Where is thought?

[journyman161]

The interesting thing is that it needs belief that science can do all these things in order to start doing it that way

Um, no, that turns out not to be the case. The whole thing about Science is that it doesn't require belief - that's the whole point of Science. If you have to believe it, it ain't Science.

There may be ways in which science might enable us to understand more about the cosmos. But IMO it is more probable that science as we know it, and that is commingled with technology, will always be blocked from finding the deeper reality of things which human beings possibly cannot fathom very much while still alive

While this is an interesting statement, it is scientifically a null statement. It is opinion & has no validity in any science except perhaps psychology.

Thinking outside the paradigm is however not a trait of science, though. The real, existing scientific community on this planet thinks mostly within paradigms, not outside

And yet strangely, science has consistently stepped the human race outside the current paradigms & into brave new worlds. People may hang onto a current paradigm, but the next generation of scientists, looking to make their place in the world, will break the old paradigm wide open.

I can understand why people look at the corruption around us & blame science, but science did not cause the corruption - that is the fault of greed & power seekers. If there are questions, Science can address them. Claiming anything within the universe is outside the realm of rational thought simply continues the faith paradigm & we all know where that has led us. All those things you are pointing out come from the continuation of that paradigm & the failure to fully implement rational thought.

Quantum ideas bring us the possibility of finally understanding what this universe is about. String Theory is an approach to understanding the basics of construction & some scientists are delving even beyond that.

And yes, without those interested in basic research, there would be very little development of spiritual or astral knowledge or experience. It is hard to find the leisure to meditate when nearly all waking hours are spent finding & preparing food & keeping the cave warm.

People do bad things with science; but people, for much longer, have done bad things with religion, spirituality & mysticism. It is the dedication of those pursuing basic knowledge that have brought Humanity to the potential for a better world.

[Korpo]

People have meditated since the dawn of time. There were always ways, they did not need science for that. In fact, before electric light illuminated all of our nights people had to stop most activities when sun went down. The way your time you was spent was very different, but just because you got not a day off does not mean these people were all unhappy. Most of them weren't spiritual seekers, either.

The scientific paradigm requires belief in the ultimate explainability of all things, and where would that come from?

Even if quantum and string theory provided accurate answers you may never have the computation capacity to use these answers to come up with concrete solutions.

It is quite possible that this world is only a denser environment loosely based on higher reality. And that your awareness is the only way to know that and perceive that. You might not find a single trace of that in our world except in your mind. Then science as we know it would be totally beside the point.

If you want to pursue that kind of knowledge, you can do that. But spiritually it is not that important. It depends on your priorities.

Oliver

[journyman161]

*shrug* It is only an opinion that Science can't deal with spirituality. We don't yet have Quantum or String theories nailed down so it is difficult to dismiss where they may lead us or what they may make us capable of achieving in such a casual way. As for computation capacity, if things keep going the way they seem to be, we may have all we need in both Consciousness AND the structure of the Universes.

It IS quite possible this universe is only a denser environment but that makes the full understand of it even more important - without knowing the basics of this, how can we ever do more than wish or fantasize about what the higher realms may be?

Given how many different & sometimes mutually contradictory views there have been using faith & mysticism as sole arbiters of Truth, I would think a rational approach might actually improve the situation. Even on these forums there is a lot of radically differing views about what is going on & what people are experiencing. Bringing some rational (ie. scientific) approaches to what members experience could help define what they are living & help them separate the real from the imagined.

Faith & 'knowing' through mystical means just what 'Truth' is has killed more & brought more misery to human life than any other cause. It is about time to start bringing real knowledge to the fore & start dealing with the myth that personal experience can't be rational.

[Korpo]

Actually, economy has killed most people, not religion. Economy matters more than politics or religion in the long run.

You also constantly confuse spirituality and religion, it is exactly the same difference between science and technology you postulate. Spirituality just is.

I see you *believe* in science. You *believe* science will uncover this or that but you cannot possibly know. You are just betting on one option like anyone else.

Since can, BTW, according to its own rules, not uncover answers to all questions. Gödel proved that there are more questions you can ask than answers...

Oliver

PS - Spirituality has one advantage. It can happen in *this* lifetime. It could do so 3,000 years ago. It does not require a specific point in time to work.

[journyman161]

The point about economy would be better made if religion hadn't controlled most of the known world for most of history. Economy doesn't demonise other people & provide justification for the worst excesses of history.

I have made it clear I don't confuse spirituality & religion. I don't 'believe' in Science in the way you say - I do believe it is the best method we have found so far to increase knowledge.

Godel proved no such thing - his theory deals only with mathematical systems...

In 1931, the Czech-born mathematician Kurt Gödel demonstrated that within any given branch of mathematics, there would always be some propositions that couldn't be proven either true or false using the rules and axioms ... of that mathematical branch itself. You might be able to prove every conceivable statement about numbers within a system by going outside the system in order to come up with new rules and axioms, but by doing so you'll only create a larger system with its own unprovable statements. The implication is that all logical system of any complexity are, by definition, incomplete; each of them contains, at any given time, more true statements than it can possibly prove according to its own defining set of rules.

