all the foibles of human beings are brought to science, somehow science manages to produce these wonderful insights of the universe, and these predictive theories, challenged by empirical observations, builds the basis for the innovations that power the technologies that make humans distinct.



As for human emotion, that produce such a powerful narrative of the human state, one can thank the hormonal "reward" system of a complex organism... our own ability to create narrative may not yet acknowledge the importance of our biology. And in most cases, we wouldn't want to.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 30, 2014 - 05:21pm PT
The "reality" of it all is not an issue, rather, it is the ability to predict the outcome of the behavior of the universe. Given the successes (and the failures) it is irrelevant what the "nature of the universe is" as implied by the statement that these are "meditations on what might otherwise be pure chaos and unknowable."

That science is not interested in the nature of the universe seems a bit of a tap dance. My point was simply that the universe supports certain structures (laws) or certain laws support the universe and these laws produce certain effects and those effects result in what is.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 30, 2014 - 05:31pm PT
"As for human emotion, that produce such a powerful narrative of the human state, one can thank the hormonal "reward" system of a complex organism... our own ability to create narrative may not yet acknowledge the importance of our biology. And in most cases, we wouldn't want to."

By attaching electrodes to the brain emotional states may be induced...
But what is experiencing those emotional states? What is the experience of those emotional states? What desires to know scientifically or philosophically? And how does the structure of the universe allow that desire?

If these things are the products of evolutionary necessity they are nevertheless born of a mediated universe, which through its structure, has determined their existence.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Nov 30, 2014 - 05:51pm PT
take an adolescent dose of testosterone daily and see how your consciousness changes...

or do you think it won't?

what do you think the nature of "desire" is then?
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Nov 30, 2014 - 05:54pm PT
My point was simply that the universe supports certain structures (laws) or certain laws support the universe and these laws produce certain effects and those effects result in what is.

that would seem somewhat circular, or are you saying that the "laws" of the universe that we have constructed make the universe...

that would be a solipsism.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 30, 2014 - 06:11pm PT
There is no reason that I can think of or imagine why science as a method cannot be applied in areas other than empirical studies. But for the differences in measuring devices and metrics, the approach should produce interesting results no matter where applied. The body is the penultimate measuring device. (Seems like the Duck has said something similar to this.)

Metrics can be logic, the sound of a mantra, what a good story or archetypal symbolism might bring to one, feelings that community provide, or the unconsciousness in sleep. Elevating one (e.g., rationality) over other metrics constitutes a modern prejudice and does not allow for triangulation of findings. Not one approach can go beyond itself. Even the mind is limited; it is only what it thinks. Each method has its failings.

We seem to infer an unconsciousness when memory or communication is lapsed.

Mysterious connections to the unconscious show up when the mind gets engaged with routine or mundane activities and let run on their own. I also get what appears to be the same connection to an unconscious in sitting contemplations when subject and object, experience and experiencer, drop away. Mysterious outcomes of the processes are becoming regular and predictable for me as I gain practice. I can’t explain or define it, but I can generate it.

I don’t feel that consciousness is a counterpart to unconsciousness. It seems that matter is a counterpart to consciousness.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 30, 2014 - 06:15pm PT
Ed: take an adolescent dose of testosterone daily and see how your consciousness changes...

I don’t think you have this quite right, Ed. Your consciousness doesn’t change; you are still Ed (or whomever is doing it). What changes is your experience.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 30, 2014 - 06:18pm PT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3eGX-wkFgM

paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 30, 2014 - 06:25pm PT
"that would seem somewhat circular, or are you saying that the "laws" of the universe that we have constructed make the universe...

that would be a solipsism."

The laws of physics are not created by us. I certainly wouldn't say they were. What I'm saying is that consciousness exists in the universe because of the structure of those laws. That the physical laws of the universe favor consciousness or it wouldn't exist. Consciousness was an undeniable potential at the very beginning as was life.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Nov 30, 2014 - 06:29pm PT
Given the successes (and the failures) it is irrelevant what the "nature of the universe is" as implied by the statement that these are "meditations on what might otherwise be pure chaos and unknowable."

The priority that science has over, say philosophy, is its predictive capability. And in the discussions of consciousness, we know when we have a scientific theory and when we do not. Philosophy, on the other hand, has no idea whether it has or has not anything relevant to say on the matter, there is no way to establish philosophical "truth."
-


Where all of the above breaks down is at the level of consciousness itself. What is predictable, in Ed's philosophy, is the behavior of stuff. But that stuff, as Ed pointed out earlier, "has no physical extent" when redcuce it down far enough. What is left? Nothing. Or no-thing. When we reduce mind or consciousness down far enough, and all the predictable stuff drops away, we find that consciousness itself is empty. No thing. There is no way to establish this by way of stuff (Ed's "truth"), since the absence of stuff by way of reductionism (all viable meditation is a form of conscious reductionism), but that's no to say there isn't truth to be found, and that certain "philosophers" have something relevant to say on the matter. They don't have anything rlevant to say on stuff, perhaps, but that's not their path. All the stuff that is so predictable is ultimately seen as being entirly empty.

JL
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Nov 30, 2014 - 06:32pm PT
A thread of teachers. Everybody's here to teach, lol!

.....

Flip the script...

[Click to View Linked Image]
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Nov 30, 2014 - 06:33pm PT
except that you can't prove, philosophically, that there isn't some empirical path to understanding consciousness... that it will all be "understood" (read: predictable) by using reductionist scientific methods.

to attempt to just state your view as fact doesn't cut it...
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Nov 30, 2014 - 06:34pm PT
Speaking of laws and desire...

[Click to View Linked Image]
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 30, 2014 - 06:41pm PT
"what do you think the nature of "desire" is then?"


This is a great question. Desire requires a desiring entity and therein lies the mystery-a self realizing consciousness that stands both apart and as a part of its experience.

It's a consciousness that can imagine a suggested perfection underneath the aggregate chaos of nature, a consciousness that can realize perfect forms from the suggestion of the imperfect.

