Month, Day: 169, Speech, Questions (Independence)
Our favorite day of every month. The next month is so, too. What? Questions! The real basis of the gift of science.
---
In the 100-year look back, the Master's trip to the US is now over. He's in England.
That departure could motivate consideration of several things, such as the cognitive issues related to seeing the truth in people and the truth as it's differentiated by locale. The Master spent a lot of time in New England, and more in New York, in particular. He met many people, of all types. He saw plenty of the geographic realities of the northern part of the continent.
But, the Master liked Americans, their spirit, and more. One has to think about His analysis of them after observing, for the first time, what might be considered a new breed (not, in any way, meant to connote race) of person (that multitude behind the dream of America).
Consider the mixture of people here. His visit was about the time of 300th anniversary of the early comings from Europe. In New England, there were many from the northern European heritage. The difference between those who were here and those still there might have been obvious (somewhat). We would have loved to ask (remember, Questions). Yet, there was a lot of commonality, as we know (so, too, God's Creation is everywhere dense, not specifically blessed in any part, except, perhaps, pieces of Israel).
---
There can be much more to say, in this regard. But, audacity says to take this approach: just as DNA analysis looks at the physical heritage of one's past, there is another type of analysis that will measure something that depicts the accumulation from the spirits of your ancestors (perhaps, psychether might be conceptually related).
Say what?
Yes, the healthy mind cannot ignore the Holy Spirit for all time. As well, it cannot but see God's Hand everywhere. But, what is healthy, in this regard? We'll get there.
In any case, no amount of denial makes the Reality go away. Brights can claim to disprove God till they're blue in the face, but that effort, no matter how long and hard, does not effect the Reality. It does not need our attention.
Basically, we're talking an either/or choice. If one denies, fine. It's a person's choice. What ramifications might there be to this choice? We may or may not see, in this lifetime.
If one does not deny, one would hope that there is a benefit from such. The huge problem is that there is a big gap between the realization and operational effectiveness. Tons can be discussed about this, and, probably, will be, in time. For the individual now, we just have to learn to balance Independence and strict obedience.
Why Independence? How else science? Too, who can take control of some else's life and tell them how to live? Oh, I know, plenty try this; it's the cause of a whole lot of problems; yes, even to those who advance in various roles related to their belief (stated generally, purposefully).
----
Now, our problem is that the way of science has been subsumed under severe materialism, as if by necessity. That is, those making the deny choice, see above, are in charge. Yet, as we heard from the Master, science is much more than that. It's how we know God and His Creation. The principle says harmony of science and religion (two wings, of equal power).
So, there are many issues here to resolve.
---
The problem, with dealing with psychether, is that science is public, meaning that reproducibility, and more, is the watchword for evaluations. And, guess what? The psychetheral thing is shared by all humans; actually, it is directly addressable by (accessible to) one's consciousness with effort. We're talking part of Creation.
One might say that altered states are sought, in part, in regard to wanting to know this thing better. But, artificial means are not necessary.
---
As an aside, we'll have to look at certain types of characteristics a little differently. You want me to tell you how? As I said, this is just a glimmer, about which I'll be jawboning. For instance, for the smarties, we'll look at kings and others who wielded power. That is, the Master, on several occasions while here in this newest of situations, said that levels (as in stations) are a necessary item to having any kind of order. That is, we cannot all be chiefs. In one instance when this topic was mentioned, He was with an offspring of a military officer; that is the obvious example to think about.
Aside: this is a system's concept, folks. At the same time, within the system, the Master said that all ought to be fully utilized and happy. Hence, we're not talking the age-old, top-down crap that the underlings have endured for God-only-knows how long.
Aside: We know that no one, with wisdom (see Aqdas) would want to be king - or President, for that matter - even if the crown were thrown in the ring. Too, kings have a role that makes them exemplars of God's good Graces (if only they would wake up to this -- anyone beside St. Margaret of Scotland on the list of good people?) to the folks in their domain, and, perhaps, to others. We really need to look up to them. However, given the character flaws of humans, no one of these types would be perfect, nor would they come to power except by gaming the system (yes, Pharaohs all). So, in the land of the democratic ideals, one might consider that the role is the important thing. George Washington is the perfect (yes, used advisedly) example: many (idiots all) wanted him to be crowned, but George (let's hear it for the Saint) said no and retired to Mount Vernon.
All sorts of musing will be coming forth about this subject.
