Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 44 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
welcome to the newly developing glaciation period.
by paul
10/24/19 03:23 PM
Potatoes on Mars
by paul
10/24/19 02:55 PM
Fishing , baiting the hook.
by paul
10/24/19 02:43 PM
F=mv ... mv=F
by paul
10/24/19 02:37 PM
Do we have a moderator?
by paul
10/23/19 12:30 AM
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
10/23/19 12:22 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 13
Page 7 of 11 < 1 2 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >
Topic Options
#35565 - 07/25/10 02:15 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: samwik]
redewenur Offline
Megastar

Registered: 02/14/07
Posts: 1840
People have a notorious propensity for creating mythologies to fill whatever knowledge gaps happen to exist. As science fills those gaps, believers struggle to cling to old mythologies which, nonetheless, must either evolve or eventually die. Yet, as science makes new discoveries new questions arise and new gaps are found; and those new gaps offer opportunities for new mythologies to evolve and develop, and so the cycle continues. The need to adhere to, or to formulate, a metaphysical belief system is natural and understandable - but it's folly to look to the physical world to substantiate such a system. Belief that Dark Matter and Dark Energy must be unmeasurable may be commensurate with some inner need, but it's a walk on thin ice.
_________________________
"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler

Top
.
#35567 - 07/25/10 03:27 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: samwik]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: samwik

Isn't Dark Energy (or dark matter) "dark" by defition because it's un-measurable?

Just because they can infer a certain amount of "something" must exist (to explain the current theories), doesn't mean


Yea indirectly measured, maybe measured wrongly, but still measured. They've quantified how much they detected. That's different from more unmeasurable quantities like whatever that 'energy' that can be accessed by human thinkers is.


Quote:

are true but metaphorical, our task is to correctly decipher the metaphor in light of scientific evidence also


That's trivially true. Any statement can be considered a metaphor, and interpreted to metaphorically describe something which we've already discovered by another means. You shouldn't limit yourself to religious documents. There are plenty of fairytales from all round the world which are just as correct - if interpreted metaphorically to fit whatever you happen to already know.

Top
#35568 - 07/25/10 03:34 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: redewenur]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: redewenur
People have a notorious propensity for creating mythologies to fill whatever knowledge gaps happen to exist. As science fills those gaps, believers struggle to


Yea I think that's where they're heading. But the story's so clouded by swathes of arbitrary information and biographies that it doesn't even begin to make any sense at all.

Samwik just summed up the same idea with:

"If the other 95% is as complex as this 5%, then it would be so much more likely that some omnipotent founding force informs this Creation."

Top
#35569 - 07/25/10 03:40 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: samwik]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Samwik, thanks for your insight.

Talking about powers that can be used to create and/or destroy, in the Agnosticism/Atheism forum
http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?msg=44735.127&nav=messages&webtag=ab-atheism
I am having a dialogue about the DIFFERENCES BETWEEN luv (eros), love (philia), and Love (agape) as practiced by human beings.

In the Greek New Testament, the word agape--the special Greek word for GOD-like Love--is used 140 times. In I Corinthian 13--Paul's great poem on agape/Love--Paul calls it "the greatest of these ...". In I John 4:7-21 John tells us that GOD is Love.

Love does not just mean luv--that is, the erotic, sexual, sensual and somatic-hormone-driven kind of luv--valuable in its right place though it is.

How prepared and ready are we as human beings to be truly humane beings--that is, capable of being truly Loving, without conditions?

When GOD is Love
Redewenur, GOD as Love is not about being a "god of the gaps". smile

In my humble opinion, GOD (not as a being separate from us)--at work in and through human beings, willing so to mediate it--is Love. When this happens, luv (eros)--that is, sexual attraction to wives--becomes more than just lust, it builds families. When not used to build families it can be the opposite--a most destructive and even criminal force.

Love (philia), in the ordinary friendship-sense of the word, becomes loyalty. It is a power that can build communities, nations and the global village.

GOD, as Love (agape)--that is, as unconditional love, is that quality which gives good will, regardless of conditions and circumstances, the ability to give good will, and to do good things to all and sundry, even under the worst of circumstances.

Obviously, the romantic kind of hormone-generated luv we find in certain movies and read about in cheap novels is not Love. Nor is it love as friendship. When the handsome hero in the James-Bond movie series "makes luv" to his "luver" he is really saying, "I like me, and I want you ..."
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#35570 - 07/25/10 04:52 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: Revlgking]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

GOD, as Love (agape)--that is, as unconditional love, is that quality which gives good will, regardless of conditions and circumstances, the ability to give good will, and to do good


That's not the Christian God as I understand it. With him you have to love him unconditionally, but he's allowed to throw you in a lake of fire if the conditions permit.

Are you inventing a new God who doesn't punish people?