Desire is the imagined need of that entity and it's the mystery of that isolated entity and its ability to see the eternal in number, numerical relationship and in geometric forms that suggests deity.

High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Nov 30, 2014 - 06:47pm PT
[Click to View Linked Image]
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Nov 30, 2014 - 06:57pm PT
"except that you can't prove, philosophically, that there isn't some empirical path to understanding consciousness... that it will all be "understood" (read: predictable) by using reductionist scientific methods."

Science may very well reveal consciousness, but you don't want to mistake that knowledge for the necessary relationship we must make with that consciousness in order to live a "good life" to know ourselves" and so on, better such matters are left to philosophy.
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Nov 30, 2014 - 07:10pm PT
Interesting discussion of interesting and worthwhile questions for the current age - definitely more useful than jousting about religion.

Meanwhile, I think Jung is being unfairly maligned here. He had hundreds of patients draw pictures for example, to reveal their unconscious. He observed that as they recovered psychological balance, their drawings became more balanced and finally featured circles like mandalas. That seems to me to be based on empiracal evidence, not just personal theory.

My critique of him and those who evaluate him, is the fact that he is credited with a number of ideas which he did not invent but rather borrowed and translated from eastern esoteric concepts into modern psychological terminology. To my mind he was more of a cultural interpreter than an original thinker. Joseph Campbell was more open about his sources and then tied them together with a theory.

As for the archetypes themselves,Jung noted and it is my experience from dream work, that there are levels to archetypes. Some are universal or nearly so, others are strictly cultural, and some are personal. Discerning the differences is all important to understanding the meaning of the dreams and the nature and state of one's unconscious. Perhaps jgill who has also worked with dreams has some insights on this.

And finally, since we've just been able to measure brain activity and decoded the human genome I think it's entirely premature to say we have no physical evidence yet of the archetypes.Unfortunately, none of us is likely to still be around when this comes to be known one way or the other with certainty.

MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 30, 2014 - 09:05pm PT
Ed: Philosophy, on the other hand, has no idea whether it has or has not anything relevant to say on the matter, there is no way to establish philosophical "truth."

Very likely, but then I didn’t always think that was philosophy’s only objective. I thought it was to help people think. That might indeed be relevant to every rational conversation.

What constitutes good reason? Only empirical data, a number of tests, and a statistical probability?

I don’t think that truth can be told.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Nov 30, 2014 - 09:31pm PT
Desire is the need for love. Love is a feeling and maybe understanding of at-one-ment.
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Nov 30, 2014 - 09:34pm PT
Perhaps jgill who has also worked with dreams has some insights on this

I never experienced anything like an archetype, Jan. Just what appeared to be normal reality with some of the laws of physics bent a bit and sensory signals enhanced somewhat like the description in an old Stephen King novel about a boy who ventured into an alternate reality and found he could smell a fresh onion pulled from the earth a mile away.

Good to see JL back in form. The older I become the less likely I will reject no-thingness.
MH2

climber
Dec 1, 2014 - 08:02am PT
"Just remember Mickey, we all regress to the same mean. And it's a pretty mean mean."


 Jon Art
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Dec 1, 2014 - 09:06am PT
I think the cross up here on most discussions is that we are talking about two different kinds of inquiry - measuring and "philosophical" - and the two are clearly not the same. A common mistake is believing that philosophical investigation is actually an attmept to do science without the methodology, techniques, and matmatical exactitude Or that measuring is about the nature of things, and believing that the mesaurement IS the nature of things. End of story.

Ad Ed pointd out, questions about the fundamental nature of things are irrelevant to the scientific task of setting up experiments and deriving laws per the predictable outcome and the behavior of stuff - from how a virus replicates, to the spin of an atomic particle. Likewise, the inquiry into fundamental nature eventually makes the mesurements irrelevant since at the deeper levels, the investigation is not about stuff.

Oddly, the investigation into stuff ultimately says that when reduced down far enough, the stuff "has no physical extent."

What to make of it is a large discussion.

And John, I believe it is misleading and unproductive to search for arechetype as you might search for arrowheads. Like they are encountered outside of your own subjective experience. I believe we can only expoerience the personal manifestation of the archetype. And we do that all day every day. It would be easy for a reductinist to take this and believe that the archetypes are simply the result of DNA, evolution, genetic drivers, and so forth. We can easily see why someone would believe as much.

JL
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Dec 1, 2014 - 09:24am PT
The easiest way to encounter personal archetypes is to analyze repetitive dreams, or dreams with common themes. These are our mind's way of telling us that we're not paying attention to something that we should. If you think deeply about what they have in common, you'll likely discover what you've been ignoring - and be amazed at how clever the unconscious is in choosing the symbols to try to get through to you. If the issue is unresolved long enough, one or two symbols will become archetypal for you personally. After a while you'll come to recognize them as old friends. If and when you finally resolve the issue, you'll notice one day that you haven't seen them around for quite a while.
Fossil climber

Trad climber
Atlin, B. C.
Dec 1, 2014 - 10:03am PT
It's probably not an original thought, but it just occurred to me...

If someone found Jesus' bones and ran his DNA, what do you suppose they would find?
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Dec 1, 2014 - 10:28am PT
How do you contrast Jung's collective unconscious to Platonic forms?

It would be a natural assumption ,given central aspects of the theory of the collective unconscious and Plato's ideal forms, to conclude that Jung was directly influenced by the overarching idea of the Platonic forms. I don't know if that was the case ,but If it were the case , then it would be a next step to point out that Jung may have been therefore 'tainted' or compromised by his adherence to the Platonic approach. Again, only if it can be shown that Jung, by his own admission, traced his core thinking as regards the CU to the 'mother ship" of Platonic idealism.

