Leonard
|
Re: Off topic slightly...
Jan 07, 2006, 16:30
|
oops, pressed send too soon.
See, they have 'theories' that they've crowbarred their observational data to, which is basic pseudoscience. They need to identify the exact relationship that pulls their theories together, they need to quantize it exactly. They also need to explain exactly the link between their observations and the explanations they are pulling out of their ass exactly, how do they scientifcally make the leap from observation to catch all explanation. you may as well say, 'This happened cos God made it happen' it's equally 'scientific'
|
cHARLIE
|
|
This would make my day if it can be proved!
(((charLie)))
|
Leonard
|
Interesting innit ?
Jan 10, 2006, 10:32
|
That people who have modern spiritual beliefs seek to have science validate it. Whereas those whose spiritual beliefs go back a couple of thousand years or so (christians etc) don't give a stuff (intelligent design), and say that their belief is so strong they don't need the validation.
Ita most notable when you think of the Thelemic tradition (Aleister Crowley) that led onto the IOT (William Burroughs mates) and then to chaos magic (Peter Carroll and Phil Hine, though Mr Hine has gone all 'tantric' now apparently), all of those constantly tried to find correllations between science and their own theories. Then again, they are magical systems, so... Maybe they think magic has to obey the laws of thermodynamics, after all Crowleys brief attempt at describing Karma seems to be suggesting thats one of the reconcilliations with science he was attempting. As we know a lot more about causality these days the Chaos boys theory of magic fits snugly with modern scientific theory (though is, as theophilosophies go, big frilly pants full of holes).
However, when you consider the evangelicals version of the Holy Spirit then they definitely have a magical system. However their edited versions of the gospels and New Testament were put together by people who said the Holy Spirit left when Paul died and there is no way that people can be in it/use it today. Which is one of the reasons why they are so fucked up today, maybe.
I've met very good scientists who are part of the evangelical movement, and they have profoundly different takes on their faith, but still don't think take Intelligent Design as literaly as most of the others of their faith. So.. science has to some extent effected their faith, but not importantly enough to make them throw their bibles out. This is because they are in Spirit, they have a magic that they know beyond any doubt works, they have personal experience of it. Maybe those of more modern spiritual beliefs don't have the same strength in their magic/beliefs ,as most (with the exception of most wicaans, who again, frankly don't give a stuff what science says) do seem to try and crowbar modern science into their philosophy. What do you guys think ? Why care what science says so much ?
|
cHARLIE
|
Re: Interesting innit ?
Jan 10, 2006, 10:56
|
Good posting dude!
However
Evidence is all I am after . Evidence that I can understand that would do me.
The space between things can not just be *no thing* &. *No thing* can not *be* surely?
How is it nailed down . . . bring in the Buddhist philosophies e’h?
(((charrr)))
|
Leonard
|
Re: Interesting innit ?
Jan 10, 2006, 11:07
|
|
heh, nah mate. Go for the Taoist solution. 'There was a great mystery' and then the universe was created. Good Enuff ;D
|
cHARLIE
|
Re: Interesting innit ?
Jan 10, 2006, 11:57
|
I have always suspected that every thing was never *just* down to *matter* and we are much more than organic lumps of flesh!
If they can confirm this It will put every thing in place for me.
Innum!
charrr
|
Leonard
|
Re: Interesting innit ?
Jan 10, 2006, 12:40
|
Well, as for there being 'something else' that links everything else so to speak, science pretty much gives you that TBH (keywords, shape of galaxies, gravity, dark matter). Also the ZPF thing or Casimir effect is real, though the energy produced is still subject to the laws of thermodynamics. http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/15/9/6
However, linking/proving any of this to some kind of communal spiritual conciousness (Like the theories of Jung) is about as likely as proving M-theory beyond all doubt. As in, completely impossible. Therefore, just be happy in your own philosophical sophistry, because the proof can never be obtained (see Planck), and if you think you've got one, grab a hold of Occams Razor to make sure your not just.. well.. pulling explanations out of your ass ;).
You can't quantize the soul, or its effects can ye ?
|
Leonard
|
Re: sorry.. right.. planck..
Jan 10, 2006, 12:44
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length
Our accuracy is limited, and there are things we can never measure, if they are there.
|
cHARLIE
|
Re: sorry.. right.. planck..
Jan 10, 2006, 13:03
|
"Our accuracy is limited, and there are things we can never measure, if they are there."
indeed.......CosMic Censorship
(((charrr)))
|
cHARLIE
|
Emptiness is Full of Energy theE tAo*
Jan 11, 2006, 13:50
|
Thought this was very apt...
Emptiness is Full of Energy
"The Tao is an empty vessel;
it is used, but never filled.
Oh, unfathomable source
of ten thousand things!
"Oh, hidden deep but ever present!
I do not know from whence it comes.
It is the forefather of the gods."
Lao Tzu -Tao te Ching
Things are gonna change doods!
(((charLie)))
|
