Where is thought?

[CFTraveler]

Science is asking the questions, whereas spirituality is experiencing the answers so to speak. They both guide us to truth, but one is shared with the community, while the other is deeply personal.

Yeah, I have a wonky contorted world view, but it works for me.

I like it too.

[star]

But I thought that the world was only 6,000 years old?

Damn you science, damn you!

[journyman161]

Well, about the whole initiation thing. That's what I meant by patterns, or the chicken and the egg scenario. Think of a patten like you do a circle, its a fairly simple apttens, but where does it begin, where does it end?

Patterns don't even begin to explain thought, or at least originating thoughts. Yes there are thoughts we can trace to outside events but there are also, (& it may just be what makes us human) the way we make new thoughts & so transform the world around us. Patterns simply don't explain this in any way.

There's a whole book on how patterns develop from simple rules (A New Kind of Science by Stephen Wolfram), which I think is a step in the right direction to understanding how these patterns develop into the forms that we know. It is, I think, entirely concievable that the creator created the matter we are made of in just the right proportions to self assemble into the people we are of today, and thereby generate the particular patterns required to project back "home" so to speak

It may be conceivable that the creator did this but the idea of a Creator is simply not proved yet, so to take a maybe/perhaps & use it to explain other facets of reality isn't science, it becomes belief.

Patterns are nice, but they haven't yet been shown to be the basis of anything except some nice (original) thoughts about how they may be related to the Universe around us - they have certainly not been shown to have anything to do with a Creator.

There is no need to invoke a spiritual explaination just because we don't understand something fully. God exists whether there is a physical explaination or not. In fact, I find observating god's handiwork in explicit detail so much, I decided to make a career of it. Understanding how our reality works doesn't somehow make it less magical, it makes it more so.

Agreed there is no need to evoke a spiritual explanation when we don't understand something, but assuming God exists is simply a leap of faith & not science at all. God might exist - until we have some evidence of the matter it is blind fatih alone that allows one to say 'God exists whether there is a physical explaination or not' - science admits no such statements of belief.

[DM*Cubic]

No phenomenon is locatable in space.

[White Wolf]

I think if you pick up the book I mentioned you'll see all sorts of magic right before your eyes. You can see the mundane transform into magical, simple to complex, linear to non-linear. Its a impressive work. I'm using patterns in a very abstract definition here.

Its not perfect though. The patterns seem to top out in complexity. It is a proof of concept though. I think it holds promise.

You could call the creator the big bang and remove most of your issues with the second quote. There's no need to school me on logic. I know full well that I've purposely left the realm of known science, and you do too. "I think" being the operative word that clues the reader that I've entered speculation mode.

You missed the point entirely in your effort to dissect my inconsistencies. Yes, there are many, I'm not disputing it. My point was that belief in god is not determined by physical understanding. I could know everything there was to know about the world at this point in time, and yet if I chose to, still believe in god. There is no predicate for belief. It is something we will into being. Just as ignorance does not make one believe in god.

[CFTraveler]

My point was that belief in god is not determined by physical understanding. I could know everything there was to know about the world at this point in time, and yet if I chose to, still believe in god. There is no predicate for belief. It is something we will into being. Just as ignorance does not make one believe in god.

I have to agree with this premise, because belief in God is often a choice, even when it doesn't seem to make sense in the context of cultural or familial history. That's why you have such different ranges of belief systems in the same family, mine being one good example of that.
This also reminds me of the threads about enlightenment, wherein before enlightenment one strives for something or comes to a realization, and after enlightenment one chooses whatever one wants to believe in.
Belief is a funny thing, and thinking less of someone because they believe in [insert belief here] is a form of prejudice, pure and simple.