thought


Tags

  1. thoughts in space
  2. thought problem
  3. science
  4. religion

Comments


Mark de LA says
Seth: ... You know i can conceive that Ahriman and Lucifer, as principles, exist apart from humans.  It is more difficult for me to conceive that Christ does.  Even Steiner's descriptions of him were integrally connected to humanity.  I can feel Christ as a human.  I am really not so very sure that i would feel him as an alien creature. 
... I don't hold principles & beings in the same context. Christ according to RS was a Sun being who incarnated in a human body & then at the Mystery of Golgotha united his being to the Earth as it's Spirit.  That's why the asteroid will probably never hit the Earth & makes the whole discussion moot.


Mark de LA says
BTW, this was inspired by some programs recently viewed on the Science Channel !

Mark de LA says
seth 2012-09-02 09:28:19 16167
wouldn't that destroy all religion too?
Well, it would certainly destroy churches, synagogues, mosques & temples & yet may not destroy those things wholly spiritual.


Mark de LA says
seth 2012-09-02 11:53:43 16167
MR 2012-09-02 09:35:13 16167
seth 2012-09-02 09:28:19 16167
wouldn't that destroy all religion too?
Well, it would certainly destroy churches, synagogues, mosques & temples & yet may not destroy those things wholly spiritual.

it's interesting to note that both science and religion assume, without proof, that their objects would survive such a catastrophe. 
Maybe, maybe not. Certainly science won't survive because there are no physical people to carry it around. Science depends essentially on empiricism. There are many kinds of proofs besides empiricism which I am not going to argue at this time; direct experience is one kind.


Mark de LA says
To net it down a bit for you - this is just a piece of conceptual art.  Try having a game of football without a football, teams, a football field or any place to play it, or anybody to watch it .


Seth says
MR 2012-09-03 09:31:03 16167
seth 2012-09-03 09:05:00 16167
MR 2012-09-03 09:00:42 16167
seth 2012-09-03 08:04:03 16167
MR 2012-09-02 12:46:24 16167
seth 2012-09-02 11:53:43 16167
MR 2012-09-02 09:35:13 16167
seth 2012-09-02 09:28:19 16167
wouldn't that destroy all religion too?
Well, it would certainly destroy churches, synagogues, mosques & temples & yet may not destroy those things wholly spiritual.

it's interesting to note that both science and religion assume, without proof, that their objects would survive such a catastrophe. 
Maybe, maybe not. Certainly science won't survive because there are no physical people to carry it around. Science depends essentially on empiricism. There are many kinds of proofs besides empiricism which I am not going to argue at this time; direct experience is one kind.

like i said, we believe that the objects of science would survive when their instruments are destroyed ... the same with the objects of religion.  to comprehend my message you should contemplate what my word "objects" refers to.
Repeating your sentence doesn't make your sentence any stronger, better or useful. The spiritual world doesn't depend upon a physical survival - it was here long before the physical. Your belief or not in such does not make it more or less real except perhaps for you.  The spiritual world is not an object - it is being.
 

Nor do the things studied by scientific instruments depend on the existence of those instruments. 
Yeah, but they do depend upon the things studied existing & people there to observe.

For example gravity does not depend on humans observing it to exist.  That, of course, we take on faith without proof.   I'm pretty sure you can provide a similar example from the spiritual world.  You can read my original statement for my point ... it's truth hasn't been changed by your argument ... just like gravity doesn't need human observation to exist ... neither does my point need your agreement to exist.

