• 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!

"Scientism" on Wikipedia ...

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Thoughts don't get a pass as being special and un-reduceable.
It takes energy to move neurons around and the process is bound by the same laws. The sentence has a meaning to a brain and code has meaning to a computer. Neither are outside the physical system. It doesn't matter that we cannot map out all of the microscopic and even subatomic happenings of a thought. We cannot do that for anything except simple interactions but we know they are physical. There is nothing there that suggests anything beyond the basic physical laws. Being "thoughts" don't give it magic power unless you can demonstrate some supernatural aspect. So this doesn't demonstrate anything divine.
Philosophy doesn't demonstrate a divine.

I am not a religious person in the standard sense.
And stop claiming that your assumption, that the universe is physical, is a fact. It is not a fact, because you can't do everything you do as a human only using your methodology,
In your text are words, which have no objective referent in combaition. You can't even show them to be real outside your mind, as they only refer back to your first personal mental understanding.
So here is your magic. You think the universe is physical, therefor it is a fact, that it is physical.
As a skeptic I haven't been able to do that and nor can I do an objective God.

There are 3 versions at play here.
  1. The universe is physical.
  2. The universe is from God.
  3. I can't get neither to work.
I am of the 3rd version.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
The universe is reducible to laws of probability, fundamental forces and a strict limit to how much information you can get. Everyone who tries can get the same experience and results. That isn't subjective.


You are using the word ‘information’ in the way physicists use the word, ie in it’s physical rather than it’s semantic sense. Information not in the sense of meaning conveyed and ideas exchanged, but in the sense in which a physical variable is itself information (a specific temperature, say, or the rate of acceleration of an object)

So you have reduced the interpretation of a word, but you have not reduced the universe.

In any case information even in the sense you have used it, is both finite and inexhaustible. There is a limit up to which we can measure physical variables. This a function of of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, measurable by the Planck constant. But it is always possible to learn something new about an object, because when we gather information on it’s position, we lose information on it’s speed, for example.

Functions and behaviours of natural phenomena can be interpreted and predicted probabilistically, but I think you are wrong to say that the universe is reducible, or even that all it’s laws (which are human constructs anyway) can be understood. This is hubris, and the Classical Gods abhorred hubris.

“And the abyss shouts from her depth laid bare,
Heaven, hast though secrets? Man unveils me; I have none.”
- Percy Shelley, Prometheus Unbound
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
There are 3 versions at play here.
  1. The universe is physical.
  2. The universe is from God.
  3. I can't get neither to work.
I am of the 3rd version.

So you think there is no physical universe, really? You do understand that claiming the physical universe exists as a fact, is not the same as claiming only the physical universe exists, don't you? Or are you actually denying the existence of the physical universe?
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
So you think there is no physical universe, really? You do understand that claiming the physical universe exists as a fact, is not the same as claiming only the physical universe exists, don't you? Or are you actually denying the existence of the physical universe?

Well a part of my experiences are physical, but not all. And if you want to play physicalism, then go for it. :)
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
So does the physical universe exist? Only you didn't answer.
No, there is no physical universe as the universe is not than just physical. The universe is in part physical, but not just physical.

You really like yes no dichotomies. The universe is the set of human experiences and thoughts about it as a part of it and some of the experiences are physical, but not all.
And, yes, I am doing a version of phenomenology and coherentism, but it is also methodological solipsism and pragmatism. And no, you can't understand that unless you read about in obscure and weird books. :)
And I start with the following assumption which is without evidence or proof: Objective reality is epistemologically fair.
 

wandering peacefully

Which way to the woods?
I facepalmed the inexplicable degree of denial of the obvious fact that the poster actually has an idea of God in his mind as he talks about it. He talked about how he viewed God. Something was in his head in order for words to come out. Common sense sometimes just doesn't seem prevail, so what else can one do but facepalm?

As far as the heart goes, I don't need to explain to you I'm not talking the literal organ here, as I seem to have to do inexplicably for others. I think you naturally understand it as a metaphor in the context I am using it. How does the heart have anything to do with an "explanation" of reality? I never said that. Explanations are cognitive in nature. But the heart can know, what the mind cannot reason. For sure. Don't you just know something in your heart to be true, even though you can't explain it to yourself? Some can't. But those who learn to be attune to their other senses, like intuitions and 'gut feelings' can and do. In fact, the greatest minds are led by that, which inspires them to search with the mind to attempt to understand what they feel and sense to be true.

Here's a fantastic quote that explains just that:

“The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. He to whom the emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand wrapped in awe, is as good as dead —his eyes are closed. The insight into the mystery of life, coupled though it be with fear, has also given rise to religion. To know what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty, which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms—this knowledge, this feeling is at the center of true religiousness.”