---
This post is only a cursory hint. Earlier, and for years, I've used psychether as a label for this mysterious thing without understanding what might be the reality of the thing to other than myself. It's not really mysterious, as, again, all conscious humans know about that in which this thing manifests itself.
In fact, psychether was used for the fact of 'ether' being misunderstood (look at the wiki page on Science and Religion related to the Faith -- all the dancing around so that the brights won't call one an idiot -- hah). Not only is psychether fairly complex, our friend Albert would find it fascinatingly familiar in properties to what he had conceived for his space-time model, except that it transcends such. That is, we're not talking spatial or temporal, and not transcendental. Rather, it's more core.
The brights, with their energetic denials of anything dealing with this truth, know the reality, too. Hence, their forcefulness in making denials. And, the use of Richard's concept in the title is intended to bring the 'meta' into memes. Richard's creativity, with regard to the term, is to be recognized, yet he opened a can of worms (which will be explained, in time).
Aside: this post is precipitated by the need to foster discussion. Too, I've been heavy into history and genealogy for about three years now. As I've swept across the expanses of western civilization's cradle, and over the long time frames and learned about those who had the talent (no monarch was without very dirty feet, and perhaps even worse), I've seen that we're playing the same old tunes, over and over (Return comes into play, here, in part). It's not a big leap to see that the energies behind all of the dynamics are the same (one task is to model how this might be); and, that families bridge the generational span, yet do not.
Aside: the Crusades are a focal, for good reason. But, that bickering goes further back. It is not necessary. Mind you, we ought not be patsies, either. The Master said that while here, to boot.
---
Perhaps, we're in the day where no one religion will be above the rest. Get used to it. Perhaps, realizing this might be a key to having peace.
And, part of the psychether relates to the wars that come from the striving for dominance. It's more than just a replay of the Crusades every generation.What we have are little Lords, and all of those types, sparring about while the people suffer. Is that the way it ought to be? The problem is that the little guy's failing hurt only a small collection of people; these types' failures have wide ranging impact on many and many, and for a long time.
---
As we've been told, succeeding generations will converge toward the proper views. Methinks that the lure of the e-world is indicative of the pull of the psychether. In fact, electro-magnetic phenomena (through the fact of the attribute of Light) are involved somehow. Many concepts out of in-the-small physics might have some analog.
Pull? Yes, e-world may be an analog, but it pales in comparison to the real thing which is not to be mimicked by the virtual states (which are essentially empty). Yet, some type of augmentation, in a whole new sense, might come into play. That is, the emergence of the e-whatever is a gift in this regard. It'll help form the proper scientific framework in order to study psychether.
---
As an aside, there is something related to psychether and matter which accounts for differences around the planet that are beyond our normal dealings. Nope, did not say paranormal. We'll, for now, just say that this part of Creation is one motivation behind the 1-hour trip counsel for the internment of bodies after death.
Remarks:
09/07/2015 - Bolded psychether as embolded by Multisense Realism work.
12/13/2015 -- This Atlantic article is fairly concise in its presentation of the issues. One example of those who experienced an NDE was a physician (Dr. Eben Alexander) who is accused by some of being anti-scientific.
Modified: 09/07/2015
Showing posts with label Autodidact. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Autodidact. Show all posts
Friday, December 7, 2012
Friday, May 20, 2011
Peter and motivation
Month, Day: 168, Grandeur, Grandeur (Independence)
As we work constructively to build a basis, we'll look at Motivation from time to time, also.
We'll point a lot to the SAQ, as it is a seminal work. For instance, look at this in relation to Religion and Science.
SAQ #34 (Peter's Confession of Faith): While the religion of God is the promoter of truth, the founder of science and knowledge, it is full of goodwill for learned men; it is the civilizer of mankind, the discoverer of the secrets of nature, and the enlightener of the horizons of the world. Consequently, how can it be said to oppose knowledge?
---
Peter will be a central point for several constructive arguments.
Remarks:
05/26/2011 -- A 'super' position can have merit.
Modified: 05/26/2011
As we work constructively to build a basis, we'll look at Motivation from time to time, also.
We'll point a lot to the SAQ, as it is a seminal work. For instance, look at this in relation to Religion and Science.
SAQ #34 (Peter's Confession of Faith): While the religion of God is the promoter of truth, the founder of science and knowledge, it is full of goodwill for learned men; it is the civilizer of mankind, the discoverer of the secrets of nature, and the enlightener of the horizons of the world. Consequently, how can it be said to oppose knowledge?
