| |||||||
| Spirituality, Consciousness, & Awareness Spirituality, beliefs, the nature of reality, consciousness, awareness, metaphysics, truth, philosophy, religion |
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
02-13-2007, 02:04 AM
| #61 (permalink) | |
| Banned Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 22,520
  |  Quote:
| |
|      |
|
02-13-2007, 02:11 AM
| #62 (permalink) | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 525
| Quote:
 But...say...there's nothing quite like the passion of feeling that the Universe is actually meaningful, and that a higher life form evolving would actually be meaningful.  Last edited by Megan; 02-13-2007 at 02:13 AM. | |
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 03:49 AM
| #63 (permalink) |
| Banned Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 22,520
| Meaning?
Now that you mention it, I believe there is NO inherent meaning in the universe; there is only the meaning that I (you) (each person) generates for hermself. I realize that tends to make faithheads fulminate (pkshewwww!!!bubble bubble fizzfizz), but I think I might be my most passionate when I'm NOT busy making meaning all over the place, and rather, just Being. And Megan, the meaning (and the words) that you generate are lovely. |
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 01:15 PM
| #64 (permalink) | ||
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 525
| Hermself...gotta remember that one...
...and Fulminate in 2008--a campaign slogan for Gore? Quote:
Ah, so the suicide bombers' meaning is on a par with the meaning of the framers of the US Constitution? Can we say P-O-S-T-M-O-D-E-R-N S-O-U-P? Quote:
Science and religion are in the same existential boat: no absolute truth. The revolutionary photo of the earth hanging in space is a living reminder of, and metaphor for, our existential dilemma:  I am yours, Terran and proud, my lovely girl, Megan Last edited by Megan; 02-13-2007 at 02:48 PM. | ||
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 01:38 PM
| #65 (permalink) |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 525
| The Universality of the Golden Rule in the World Religions Christianity: All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye so to them; for this is the law and the prophets. --Matthew 7:1 Confucianism: Do not do to others what you would not like yourself. Then there will be no resentment against you, either in the family or in the state. --Analects 12:2 Buddhism: Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful. --Udana-Varga 5,1 Hinduism: This is the sum of duty; do naught unto others what you would not have them do unto you. --Mahabharata 5,1517 Islam: No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself. --Sunnah Judaism: What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellowman. This is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary. --Talmud, Shabbat 3id Taoism: Regard your neighbor’s gain as your gain, and your neighbor’s loss as your own loss. --Tai Shang Kan Yin P’ien Zoroastrianism: That nature alone is good which refrains from doing to another whatsoever is not good for itself. --Dadisten-I-dinik, 94,5 The Golden Rule in World Religions Last edited by Megan; 02-13-2007 at 01:47 PM. |
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 03:09 PM
| #66 (permalink) |
| Banned Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 22,520
|
Megan, I said there is no inherent meaning in the universe, only the meaning we make. I was not comparing here the morality of the meaning one individual or group creates. That's for another discussion. Why are going on about the Golden Rule? Are you saying that because a system of morality works better, or is adopted by a majority, that it is a more inherent part of the universe? What I meant by my remark is that humans make meaning. That's all the meaning there is. As you say, "no absolute truth." We are each free to generate meaning in our lives that work for us (or don't). We're free, and that's a meaning I make! So, what exactly are you on about with the golden rule? Speak simply please; I haven't had my coffee yet. Much affection, A |
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 04:50 PM
| #68 (permalink) |
| Banned Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 22,520
|
Shaden -- what?? I don't understand why you say that. I also don't understand why Megan said what she said most recently. Were we talking about the relative superiority of meanings or moral structures? I wasn't. What the heck? I have had my coffee but I still don't follow this turn of conversation. I think I've sprained my medulla oblangata. |
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 06:13 PM
| #69 (permalink) | ||||
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 525
| The "Save the Endangered Medullas Foundation" presents... Quote:
You mean...the meaning we make is not inherent in the universe? Where does it come from then, pray tell? It's only for another discussion if the meaning we make is not inherent in the universe. Are human beings alien to this universe? Did we not evolve out of this very universe? Quote:
Not a more inherent part of the universe (for one thing cannot be more inherent than another in a universe), but rather, a more adaptive part of the universe, it works better, a la Darwin. Quote:
I agree. [Edit: But I will add a qualification later.] So...in general, would you say that the meaning the suicide bombers make works for us, the human race, as well as the meaning the framers of the US Constitution make for us? IOW, is some meaning informationally deeper in an evolutionary sense, more adaptive, i.e., does it work better, than other information? Quote:
Likewise with much affection, I submit for your consideration that, given our mutual predilection for the long-term survival of the human race (which is itself adaptive, i.e., works better, I trow), the Golden Rule is a meme that has sprung up all over the globe amongst the religions, and, most recently, amongst the philosophers, and, therefore... This Golden Rule meme is adaptive in the evolutionary sense for the long-term survival of the human race. Ta-da! M Last edited by Megan; 02-13-2007 at 06:42 PM. | ||||
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 06:47 PM
| #70 (permalink) | |||
| Banned Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 22,520
| Ah, there you are! Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And yes, I reckon that the meanings that work better for me (and you!) are more geared towards the long-term evolutionary progress of mankind. However, I was responding to your comment: "But...say...there's nothing quite like the passion of feeling that the Universe is actually meaningful, and that a higher life form evolving would actually be meaningful" -- and pointing out that I think the only reason that the universe is meaningful, is because we fill it with meaning. Us. Humans. It's not there till we do. It wouldn't be there if we didn't make it. Again, I wasn't making any moral or value comparisons between your remark and any conflicting ideas, and couldn't figure out why you thought I was. "Ah, so the suicide bombers' meaning is on a par with the meaning of the framers of the US Constitution?" In that humans generate the meanings, yes. Also in that each person has the right to generate their own meaning, yes. Naturally that means living (or dying, as the case may be) with the consequences of those meanings. Which meanings I prefer to generate and live by is quite another story. The reason I'm being careful with this is that it chafes me when folks stake claim on what the universe "means" (or "wants"), as if they are stating an ultimate truth, whether they are a suicide bomber, a faithhead, a scientist, an employer, or little ol' moi. I don't think you're doing that, by the way -- stating anything as an absolute truth. | |||
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 07:15 PM
| #71 (permalink) | ||
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 525
| Ah...Allow me to qualify once again... Quote:
Likewise, all beliefs are inherent as potentials, else people couldn't invent beliefs and hold them. Consider the absurdity of thinking up a belief that was impossible to think up. Like the Red Queen, in Alice, we can believe five impossible things before breakfast every day, if we wish. I submit that memes are evolutionary in nature, and that some beliefs/memes are the equivalent of biological misfires, i.e., are not adaptive overall to the long-term survival of the human race, while others, e.g., The Golden Rule Meme, are adaptive in the evolutionary sense. So we agree: Quote:
Notice the value-laden word "progress" there. Last edited by Megan; 02-13-2007 at 07:26 PM. | ||
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 07:34 PM
| #73 (permalink) |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 525
| You are saying:
Am I seein' what you're sayin'? Did I leave anything out? |
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 07:42 PM
| #74 (permalink) | |
| Banned Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 22,520
| Quote:
Thank you for your gracious and skillful communication. p.s., Shaden, okay, I get it now; sorry for my density. It's funny to me how some religious people complain that without god, life has no meaning, because they rely on the religion to generate meaning in their life -- when they could generate their own! p.p.s. I am going to stick to lightweight concepts for the rest of the day, or until my medulla oblangata heals up. Time for lunch! | |
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 08:23 PM
| #76 (permalink) |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: On the internet
Posts: 129
|
Atheists does not mean they are irreligious. However, this is what we associate them with ,irreligious. It simply mean no belief in the existance of god. So I would classify Dawkin irreligious atheists. However Dawkin and his followers are what I classfiled as willfully ignorants, BS spouting group of people. I would lump them together with creationists who oppose evolution. On the subject on the meaning of life...and of course god. We wonder, we think, we philosophize, so therefore there are inherient meaning in the universe. We devise scientific theories and laws, so therefore there iare some truth in the universe. Because of our search for the truth, therefore God exists. I must admit, belief, disbelif, or agnostic about the existance of God does not change our lives dramatically unless we define God and the belief system in such a way that it dramatically impact our lives. I choose to believe in god. |