- Albert Einstein, Living Philosophies​

That's "the heart" knowing something the mind, which is dull by comparison, can only begin to hope to understand. The heart, that feeling, is what leads the mind. As Einstein said, "It is the source of all true art and science".

So much for scientism!! :)
Do you know what I have never seen from you or @PureX ?

Any acknowledgement at all of the spiritual experiences both I and @It Aint Necessarily So have described in the open for all to see. Even though neither of us find it important to explain those experiences. We both have had the same experiences in different format that you two have.

As well as millions of other humans have since the dawn of human imagination capability.

The only difference between us and them is the fact we are able to acknowledge these experiences are derived through the evolved and complex mind of the human animal.

Neither of you are willing to give up the cozy comfortable feeling that these special experiences are a result of evolution of the human mind and not some universal causation , being magically brought about by some totally uninvolved, totally invisible and immeasurable, non-substance which you try to communicate as some god.

How about speaking to the experience of the now rational atheists have experienced and expressed?

Have you been a deer running through the snow in the forest? Leaving only deer prints? Well, I have. At the time, I was in a state of belief about magic.
How are you going to explain that other than I have acquired knowledge about how and where deer run, because I've been following their tracks for 45 years?

This is not all about you and your ignorance of what agnostic atheists believe because you have been told many times what this is.

You ignore those aspects of our stories because you are scared your stories may not be realistic.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Do you know what I have never seen from you or @PureX ?

Any acknowledgement at all of the spiritual experiences both I and @It Aint Necessarily So have described in the open for all to see. Even though neither of us find it important to explain those experiences. We both have had the same experiences in different format that you two have.
I certainly am acknowledging his spiritual experiences, and I will yours as well. You can see that in my recent posts with him, which I'm trying to get back to due to limited posting time lately. But for some reason, I'm not recalling those coming up in discussions between us. You may have mentioned them elsewhere, and I may have missed them. But I certainly do not ever dismiss someone's spiritual experiences. I'm always interested in hearing about those. I'm not like a Christian who thinks only their own are real and the rest are fake. Unlike them, I know that there are many ways in which one experiences the Absolute, and that they may understand it differently. The language is not important. The experience is.

The only difference between us and them is the fact we are able to acknowledge these experiences are derived through the evolved and complex mind of the human animal.
I don't deny evolution. Have I ever given the impression I do? What I don't do however, is reduce them to "just the brain", meaning there is nothing real about them, as so many so-called skeptics feel compelled to do in order to minimize the significance of what these are, that we need not see them as anything worth paying much attention to. That I find irrational.

Neither of you are willing to give up the cozy comfortable feeling that these special experiences are a result of evolution of the human mind and not some universal causation , being magically brought about by some totally uninvolved, totally invisible and immeasurable, non-substance which you try to communicate as some god.
Wow. Really? I don't ever recall thinking like this. I think you are making huge assumptions, about both of us frankly, and there seems a lot of projecting your own misunderstanding of anything we are actually saying, trying to lump us in with fundamentalist, prerational, prescientific theists. That's nothing I believe in.

But I will say, I do find all of the universe to be miraculous, fully embracing evolution and everything that science reveals about it. You don't find it all rather magical and miraculous? That's sad if you don't.

How about speaking to the experience of the now rational atheists have experienced and expressed?
I do and I have. I used to self-identify as a "spiritual atheist". You didn't know that, did you?

Have you been a deer running through the snow in the forest? Leaving only deer prints? Well, I have. At the time, I was in a state of belief about magic.
How are you going to explain that other than I have acquired knowledge about how and where deer run, because I've been following their tracks for 45 years?
Actually, I do recall your mentioning these things to me. And I recall having acknowledged them. Can you find where I ever dismissed them? No, you can't. I think you are worried about that, and are imagining I must have, because you expect that from someone. That's not what I did. But you are imagining your own fears here.

This is not all about you and your ignorance of what agnostic atheists believe because you have been told many times what this is.
I'm not ignorant of any of it. I was a champion of atheists and atheism for many years. I know about about atheism and agnosticism. I still respect it of course. I just don't care for the fundamalistic versions of it, just as I don't care for the fundamentalist version of religion either. To me, it's not what you believe, but how you believe that matters most.

You ignore those aspects of our stories because you are scared your stories may not be realistic.
You make things up about the both of us which are untrue.
 

lukethethird

unknown member
Since when do natural explanations mean there is nothing real about the experience? Some experiences are hard to explain, God is not an answer to anything, so who is the one minimizing the significance of experience on this thread?
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Concentration and insight, huh (I skimmed the link)? I do most of my thinking pacing around the kitchen island, composing posts like this, and when lying in bed. My concentrating ability and insightfulness are actually quite satisfactory. I don't utilize rituals or props, or put aside a special time for these activities. It's part of daily living. I'm doing it now.