---
Peter will be a central point for several constructive arguments.
Remarks:
05/26/2011 -- A 'super' position can have merit.
Modified: 05/26/2011
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Foreknowledge
Month, Day: 168, Splendour, Will (Majesty)
That, in the title, is one attribute that is human and shared with the Manifestation. Too, the Manifestation has a much greater facility, beyond what we can comprehend. Yet, we can contemplate these facilities in an effort to improve ourselves and our work, such as science. How is that?
----
Well, this blog started in 2008, in sort of a recoil. From what? Limitations being put up upon that which was on wiki related to science and faith (see Mission and Methods). Since then, there have been a few posts here that related to the subject page (faith and science, science and religion). But mostly, I've only browsed the page (and the arguments) from time to time.
How did I get back to the page today? Well, on the 5th read of the Koran (Rodwell this time, again), I've been going to the WWW (which has really matured the past five years) to look more thoroughly at topics (beyond the mere listening to experts - autodidactic'ally, okay?). The topic in question was 'djinn' and such. And, while looking at definitions, I ran across a page that mentioned the notions from an esteemed nuclear engineer (see below), who is of the Islamic faith.
---
You can look it up, but here is the gist: we can probably develop power sources using concentrated attention by humans (for those who quibble, interpretation is core to the human experience [why else the emphasis on its control, for certain types?]).
Or, as an aside, we are immersed in an objective universe (SAQ #79), yet for each of us, the experience is subjective (ah, science CANNOT overcome this, folks -- teehee). Some think the guy is nuts; I think that he exhibits several things that we (those who are followers of the Glory) ought to be studying (as in, there is a glimmer of truth here that we ought to understand). Ah, how many barbs of quackery will be thrown on this (but then, George B took his licks, too)?
---
So, back to the subject. The page, mentioned above, has evolved. It now has more than the three topics that were there five years ago (look it up). In fact, a couple may have been challenged (I haven't paid close attention).
But, the list has a bias toward the physical sciences being the prime view for any ontological study. Ah. Is that so? We have allowed materialistic views to, essentially, lead us down the perdition-laden paths to mineralization. Think of it!
---
As mentioned last time, we need to bring in themes from human-based science, to boot. What might these be? Well, it'll be a long list.
For one, the notion of foreknowledge (Valley of Wonderment, for example) goes beyond just that in the sacred texts. Consider, please: some types of this could be characterized as a human reaction (albeit, imaginatively) to pondering some bit of this sacred text (example of Scripture influencing science via inspired behavior).
---
As an aside, the oversight allowed via abstraction, and its support by mathematics, gives a view that can be thought of as foresight (how does that differ from foreknowledge?). Many examples exist, but some of the work of James Clerk Maxwell is used quite often, in this sense.
I think that many, like Lakatos, have not been given enough due (the whole quasi-empirical notion can be bolstered by using the Writings).
---
Actually, the enumeration of human facilities would be endless (as is the Ocean of Words). Yet, there could be themes (categories, if you would) that are of substantial enough basis to be almost invariant.
Granted Wikipedia is NOR. But, what work has been done that could be used as source? Anyone even looking?
Let me put it this way. The assaults (potential or otherwise) of the brights ought not be a deterrent.
A new type of operational basis needs to be defined and exercised.
---
And, the whole notion of the texts being inerrant, or not, in this context can be characterized as misguided, somewhat. The 7V and the 4V, clearly, denote the limitations on words, but not Words.
Remarks:
01/25/2012 -- Yes, still at it. Ready to be more audacious. What we're looking for has to do with mind; at some point, it will be allowed by science that we can observe effects (actually, predict, to boot - one step forward will be a more insightful mathematics).
06/02/2011 -- Construction II.
05/26/2011 -- A 'super' position can have merit.
05/17/2011 -- Stephen gets press.
05/09/2011 -- We need a constructive re-look.
04/04/2011 -- The autodidact's role is still to be defined.
Modified: 01/25/2012
That, in the title, is one attribute that is human and shared with the Manifestation. Too, the Manifestation has a much greater facility, beyond what we can comprehend. Yet, we can contemplate these facilities in an effort to improve ourselves and our work, such as science. How is that?
----
Well, this blog started in 2008, in sort of a recoil. From what? Limitations being put up upon that which was on wiki related to science and faith (see Mission and Methods). Since then, there have been a few posts here that related to the subject page (faith and science, science and religion). But mostly, I've only browsed the page (and the arguments) from time to time.
