You can't have perfect knowledge through science

[PolyHedral]

Language does not stand on its own. But kindly tell me of one human language where "I" or its equivalent is absent.

Language is not used exclusively by humans.

But your sense objects are true?

No. In the wonderful words of Feynmann (may he rest in peace :liturgy "Electrons act like waves... no, they don't exactly. They act like particles... no, they don't exactly."

"It's very hard to imagine all the crazy things that things really are like." The things that are true aren't immediatly comprehensible to anyone except quantum mechanics and high-level mathematicians.

Whether you used an "I" or not, would not matter. In fact that would be artificial. And then you yourself said "I couldy explain".

In reality, I can't explain anything; I cannot physically meet you. What I can do, however, is write an explanation, and give it to a middleman for you to pick up. At that point, I have been removed from doing the explaining.

More generally, my explanation has my Colour attached to it; It has additional meaning because you believe it was written by me. (This belief might not be accurate. ) It is important in science, and fundamental to physics, to realise that Colour does not exist. Where information, especially mathematical information, originates from does not matter. Its truth is completely independent from whether an intelligence found it in some clever manner, or whether it was among the billion pieces of paper a room full of monkeys bashed out.

They are known to whom?

What is "known?" What does it mean, in this context, to "know" something? Is it to know that this is the correct answer? Is it to know that you know about quantum field theory? Is it something else?

 

[jarofthoughts]

In reality, I can't explain anything; I cannot physically meet you. What I can do, however, is write an explanation, and give it to a middleman for you to pick up. At that point, I have been removed from doing the explaining.

More generally, my explanation has my Colour attached to it; It has additional meaning because you believe it was written by me. (This belief might not be accurate. ) It is important in science, and fundamental to physics, to realise that Colour does not exist. Where information, especially mathematical information, originates from does not matter.

Love this explanation.
Couldn't have said it better myself!

(To be fair, I probably couldn't have said it -as good- myself... :sad4: )

 

[atanu]

The source? The immediate source can be easily seen with science. We are made of stars. The originating source is just matter and energy.

Again you are just covering up the awareness through which you are able to conceptualise this.

• I do not understand how a created thing can unravel its source.
• How awareness that as per you is deterministically created be still rational. When there is no 'I' and its awareness then how can its view be true?

All these unanswered questions are brought up afresh again and again as facts.

 

[9Westy9]

You can't have perfect knowledge. Unless of course you're god.

 

[atanu]

Language is not used exclusively by humans.

Ha. That is not the answer to "Which human language does not use I?" And we are talking now based on human language. Further, that a cow or a dog will come to me when i show them food indicates that living beings all have sense of self. Whether that is illusion or not is not the question at this moment.

"It's very hard to imagine all the crazy things that things really are like." The things that are true aren't immediatly comprehensible to anyone except quantum mechanics and high-level mathematicians.

Nothing new to me.

---- Where information, especially mathematical information, originates from does not matter. Its truth is completely independent from whether an intelligence found it in some clever manner, ----?

That is not the point. I request a benevolent and non-sarcastic attention on this point.

Hindu scriptures do mention about rta, the law, that brings up and governs the universe. You may read about it.

Rta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The point is if my awareness is causally determined then, i am zombie, and i have no way to know and abide by the rta. Whereas we know that through yoga, meditation etc. we can have volitional control over seemingly independepent brain.

Further, if Consciousness is created then it is an illusion and your rationality has no meaning or as much meaning as my nonsense rambling.

It has profound practical ramifications.

Spoiler: Note

(I will just mention here that in addition to the rta, there is satya (truth), in hindu scripture. Satya is the life force, the energy. Both the rta and the satya are however two properties of existence-consciousness-bliss, which is the truth of the truth.

Hindu scriptures hold that existence exists and sprouts because of consciousnss of bliss. )

 

[atanu]

You can't have perfect knowledge. Unless of course you're god.

That is true. Be ye perfect as the Father in heaven is.

 

[PolyHedral]

Ha. That is not the answer to "Which human language does not use I?" And we are talking now based on human language. Further, that a cow or a dog will come to me when i show them food indicates that living beings all have sense of self.

This appears to be a non-sequitor. How do you suppose they have a sense of self when they move towards food?

That is not the point. I request a benevolent and non-sarcastic attention on this point.

What makes you think that it was sarcastic?

The point is if my awareness is causally determined then, i am zombie, and i have no way to know and abide by the rta.

This is definitely a non-sequitor. Probably has something to do with attaching a Colour to the rta that isn't actually there.

Whereas we know that through yoga, meditation etc. we can have volitional control over seemingly independepent brain.

Whereas this is circular reasoning. You know that you have free will because you think so?

Further, if Consciousness is created then it is an illusion and your rationality has no meaning or as much meaning as my nonsense rambling.

More non-sequitors. Meaning is independent from source, and so it doesn't actually matter if conciousness is an illusion or not; the results can still be true.