From the link:

"You start to undercut subject/object dualism, which is the basis of all suffering and illusion. Gradually, higher and higher realms of existence, leading toward the ultimate or nondual dimension, are all made obvious to you. You transcend your ordinary self or ego, and find the higher and subtler dimensions of existence—the spiritual and transcendental."

I don't know what language like this is talking about. There must be something going on in other minds that this speaks to. I don't experience my life as suffering or illusion. I have no incentive to try to change the way I perceive or processes the world around me.
Yes, concentration meditation has the secondary benefit of increasing your attention skills, but that is not it primary purpose or intention. Defocal meditation also can increase your attention skills in general as well, as a side benefit. But that's not it's main reason for doing it.

As far as "suffering" goes, he's referring to the Buddhist teaching from the Four Noble Truths: The Four Noble Truths in detail - Life and teachings of the Buddha - Edexcel - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - Edexcel - BBC Bitesize

The Buddha believed that most suffering is caused by a tendency to crave or desire things. A person might crave something nice to eat or desire to go on a nice holiday or earn lots of money. Buddhism teaches that through being dissatisfied with their lives and craving things, people suffer.​

I agree with this. But we may not necessarily recognize suffering, as it's something we all live with daily. It's just there like a constant ache we no generally just learn to ignore, but once someone has tasted Liberation, or Freedom from suffering, it becomes painfully apparent. And that is the path of letting go of cravings and desires, things which create that "separation" or that "fallen state", which all religions speak of in some manner or another. It's as Plotinus said, "Mankind is poised midway between the beasts of the field and the gods". That in-between state, is "suffering" that we seek release from in seeking the Divine, or Transcendence, or Nirvana, or Oneness, or Enlightenment.

I'm also a musician, and have spiritual experiences with much music - a kind of rapture, a transporting to another mental space. I suspect that this and similar experiences are what people are referring to with words like the quote above from your link. I just don't use that kind of language except maybe in a situation like this one to find common language with another.
I would choose different words than the description above. I'd say things like "flow state", or even moving outside of yourself, getting into the zone, even nondual states depending on the experience. But it's all connected in certain ways are another. A lot of sports players experience that as well. Marathon runners, golfers, etc.

I'd like to hear something you've composed or performed. I've played in bands for years, but not in a while. I play lead electric guitar and sing. This is a slow 12-bar blues in a minor key, always soulful. Playing something like this, as I'm sure you'll agree, transports one. The mind is in a different place, not concentrating like it did when practicing and learning chords and scales, but just disappearing and blending into the room and song. Maybe this is what others mean by non-dual thought. I hope you like this:

Great! I like it. Yeah, you're a musician. :)

My music experience is mainly as a composer, though I do occasionally do performances of my solo piano works. What I'll share here is a few pieces I've recently done, playing midi keyboards and various synth and sample libraries.

The first one here is something I wrote to go with an 8mm film I had digitized of my mother swimming off the boat that my father shot back in the late 70's. It was my first time trying editing film to make a looping, yet not purely sequential splicing of the clips together to make this film. It's meant as a meditation for me and family of my mother, who passed away a couple years ago now. But it's just beautiful artful thing in itself for anyone. I wrote this while I was recovering from being laid out for a couple weeks with bacterial pneumonia this past January.


These other two are more recent. The one "Sleepytime" is a sort of odd, quirky song, yet with some depth and direction to it. It's kind of "sleeper" song, pun intended. The second one, "Into the Deep" is more a sweeping ambient yet, rising orchestral type piece.

Sleepytime

Into The Deep

Incidentally, this is a good example of what I mean when I say that experience and reason can be used to facilitate nonrational experience. What goes into preparing for a moment like that? Concentration, study, practice, all in the service of being able to go into a creative mode absent concentration or even thought in words. Improvising on guitar is like singing with the hands, or flying. I'm glad we found common experiential ground here.
Amen. :)

I'll reply to some of your other thoughts later. I enjoy this discussion and sharing of our love of music. I write only music without words. It's how I began writing music to express deep feelings during a very difficult time in my life. It became my voice, and frankly saved me at that time.
 
Last edited:

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Since when do natural explanations mean there is nothing real about the experience? Some experiences are hard to explain, God is not an answer to anything, so who is the one minimizing the significance of experience on this thread?
I cannot count the number of times where I have described my experiences, that it is challenged as "That was all just in your head" type responses. I haven't seen that from you, but I can name a few on the site who have. I can name many more from another site as well.