More to the point, how is that connected to dark energy? There's plenty we don't know about the universe without even considering dark energy. God might just be hiding away in the distance where we can't see him.


Edited by kallog (07/25/10 04:54 AM)

Top
#35571 - 07/25/10 05:57 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: kallog]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Kallog, I like your frank comments. I think it was Voltaire who said: "If God did not exist we would need to invent him." laugh

But seriously, as I understand the GOD-idea, there is NOTHING beside, other-than, or outside GOD--the simple ability, the gift, we all have to will good, even when we do not feel like it.

Once this idea came to me and I stopped thinking of a god as a separate being to whom I had to plead, pray and offer homage--and this happened years ago--the dark energies within me began to fill with light. Try it, you'll like it.

The simple act of giving good will (but it takes a little practice) to all people and circumstances, is all that I did. No complicated philosophy, theology, creeds or religion was necessary. Of course, it is fun to think, read and talk about them.

I find that good will sincerely given--and I do it, consciously and unconsciously, with every thought and breath--dissipates all darkness, anger, resentment, fear, depression, whatever and brings light to all situations.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#35573 - 07/25/10 06:22 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: Revlgking]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

the dark energies within me

Hang on, that obviously a different dark energy, right? This is where I reckon inventing new words would be a good idea to avoid confusion.

Quote:

The simple act of giving good will (but it takes a little

That's cool, but what's it got to do with God? It sounds like you've made God redundant.

Top
#35587 - 07/25/10 02:13 PM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: kallog]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Quote:
That's cool, but what's it got to do with God? It sounds like you've made God redundant.
BTW, right now, when you use the word 'God' or 'god' what comes to mind? Anything? In what faith, religion, theology, philosophy were you born and raised?

When I was a child, I was raised--in a loosey-goosey sort of way--to believe in a god who was somewhat like an invisible and supernatural, or spiritual, being--an invisible friend who could see and hear everything I did, one who would listen to me when I talked. I got suspicious of the idea when "he" did not talk back.

I gave up believing in mental idols that about the same time I started to think for myself and discovered that Santa existed only in story books and in the comics. I think I was born asking questions. laugh Yes, I am willing to say more on this--if I am not boring you, eh?


_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#35648 - 07/29/10 03:12 PM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: Revlgking]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

When I was a child, I was raised--in a loosey-goosey sort of way--to believe in a god who was somewhat like an invisible and supernatural, or spiritual, being--an invisible friend who could see and hear everything I did, one who would listen to me when I talked. I got suspicious of the idea when "he" did not talk back.


Yea same here. Then that degenerated into more of an Einstein's god who doesn't even have a consciousness, but is basically another word for "nature", now I just call it what it is - nature.

Top
#35651 - 07/29/10 05:22 PM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: kallog]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Nature, GOD for you! I am sure you are a GOD-natured person. Now that you have been converted to all that is Good, Orderly and Desirable, send me an offering. If you don't, I will stop sending rays of awareness to you and you will become a robot--ready to be programmed by any master who owns you. Am I making my consciousness understood? laugh laugh

But seriously, IMO, the consciousness of GOD is in us--collectively. Think of this: Any community filled with GOD-like--good-intentioned, good-inclined, etc--people is a good place--a GOD-like place--to live.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#35652 - 07/30/10 02:38 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: Revlgking]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
But seriously, IMO, the consciousness of GOD is in us--collectively. Think of this: Any community filled with GOD-like--good-intentioned, good-inclined, etc--people is a good place--a GOD-like place--to live.


Somehow you're associating God with good. There's not many religions with good gods! Why not just call it "us collectively"? Otherwise there's no point having the word god because it's got too many meanings and nobody will understand each other.

Top
#35667 - 07/31/10 01:46 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: kallog]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Originally Posted By: kallog
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
But seriously, IMO, the consciousness of GOD is in us--collectively. Think of this: Any community filled with GOD-like--good-intentioned, good-inclined, etc--people is a good place--a GOD-like place--to live.


Somehow you're associating God with good. There's not many religions with good gods! Why not just call it "us collectively"? Otherwise there's no point having the word god because it's got too many meanings and nobody will understand each other.




Yes, definitions (interpretations) tend to get in the way....
Calling it "us collectively" or "oneness" is one answer. Avoiding the name overall is a path some choose. And if you pinned them down, all the members of any given church would probably have fairly different definitions, but they probably all think the others agree. An old man on a throne... an entity... or a process... there are lots of ways to conceptualize or define G0d. I wonder which definition or concept athiests reject.... I know which ones that I reject, and which direction seems to work.
===

...to catch up a bit....
I still think "dark" stuff has only been postulated, based on other measurements, but not itself directly measured or "sensed or perceived" in any direct manner; but whatever....