Jung wanted his theories to be regarded and approached scientifically. At the end of the day he thought of himself as a scientist, first and foremost. No scientist in an investigation of nature should allow the thinking of a speculative philosopher ,living two thousand years prior, to influence his thinking to such an extent that he fundamentally orders his theories to reflect an underlying shared conviction in those speculations.
This is not a dig at philosophy or an unreasonable elevation of science--- it is a thumbnail description of how these things function.

What aspect of consciousness, if any, do you consider to be "universal," or is consciousness itself - like archetypes, and other content - a cultural gizmo.

Those aspects of consciousness that I consider universal are those biological determinants that result in particular reoccurring outcomes and are traceable to identifiable causes. A good example would be hunger. I don't need to explain how the natural imperative of obtaining food orders human consciousness , or the consciousness of Lemurs. Hunger is more than just a pang in the abdominal region--- it's critical effects creates a fractal web of interlocking conciousness content. Like cultural gizmos, which socially reinforce the universality in a structural and dynamic way.





Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Dec 1, 2014 - 01:48pm PT
Those aspects of consciousness that I consider universal are those biological determinants that result in particular reoccurring outcomes and are traceable to identifiable causes. A good example would be hunger.


That's what we call in psychology instinctual energies, Ward. It's pretty clear that you are using a program model to approach this, whereby you can reverse engineer any outcome to a genetic "cause" as inherent in the master program. But I wasn't talking about the specific content of consciousness, but rather consciousness itself.

As was show way back when, the map is not the territory.

JL
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Dec 1, 2014 - 01:50pm PT
"biological determinants"

Nice phrase. But what is the determiner if not the very structure of the universe itself and within that structure can't we then find the seed of social accommodation even love? And in the largest sense wouldn't those biological determinants enjoy a kind of preexistence as inevitable possibilities given the vast and time rich nature of the universe?
Norton

Social climber
quitcherbellyachin
Dec 1, 2014 - 02:03pm PT
If someone found Jesus' bones and ran his DNA, what do you suppose they would find?


probably a little bit of Lucy, Ardi, and Cheetah's DNA

Hi Mr. Merry!
Fossil climber

Trad climber
Atlin, B. C.
Dec 1, 2014 - 02:06pm PT
Hi Norton!

Just wondered what supernatural DNA looked like.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Dec 1, 2014 - 02:20pm PT
Oh Gawd, here it is again:

And BASE, what do you mean by "mystical?" Materially based? But we have already seen that material itself, when reduced to the most basic levels, "has no physical extent."

John, go Google "Zen Physics." There is already a gaggle of people who somehow think that fundamental particles somehow validate their Zen notions. Click on any or all of them. They are pure woo.

If you decide to go down that road; to marry the mystical to the material through the discoveries of the biggest measuring machines on the planet such as the LHC at CERN, then you must also accept less fundamental particles such as Protons and Neutrons. They are still units of matter. There is no way around it. You can't dismiss a grapefruit size rock capable of taking your head off just because you read the wiki page on matter.

Which is good reading, by the way:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter

This is where I really disagree with you, John. You have posted the notion that Zen understands the basic nature of matter. I have to say, again, that you are so full of sh#t, selling something that you don't have a clue about. When you meditate, do you explore the known subatomic particles? What do you have to say about the idea of symmetry. That all particles are paired with an anti-particle (such as an electron and a positron)?

Please attempt it and then fill us in.

Nobody has discovered the nature of matter by meditating the nature of emptiness. It takes a lot of hard work, and a lot of hard mathematics. I'm not a physicist, so I don't make claims about things that I don't understand.

Did you ever take a class in Physics? Did you ever take a calculus class?





Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Dec 1, 2014 - 02:34pm PT
Largo , let me take this opportunity to extend my personal condolences to you on the recent loss of your good and longtime friend.
--------------------------------------------------------


That's what we call in psychology instinctual energies, Ward.

I call them 'aspects' of consciousness; universal aspects of consciousness ---- per your question.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Dec 1, 2014 - 03:12pm PT
You have posted the notion that Zen understands the basic nature of matter.


Kindly point out where I have said anything about Zen trying to do science - that the point of meditation was to discover the basic nature of matter.

You are like Dingus in this regards - you keep responding to the answer or info you have in your head, not what is being said.

It was a physicist who said that matter, when reduced far enough, "has no plysical extent."

What do you think he meant?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3eGX-wkFgM

JL
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Dec 1, 2014 - 06:30pm PT
Uh, I don't think "Ptyl Dragon" is a physicist.

I suppose I could be wrong about that, though.

There certainly are plentiful paradoxes at the quantum level, but what we experience in the macro-world as "solidity" is actually the result of repelling forces, which are energy.

So as always, what you're actually trying to signify here is as ambiguous as ever. But please, do go on.

(Kinda funny that the previous post was #404.)

MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Dec 1, 2014 - 06:55pm PT
Someone or some group has shown (proven?) what the basic nature of matter is?
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Dec 1, 2014 - 06:57pm PT
Base:

I looked at the URL. It begins with this:

MATTER

This article is about the concept in the physical sciences.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Dec 1, 2014 - 07:12pm PT
Cintune, it is telling that you consider the subject "ambiguous," which I sense you mean, "unclear or inexact because a choice between alternatives has not been made." This of course implies that to be perfectly clear, what we are talking about (matter and no-thing) can only be properly nailed down once we make a definitive choice.

Reductionistic science, as it has been explained to me, says that at the most basic level (reduced to the most basic "things"), what we have has no physical extent. Is this declaration ambiguous? How so?

JL
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Dec 1, 2014 - 07:13pm PT
[Click to View Linked Image]
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Dec 1, 2014 - 08:06pm PT
Someone or some group has shown (proven?) what the basic nature of matter is?

what is it you want to know?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_exclusion_principle#Stability_of_matter
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Dec 1, 2014 - 09:55pm PT
energy's not physical now? atoms dont have an extant? is this a post midterm thing?
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Dec 1, 2014 - 10:34pm PT
Ptyl Delta theory is metaphysical garbage. He also considers "demoncast". If this is your primary source, JL, you should avoid disclosing it.

