Quote:
Originally Posted by David21  Sometimes when people come across science it goes straight over their head. But I guess you are right that science is understandable if you are assuming all can get to grips with the very basics e.g. atomic structure. However, quite a few people find relativity challenging. As you may know, relativity is based on quantum physics and now scientists are proposing that the universe works along these lines. |
*sighs* Relativity is not based on quantum physics. It'd be a little hard for it to be, since relativity was proved before quantum physics was remotely established.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David21 I've heard a lot of psychics say that people philosophise on the other side, much as we are now, but I've never heard them say that scientists are probing the ethereal realm with their complicated devices. |
Or they could not be telling you about it. Or they didn't see it. Or there is no other side. What can you
prove? Convincingly? To another?
Quote:
Originally Posted by David21 From what I have read in books like "Life after Life" and others that follow a similar theme, science cannot restrain the afterlife within its very restricting laws. This is where I draw my opinion from about how science may have no place on the other side. |
You speak of science as if it were a person. Please try to avoid metaphors like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David21 Regarding the words; I did hope that I used vocabulary that was and familiar to all, but I guess you are quite right, words can take on different meanings depending on the context they're in and the way that they are perceived. |
The world is simply too uneducated for any set of vocabulary to be truly universal. We will be translating and re-interpreting ourselves and others until the end of our lives, or until the end of our willingness to listen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David21 What is God? This is the question to end and start all questions! I personally do not know what God is. |
May I suggest you (1) speculate and (2) decide for yourself? That's what I did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David21 And I don't know whether we are moving towards him, but, rather foolishly, I put a little faith into books like "A Course In Miracles" and hope that we are all the same, all equal and essentially all one. |
It is not wrong to put your faith in others' words. It is wrong to leave it there, unquestioned and unconsidered. This is why biblical literalism (taking the Bible to be literal and utterly true) is stupid and wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David21 I guess on initial observation it would seem that science is moving away from God in that it often seems to be replacing religious thought that has existed for millennia. |
I might point out my original post in this thread, which addresses this very point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David21 If, however, science allows us to learn more about ourselves, perhaps it isn't so bad? |
If you're the sort who can ignore the people and really
look and the idea in and of itself, the idea of science, perhaps you will see what I have been shown: that science is just a formalization of what we already know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David21 I guess I allowed some of my own emotions to influence my answers. Often I feel that scientists are pompous and pretentious and that irritates me. I shouldn't let my emotions govern my thinking, though. |
People can have flaws without sullying the idea they represent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David21 I don't usually trust a source like wikipidia - just about anyone could have authored the answers within its pages. |
It's not a matter of trust. Never trust any source, whether it's a person speaking, a book written, a webpage hosted, whatever. There is no reason to believe it, unless you accept a number of assumptions before it.
Every such thing is an Argument by Authority: a shortcut for actual thought. But sometimes you need to know what other people are thinking. Wikipedia is, like any source, a starting point. If you think Wikipedia is wrong, find sources that contradict it. If you're not sure, find sources that affirm it. It usually provides some. You can also click on "History" and see who wrote what when. You can see what else they've written, and whether or not you think they're sane or knowledgeable.
I've been known to say that the dictionary is wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David21 Perhaps you are right. Maybe to argue isn't so bad. But I can't help wonder how much of it is lead by the ego. The ego doesn't exist in the next realm. I suppose we have it here to learn. |
You seem preoccupied with the next realm. Why is it so important? What's wrong with this one?
Quote:
Originally Posted by David21 When we are apart of God, there is nothing to consider, no goal to be reached, no conclusion to be made - as ACIM suggests, nothing unreal exists, nothing real can be threatened, so why make defences and arguments. |
Because it's interesting. From the movie Black Robe:
Daniel: They have an afterworld of their own.
Father Laforgue: They have no concept of one.
Daniel: Annuka told me they believe that in the forest at night the dead can see. The souls of men hunt the souls of animals.
Father Laforgue: Is that what she told you? It is childish, Daniel.
Daniel: Is it harder to believe in than Paradise where we all sit on clouds and look at God?