Yes, there are many metaphors--which can be interpreted in many way--but not neccessarily "correctly" deciphered or interpreted "in light of scientific evidence ...."
===

Referring to "Dark" stuff, that 95% of reality of which we cannot perceive or sense, is not an appeal to a "G0d of the Gaps" argument ...though 95% is a pretty big gap... but it is a reminder that the 5% of "reality" that we can perceive and measure is illusory, metaphorical, and seems to be derived from some more fundamental reality. The material universe does not seem to be solid enough to hang any rejection of other immeasurable possibilities upon.

===

But whether it is humanism or spiritualism... the meaning, understanding, and consequences behind the definitions are about the same, aren't they? And regardless of how or who defines what whichever way, as a species we are stuck here in this world.

Thought you might be interested in this, which sounded somewhat familiar. I just signed the Oneness Day petition:
http://humanitysteam.org/sai/oneness-petition/document

...billed as a Civil Rights Movement for the Soul....

at: http://humanitysteam.org/
Here's #1 from the petition:
"1. That the message We Are All One, inter-related, inter-connected and inter-dependent, with God/Life/One-another, is the one spiritual message that the world has been waiting for to bring about loving and sustainable answers to humanity’s challenges. "
===

...and speaking of the Millennium Development Goals (humanity’s challenges)....
Biochar, as a nexus for global carbon management, can do more to realize all eight goals than any other single practice. Restoring the bio-chemo-geosphere, our planet, is a righteous mission for humanity. So far, we are not very well fulfilling our charge to be good stewards (Genesis 1:28-30).

...and speaking of oneness... understanding biochar's use and effects, as a nexus of the carbon cycle that is the basis of Life and an expression of G0d's Design & Creativity, is a special way of honoring G0d's Creation... or a special way of promoting sustainability for our species ...life-everlasting... or to become one with the Creation.
===

Considering our time as a species here on Earth....
The Agricultural Revolution is not yet over!

"Larding the Lean Earth" is a good book to read on the subject.

http://hypography.com/forums/terra-preta/10700-terra-preta-humor-poems-prose-wit-3.html#post300787
...for my comments; or for the internet's commentary:

http://www.conservativemonitor.com/society/2002016.shtml
http://cometherevolution.org/?p=108
http://us.macmillan.com/lardingtheleanearth

The author quotes from the 1850's:
"Well might the Chickasaws and Choctaws question the moral right of the act by which their beautiful, park-like hunting grounds were turned over to another race, on the plea that they did not put them to the uses for which the Creator intended them.... Under their system these lands would have lasted forever; under ours, as heretofore practiced, in less than a century more the State would be reduced to the condition of the Roman Campagna." -p.203
The trail of tears keeps flowing....

~
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#35669 - 07/31/10 03:07 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: samwik]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: samwik

I still think "dark" stuff has only been postulated, based on other measurements, but not itself directly measured or "sensed or perceived" in any direct manner; but


That's a long way from God which hasn't even been sensed or perceived in any way whatsoever, outside of imagination - the same imagination that created two-headed flying dragons in the Alps, Loch Ness monsters, etc.

Furthermore, dark matter and dark energy are only defined by what we've found out about them. Physicists haven't taken the extra step of claiming imaginary extra properties for them just because it feels nice.

Top
#35671 - 07/31/10 04:36 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: kallog]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Originally Posted By: kallog
Originally Posted By: samwik

I still think "dark" stuff has only been postulated, based on other measurements, but not itself directly measured or "sensed or perceived" in any direct manner; but


That's a long way from God which hasn't even been sensed or perceived in any way whatsoever, outside of imagination - the same imagination that created two-headed flying dragons in the Alps, Loch Ness monsters, etc.

Furthermore, dark matter and dark energy are only defined by what we've found out about them. Physicists haven't taken the extra step of claiming imaginary extra properties for them just because it feels nice.



Nor was I or anyone here trying to equate Dark stuff with anything spiritual (or with "imaginary extra properties"). And probably we agree that science is the perfect tool to use for understanding the material universe.

Again, it's just that we know enough of the material universe to see how limited our perceptions are, so anything is possible in the bigger picture. It seems that the material universe is an emergent phenomenon of some more fundamental reality, so why limit youself to only material-based understanding. There are patterns within material-based emergent manifestations that 'hint at' and suggest the nature of the more fundamental reality, but I think that so far the Humanities (literature) expresses those hints better than Physics, but physics is getting closer.

All the metaphors are beautiful and useful in their own way; personally I like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, since spaghetti works well as a metaphor for all those "higher" dimensions out of which energy and spacetime manifest as artifacts. Do you think there are really atoms flying around like "little billiard balls" as the models (scientific metaphors) suggest, or is that just how we perceive and usefully define them? C'mon, reality is really just like a big ball of spaghetti... but we can only perceive the intersections of the strands.... Or words to that effect. Those links may provide better metaphors.