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 08:42 PM
| #77 (permalink) | |
| Banned Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 22,520
| Quote:
| |
|
| |
|
02-13-2007, 09:12 PM
| #78 (permalink) | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Gainford, England
Posts: 375
| Quote:
Secondly your implying that because we search for truth, God exists, which implies that he is truth, which to be completely honest with you is a bit of a weak argument. Thirdly the scientific laws are just theories, based on a paradigm that we invented for ourselves. Our model of reality gives rise to these theories and laws and if our model of reality, the assumption we make about the functioning of the world, is innaccurate, everything based on it is innaccurate. Which means it's the core beliefs, not the beliefs that arise from them that are important. Religion and science both arise from assumptions... | |
|
| |
|
02-14-2007, 02:45 PM
| #79 (permalink) | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 525
| All knowledge is constructed, contextual and mutable
Scientific and spiritual knowledge are both based on assumptions, as Shaden said, and these assumptions are constructed, contextual and mutable, along with the theories that arise from them. An apt metaphor for this, I think, is the exquisite earth hanging in space.  Our assumptions and theories hang 'suspended in space' also. This is not a bad thing, even though uncomfortable for some; this is the way the universe works, IMO. Atheism is a philosophical preference, not a scientific stance, as metaphysics is not in the purview of science. Therefore, scientific credentials do not confer upon one any special authority to pronounce upon metaphysical matters, other than to state one's own philosophical preferences. Neither do religious credentials entitle one to pronounce on scientific matters, other than to state one's opinions and preferences, IMO. As a Nobel prize-winning physicist said: Quote:
Last edited by Megan; 02-14-2007 at 02:56 PM. | |
|
| |
|
02-15-2007, 12:00 AM
| #80 (permalink) | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: On the internet
Posts: 129
| Quote:
If anything, we can see that we can measure the world somewhat objectivly by the results we get. Otherwise, we would not have nukes or computers. As for god, I never have the need to justify god. Because it is a futile exercise to dispute the existance of god. There are no harm in believing in the existance of god. So....I just believe there is a god. And so god become incorporated into my belief system. It become fundamental. "Secondly your implying that because we search for truth, God exists, which implies that he is truth, which to be completely honest with you is a bit of a weak argument." Well, I was just stating my beliefs. | |
|
| |
|
02-15-2007, 08:36 AM
| #81 (permalink) | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Gainford, England
Posts: 375
| Quote:
Noone here is objectively right, but discussion allows evolution of ideas and this evolution allows us to explore the space that we inhabit. Ignorance is born out of sticking ourselves in one position and fighting off who ever comes near us. It's the reason why Texas is not a good place to go with 'Vote Hillary' painted on your car (watch Top Gear for the results)  | |
|
| |
|
02-20-2007, 03:39 PM
| #83 (permalink) |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 525
| All's fair in love and the Culture War YouTube - Richard Dawkins and evolutionists should absolutely watch! Anyone think there's something rotten in Denmark?  Last edited by Megan; 02-20-2007 at 03:43 PM. |
|
| |
|
02-20-2007, 07:51 PM
| #86 (permalink) | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 587
| Quote:
I think natural selection proves much but not everything...but twisting into my world-view, science tells us hows, not whys, and Dawkins and hyper-atheists have started to tell us 'whys'. and have started to sound pretty fundementalist themselves.... Honestly could you ever see someone like Dawkins ever saying 'hey, maybe there is a another way'? Its like the experience of running into a professor in college who worked hard to prove his thesis, your well written well researched paper gets and 'D' because it happened to question something of his. even enstien could accept the perception changing views that quantom theory brought.... Last edited by dor; 02-20-2007 at 08:05 PM. | |
|
| |
|
02-20-2007, 08:08 PM
| #89 (permalink) | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 587
| Quote:
| |
|
| |
|
02-20-2007, 08:15 PM
| #90 (permalink) |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 525
|
Yeah, the loop is obvious, and I don't think that's so dishonest, really. As for the cross-cut, well, I'll just throw out a couple of links and see what conclusions you guys come to. Dispatches from the Culture Wars: The Richard Dawkins Incident Creationist Deception Exposed See you guys somewhat later. |
|
| |
|
| Bookmarks |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:52 PM.