;>(
jstan

climber
Dec 1, 2014 - 10:53pm PT
Would you believe it? Cintune has the hots for Fibonacci numbers.

I can almost remember seeing that problem 55 years or so ago.

FWOOOM!


paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Dec 2, 2014 - 02:03am PT
"Someone or some group has shown (proven?) what the basic nature of matter is?"

"what is it you want to know?"

I want to know what constitutes a well lived life and what is the criteria for that opinion based on a purely scientific point of view and a full knowledge of the nature of matter.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Dec 2, 2014 - 03:36am PT
Step 1: look in a mirror.
Step 2: if you've completed step one, you're probably alive.
Step 3: Enjoy that feeling.
Step 4: Keep enjoying it.
MH2

climber
Dec 2, 2014 - 08:07am PT
I want to know what constitutes a well lived life and what is the criteria for that opinion based on a purely scientific point of view and a full knowledge of the nature of matter.



And after that you will carry water in a sieve?
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Dec 2, 2014 - 08:31am PT
What is stable? Matter, or the theory?


Thanks for responding, Ed:

It’s that adjective “basic” in the term, “basic matter,” that I’m asking about. What do you / ‘we’ know?

What is the final substance (or whatever) at the bottom of it all, of all matter?

It is my apparent poor understanding of physics that says that no one ‘knows.’ What people have are theories about matter. I think that is what the Wiki page said, that Base pointed us to. Are you challenging Wiki’s claim that matter is a theory (model, concept, abstraction. etc.), rather than a “fact?”

For the sake of clarity (and my wont to avoid confusion), I am not questioning the predictability of outcomes of studies or even the usefulness of one theory over another. I am not challenging provisionalism, either. I am asking what is at the bottom of everything (here, matter). If matter has no final explanation or bottom, then what is it? Matter, if at all substantive, cannot be a theory—can it? Could theories be the bases of everything that you see, test, and measure?
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Dec 2, 2014 - 09:10am PT
MikeL wonders:
I am asking what is at the bottom of everything (here, matter).

and I wonder if it has any meaning whatsoever. Let's say you were magically gifted the knowledge, how would it change anything for you?

First, what do you mean by the term "bottom of everything"? It presumes that there is some ultimate "truth" that is knowable. An interesting presumption, and one that has no supporting evidence, and even no philosophical basis, though it is a standard presumption in some philosophies.

What if there is no "bottom of everything"? then you will be denied knowing the "truth" since there isn't any.

How would that change things for you?
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Dec 2, 2014 - 09:30am PT
Largo, I really don't have any problem with most of the things you say, particularly when they have to do with your specialty, meditation. At least you are our resident expert, along with Mike.

Before the last thread was nuked, you were talking about the nature of matter. You had been reading this website:

http://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/mass-energy-matter-etc/matter-and-energy-a-false-dichotomy/

So I read some of the discussions. It is basically a particle physics for non scientists website.

You made this post, which I remember well:

"Form is emptiness. Emptiness is form. Exactly."

I'll never forget that. After all of these years of fighting science, which you have done, so don't waste our time denying it, you found something in science that "fitted" your pre-conceived notion of what is real.

Particle Physics is pretty weird. It isnt' my area of study, but I can get the basic gist of it.

So Largo. We know that a proton is not a fundamental particle. It is made up of smaller particles. Two up quarks and one down quark, whose mass is oddly enough only 1% of the total mass of the Proton. I didn't go further than this. I only have 10 hours of physics, and classical physics is adequate for my work.

From there it is all cutting and pasting, for both of us.

Apparently you read something that fit your Zen ideas, that most matter is almost all empty space. You did not find that out by meditating. You found it out on a website or through your carpool. I do assert that.

This revelation that you posted was not based on anything that you learned in a Zendo. It was based on words posted by a physicist. A scientist. You have been going off on scientism and measuring for years now.

This is the biggest measuring device on Earth, which you apparently now embrace:


Did you change your tune about scientism, reductionist thinking, and measuring? Honestly?

WBraun

climber
Dec 2, 2014 - 09:33am PT
This is the biggest measuring device on Earth, which you apparently now embrace:

No it isn't.

It's absolutely nothing compared to the soul.

Without the soul there would be absolutely no measurement period.

The soul is the source of all measurements ......
crankster

Trad climber
Dec 2, 2014 - 09:55am PT
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Dec 2, 2014 - 10:09am PT
[Click to View Linked Image]
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Dec 2, 2014 - 11:04am PT
"First, what do you mean by the term "bottom of everything"? It presumes that there is some ultimate "truth" that is knowable. An interesting presumption, and one that has no supporting evidence, and even no philosophical basis, though it is a standard presumption in some philosophies."

Really? Science doesn't presume such a possibility as they struggle to reveal the "god" particle with the "biggest measuring device" on earth?

"Pondering the question "why there is something rather than nothing" is hopeless."

A question that is probably more disconcerting than just hopeless since it implies an eternal mystery far beyond the reach of science.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Dec 2, 2014 - 11:42am PT
Ed:

“No bottom” wouldn’t change anything for me, since I tend to see things as not very concrete or serious to begin with.

I’m fine with no bottom and no meaning. I’m fine with “it’s all labels, theories, models, and abstractions.” I’ll still teach that stuff because it’s the role that I’ve found myself in, and I can be very expressive in that role, but I won’t be taking any of it all that seriously. Teaching “stuff” is a basis for development of thinking, reason, and looking at feelings, stories, instincts, and activities. Teaching is a basis for dialogue and conversations.

Perhaps if a non-serious view were widely shared, we might have more “skillful means” among humans and other living beings. I mean, look around; we’re awfully serious about most everything these days. And to what end? (We can’t “fix” samsara. We could be more enlightened about reality, though, by being more playful and open about it.)

For example, on the Wiki page that Base pointed to, the article indicates up front that it discusses a concept, but read anything else on the page beyond that point, and it is written as if matter were unassailable fact. (A little post-modern analysis there, anyone?)