~ wink
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#35672 - 07/31/10 05:09 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: samwik]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: samwik

Nor was I or anyone here trying to equate Dark stuff with anything spiritual (or with "imaginary extra properties").


OK, glad that's cleared up.


Quote:

the material universe is an emergent phenomenon of some more fundamental reality, so why limit youself to only


May well be. And animals are an emergent phenomenon of some more fundamental reality (the material universe). Human emotions and imagination are even higher level phenomena. They seem important to us because we're strongly aware of them, but they're only based on the physical world we and our ancestors experienced.

Quote:

think that so far the Humanities (literature) expresses those hints better than Physics, but physics is getting

If by 'better' you mean in a way that feels nicer to humans, then sure. But humanities can in no way get any closer to fundamental understanding than physics can. The best it can do is placate and fool people. It has a long history of being consistently wildly wrong about nearly everything.

Physics on the other hand is slowly converging on a more and more consistent picture of reality. Literature seems to be diverging - wilder ideas are popping up where in the past things were simpler. Obviously that means it's getting more and more wrong, because it's getting more and more self-contradictory.



Edited by kallog (07/31/10 05:12 AM)

Top
#35673 - 07/31/10 05:47 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: kallog]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
smile I guess it depends on how you define literature....
Sure there's lots of divergence and diversity, but there are increasingly also common themes and patterns to discover.

I think The Golden Rule surpasses anything physics has come up with so far, but I suppose "For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction" comes pretty close to "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

~ smile
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#35675 - 07/31/10 06:48 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: samwik]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
samwik wrote:
"I think The Golden Rule surpasses anything physics has come up with so far, but I suppose "For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction" comes pretty close to "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.""

Hooray! The Golden rule expressed as a Science Fact!!... Although the notion of 'goodness' is not expressed fully by either.

I feel people here are (or were) trying to equate dark matter with God. Is this justifiable? There are heaps of mysterious things everywhere, many of them grouped together in the 'supernatural junk basket'. Gradually some are being explained. ( If you are an aspiring saint for instance, it is hard to get one of those miracles that require medical recovery as modern medical treatments have cleared up many of the various conditions fairly well!) Maybe one day Dark Matter will be fully understood too.. that is if it is proved to exist. But the present lack of proof does not preclude people from believing in its existence, so in that way it is the same as god, incapable of proof, but in the presence of belief it does not matter. Belief will make it so for the believer.

Neither does it matter if it is 'true'. Truth is always conditional-never absolute. Indeed truth for we humans often exists on a need to know basis, influenced by the conditions of the moment.*

*That was very cynical!! I'll stop now!

Top
#35677 - 07/31/10 09:18 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: Ellis]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Cynical, but True! wink

...but already specified not talking about the 'god of the gaps' or equating god with the dark 95 percent... but you sound as if science precludes spirituality, or vice versa; but....

Can't the two be seen as different perspectives on ways to understand reality--each based on different definitions, concepts, etc., with each useful in different circumstances or for different intentions--but still meaningful for the purposes of relating to and understanding reality. As with Relativity and Truth, the perspective makes a difference to understanding the reality.

And sometimes science is too specialized to see the big, humane picture--and sometimes religion is too generalized to see the reality on the ground--so they each seem to have value in complementing each other. There isn't a problem with contradictions, is there?

~ Cheers!
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#35678 - 07/31/10 10:57 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: Ellis]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: Ellis
samwik wrote:
come up with so far, but I suppose "For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction" comes pretty close to "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.""

That's just a crude analogy. It's got no meaning on Mars, or among plants.


Quote:

preclude people from believing in its existence, so in that way it is the same as god, incapable of proof, but in the presence of belief it does not matter. Belief will make it so for the believer.

There's some evidence for the existence of dark matter. There's no evidence for the existence of God. So they're totally different. Perhaps you could say dark matter is like a primitive tribe's fire god living in the volcano. Sure there's something there causing the hot rocks to come out and they don't know what it is. But they go further than science and arbitrarily assign human-like attributes to it. That's when it becomes religous and impedes further understanding of nature.

Top
#35679 - 07/31/10 11:07 AM Re: The Concept of the Whole and Threadism [Re: samwik]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: samwik

Can't the two be seen as different perspectives on ways to understand reality--each based on different definitions,


Religion is a way to obscure reality. But it does provide a tool for understanding human psychology. I don't mean by believers, but by psychologists studying religious behavior.

Quote:

And sometimes science is too specialized to see the big, humane picture--and sometimes religion is too generalized to see the reality on the ground--so they each seem to have value in complementing each other. There isn't a problem with contradictions, is there?


The humane picture is small. There's only a few billion humans in the universe, and all crammed into one planet. That's the narrow domain of religion. Science covers a much wider scope and has produced some big pictures encompassing humans as well as plants, rocks, stars, dark matter, space, etc.

Top
Page 7 of 11 < 1 2 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.