It's a common response. I have never claimed my experiences as proving some theological idea of God, yet it somehow always gets knee-jerk assumed. It's nice when people actually listen, than assume what my thoughts and beliefs are. It's always assume that someone speaking of their spiritual experiences, that that person is must be trying to give evidence of a fundamentalists' idea of a sky god of sorts.

Where does that come from? Their own fear that the fundi's beliefs may really be true, and it's safer if nobody's spiritual experiences are actually valid, because that might mean that god is actually real? So therefore, any of these, must all be "just the brain"? Safer to just call of it it "woo". Right?
 
Last edited:

lukethethird

unknown member
Invoking the supernatural into the explanations of our experience is what our ancestors did because they did not know any better. The human brain is the most complex entity in the known universe, so to say it's just the brain is a misnomer. Why don't you take issue with the poster that said such a thing?
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Invoking the supernatural into the explanations of our experience is what our ancestors did because they did not know any better.
Have I invoked the supernatural? Why do you assume I am? I don't view anything outside the natural world. However, our understanding of what the natural world is, is still very limited. We today are much like what you consider our ancestors were. To assume we know really know the way of the universe because we've got the modern tools of science, is probably what our ancestors felt about themselves. Each generation thinks they really knows what's going on. As will the next one a thousand years in our future.

Think of how backwards and primitive our understanding today will be considered in comparison with theirs? To us now, theirs looks "supernatural". But is it? Or is the Universe a Mystery, beyond comprehension? Isn't supernatural, only what we don't understand?

The human brain is the most complex entity in the known universe, so to say it's just the brain is a misnomer. Why don't you take issue with the poster that said such a thing?
Is it? Do you know everything in the known universe? Do you believe earth is the center of the universe, and man is the pinnacle of evolution? I'm curious if you think this.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I enjoyed the music very much. The sound track to the video of your mother was very pleasant. Sleepytime was pretty interesting and innovative. I couldn't open Into The Deep.

The Buddha believed that most suffering is caused by a tendency to crave or desire things. A person might crave something nice to eat or desire to go on a nice holiday or earn lots of money. Buddhism teaches that through being dissatisfied with their lives and craving things, people suffer.
I agree with this. But we may not necessarily recognize suffering, as it's something we all live with daily. It's just there like a constant ache we no generally just learn to ignore, but once someone has tasted Liberation, or Freedom from suffering, it becomes painfully apparent. And that is the path of letting go of cravings and desires, things which create that "separation" or that "fallen state", which all religions speak of in some manner or another.

As I said, I really can't identify with that. The suffering I have done in my life was unrelated to craving. I had a cruel stepfather as a boy, and a bad marriage as a young man, both of which caused great unhappiness, but all I craved there was resolution, and with resolution, equanimity was restored. And there is nothing that I crave now. I have a simple, satisfying, and easy life without conflict. I'm retired now, but even when I was in the thick of it during my years of self-development (military, university) and generativity (professional career, travel), I never experienced it as suffering or craving. I had goals, but that's not craving.

When I first read these words from Buddha about 30-35 years ago, I pretty much had the same reaction then as now - what is all of this talk of craving and suffering? I think there is much to be said for managing one's internal experience. I alluded to this before, when discussing how reason can best be put to use facilitating the happy experiences and minimizing the dysphoric ones. You simply decide what kind of thinking is productive and which just pesters one without generating anything useful, and refuse to indulge the latter. I used it yesterday, and earlier in the week. It doesn't seem all that insightful to me, but I'm sure that there are many who are tormented by their thoughts, over which they have little control.

Anyway, thanks for that. This has been a productive and pleasant discussion.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
I enjoyed the music very much. The sound track to the video of your mother was very pleasant. Sleepytime was pretty interesting and innovative. I couldn't open Into The Deep.



As I said, I really can't identify with that. The suffering I have done in my life was unrelated to craving. I had a cruel stepfather as a boy, and a bad marriage as a young man, both of which caused great unhappiness, but all I craved there was resolution, and with resolution, equanimity was restored. And there is nothing that I crave now. I have a simple, satisfying, and easy life without conflict. I'm retired now, but even when I was in the thick of it during my years of self-development (military, university) and generativity (professional career, travel), I never experienced it as suffering or craving. I had goals, but that's not craving.

