• 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!

Stephen Hawking and his "no need for God" hypothesis

Pleroma

philalethist
Again: just because we don't know something yet doesn't mean you can just make stuff up to explain it, and your logic is internally inconsistant. If you're going to suggest that nothing exists outside of the mind, then you cannot assert a God exists. Your logic is self-defeating.

No, you have not understood the type of idealism espoused in esoteric religions.

Idealism in Ancient philosophy

The oldest reference to Idealism in Hindu texts is in Purusha Sukta of the Rig Veda. This sukta espouses panentheism by presenting cosmic being Purusha as both pervading all universe and yet being transcendent to it.[1] Absolute idealism can be seen in Chāndogya Upaniṣad, where things of the objective world like the five elements and the subjective world such as will, hope, memory etc. are seen to be emanations from the Self.

Esoteric religions indeed recognize an objective noumenon world which is made of five elements like earth, water, space, air and outer space etc. So the things which are actually out there in the physical world are just these five elements, mind, Intellect, Gods and they are responsible for the retrospective creation of this empirical reality.

There are things which exists independent of the human mind and Gods are one of them, mind is the product of a divine God and not the other way round where the God is the product of a mind.
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
Idealism in Ancient philosophy

The oldest reference to Idealism in Hindu texts is in Purusha Sukta of the Rig Veda. This sukta espouses panentheism by presenting cosmic being Purusha as both pervading all universe and yet being transcendent to it.[1]
Panentheism do seem a bit idealistic but isn't there a distincition between the consciosness we have vs the consciousness god has?

Absolute idealism can be seen in Chāndogya Upaniṣad, where things of the objective world like the five elements and the subjective world such as will, hope, memory etc. are seen to be emanations from the Self.
Can you explain how "self" is used in this context? If you view self as coming from the brain it isn't idealistic. The Hindu version of self is something else?
 

otokage007

Well-Known Member
Even neurons fall under empirical reality and even they are made of particles, quarks and protons and they cannot be thought of as self existent and therefore even the brain and in fact the whole of empirical reality do not exist independent of the human mind.

So if humans didn't exist, then the whole world wouldn't exist. Oh, ok.



......



:help:
 

Pleroma

philalethist
So if humans didn't exist, then the whole world wouldn't exist. Oh, ok.



......



:help:

Anthropism is quite evident and the facts established from experiments have led to some sort of sound idealism in the philosophy of science.

Idealism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Karl Pearson wrote, "There are many signs that a sound idealism is surely replacing, as a basis for natural philosophy, the crude materialism of the older physicists."
 

Pleroma

philalethist
Panentheism do seem a bit idealistic but isn't there a distincition between the consciosness we have vs the consciousness god has?

According to this view, the self is the one which gives the strength and light to God and therefore you are one with God.

"People cannot see anything in the real realm unless they become it...if you have seen the spirit, you have become the spirit; if you have seen Christ, you have become Christ; if you have seen the Father, you will become the Father" (Gospel of Philip 61:20-32 cf. 67:26-27)


Everything in the real realm is made into fullness and therefore even you(The Self or Soul) is made into fullness and you have the potential to become the Father or God and they don't see themselves separate from God actually they see that its their soul which gives the power to God and therefore you're the unity behind the father.

Mandala - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to the psychologist David Fontana, its symbolic nature can help one "to access progressively deeper levels of the unconscious, ultimately assisting the meditator to experience a mystical sense of oneness with the ultimate unity from which the cosmos in all its manifold forms arises."

Can you explain how "self" is used in this context? If you view self as coming from the brain it isn't idealistic. The Hindu version of self is something else?

The Self is something different and it is based on a completely different epistemology, it doesn't have anything to with the brain or its neural processing.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Esoteric religions indeed recognize an objective noumenon world which is made of five elements like earth, water, space, air and outer space etc. So the things which are actually out there in the physical world are just these five elements, mind, Intellect, Gods and they are responsible for the retrospective creation of this empirical reality.