 

[cablescavenger]

Men wrote the bible. The bible has been written rewritten and manipulated by writers over 1500 years. It was first written at a time when there was very little understanding of the world around them, and science did not exist. Everything was attributed wrongly to God, we know that now because we have science.

What science can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt is that some people are not prepared to listen and learn. They talk of evidence, but offer none in return. If you ask a religious person for evidence they open one book, and do not lift their head above the pages for further explanation.

I prefer enlightenment. It is a beautiful thing!

 

[atanu]

This appears to be a non-sequitor. How do you suppose they have a sense of self when they move towards food?

How do you know they do not? Why do you eat if not to presrve the self?

What makes you think that it was sarcastic?

Because some scientists appear to me to be blind. I tend to think that they are not blind but they are being sarcastic.

 

[atanu]

This is definitely a non-sequitor. Probably has something to do with attaching a Colour to the rta that isn't actually there.

What is not there?

Whereas this is circular reasoning. You know that you have free will because you think so?

More non-sequitors. Meaning is independent from source, and so it doesn't actually matter if conciousness is an illusion or not; the results can still be true.

Your arguments prove that you have free will to be blind. Or your blindness just arises due to causal determinism.

Either of the above is correct. Probably the latter.

 

[PolyHedral]

How do you know they do not? Why do you eat if not to presrve the self?

Because it is written into their thought process. You obviously ate things before you understood why.

Because some scientists appear to me to be blind. I tend to think that they are not blind but they are being sarcastic.

No, the point about Colour is perfectly true.

What is not there?

"The point is if my awareness is causally determined then, i am zombie, and i have no way to know and abide by the rta."

The bold shows that you are assuming that a conclusion cannot be valid because of where it comes from; this is wrong, and a variant of the ad homenim.

Your arguments prove that you have free will to be blind. Or your blindness just arises due to causal determinism. Either of the above is correct. Probably the latter.

And so it doesn't conclude anything.

 

[atanu]

Because it is written into their thought process. You obviously ate things before you understood why.

Exactly.

The self is actually older and greater than your ego and your assertions of knowing the truth is illusion, because ego is illusion. You are only posing to know.

Right.

Now onwards this. :ignore:

 

[PolyHedral]

The self is actually older and greater than your ego and your assertions of knowing the truth is illusion, because ego is illusion. You are only posing to know.

Ad Hominem. Your argument is invalid.

 

[atanu]

Ad Hominem. Your argument is invalid.

I am sorry that you perceive it as Ad Hominem. I apologize for creating that impression.

My point was general for all those who on one hand negate/abuse Self/self and its given powers and on the other hand extol their own rationality/arguments/concepts.

I said that i will henceforth ignore this topic because i am wasting a lot of time.

Nothing personal.

 

[Walkntune]

The scientific method is based on a flawed axiom that we can know the reality through our senses. Unfortunately all human beings are subject to four defects:
1) Our senses are limited and imperfect
2) We make mistakes
3) We are in illusion
4) We cheat.

Due these defects we can not know the Truth through this method. In order to have perfect knowledge you must hear from higher authority. Just like if you want to know your father you have to ask your mother. You can't go to every man and test them.

Applying scientific method to the universe is the same as applying theory to music.When you bend that thrd up a little and hit that sweet note the truth rings out and you know the rules were meant to be broken.

 

[Shades-o-Blue]

Those that believe in God seem to forget that if God exists, I am exactly as I am supposed to be. For god is perfect and created me with his perfect knowledge.

Well the knowledge he imparted on me is to put some of my faith in Human science.

"Some" of your faith, or most of it?

 

[PolyHedral]

Those that believe in God seem to forget that if God exists, I am exactly as I am supposed to be. For god is perfect and created me with his perfect knowledge.

You mean you're supposed to be weak and stupid? (I mean this in sense of comparing you to what could be; all humans are weak and stupid in this context.)

My point was general for all those who on one hand negate/abuse Self/self and its given powers and on the other hand extol their own rationality/arguments/concepts.

They deny the properties you are attributing to the "self;" of course I actually exist, but "I" is not a special thing, anymore than the colour red is a special thing that underpins the whole universe.

Specially, your fallacy is here:

...your assertions of knowing the truth is illusion, because ego is illusion.

You are claiming that my ideas are not true because of where they originate from. That's not valid logic.

 

[atanu]

You are claiming that my ideas are not true because of where they originate from. That's not valid logic.

Okay. I agree to disagree. My objection is not only wrt where they originate from.

 

[PolyHedral]

Then what is the problem? You seem to be alluding to the fallacy of the stolen concept, but it's hard to understand.

 

[Willamena]

You mean you're supposed to be weak and stupid? (I mean this in sense of comparing you to what could be; all humans are weak and stupid in this context.)

Nonsense: if you're going to take that approach, all human beings are also strong and brilliant.