When I first read these words from Buddha about 30-35 years ago, I pretty much had the same reaction then as now - what is all of this talk of craving and suffering? I think there is much to be said for managing one's internal experience. I alluded to this before, when discussing how reason can best be put to use facilitating the happy experiences and minimizing the dysphoric ones. You simply decide what kind of thinking is productive and which just pesters one without generating anything useful, and refuse to indulge the latter. I used it yesterday, and earlier in the week. It doesn't seem all that insightful to me, but I'm sure that there are many who are tormented by their thoughts, over which they have little control.

Anyway, thanks for that. This has been a productive and pleasant discussion.

That is a good post. How? You didn't go "we". You manage as you can and you describe that. Now I can replicate it and I do identify with it in part.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Do you know what I have never seen from you or @PureX ?

Any acknowledgement at all of the spiritual experiences both I and @It Aint Necessarily So have described in the open for all to see. Even though neither of us find it important to explain those experiences. We both have had the same experiences in different format that you two have.

As well as millions of other humans have since the dawn of human imagination capability.

The only difference between us and them is the fact we are able to acknowledge these experiences are derived through the evolved and complex mind of the human animal.

Neither of you are willing to give up the cozy comfortable feeling that these special experiences are a result of evolution of the human mind and not some universal causation , being magically brought about by some totally uninvolved, totally invisible and immeasurable, non-substance which you try to communicate as some god.
What you don't seem to grasp is that understanding the physical mechanisms by which such experiences happen in no way (logically or otherwise) negates their being actual experiences of a divine nature. Just as cosmology and evolution do not logically or otherwise negate the supposition of a creator God. What happens to us and how we understand what happens to us are not equivalent. Though, for us, they sure seem like it. And often, because we have no practical alternative, we have to take them as being equivalent.

I have personally had such a 'god experience' and can personally attest to the fact I have no idea what it was. Or if it was what I thought it was at the time. I was only a small child, and was not under any particular stress at the time, so I find it very unlikely that my 6-year-old mind conjured up such an elaborate and spectacular experience all on it's own. Though I do suspect that whatever it was that was happening, I was interpreting it in the only way I could given my very limited understanding of the world at that age. This does not, however, negate the wonder and power of the experience. And even now, many years later, I still cannot explain to myself or to anyone else what "really" happened, as you seem to do.

I don't talk about it because I honestly don't know what to say about it. Nor do I know what to say when others share their similar inexplicable "spiritual" experiences. They happen. They are inexplicable. That's about all I can say.
 
Last edited:

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Do you know what I have never seen from you or @PureX ?

Any acknowledgement at all of the spiritual experiences both I and @It Aint Necessarily So have described in the open for all to see. Even though neither of us find it important to explain those experiences. We both have had the same experiences in different format that you two have.

As well as millions of other humans have since the dawn of human imagination capability.

The only difference between us and them is the fact we are able to acknowledge these experiences are derived through the evolved and complex mind of the human animal.

Neither of you are willing to give up the cozy comfortable feeling that these special experiences are a result of evolution of the human mind and not some universal causation , being magically brought about by some totally uninvolved, totally invisible and immeasurable, non-substance which you try to communicate as some god.

How about speaking to the experience of the now rational atheists have experienced and expressed?

Have you been a deer running through the snow in the forest? Leaving only deer prints? Well, I have. At the time, I was in a state of belief about magic.
How are you going to explain that other than I have acquired knowledge about how and where deer run, because I've been following their tracks for 45 years?

This is not all about you and your ignorance of what agnostic atheists believe because you have been told many times what this is.

You ignore those aspects of our stories because you are scared your stories may not be realistic.

Here is my problem. As far as I can tell you take for granted the following:
That the universe is natural. That is no a fact.
You treat real as objective. That is not the case as far I can tell. Real is a first person judgement or normative rule.

Now here are the facts of the everyday world. It is a fact that some people believe differently than you and in some cases can further act on that. That you judge that as a case of a negative, is as far as I can tell in you and not in their belief.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Have I invoked the supernatural? Why do you assume I am? I don't view anything outside the natural world. However, our understanding of what the natural world is, is still very limited. We today are much like what you consider our ancestors were. To assume we know really know the way of the universe because we've got the modern tools of science, is probably what our ancestors felt about themselves. Each generation thinks they really knows what's going on. As will the next one a thousand years in our future.

Think of how backwards and primitive our understanding today will be considered in comparison with theirs? To us now, theirs looks "supernatural". But is it? Or is the Universe a Mystery, beyond comprehension? Isn't supernatural, only what we don't understand?

Is it? Do you know everything in the known universe? Do you believe earth is the center of the universe, and man is the pinnacle of evolution? I'm curious if you think this.
It is amazing to me how 'gnostic' most atheists are. How strongly they believe that if God exists, they would certainly be able to know it based on the overwhelming power of "logic and evidence".
 
Top