It is only implication that it could be extended even to other logical systems than mathematical ones. And it is Theory, something Science is good at & also good at improving upon.

Too many people look at scientific theories & make them over into 'fact' but Science doesn't do this - people with 'beliefs' do it.

[CFTraveler]

Guys, I'm with Jman on this one.

I can understand why people look at the corruption around us & blame science, but science did not cause the corruption - that is the fault of greed & power seekers. If there are questions, Science can address them.

Korpo, I think you're right in that science can't answer all questions, but it can certainly address them. It doesn't mean it can answer questions of things that matter to you, but it allows you to ask them, something that religion (which is nothing but the organized and politicized application of spiritually obtained data) sometimes doesn't even allow.

Claiming anything within the universe is outside the realm of rational thought simply continues the faith paradigm & we all know where that has led us. All those things you are pointing out come from the continuation of that paradigm & the failure to fully implement rational thought.

I agree with this too- the reason that the scientific establishment is so entrenched in their paradigm (as opposed to individual scientists that graduate with that fluffy-bunnyish wish to discover the unknown) is because of this way of thinking.

The thing is that this way of thinking (reactionary in the political sense) is true about any discipline that requires a power structure, be it religion, politics or science. So IMO this is a human trait, not a characteristic of any discipline in particular (which sounds a lot like what Jman said, but in my words).

So yes, I take what I get from meditation very seriously, but I won't take channeled information for an explanation on how things work, unless observation supports it. Of course this is how I view the world.

[White Wolf]

Godel's theorem proves the exapanding horizon of awareness that is mathematical discovery, and by association, science. That's really all it does. He also proves the existance of propositions which are known to be true, but yet are unproveable. As a kinda of limitation of logic.

I really don't know enough about it to say much further. I will say that what little I read on it, seems to be true. There's always more questions than answers, and the logic can not prove all solutions.

I think however, that science has proven that the area that is provable is far and wide indeed.

I think applying some rationality to spiritual matter might result in a net gain for both reason and spirituality. I'm not going to debate that. That is my opinion, and I don't think anyone can convince me otherwise of that assumption short of an explaination why it can not be.

As for your views, I think you have overly romantized spirituality in your world view. I know my science has flaws, just like spirtuality has flaws. It is only by testing your flaws that we rise above them. That's where reason come in and helps us clear the air.

Science does require belief. Its a very specific type of belief though. They are called assumptions. We assume the universe is infinite for instance. Thats probably the biggest one most people hold. The point is that the expanding horizon of knowledge eventually eclipses our beliefs and replaces them with understanding and truth. It is the struggle to understand that redeems our race from the obscurity of brush and propels us onward to the heavens.

[CFTraveler]

I think applying some rationality to spiritual matter might result in a net gain for both reason and spirituality. I'm not going to debate that. That is my opinion, and I don't think anyone can convince me otherwise of that assumption short of an explaination why it can not be.

In his writings, Robert Monroe said something to that effect in a different way. He postulated that bringing right-brain function to left-brain experience was the way to achieve an 'awakening' of the collective unconscious. For isn't that what we do when we attempt conscious projection?

[journyman161]

Just a thought about Godel's Theorem - if indeed true & applicable to our quest for Knowledge in this Universe, it may be the defining purpose for which we are here.

If a thing cannot be known in its entirety without stepping outside the system that is the thing, then we have, in place, here & now, both the thing/system AND the point outside that makes Knowingness of the thing possible.

Consciousness. As near as anyone can tell so far, Consciousness lies outside the realm of the more mundane universe. It doesn't seem to answer to any of the definitions or explanations that even Quantum Theory bring to light. Relativity requires an Observer. It is thought that things exist in quantum flux until observed, at which time they collapse out into a specific 'reality' - so even in its infancy, Quantum Theory is bringing a scientific feasibility to the Being.

And maybe, just maybe, our purpose is to 'prove' (in that special Science sense) Godel's Theorem.

[White Wolf]

I said (in other words) earlier that science through quantum mechanics strongly indicates that subjectivity is the basic for our reality.

I think through this debate, that central idea got lost, but it bears repeating. You get what you ask, and no more.

As a little primer for those that understand. In physical terms, this means if you want to know more about the position of a particle, you are required to give up knowing its momentum ( velocity is speed, and direction, if you include mass, you get momentum). So if you want to know a particle's position with great precision, you must give up a protortionate knowledge of it's of its weight, direction of movement, and/or speed.

This is not science fiction, this is the basis for transitor, laser, and many medical scanning technologies. The universe is exactly this absurd at it's most fundamental levels. This is a 50-75 year old theory, but it is extremely accurate, and has passed nearly every test put forward against it.

So it's not like science has forgotten about its subjective roots. I think through its empirical process, it has proved it in a way that no spirital experience can provide. Not to say that I don't value my spiritual experiences. I think that are an essential guiding force behind my life, and even the whole of science.

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.