There are things which exists independent of the human mind and Gods are one of them, mind is the product of a divine God and not the other way round where the God is the product of a mind.
Evidence, please.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...dir/138804-orthodox-religions-world-dead.html

The works of Carl Jung are enough to show that gods are real and these gods are everywhere in all aspect of human life and in all aspects of human existence. There are other scholarly evidence for this and psychologists are already investigating this hot topic.
Carl Jung never showed any such thing, and as a fan of his work myself I can attest that his works make no such revelation.
 
Last edited:

Heathen Hammer

Nope, you're still wrong
"Made into fullness" sounds like prosy nonsense made specifically vague so as to appear profound, but without any logical backing. What does it mean, precisely?
 

Heathen Hammer

Nope, you're still wrong
Nope, science actually agrees with me. :)

[youtube]IKYyzNwWgRY[/youtube]
Quantum to Cosmos Part 4 - YouTube

As Anton Zielinger clearly says we create reality rather than passively observing it. There is no empirical reality independent of the human mind and the human mind is the product of a divine God.

The next breakthrough is going to come from Esotericism and its going to redefine and reshape both orthodox religions as well as Science.
Influence, not create.

Your interpretation of scientific statements is wrong, it appears. And it gives you dreams of importance, where there is none.
 

Heathen Hammer

Nope, you're still wrong
Where in the 9-odd minutes?

Placing large videos in front of people which supposedly support you is a rather sloppy method. Try getting transcripts of the specific statements that are actually pertinent.

Nobody is going to watch any videos. Make your own actual arguments and support them specifically.
 

Pleroma

philalethist
Where in the 9-odd minutes?

Listen from 2:00 to 4:00.

He specifically asks "Is it out there as it is" and "our experiments create reality which wasn't there before".

Placing large videos in front of people which supposedly support you is a rather sloppy method. Try getting transcripts of the specific statements that are actually pertinent.

Nobody is going to watch any videos. Make your own actual arguments and support them specifically.

Dude, these are facts established from experiments, this is the way nature is, you can be as deluded as ever and go on believing in your flawed position but you do need a reality check and I go by evidence.

The Reality Tests § SEEDMAGAZINE.COM
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Dude, these are facts established from experiments, this is the way nature is, you can be as deluded as ever and go on believing in your flawed position but you do need a reality check and I go by evidence.
... Says the guy who believes reality doesn't exist?
 

Heathen Hammer

Nope, you're still wrong
Listen from 2:00 to 4:00.

He specifically asks "Is it out there as it is" and "our experiments create reality which wasn't there before".
Dude, these are facts established from experiments, this is the way nature is, you can be as deluded as ever and go on believing in your flawed position but you do need a reality check and I go by evidence.

The Reality Tests § SEEDMAGAZINE.COM
You are either hyperbolising or taking completely out of context what he says.. he says 'in some experiments, we are creating a reality that was not there before,' but nowhere is he saying there is no reality outside the mind. None. Your misinterpretation may be deliberate or inadvertent, but that's what you're doing. His brief comment about quantum dice says they have ruled out the dice communicating directly with each other or as having a random outcome where they always show the same thing; he speaks of a new kind of randomness, but one without an intelligent outside influence.

My reality checks are always covered.
 

Pleroma

philalethist
... Says the guy who believes reality doesn't exist?

A sound idealism is indeed surely replacing the physicalism of science. The atheistic position is no longer valid.

Karl Pearson wrote, "There are many signs that a sound idealism is surely replacing, as a basis for natural philosophy, the crude materialism of the older physicists."

Poor Schroedinger argued for 40 years that the writers of the Upanishads knew the truth. We all know that is book 'What is life?' paved the way for the discovery of the genetic code and the DNA and revolutionized the field of Biology and paved the way for molecular biology and in the same way his other two books 'Mind and Matter' and 'My view of the world' is going to change the way we perceive our place in the cosmos.

Erwin Schrödinger - Wikiquote
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
A sound idealism is indeed surely replacing the physicalism of science.
In other words, making science useless.