Mark de LA says
seth 2012-09-03 09:05:00 16167
MR 2012-09-03 09:00:42 16167
seth 2012-09-03 08:04:03 16167
MR 2012-09-02 12:46:24 16167
seth 2012-09-02 11:53:43 16167
MR 2012-09-02 09:35:13 16167
seth 2012-09-02 09:28:19 16167
wouldn't that destroy all religion too?
Well, it would certainly destroy churches, synagogues, mosques & temples & yet may not destroy those things wholly spiritual.

it's interesting to note that both science and religion assume, without proof, that their objects would survive such a catastrophe. 
Maybe, maybe not. Certainly science won't survive because there are no physical people to carry it around. Science depends essentially on empiricism. There are many kinds of proofs besides empiricism which I am not going to argue at this time; direct experience is one kind.

like i said, we believe that the objects of science would survive when their instruments are destroyed ... the same with the objects of religion.  to comprehend my message you should contemplate what my word "objects" refers to.
Repeating your sentence doesn't make your sentence any stronger, better or useful. The spiritual world doesn't depend upon a physical survival - it was here long before the physical. Your belief or not in such does not make it more or less real except perhaps for you.  The spiritual world is not an object - it is being.
 

Nor do the things studied by scientific instruments depend on the existence of those instruments. 
Yeah, but they do depend upon the things studied existing & people there to observe.


Mark de LA says
Nesting has exceeded my desire to read through it so your latest quote is what I respond to here:
seth above: ... For example gravity does not depend on humans observing it to exist.  That, of course, we take on faith without proof.   I'm pretty sure you can provide a similar example from the spiritual world.  You can read my original statement for my point ... it's truth hasn't been changed by your argument ... just like gravity doesn't need human observation to exist ... neither does my point need your agreement to exist.
... gravity is not science.  gravity is a phenomenon of the physical world. science describes & tries to explain the empiracle world.  No World - & no scientists to describe it ... no science ... it's that simple.
 


Mark de LA says
seth 2012-09-04 03:50:32 16167
MR 2012-09-03 09:34:18 16167
To net it down a bit for you - this is just a piece of conceptual art.  Try having a game of football without a football, teams, a football field or any place to play it, or anybody to watch it .

Yep, without humans playing the game of football, the football would not exist.   The thought problem is how much of physics is that same way.  I proposed thinking about gravity ... or light.  Would they still exist if suddenly, as in your conceptual art, our entire planet was destroyed?  Then switch over to Airman, Lucifer, and Christ.  Would those "beings" still exist? 

It is an interesting thought problem ... Kudos !


You could play the same thought problem on your favorite RWG game.  If the sensitivity of your ego was suddenly eliminated, would i still be wrong?
Those beings while intimately connected to humans existed before humans & are not a creation of humans. The rwg bullshit is out of any rational context here, but if you & I didn't exist there would still be the rwg between others.


Seth says
MR 2012-09-04 07:59:34 16167
seth 2012-09-04 03:50:32 16167
MR 2012-09-03 09:34:18 16167
To net it down a bit for you - this is just a piece of conceptual art.  Try having a game of football without a football, teams, a football field or any place to play it, or anybody to watch it .

Yep, without humans playing the game of football, the football would not exist.   The thought problem is how much of physics is that same way.  I proposed thinking about gravity ... or light.  Would they still exist if suddenly, as in your conceptual art, our entire planet was destroyed?  Then switch over to Airman, Lucifer, and Christ.  Would those "beings" still exist? 

It is an interesting thought problem ... Kudos !


You could play the same thought problem on your favorite RWG game.  If the sensitivity of your ego was suddenly eliminated, would i still be wrong?
Those beings while intimately connected to humans existed before humans & are not a creation of humans. The rwg bullshit is out of any rational context here, but if you & I didn't exist there would still be the rwg between others.

You know i can conceive that Ahriman and Lucifer, as principles, exist apart from humans.  It is more difficult for me to conceive that Christ does.  Even Steiner's descriptions of him were integrally connected to humanity.  I can feel Christ as a human.  I am really not so very sure that i would feel him as an alien creature. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2012-09-04 08:44:01 16167
MR 2012-09-04 07:52:33 16167
Nesting has exceeded my desire to read through it so your latest quote is what I respond to here:
seth above: ... For example gravity does not depend on humans observing it to exist.  That, of course, we take on faith without proof.   I'm pretty sure you can provide a similar example from the spiritual world.  You can read my original statement for my point ... it's truth hasn't been changed by your argument ... just like gravity doesn't need human observation to exist ... neither does my point need your agreement to exist.
... gravity is not science.  gravity is a phenomenon of the physical world. science describes & tries to explain the empiracle world.  No World - & no scientists to describe it ... no science ... it's that simple.
 

