Month, Day: Mercy, Light (Beauty)
Month, Day: Mercy, Mercy (Perfection)
Science has a role just as those who support science fill roles. What might this role be?
Well, science is a gift from God on how we can (are to) know, including knowing God ("Science is the first emanation from God toward man"). It's Mercy, so as to answer our Questions.
Given our limitations, Creation ought to be the focus of our study.
-- Now, a Creation-based science would look like what? No one has tried this audacious step yet, essentially, so we do not know. There seems to be little eruptions (the proverbial green-shoots) here and there. The necessary integrating scheme can only come from the Writings.
-- Oh, does not science now deal with Nature? Yes, in part. But, as we all know, those who do science as it is known now (scientism, in many cases) think that materialism is essential as the mark of the brightest. Ah, is that so? Nature is part of the gift of science (from God, of course).
-- What would possibly be different? One ramification would be a better balance between the abstracted foundations and the operational bases. That is, rather than fight the quasi-empirical necessity, foundations will be built upon matter (this is the invert of how humans have gone so far). The operational scheme will encompass both analog and digital components, as required due to the explicit reality that is both wave and particle (ah, yes, metaphorical, but, only in part - we just have to learn how to express the necessary explanation).
This theme will recur, regularly.
Remarks:
03/17/2011 -- Just as St. Patrick carried the message, so too ought we act to bring forth a proper viewpoint.
10/02/2009 -- World embracing, at its best.
09/06/2009 -- Essentially, more is undecidable than we like to admit, basically due to our talent for success (ergodicity, essentially) keeps the hubris refreshed (generation by generation).
08/05/2009 -- We'll look at SAQ #37 more in the context of how the Teleological influences.
07/19/2009 -- From the beginning.
07/07/2009 -- Ought we be thankful for the Brights?
06/30/2009 -- Issues related to duals abound which is an important part to the puzzles. One main theme would be the necessity of organic components as being integral to truth processing and to filling in the gaps resulting from underdetermination.
Modified: 03/17/2011
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Saturday, June 20, 2009
The secular
Month, Day: Light, Questions (Independence)
We're to be a-political, yet one has to wonder if any religious view can be sufficient for operational efficiencies that respect everyone. So, given recent events (and a must-see movie), a secular opinion or two seemed to be in order.
Yet, they will relate to Light. Look at this WSJ article ("Why the Eyes Have it", 09/19/2009) that raises questions (of course, Fridays seem to allow philosophical musings to come around the walls of control) about human capability. We process what we get from light via the eyes in a 1/10th of a second. Ah, such facility is one of several that we've received from our Creator.
In one of the working schemes, theorists propose and hope that someone can "design experiments that might render a decisive verdict" and that we can overcome our limits that result from underdetermination.
This latter we ought to know from the Writings. But, the questions remain in the context of audacity as to how theory can be influenced by the Writings. Let us count the ways.
Remarks:
12/19/2009 -- The Doctor Who Defied Tehran.
07/26/2009 -- Being secular creates dependencies that run counter to our goals, that is they try to thwart the sword.
Modified: 12/19/2009
We're to be a-political, yet one has to wonder if any religious view can be sufficient for operational efficiencies that respect everyone. So, given recent events (and a must-see movie), a secular opinion or two seemed to be in order.
Yet, they will relate to Light. Look at this WSJ article ("Why the Eyes Have it", 09/19/2009) that raises questions (of course, Fridays seem to allow philosophical musings to come around the walls of control) about human capability. We process what we get from light via the eyes in a 1/10th of a second. Ah, such facility is one of several that we've received from our Creator.
In one of the working schemes, theorists propose and hope that someone can "design experiments that might render a decisive verdict" and that we can overcome our limits that result from underdetermination.
This latter we ought to know from the Writings. But, the questions remain in the context of audacity as to how theory can be influenced by the Writings. Let us count the ways.
Remarks:
12/19/2009 -- The Doctor Who Defied Tehran.
07/26/2009 -- Being secular creates dependencies that run counter to our goals, that is they try to thwart the sword.
Modified: 12/19/2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Science and the Manifestations
Month, Day: Light, Words (Majesty)
An example of how our use of light has abounded, in so many ways beyond just the prowess with electromagnetics, is Facebook (500+ Baha'i references). There have been discussion forums galore, since the internet's inception, what with Usenet, et al. This latest may be the largest collective, though, which is only just begun (Carpenters).