The atheistic position is no longer valid.
No it isn't.

Karl Pearson wrote, "There are many signs that a sound idealism is surely replacing, as a basis for natural philosophy, the crude materialism of the older physicists."
Well, whoop-de-doo.

Poor Schroedinger argued for 40 years that the writers of the Upanishads knew the truth. We all know that is book 'What is life?' paved the way for the discovery of the genetic code and the DNA and revolutionized the field of Biology and paved the way for molecular biology and in the same way his other two books 'Mind and Matter' and 'My view of the world' is going to change the way we perceive our place in the cosmos.

Erwin Schrödinger - Wikiquote
I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, your epistemological ramblings are amusing, but nowhere close to being informative or accurate.
 

Pleroma

philalethist
You are either hyperbolising or taking completely out of context what he says.. he says 'in some experiments, we are creating a reality that was not there before,' but nowhere is he saying there is no reality outside the mind. None. Your misinterpretation may be deliberate or inadvertent, but that's what you're doing. His brief comment about quantum dice says they have ruled out the dice communicating directly with each other or as having a random outcome where they always show the same thing; he speaks of a new kind of randomness, but one without an intelligent outside influence.

My reality checks are always covered.

Contrary to your false misconception, Bell theorem is proved based on two premises i.e Locality and Realism and Aspect team proved that Bell inequality is violated and either of the assumption locality or realism must be false and what Anton Zeilinger et al team did that they tested for a more advanced theorem developed by Leggett which allowed non-locality and tested for realism and these theories are called as non-local realistic theories but even these theories failed to model nature properly and the conclusion is that we need to abandon realism.

An experimental test of non-local realism

Simon Groblacher,1, 2 Tomasz Paterek,3, 4 Rainer Kaltenbaek,1 Caslav Brukner,1, 2 Marek Z_ ukowski,1, 3 Markus Aspelmeyer,1, 2,  and Anton Zeilinger1, 2, y 1Faculty of Physics, University of Vienna, Boltzmanngasse 5, A-1090 Vienna, Austria 2Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information (IQOQI), Austrian Academy of Sciences, Boltzmanngasse 3, A-1090 Vienna, Austria 3Institute of Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics,
University of Gdansk, ul. Wita Stwosza 57, PL-08-952 Gdansk, Poland
4The Erwin Schrodinger International Institute for Mathematical Physics (ESI), Boltzmanngasse 9, A-1090 Vienna, Austria

Abstract

"Most working scientists hold fast to the concept of 'realism' - a viewpoint according to which an external reality exists independent of observation. But quantum physics has shattered some of our cornerstone beliefs. According to Bell's theorem, any theory that is based on the joint assumption of realism and locality (meaning that local events cannot be aff ected by actions in spacelike separated regions) is at variance with certain quantum predictions. Experiments with entangled pairs of particles have amply con firmed these quantum predictions, thus rendering local realistic theories untenable. Maintaining realism as a fundamental concept would therefore necessitate the introduction of 'spooky' actions that defy locality. Here we show by both theory and experiment that a broad and rather reasonable class of such non-local realistic theories is incompatible with experimentally observable quantum correlations. In the experiment, we measure previously untested correlations between two entangled photons, and show that these correlations violate an inequality proposed by Leggett for non-local realistic theories. Our result suggests that giving up the concept of locality is not sufficient to be consistent with quantum experiments, unless certain intuitive features of realism are abandoned [1]."
 

Pleroma

philalethist
In other words, making science useless.

Science will stay as it is, perhaps how we teach science and physics will change and scientists might adopt weak objectivism while describing their scientific models.

No it isn't.

What we call empirical reality is only a state of mind is a scientific fact and that mind is the product of a divine God. Atheism is dead.

Well, whoop-de-doo.

I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, your epistemological ramblings are amusing, but nowhere close to being informative or accurate.


Its already happening, wake up and accept the truth. These are facts established from experiments. Its funny how atheists deny facts and show double standards.
 
Top