Scientific Method is useless in religion?

[Monk Of Reason]

Well as a subscriber to pantheism....there is no catch...the universe is alive...to think otherwise is to suppose universal life comes from universal non-life...yes?

Well to say that there is no difference between life and non-life itself on chemical or physical levels would be far more true than not so at this point I can agree. I doubt we would agree that the universe itself is sentient as a whole.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Well to say that there is no difference between life and non-life itself on chemical or physical levels would be far more true than not so at this point I can agree. I doubt we would agree that the universe itself is sentient as a whole.

That's fine...we can agree to disagree on the point of the universe itself being sentient as a whole. However fwiw my logic is that awareness can not arise from non-awareness......anywhere...ever..

 

[Monk Of Reason]

That's fine...we can agree to disagree on the point of the universe itself being sentient as a whole. However fwiw my logic is that awareness can not arise from non-awareness......anywhere...ever..

I agree. All matter is "aware" of other matter. But it doesn't mean it has the capacity for thought and comprehension which are mechanisms built out of "awareness".

An example of "awareness" that I mean is gravity. A pencil is aware of the earth and the earth aware of the pencil. When you drop it it will fall. That is because the two are aware of each other.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

That's fine...we can agree to disagree on the point of the universe itself being sentient as a whole. However fwiw my logic is that awareness can not arise from non-awareness......anywhere...ever..

You call that "logic," but in what way is it logical? Have you made (somewhere I haven't read) a solid, logic-based argument for why awareness can not be "emergent?"

I mean, consider, water is made of nothing but Hydrogen and Oxygen. Both of them are terrible solvents, both are flammable, and neither of them exhibits anything like surface tension. Yet water -- which truly is nothing but them -- is a wonderful solvent, used to put OUT fires, and has the property of surface tension which allows so many of natures miracles to occur. These are all "emergent" properties. What, in your view, makes "awareness" immune to emergence, in the presence of neurons, synapses, micro-tubules and all the other wonders of the brain?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You call that "logic," but in what way is it logical? Have you made (somewhere I haven't read) a solid, logic-based argument for why awareness can not be "emergent?"

I mean, consider, water is made of nothing but Hydrogen and Oxygen. Both of them are terrible solvents, both are flammable, and neither of them exhibits anything like surface tension. Yet water -- which truly is nothing but them -- is a wonderful solvent, used to put OUT fires, and has the property of surface tension which allows so many of natures miracles to occur. These are all "emergent" properties. What, in your view, makes "awareness" immune to emergence, in the presence of neurons, synapses, micro-tubules and all the other wonders of the brain?

Selective awareness emerges from an underlying broader awareness....it is logically absurd to consider that selective awareness arises from non-awareness.

Again it is not logical to expect to fully understand nature by selective cherry picking parts of it to make a point while ignoring that which is underlying the full nature. Atomic elements do not exist in an empty vacuum, they exist in the omnipresent zpe, and in fact are actually constituted of it. When elements combine to form a molecule, there are significant changes taking place that are facilitated by the zpe. The universe is one and all apparent separateness is merely due to the limited sensory perception of the human entity. Underlying all change is an underlying unity....the whole is forever one and changeless...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I agree. All matter is "aware" of other matter. But it doesn't mean it has the capacity for thought and comprehension which are mechanisms built out of "awareness".

An example of "awareness" that I mean is gravity. A pencil is aware of the earth and the earth aware of the pencil. When you drop it it will fall. That is because the two are aware of each other.

Fair enough....my own religious practice is cease using the capacity of thought.....if there is an underlying awareness to thought consciousness...that's the way to realize it...

 

[Thief]

You mean like this....

God sleeps in the rock,
Dreams in the plant,
Stirs in the animal,
And Awakens in Man. - Al Arabi

.

uuuuh......no.....more like.....

His hand set all things in motion
and He tweaks the chemistry now and then

mass extinctions.....comet strikes.....volcanoes and earth quakes....lightning....
an occasional plague

and let's not forget the garden event of Genesis

 

[Ben Dhyan]

uuuuh......no.....more like.....

His hand set all things in motion
and He tweaks the chemistry now and then

mass extinctions.....comet strikes.....volcanoes and earth quakes....lightning....
an occasional plague

and let's not forget the garden event of Genesis

Sure....God creates the good and the bad....but these actions are appropriate in the context of divine universal purpose....which is to teach souls that eternal peace will never be realized so long as they eat at the trough of good and evil... However, this apparent duality of good and evil / ying and yang....obscures the underlying unity of the Universe/God..

 

[Thief]

Sure....God creates the good and the bad....but these actions are appropriate in the context of divine universal purpose....which is to teach souls that eternal peace will never be realized so long as they eat at the trough of good and evil... However, this apparent duality of good and evil, or ying and yang....obscures the underlying unity of the Universe/God..

good and evil....the nature of a spirit
good and bad...the condition of a thing
right and wrong.....issues of morality
correct and incorrect.....matters of discussion

 

[Ben Dhyan]

good and evil....the nature of a spirit
good and bad...the condition of a thing
right and wrong.....issues of morality
correct and incorrect.....matters of discussion

These few are just an example of the infinite complementary opposite aspects of the underlying unity of existence...God.. Get with the oneness and stop eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil...

 

[Thief]

These few are just an example of the infinite complementary opposite aspects of the underlying unity of existence...God.. Get with the oneness and stop eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil...

i think the garden event ended with a test
there had been an alteration in the body and spirit in Adam
Eve is a clone.....

together they would bring unto the earth a new species of Man

but to be sure the alteration took hold.....the test

is Man now such a creature .....to seek knowledge .....even as death is the pending consequence

yes

they passed the test
so....the garden was no longer needed
and the specimens were released into the enviroment

 

[Ben Dhyan]

i think the garden event ended with a test
there had been an alteration in the body and spirit in Adam
Eve is a clone.....

together they would bring unto the earth a new species of Man

but to be sure the alteration took hold.....the test

is Man now such a creature .....to seek knowledge .....even as death is the pending consequence

yes

they passed the test
so....the garden was no longer needed
and the specimens were released into the enviroment

A quaint belief to be sure...but who am I to question it...it matters not in the bigger scheme of things...when the book is opened to see whose names are written there...