Me? I’d like to know what Paul wants to know:

I want to know what constitutes a well lived life and what is the criteria for that opinion based on a purely scientific point of view and a full knowledge of the nature of matter.

In my view, matter is nothing “to know.” That knowledge, if it can be called such, doesn’t seem to help Reality a bit. It’s essentially empty as it is, alone, independent, free-standing. What “matters” is consciousness, becoming connected to one’s heart, and aligning intentions with what flows. Link “matter” up with those, and I think a person could have something realized.

(BTW, Tvash above nailed it.)

Isn’t it somehow telling that the word “matter” is so often used in declarations of “what matters?” The metaphor seems accepted as a reference for truth, or what is really true. But aren’t metaphors just analogies?

I’m not against science. I think that a material view on reality is interesting, along with a number of other kinds of knowing that comes through different structures of consciousness. Science certainly has its place. (Just not the whole place, please.)
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Dec 2, 2014 - 12:10pm PT
I want to know what constitutes a well lived life and what is the criteria for that opinion based on a purely scientific point of view and a full knowledge of the nature of matter.

You're in the wrong department. The philosophy section is two doors down. Inquire at the desk and fill out the "existential revelations" form.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Dec 2, 2014 - 12:16pm PT
"You're in the wrong department. The philosophy section is two doors down. Inquire at the desk and fill out the "existential revelations" form."

...and this is exactly the point. There is a place where science simply isn't up to the task and in this place the wisdom of myth, religion and philosophy may reconcile us to those "existential revelations."
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Dec 2, 2014 - 12:54pm PT
There is a place where science simply isn't up to the task....

Non-overlapping magisteria
Main article: Non-overlapping magisteria
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-overlapping_magisteria

In his book Rocks of Ages (1999), Gould put forward what he described as "a blessedly simple and entirely conventional resolution to ... the supposed conflict between science and religion." He defines the term magisterium as "a domain where one form of teaching holds the appropriate tools for meaningful discourse and resolution." The non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA) principle therefore divides the magisterium of science to cover "the empirical realm: what the Universe is made of (fact) and why does it work in this way (theory). The magisterium of religion extends over questions of ultimate meaning and moral value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry." He suggests that NOMA is "a sound position of general consensus, established by long struggle among people of goodwill in both magisteria."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_Gould#Non-overlapping_magisteria
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Dec 2, 2014 - 01:29pm PT
There is a place where science simply isn't up to the task and in this place the wisdom of myth, religion and philosophy may reconcile us to those "existential revelations."

I agree. Existential questions are more in the domains you cite, but becoming excited and involved in scientific discoveries might mute those disturbing questions. There are various ways of dealing with the feelings of emptiness and worthlessness that underlie existential dilemmas and exploring science is one.

On the other hand science has given us numerous pills to pop, some of which would take the sting out of existential turmoil.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Dec 2, 2014 - 01:54pm PT
^^^Wow, now i'm speechless!

can you be sure the universe wasn't invented as a playground for emotions?
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Dec 2, 2014 - 02:09pm PT
Apparently you read something that fit your Zen ideas, that most matter is almost all empty space. You did not find that out by meditating. You found it out on a website or through your carpool. I do assert that.
----


On the basis of what empirical evidence? Have you been camping inside of my head all these years BASE LOL.

I have never been around a group so adamant in looking around the hard questions and attacking the messenger - always implying what you are merely projecting in your head.

Strange thing is, anyone who has done sustained attention training knows that mind is mostly empty space, and that content (thoughts, feelings, memories, sensations) are like so many minute particles once the brain settles. We did not discover that by reading science.

There is only one reality. And there is only one way to look at it - through the agency of your own raw awareness. Adding instrumentation does not and cannot foist awareness out of the investigation.

Ed insisted that there is no truth at the bottom of it all. At the same time he said that at the bottom of it all, when stuff was boiled right down to the last basic stuff, it had "no physical extent."

Reductionism has and will always believe that the "truth" issues from basic stuff. The further down we go, the more basic the truth till we get right down to elemental "causes" or factors. If that is not the "bottom of it all," then what is? And at bottom, what do we find?

JL
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Dec 2, 2014 - 02:09pm PT
can you be sure the universe wasn't invented as a playground for emotions?

That's an intense question.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Dec 2, 2014 - 02:26pm PT
"There is only one reality. And there is only one way to look at it - through the agency of your own raw awareness."

While I'd remove the subjective term "raw" from this sentence (it is self contradictory otherwise), I would also add that there are over 7 billion makes and models of said awareness - and probably a lot more than that if other species, both on earth and off, are included.

So much for the one way highway.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Dec 2, 2014 - 02:29pm PT

..and this is exactly the point. There is a place where science simply isn't up to the task and in this place the wisdom of myth, religion and philosophy may reconcile us to those "existential revelations."

For sure science can get to the "bottom of things" in a solar-system not containing "Life". Where elements and energies are apply seen and measurable and predicted.

But will science ever be able to predict how many branches a certain acorn will produce? Or why the Chinese Black-neck Crane will fly away from the flock and starve itself to death after its spouse for life dies?

Science can only label a deterministic effect, and from there predict what may happen next. But when there's a choice in the matter, or a prevailing wind, well then it's all given up to chance or luck.
PSP also PP

Trad climber
Berkeley
Dec 2, 2014 - 02:48pm PT
JG said "worthlessness that underlie existential dilemmas"

Worthlessness is a construct of "I". No attachment to "I" then no attachment to worthlessness.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Dec 2, 2014 - 02:53pm PT
There is only one reality. And there is only one way to look at it - through the agency of your own raw awareness. Adding instrumentation does not and cannot foist awareness out of the investigation.

OK. I will remember that you said this. In my field we call this "Stepping on your dick."

You heard it everyone. The subatomic, microscopic, telescopic, show is over. Don't forget to pay the lady at the front desk on the way out.