Yep.  Gravity is one of the objects of science ....
source: seth 2012-09-02 11:53:43 [item 16167]
it's interesting to note that both science and religion assume, without proof, that their objects would survive such a catastrophe.
... in other words gravity is one of the things that science studies.

My observation is still true.  The more interesting part of that symmetry is to talk about the objects ("beings" whatever) of religion.  

WOW! It is amazing how long you will argue a point.  Tina got it almost immediately. One afternoon Genesthai awoke out of a deep afternoon sleep & pronounced that 17(?) Universes had already been destroyed.  In that sense, then, your point would be valid since a Universe contains all it's beings. The rest is a problem you have with what RS calls the Spiritual World.


Seth says
MR 2012-09-04 09:04:20 16167
seth 2012-09-04 08:44:01 16167
MR 2012-09-04 07:52:33 16167
Nesting has exceeded my desire to read through it so your latest quote is what I respond to here:
seth above: ... For example gravity does not depend on humans observing it to exist.  That, of course, we take on faith without proof.   I'm pretty sure you can provide a similar example from the spiritual world.  You can read my original statement for my point ... it's truth hasn't been changed by your argument ... just like gravity doesn't need human observation to exist ... neither does my point need your agreement to exist.
... gravity is not science.  gravity is a phenomenon of the physical world. science describes & tries to explain the empiracle world.  No World - & no scientists to describe it ... no science ... it's that simple.
 

Yep.  Gravity is one of the objects of science ....
source: seth 2012-09-02 11:53:43 [item 16167]
it's interesting to note that both science and religion assume, without proof, that their objects would survive such a catastrophe.
... in other words gravity is one of the things that science studies.

My observation is still true.  The more interesting part of that symmetry is to talk about the objects ("beings" whatever) of religion.  

WOW! It is amazing how long you will argue a point.  Tina got it almost immediately. One afternoon Genesthai awoke out of a deep afternoon sleep & pronounced that 17(?) Universes had already been destroyed.  In that sense, then, your point would be valid since a Universe contains all it's beings. The rest is a problem you have with what RS calls the Spiritual World.


Well usually the reason that i continue is that you almost never say anything that demonstrates a comprehension of my points.   But what you do say are things that demonstrate that you have no comprehension of my points and that in fact you don't read what i say carefully enough to even deal with them.   Your last comment is a case in point.  Tina got what point?  The point of your cartoon?  Or the thought problem it invoked in me?

Incidentally what is the problem i have with what RS calls the Spiritual World ... and what bearing does it have on my observation?

You can cut these things shorter by honestly acknowledging the parts of my points that you agree with and/or at least understand. 

Mark de LA says
Seth, I agree not with your point equating or collapsing belief in the spiritual world with science. You muddied my joke with your problem not appreciating that that was all it was - a joke with a slight edge at the expense of science.


Mark de LA says
seth 2012-09-04 09:43:12 16167
... whatever ... you still don't get it ... it is very simple ... perhaps too simple for you to even see ... but it is in-fact true.  Incidentally your perversion of my point further demonstrates that you still did not get it.

I give up.

Incidentally i laughed at your joke .  I originally though that carrying it further would be even more interesting.  Too bad.
Your asserting something is true doesn't make it true nor the converse; except perhaps in your own mind. You apparently failed in being able to clarity your point & have now started off in the ad hominum direction.  Stopping would be good now.


Mark de LA says
seth 2012-09-04 12:58:05 16167
seth 2012-09-04 12:26:46 16167
MR 2012-09-04 12:16:24 16167
seth 2012-09-04 12:12:54 16167
MR 2012-09-04 12:01:34 16167
seth 2012-09-04 09:50:27 16167
MR 2012-09-04 09:31:38 16167
Seth: ... You know i can conceive that Ahriman and Lucifer, as principles, exist apart from humans.  It is more difficult for me to conceive that Christ does.  Even Steiner's descriptions of him were integrally connected to humanity.  I can feel Christ as a human.  I am really not so very sure that i would feel him as an alien creature. 
... I don't hold principles & beings in the same context. Christ according to RS was a Sun being who incarnated in a human body & then at the Mystery of Golgotha united his being to the Earth as it's Spirit.  That's why the asteroid will probably never hit the Earth & makes the whole discussion moot.