Baha'i Faith and Science's (Wikipedia) discussion page had a brief interchange about whether the Writings are propositionally complete. Well, the Incompleteness Theorem may suggest not; yet, we have the larger piece of evidence in that the Manifestations recur regularly. Too, we're told that limits are imposed judiciously by the hosts (angelic and otherwise).
Hence, we need to know that there is no axiomatic set that would found the new audacious view; at least, not in total, but there may be (are) operational subsets that will be (are) of much interest. Who is looking at this?
What we have now after the latest Revelation is the Manifestation as the paragon, the Writings as the evidence, and the Administration as the workable covering scheme. It's that first that we need to look at more closely, in term of the audacity that is required.
That is, the influence via the axioms may be insignificant compared to that of the rules, definitions, and milieu that relate to the Manifestation's importance.
From the Facebook page, PUP, pg 128: "... religion must be in conformity to science and reason. If a religion does not agree with the postulates of science nor accord with the regulations of reason it is a bundle of superstitions; a phantasm of the brain. Science and religion are realities, and if that religion to which we adhere be a reality it must needs conform to the fundamental reality of all things."
We will look more closely at 'postulates of science' and 'regulations of reason' in the context of this post, using, of course, discussion of how we know and raise Questions.
Remarks:
08/01/2012 --Ether, in a manner that is unavoidably true. Our task? Show how to handle the matter from a scientific (the wise interpretation, okay?) framework. And, audacity is not necessary.
03/17/2011 -- Just as St. Patrick carried the message, so too ought we act to bring forth a proper viewpoint.
08/05/2009 -- We'll look at SAQ #37 more in the context of how the Teleological influences.
07/19/2009 -- From the beginning.
06/22/2009 -- We can know.
Modified: 08/01/2012
An example of how our use of light has abounded, in so many ways beyond just the prowess with electromagnetics, is Facebook (500+ Baha'i references). There have been discussion forums galore, since the internet's inception, what with Usenet, et al. This latest may be the largest collective, though, which is only just begun (Carpenters).
Baha'i Faith and Science's (Wikipedia) discussion page had a brief interchange about whether the Writings are propositionally complete. Well, the Incompleteness Theorem may suggest not; yet, we have the larger piece of evidence in that the Manifestations recur regularly. Too, we're told that limits are imposed judiciously by the hosts (angelic and otherwise).
Hence, we need to know that there is no axiomatic set that would found the new audacious view; at least, not in total, but there may be (are) operational subsets that will be (are) of much interest. Who is looking at this?
What we have now after the latest Revelation is the Manifestation as the paragon, the Writings as the evidence, and the Administration as the workable covering scheme. It's that first that we need to look at more closely, in term of the audacity that is required.
That is, the influence via the axioms may be insignificant compared to that of the rules, definitions, and milieu that relate to the Manifestation's importance.
From the Facebook page, PUP, pg 128: "... religion must be in conformity to science and reason. If a religion does not agree with the postulates of science nor accord with the regulations of reason it is a bundle of superstitions; a phantasm of the brain. Science and religion are realities, and if that religion to which we adhere be a reality it must needs conform to the fundamental reality of all things."
We will look more closely at 'postulates of science' and 'regulations of reason' in the context of this post, using, of course, discussion of how we know and raise Questions.
Remarks:
08/01/2012 --Ether, in a manner that is unavoidably true. Our task? Show how to handle the matter from a scientific (the wise interpretation, okay?) framework. And, audacity is not necessary.
03/17/2011 -- Just as St. Patrick carried the message, so too ought we act to bring forth a proper viewpoint.
08/05/2009 -- We'll look at SAQ #37 more in the context of how the Teleological influences.
07/19/2009 -- From the beginning.
06/22/2009 -- We can know.
Modified: 08/01/2012
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Knowledge and the Manifestations
Month, Day: Light, Beauty (Beauty)
Month, Day: Light, Glory (Glory)
We don't get that congruence every month with the day of the month and the day of the week.
There are many references to the theme, especially in the SAQ (Part Three).
One from the Tablet of Ahmad is so apropos: "Verily this is that Most Great Beauty, foretold in the Books of the Messengers, through Whom truth shall be distinguished from error and the wisdom of every command shall be tested."
Note, Teleological and Operational.