Instrumentation does not and cannot foist awareness out of the investigation.

So forget about the "fundamental nature of matter." The LHC is doing the devil's work.

It was a momentary lapse, I guess.

Does anyone want to look at cool pictures? The Chandra X-Ray observatory has been working hard for quite a while. It has to be in orbit because of our damn atmosphere. Here is a look at detail within a couple of supernova remnants:




BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Dec 2, 2014 - 03:01pm PT

Really? Science doesn't presume such a possibility as they struggle to reveal the "god" particle with the "biggest measuring device" on earth?

Boy, the ego in that white-coat that coined the godparticle term, Eh Ed? Was he really proposing to see far enough down, he would be eye to eye with the Creator, or the understanding to Creation?
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Dec 2, 2014 - 03:10pm PT
YEAAAAA!! Looky we had almost everyone back on that last page!

Jus like ol'times

Group hug{} i LOve You'all!

And it has NOthing to do with matter?

now get back to being pissed
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Dec 2, 2014 - 04:05pm PT
Instrumentation does not and cannot foist awareness out of the investigation.

So forget about the "fundamental nature of matter." The LHC is doing the devil's work.
--


The LHC is not aware. It is not sentient. Till a sentient being inspects the data collected, what is it?

BASE, you have fallen once more into the illusion of an objective, stand alone world that runs like a movie in a movie house, regardless of whether or not there is a paying customer there to witness same. And so in the vast and foggy reaches of your brainpan, you see a machine doing the meaningful work. That's called "forgetting that you have a dick."

And Tvash, you might bring your own self up to speed on awareness, and what it is, and what "raw" actually means, by looking into the archetypes that some posers on this thread insist do not exist (owing to archetypes not having a place at the periodic table).

Awareness is an archetypal or universal function. What you are confusing with your 10,000 versions of same is the brain or nervous system that processes what awareness intakes, be it a honey badger or a rock climber. Having no empirical experience with what awareness is (I suspect), and instead conflating same with content (WHAT and how different species fashion what awareness brings them), you quite naturally are left with your own version of same, a kind of Jede Clampett take on a basic function.

Fact is, with just a little basic work you could get clear on it instead of busting out more fatuous quips, but verily, you might learn something new that way.

Ain't it grand.

JL
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Dec 2, 2014 - 04:28pm PT

Fact is, with just a little basic work you could get clear on it instead of busting out more fatuous quips, but verily, you might learn something new that way.

HaHaHaHa, Happy Days Happy Days!

What ever happened to TVish' meditation classes?

i hope JL didn't kill the DrF thread just to destroy the proof of his willingness to pay for it?! HeHeHe
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Dec 2, 2014 - 06:28pm PT
Really? Science doesn't presume such a possibility as they struggle to reveal the "god" particle with the "biggest measuring device" on earth?

the Higgs particle, referred to as "The God Particle" after the title of a book by Leon Lederman and Dick Teresi... it's a good read and even better if you knew the people (and lived through the events recalled in it).

This boson is so central to the state of physics today, so crucial to our final understanding of the structure of matter, yet so elusive, that I have given it a nickname: the God Particle. Why God Particle? Two reasons. One, the publisher wouldn't let us call it the Goddamn Particle, though that might be a more appropriate title, given its villainous nature and the expense it is causing. And two, there is a connection, of sorts, to another book, a much older one...

"Today" was the time it was written, 1993, and I think that since then we already know that the "standard model of high energy physics," for which the discovery of the Higgs was the last piece of the puzzle, is not enough to explain the universe.

The greatest result out of the LHC may be a non-observation, the failure to detect evidence for "Super Symmetry" which was thought to be the next step Beyond The Standard Model..



The bottom is definable if somewhat inaccessible in our current physics models. It's the Planck scale...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_scale

...we currently lack a theory of gravity where the gravitational strength is large enough to be felt at the atomic level... a quantum theory of gravity. It is possible that we'll understand the Planck scale and move the bottom even lower...



as for there being "nothing" how could the quantum behavior of particles be of any interest to Largo, or to MikeL, or anyone else? As far as we all are concerned, matter is solid, has mass, reacts in the myriad of ways engineers have determined over the course of human existence.

I can't imagine a less practical concern than the possibility that matter is the result of the symmetries of the universe. If the argument that physics and science can't inform the "common person" on their life, how could the philosophy of matter be any different?

If you want to discuss the philosophy of matter, then I can't imagine that the scientific outlook is less nuanced and sophisticated than any of the past or current philosophical concepts, the scientific view of matter is much more informative than that of philosophy.

You can't have it both ways...

...explain to me why it matters?
WBraun

climber
Dec 2, 2014 - 06:39pm PT
The missing link is the soul to all complete understanding of matter.

It's been said for millions of years contrary to what modern man has become.

Material matter is only the inferior energy.

Studying matter will never give the solution because it is permanently incomplete ......
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Dec 2, 2014 - 06:44pm PT

PsP; Worthlessness is a construct of "I". No attachment to "I" then no attachment to worthlessness.

you say Worthlessness as if a bad thing, what if "I" is a construct of Worthlessness?

Being an "I" myself, i find no celebration when dis-entached. Doesn't Celebration come when we show this worthlessness to the worthfull?

Your "No attachment to "I"" sounds alot like JGill's "pop a pill" to forget what happened and go on, approach/conclusion?

No attachment = No conclusion

Jesus is the only one i've heard preach, "Love those that hate you"

This goes as much against science as it does philosophy.

meditate on that

then tell me what is worth
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Dec 2, 2014 - 06:46pm PT
by looking into the archetypes that some posers on this thread

Who are you talking about?
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Dec 2, 2014 - 06:50pm PT
as for there being "nothing" how could the quantum behavior of particles be of any interest to Largo, or to MikeL, or anyone else?