Well ok your are certainly right about one thing ... that is the kind of stories that RS tells where i go tilt.  So if  astronomers see an asteroid coming to destroy the earth, will you be one of the people shouting not to worry about it?
Do you think @S'th , that worrying would do any good? I don't. I'd probably shit a brick like most anyone else.


Trying to break the asteroid up prior to impact might be better than shitting a brick. 
You watch too many movies. I've been asuming the asteroid is big enough to destroy the entire planet Earth. But, hey ... doing something makes some people feel good. LOL, & good Luck - we can't even protect Louisiana from a Hurricane.

Yep i would make a herculean effort to avoid the destruction of the Earth.   I would not belittle the effort.  I guess that tells volumes about our philosophical differences.

Happy birthday in any case
Thanks for the birthday wishes.  The strawman is rejected. No belittlement.

See Also

  1. Thought #Patterns with 188 viewings related by tag "religion".
  2. Thought small motor - via G+ with 28 viewings related by tag "Science".
  3. Thought One Truth XOR a collection or Singularities with 18 viewings related by tag "religion".
  4. Thought Gangs - Mobs & Mob Mentality - Tantrums with 6 viewings related by tag "science".
  5. Thought Religion of Love vs Hate with 5 viewings related by tag "religion".
  6. Thought Do we want to keep the America government secular? with 3 viewings related by tag "religion".
  7. Thought Science & Karma with 2 viewings related by tag "science".
  8. Thought about: Tempting Faith with 2 viewings related by tag "religion".
  9. Thought The Library of Babel & Piles & Piles of Words with 2 viewings related by tag "science".
  10. Thought about: Brainwashing 1A - Gore et. al. - comment 15617 with 2 viewings related by tag "science".
  11. Thought The Eco Religion with 2 viewings related by tag "religion".
  12. Thought Mass Hypnotism in War, Politics & Daily Life with 1 viewings related by tag "religion".
  13. Thought Cowards & Atheists with 1 viewings related by tag "religion".
  14. Thought [title (20741)] with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  15. Thought about: I do not create 100% of my experience - comment 55951 with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  16. Thought Science vs Mysticism with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  17. Thought Getting from I to We with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  18. Thought Religions Of The World with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  19. Thought Truth & Science with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  20. Thought New Report Sponsored by NSF, NOAA, and USGS: with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  21. Thought AH! Science with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  22. Thought regarding the value of decay with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  23. Thought The Authority of the Priest with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  24. Thought Religions with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  25. Thought Embryonic Stem Cell Debate with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  26. Thought God versus Science Questions & Other Musings with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  27. Thought about: the god delusion debate - richard dawkins vs john lennox (preview) - youtube with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  28. Thought Everything is Metaphysics with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  29. Thought Politics is subverting Science with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  30. Thought Religious Intolerance in General with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  31. Thought Bush's proclamation ... with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  32. Thought On the Transcendental News Front with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  33. Thought Some Nausea For Those Who Mix War With Religion with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  34. Thought Atheism, Religion & Secularity with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  35. Thought Obama, His Religion & Hypocrisy with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  36. Thought Be proud to possess lethal power ! with 0 viewings related by tag "thought problem".
  37. Thought The Holy Trinity with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  38. Thought Neither Gods Nor Beasts with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  39. Thought I am a Skeptic of both Science & Religion & Skepticism with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  40. Thought Atheism vs Theism vs Science with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  41. Thought NO Religion -V- Anti-Religion with 0 viewings related by tag "religion".
  42. Thought Battlefield Cell with 0 viewings related by tag "science".
  43. Thought Bad Science with 0 viewings related by tag "science".