Remarks:
03/17/2011 -- Just as St. Patrick carried the message, so too ought we act to bring forth a proper viewpoint.
06/11/2009 -- Science and Religion.
Modified: 03/17/2011
Month, Day: Light, Glory (Glory)
We don't get that congruence every month with the day of the month and the day of the week.
There are many references to the theme, especially in the SAQ (Part Three).
One from the Tablet of Ahmad is so apropos: "Verily this is that Most Great Beauty, foretold in the Books of the Messengers, through Whom truth shall be distinguished from error and the wisdom of every command shall be tested."
Note, Teleological and Operational.
Remarks:
03/17/2011 -- Just as St. Patrick carried the message, so too ought we act to bring forth a proper viewpoint.
06/11/2009 -- Science and Religion.
Modified: 03/17/2011
Friday, June 5, 2009
Let there be Light
Month, Day: Light, Splendour (Independence)
Yes, from Genesis. But light is a primal attribute of science (which studies Creation), to boot. Our little dribblings in the ether, such as we see here with this post (and twitter-ville et al), are evidence of major advances in knowledge the past century and a half.
But, audacity will take light further. Why? It seems to be one property that has some claim to helping us know more about the Transcendent. There will be more on this.
For now, lets briefly look at underdetermination as it applies to our discussions and as it leads to quasi-empiricism by necessity. Some type of dialectic (pointer implies much based upon AE's recognition of imagination's use - implying, thereby, too, intuition's role) needs invention here which would balance the Writings and what we know via science.
Now, of course, the goal would be testable ideas. The key issue? Science has led us down the perdition-ripe paths of materialism, uber mathematics, and big experiments (money, politics, residues [of many sorts]). Consider, please, that what we see with the growing ubiquity of the computational (and its artificial being) is a platform for a type of science (apologies to Wolfram) that is truly non-elite.
Before I get tomatoes thrown in my direction, let me add, the elite part will still be there; it's part of Creation. Okay. But, the non-elite may actually have a larger sub-space (super-space, too).
Yes, indeed. If this were not so, what purpose is there for such a large set (put here link to statement that all can know God [Iqan] - no need of clergy or its equivalent, assuming the Teleological, of course)?
Remarks:
01/25/2011 -- What would be a comprehensive view of this attribute?
09/06/2009 -- Essentially, more is undecidable than we like to admit, basically due to our talent for success (ergodicity, essentially) keeps the hubris refreshed (generation by generation).
07/26/2009 -- The Operational times will be fun.
07/19/2009 -- From the beginning.
07/07/2009 -- Ought we be thankful for the Brights?
06/11/2009 -- Science and Religion.
Modified: 01/25/2011
Yes, from Genesis. But light is a primal attribute of science (which studies Creation), to boot. Our little dribblings in the ether, such as we see here with this post (and twitter-ville et al), are evidence of major advances in knowledge the past century and a half.
But, audacity will take light further. Why? It seems to be one property that has some claim to helping us know more about the Transcendent. There will be more on this.
For now, lets briefly look at underdetermination as it applies to our discussions and as it leads to quasi-empiricism by necessity. Some type of dialectic (pointer implies much based upon AE's recognition of imagination's use - implying, thereby, too, intuition's role) needs invention here which would balance the Writings and what we know via science.
Now, of course, the goal would be testable ideas. The key issue? Science has led us down the perdition-ripe paths of materialism, uber mathematics, and big experiments (money, politics, residues [of many sorts]). Consider, please, that what we see with the growing ubiquity of the computational (and its artificial being) is a platform for a type of science (apologies to Wolfram) that is truly non-elite.
Before I get tomatoes thrown in my direction, let me add, the elite part will still be there; it's part of Creation. Okay. But, the non-elite may actually have a larger sub-space (super-space, too).
Yes, indeed. If this were not so, what purpose is there for such a large set (put here link to statement that all can know God [Iqan] - no need of clergy or its equivalent, assuming the Teleological, of course)?
Remarks:
01/25/2011 -- What would be a comprehensive view of this attribute?
09/06/2009 -- Essentially, more is undecidable than we like to admit, basically due to our talent for success (ergodicity, essentially) keeps the hubris refreshed (generation by generation).
07/26/2009 -- The Operational times will be fun.
07/19/2009 -- From the beginning.
07/07/2009 -- Ought we be thankful for the Brights?
06/11/2009 -- Science and Religion.
Modified: 01/25/2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