My suspicion is that JL, while not accepting the universality of scientific knowledge, would still prefer that science in some way verify or simply acknowledge the validity of his Zen experience of empty awareness or no-thingness. Hence his predilection for descending through the galaxy of subatomic particles and reaching the "bottom" and finding it has no physical extent. Ptyl and his demoncast are a pathetic reference(did he throw that in the mix to get our dander up?)
WBraun

climber
Dec 2, 2014 - 07:02pm PT
Modern science studies dead matter to understand life instead of studying life.

Life comes from life and life is what animates matter ......
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Dec 2, 2014 - 07:20pm PT
the scientific view of matter is much more informative than that of philosophy.

You can't have it both ways...

...explain to me why it matters?

Come'on, there isn't no science without philosophy. The Spaceshuttle and iPhone wouldn't be around without philosophy! There may be more zeros and ones of scientific data. But for us, every thing is more tangible by whats expressed(emotionally) and experienced. [Still talking about matter here].
So who's to say what's more informative?

i'll bet you a cheeseburger no scientist or robot could hit Bumgarner's pitches!
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Dec 2, 2014 - 08:38pm PT
Does anyone actually hate you, Blue?

a robot just hit a rapidly rotating chunk of space choss going over 40 km/s half a billion kms away, so there's that.

Is ebola alive?

What does it mean to be alive?

Definitions, definitions. What's a prion to do?
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Dec 2, 2014 - 10:07pm PT
If a duck quacks in a room and no one is there, does it make a noise?

If it does, does the quack have existential significance?

Or is it just a quack?


A conundrum that can make your head ache.

;>\
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Dec 2, 2014 - 11:34pm PT
^^^^^^^^^

Funny.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Dec 2, 2014 - 11:45pm PT
[Click to View Linked Image]
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Dec 3, 2014 - 07:18am PT
re: gobbledygook

''The internal mayhem I'm feeling is spilling out everywhere. I loved it, and felt very connected to activism - particularly activism that feels loaded with potential. Not the oppositional activism that seems like there's a stasis around it - earnestly sincere, but a monolith equal to the establishment.'' -Russell Brand

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11269276/Russell-Brand-wins-award-for-gobbledygook.html

I'd sure like to keep this ref /link around. Topic reminds me a bit of this place and its contents.

Will probably get deleted though.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Dec 3, 2014 - 08:54am PT
From the School of Life...

[Click to View YouTube Video]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGsE9pDSHGs

.....

Hey if a Mickey D then why not a massage parlor?

:)
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Dec 3, 2014 - 09:45am PT
Big Macs for Believers
Sushi for Sinners

I do love the golden archez coffee, though. It's often on special for a buck, too, and I don't have to be subjected to Dave Matthews and business casual at Starbucks. Plus, their coffee tastes like charred chodas to me. I will admit that their Suburban Fascist interior design is more soothing than McDonald's Adipose Clinic style.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Dec 3, 2014 - 09:50am PT
Ed: I can't imagine a less practical concern than the possibility that matter is the result of the symmetries of the universe.

Symmetries are dualisms that arise from conceptualizations. Drop the concepts, and the dualisms (left & right, right & wrong, night & day, positive & negative, matter & mind, heads & tails, etc.) fold into unity that is best described as empty or as an absence of substantiality. For our purposes here, emptiness might refer to complete openness, total potentiality, where nothing is reified.

‘What the heck is that?’ No one cay define it specifically.

Existence IS consciousness, but being transcends both. There is a witness of consciousness (the “I am” that is witnessed). Without the witness there is unconsciousness (just living). There can be no knowledge without a knower, and no knower without a witness so that one knows that one knows.

Mind gives rise to experience and experiencer. Mind is all that one is conscious of. Body appears in mind. Mind is centered in body, consciousness in mind, and awareness recognizes consciousness as a whole (unconsciousness, instinct, different forms of knowing, etc.). Mind is conscious of perceptions (and thus experience). It craves both. Mind is oriented to what happens (concepts and experience), whereas awareness is interested in mind. Awareness appears timeless, spaceless, objectless, subjectless. With an object, awareness is witnessing. Without an object, awareness is pure being without cognition. (Think of gerunds without subjects or objects inferred.)

Ed: ...explain to me why it matters?

Well, it really doesn’t.

But, . . . if the smallest measurement in mind or matter cannot be produced (the building blocks of space and time?), then there can be no causes or effects mechanically or morally.

So, what’s left? And why doesn’t it really matter?

The so-called emptiness (or absence) of objects is merely incidental when you get down to brass tacks. There is no conceptual position to defend, and it may seem like nothing worth talking about. The issue, Ed, is not whether objects truly exist but rather seeing correctly. Only seeing matters.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Dec 3, 2014 - 10:57am PT
MikeL:
"The issue, Ed, is not whether objects truly exist but rather seeing correctly. Only seeing matters."


talk about duality, perhaps you should shuck off the "correct" and "incorrect" duality in this and I think you'd probably be better off. It is at the route of the disagreement here...

and when I have argued that we have only provisional understanding, that doesn't seem enough for the "seeing correctly" crowd... who want to insist that there is a way of "seeing correctly."

In science, "seeing correctly" is provisional, and subject to testing. If you are "seeing correctly" then you're able to make predictions with precision and accuracy, which can be tested by observations of finite precision and accuracy. The observations can demonstrate the failure of the predictions and demonstrate that we were not "seeing correctly".

One then goes back and reconsiders what it was they were "seeing" and perhaps that results in another way of "seeing" and another prediction that is found to be consistent with the observations, a confirmation to some extent, but once again, provisional.



Unwinding that process into a life philosophy would be eminently doable, but then we'd give up on things like "correct" and "incorrect".

The vast majority of the post here would be very different if we gave up on that duality.
PSP also PP

Trad climber
Berkeley
Dec 3, 2014 - 11:01am PT
Blueblocker said "you say Worthlessness as if a bad thing, what if "I" is a construct of Worthlessness?

Being an "I" myself, i find no celebration when dis-entached. Doesn't Celebration come when we show this worthlessness to the worthfull?

