Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
Yes, and this seems to apply right across the scales, sub-atomic through to cosmological.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?
- Thread starter Runewolf1973
- Start date
Yes, and this seems to apply right across the scales, sub-atomic through to cosmological.
godnotgod
Thou art That
...when, in fact, it is actually.....???...what?
godnotgod
Thou art That
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
godnotgod
Thou art That
That is the outward behavior, but what is the interaction about?
godnotgod
Thou art That
You previously stated that you are a materialist. Now you say that 'solid matter' is an illusion. You are no longer a materialist then?
godnotgod
Thou art That
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
Yes, I am a materialist. Just because solid matter is an illusion doesn't mean that the forces which generate that illusion are non-existant. Interaction is very real. Forces are very real.
Last edited:
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
I'll quote Max Planck on that one... "All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together." In other words...Interaction. Everything originates and exists due to interaction.
godnotgod
Thou art That
Yes, but the forces themselves are non-material. So where is this 'material' about which you are a 'materialist'?
godnotgod
Thou art That
Now you're just being plain ridiculous: "interaction is about interaction" What kind of nonsense is that?
godnotgod
Thou art That
That's not what Planck said. He said that matter originates and exists via some force. That is not interaction. It is a one way street. Interaction is a two way street.
You left out the most important part of Planck's quote, which immediately follows:
"We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.”
https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/107032.Max_Planck
So interaction is not the primary condition; consciousness is.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
You're actually contradicting yourself, without realizing it. /
Anyways, the contradiction, is that you are claiming dualistic interaction, with a premise of non-dualism.
Last edited:
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
If you read my earlier posts you would see that I support neither a truly dualistic approach, nor a truly non-dual approach. So yes, that does seem rather contradicting doesn't it? The universe I believe is full of contradictions. It's quite wonderful isn't it?
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
The Fundamental Forces by which matter originates are interactions...Fundamental Interactions. As for Max Planck's continuation of that quote, I do believe he was speculating and not making a scientific statement. It seems he was pointing more towards a unified interactive field of sorts. Interaction is neither a one way street, nor is it a two way street. It is every street and no street all at the same time. It is neither truly two, nor is it truly one. It is All. It is everything, not one thing, not two things.
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
I equate material with tangible existence and something such as electromagnetism is quite tangible is it not?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
No.
The problem is that you are presenting both ideas, and they contradict each other. You aren't presenting ''neither''. You are ok with your contradictional idea, that's fine.