 

[whirlingmerc]

Well no... the universe being an orderly cosmos and not a chaos follows from an orderly sovereign creator God

And so the scientific revolution could have happened under many world views but didn't because they did not lead to a cosmos rather a chaos.

In the scientific revolution, theistic scientists felt that discovering things about the world would be looking at the glorious acts of God and they were propelled to do so for His glory... the same could have happened under many other world views but it was frustrated by a lack of expectation of an orderly world

Those are my views. Further discussion is here.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-76/17.44.html

 

[gnostic]

New agey haha....since the dawn of time, human beings have been learning what and who they really are in the context of the universe...the answer will never be found outside yourself as the source of your life is within....Besides...the elements of the periodic table ore omnipresent throughout the universe, along with the 'laws' of chemistry at work.....the ordering principle of the universe creates...the universe is alive... .it is the source of my being. You can wait until forever to find out through belief...but belief is not the same thing as knowing...so good luck with that...

Saying that life is "intrinsic" in the universe, is making a bold and sweeping claim. It is more wishful think than reality.

Before the invention of the telescope, the universe only comprised of the what we can only see in the sky with the naked eye. Which is really not much at all.

The early telescopes brought more stars within our sight, but it was still very limited.

Did you know that before more powerful telescopes, like those large terrestrial observatories were built, astronomers thought Andromeda Galaxy was merely a nebula within the Milky Way, and not an independent galaxy at all?

It wasn't until 1910s that they recognised Andromeda Galaxy is a "galaxy". It was only after this, did all the other galaxies that they have observed, but mistaken them for stars or nebulae, were finally recognised as galaxies.

And only with this recognition, did the astronomers realise that the universe is a lot larger than the Milky Way.

For you to claim that ancient religions know of the universe, is nothing more than dishonest anachronism.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Saying that life is "intrinsic" in the universe, is making a bold and sweeping claim. It is more wishful think than reality.

Before the invention of the telescope, the universe only comprised of the what we can only see in the sky with the naked eye. Which is really not much at all.

The early telescopes brought more stars within our sight, but it was still very limited.

Did you know that before more powerful telescopes, like those large terrestrial observatories were built, astronomers thought Andromeda Galaxy was merely a nebula within the Milky Way, and not an independent galaxy at all?

It wasn't until 1910s that they recognised Andromeda Galaxy is a "galaxy". It was only after this, did all the other galaxies that they have observed, but mistaken them for stars or nebulae, were finally recognised as galaxies.

And only with this recognition, did the astronomers realise that the universe is a lot larger than the Milky Way.

For you to claim that ancient religions know of the universe, is nothing more than dishonest anachronism.

What human beings think about the universe is irrelevant to actual reality.....that is why your monkey knowledge chatter amounts to nothing but irrelevant ego gratification. My religious practice otoh is about realizing the reality on the other side of the concept of reality.....and to know what and who I am in the context of that reality....

 

[gnostic]

What human beings think about the universe is irrelevant to actual reality.....that is why your monkey knowledge chatter amounts to nothing but irrelevant ego gratification. My religious practice otoh is about realizing the reality on the other side of the concept of reality.....and to know what and who I am in the context of that reality....

Sorry, but all religions are man-made belief, customs añd practices, so whatever you think your claim about your religion with regards to the universe is even more so empty, irrelevant and egotistic chatters.

For all your blusters about your version of Buddhism and Buddhist practice, I have not met one as egocentric as you.

The way you have insulted me about being a monkey, just only reinforced my view that you have no intention of let go of your ego,and you are nowhere near being "enlightened". You are just hypocritical fraud.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Sorry, but all religions are man-made belief, customs añd practices, so whatever you think your claim about your religion with regards to the universe is even more so empty, irrelevant and egotistic chatters.

For all your blusters about your version of Buddhism and Buddhist practice, I have not met one as egocentric as you.

The way you have insulted me about being a monkey, just only reinforced my view that you have no intention of let go of your ego,and you are nowhere near being "enlightened". You are just hypocritical fraud.

You misunderstand...'monkey knowledge' refers to so called knowledge which is merely the regurgitation of something that came from some other source..read or heard...and believed to be true. Real understanding is not secondhand knowledge, but is realized directly. It seems all you ever talk about is something you have heard from another....at the expense of discovering what and who you really are by asking yourself the question..."What am I?"...and when you understand that..."Who am I?"...both in the context of the bigger picture of universal existence itself...

 

[McBell]

You misunderstand...'monkey knowledge' refers to so called knowledge which is merely the regurgitation of something that came from some other source..read or heard...and believed to be true. Real understanding is not secondhand knowledge, but is realized directly. It seems all you ever talk about is something you have heard from another....at the expense of discovering what and who you really are by asking yourself the question..."What am I?"...and when you understand that..."Who am I?"...both in the context of the bigger picture of universal existence itself...

So what makes your monkey knowledge better than his?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So what makes your monkey knowledge better than his?

Engaging in the solitary religious exercise of stilling the mind is not an exhibition of teaching or preaching...it is a practice....no words are present... silly!

 

[McBell]

Engaging in the solitary religious exercise of stilling the mind is not an exhibition of teaching or preaching...it is a practice....no words are present... silly!

Ah.
So your monkey knowledge isn't monkey knowledge until you reveal it...