Your "No attachment to "I"" sounds alot like JGill's "pop a pill" to forget what happened and go on, approach/conclusion?

No attachment = No conclusion

Jesus is the only one i've heard preach, "Love those that hate you"

This goes as much against science as it does philosophy.

meditate on that

then tell me what is worth"


BB refer to Mike L last post it pretty much addresses all of your statements. as far as Christ being the only one to love his enemies , I have to disagree there. Tonglen style meditation wishes happiness and contentment for those who are suffering with deluded views including ourselves and our "enemies", on the out breath; and to breath in their suffering on the in breath.

jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Dec 3, 2014 - 11:36am PT
Mind is oriented to what happens (concepts and experience), whereas awareness is interested in mind. Awareness appears timeless, spaceless, objectless, subjectless. With an object, awareness is witnessing. Without an object, awareness is pure being without cognition. (Think of gerunds without subjects or objects inferred.)

It seems to be human nature to seek religious fulfillment. Here we see an effort to bestow god-like elements to an object of metaphysics. Awareness is some sort of universal field - a God Field, perhaps - that exists independent of cognition and extends through the universe, inviolate and all-pervasive. One doesn't have to pray to this deity . . . simply acknowledge its universality.

Thoughtful and attractive metaphysics, but cosmic ectoplasm at heart.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Dec 3, 2014 - 11:44am PT
^^"Tonglen style" OK, Thanks i'm looking into it
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Dec 3, 2014 - 01:17pm PT
Look at those cavemen go.
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Dec 3, 2014 - 02:35pm PT
My drone broke but the kind folks at Galaxy Hobby got it flying again

THROUGH THE MAGIC OF SCIENCE (and some fly soldering skills - man, those motor wires are tiny).
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Dec 3, 2014 - 03:39pm PT
http://io9.com/engravings-on-a-shell-made-300-000-years-before-humans-1666303398

[Click to View Linked Image]
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Dec 3, 2014 - 04:01pm PT
Homo Erectus was a very successful species. Hominid evolution had been rolling along, and with the arrival of H Erectus, the brain greatly increased in size, and we begin to see widespread use of stone tools far older than the 300,000 years posted above. I've seen figures that put tool use as old as 1.8 million years ago, and there is some evidence that they used fire as well.

Human evolution is really getting sorted out now with the use of DNA.

Anyway, we owe a lot to H Erectus. Its arrival was quite a leap over its predecessors, and it spread far from Africa.

Again, Jan may know more about this than me, as I believe anthropology is her field.

The 6000 year old Earth is such a flimsy fantasy. How people cling to it, and ignore human evolution, is to me like holding your hands over your ears and screaming, Naaaa! Naaaa! Naaaa!

Can't let BB or Go-B get too worked up about it ya know. They are our friends despite the ribbing, and I wouldn't want them to have a stroke.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Dec 3, 2014 - 06:01pm PT
Ed: If you are "seeing correctly" then you're able to make predictions with precision and accuracy, which can be tested by observations of finite precision and accuracy. The observations can demonstrate the failure of the predictions and demonstrate that we were not "seeing correctly".

Seeing correctly is just seeing, Ed. No objects. No subjects. That’s what I meant about seeing correctly. I think you hear an evaluative statement here. There is nothing to evaluate if so, because there is no object to evaluate, and no subject doing any evaluating. Ditto for prediction, unless you are saying that you predict the insubstantiality of appearances.

BTW, I’m totally fine with provisionality (“as if”). If only people who admitted it would live like it. I’d say for most scientists that I’ve met and worked with, provisionalism is a scientific position that they’re proclaiming, but they don’t seem to live like they experience it in their day-to-day lives. Is it always in the back of their minds that they’re living on assumption? Is that your experience?
WBraun

climber
Dec 3, 2014 - 06:10pm PT
300,000 years before humans evolved

Oh bullsh!t.

Humans have been around since day one and for millions of years.

You bone digging up fools will never understand.

The human race was very advanced a long time ago and they cremated everyone back then.

Only the modern fools who falsely identify with the material body as the self due to their foolish attachments bury the bodies.

Modern scientists are fools and mislead each other to the ultimate end .....
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Dec 3, 2014 - 09:43pm PT
It's good to hear that Verdi is soaring again, Tvash.

Really neat little film, DMT!

Wanderers
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Dec 3, 2014 - 10:13pm PT
We're going to have to find more than one conch to critique homo erectus art properly, but I have a feeling that more of their gussied up trinkets will show up somewhere.

A brit company is coming out with a cell phone operating Verdi sized drone with camera - for selfies, of course. No selfie sticks required.

How would homo erectus have decorated their selfie sticks, I wonder?
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Dec 3, 2014 - 10:49pm PT
jgill:

From “Wanderers” . . . .

Wanderers is a vision of humanity's expansion into the Solar System, based on scientific ideas and concepts of what our future in space might look like, if it ever happens. The locations depicted in the film are digital recreations of actual places in the Solar System, built from real photos and map data where available. Without any apparent story, other than what you may fill in by yourself, the idea of the film is primarily to show a glimpse of the fantastic and beautiful nature that surrounds us on our neighboring worlds - and above all, how it might appear to us if we were there.

If there ever was a set of compounding speculations, this is one.
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Dec 3, 2014 - 10:56pm PT
From the from page video of the NYT’s today:

From Particle Physics to the Pentagon” by Natalia V. Osipova. “Aston P. Carter, a theoretical physicist and former deputy defense secretary, is President Obama’s choice to be the next defense secretary.”


Oh, just great.
WBraun

climber
Dec 4, 2014 - 07:38am PT
Not even one instrument the modern lab coats have made can study "life" itself.

They have failed from their very first start with their incomplete defective western materialism .......
MH2

climber
Dec 4, 2014 - 07:41am PT
Why is life in quotes?
WBraun

climber
Dec 4, 2014 - 08:07am PT