How did I get back to the page today? Well, on the 5th read of the Koran (Rodwell this time, again), I've been going to the WWW (which has really matured the past five years) to look more thoroughly at topics (beyond the mere listening to experts - autodidactic'ally, okay?). The topic in question was 'djinn' and such. And, while looking at definitions, I ran across a page that mentioned the notions from an esteemed nuclear engineer (see below), who is of the Islamic faith.
---
You can look it up, but here is the gist: we can probably develop power sources using concentrated attention by humans (for those who quibble, interpretation is core to the human experience [why else the emphasis on its control, for certain types?]).
Or, as an aside, we are immersed in an objective universe (SAQ #79), yet for each of us, the experience is subjective (ah, science CANNOT overcome this, folks -- teehee). Some think the guy is nuts; I think that he exhibits several things that we (those who are followers of the Glory) ought to be studying (as in, there is a glimmer of truth here that we ought to understand). Ah, how many barbs of quackery will be thrown on this (but then, George B took his licks, too)?
---
So, back to the subject. The page, mentioned above, has evolved. It now has more than the three topics that were there five years ago (look it up). In fact, a couple may have been challenged (I haven't paid close attention).
But, the list has a bias toward the physical sciences being the prime view for any ontological study. Ah. Is that so? We have allowed materialistic views to, essentially, lead us down the perdition-laden paths to mineralization. Think of it!
---
As mentioned last time, we need to bring in themes from human-based science, to boot. What might these be? Well, it'll be a long list.
For one, the notion of foreknowledge (Valley of Wonderment, for example) goes beyond just that in the sacred texts. Consider, please: some types of this could be characterized as a human reaction (albeit, imaginatively) to pondering some bit of this sacred text (example of Scripture influencing science via inspired behavior).
---
As an aside, the oversight allowed via abstraction, and its support by mathematics, gives a view that can be thought of as foresight (how does that differ from foreknowledge?). Many examples exist, but some of the work of James Clerk Maxwell is used quite often, in this sense.
I think that many, like Lakatos, have not been given enough due (the whole quasi-empirical notion can be bolstered by using the Writings).
---
Actually, the enumeration of human facilities would be endless (as is the Ocean of Words). Yet, there could be themes (categories, if you would) that are of substantial enough basis to be almost invariant.
Granted Wikipedia is NOR. But, what work has been done that could be used as source? Anyone even looking?
Let me put it this way. The assaults (potential or otherwise) of the brights ought not be a deterrent.
A new type of operational basis needs to be defined and exercised.
---
And, the whole notion of the texts being inerrant, or not, in this context can be characterized as misguided, somewhat. The 7V and the 4V, clearly, denote the limitations on words, but not Words.
Remarks:
01/25/2012 -- Yes, still at it. Ready to be more audacious. What we're looking for has to do with mind; at some point, it will be allowed by science that we can observe effects (actually, predict, to boot - one step forward will be a more insightful mathematics).
06/02/2011 -- Construction II.
05/26/2011 -- A 'super' position can have merit.
05/17/2011 -- Stephen gets press.
05/09/2011 -- We need a constructive re-look.
04/04/2011 -- The autodidact's role is still to be defined.
Modified: 01/25/2012
Thursday, March 17, 2011
A recurring theme
Month, Day: 167, Loftiness, Honour (Majesty)
Which is? Return.
Aside: Thoughts on the day of commemorating St. Patrick. From this, we can look more closely at the following. Yes, audacity (without arrogance) is important.
----
The theme manifests itself several ways that ought to be of interest to science (that is, any reasonable mindset that is not thwarted by scientism).
The mental powers have motivations (yes, one of the Groups) that are spiritual. How does this work? Well, it is for us to work out and understand. The only limitation? We cannot ever reduce to the core, nor can we completely comprehend this; there are other characterizations that we'll get to, eventually.
Koran (The Believers): When death overtaketh one of the wicked, he saith, "Lord, send me back again, That I may do the good which I have left undone." "By no means." These are the very words which he shall speak: But behind them shall be a barrier, until the day when they shall be raised again.
Is not "send me back again" asking for a return? Of course. In this context, we ought to remember the argument proposed by Blaise, a few centuries later. Which argument, by the way, is still scoffed at by some of the brights.
---
Now, there was an allusion to recurrence which can be observed, many places, in natural phenomena. Who said that 'return' had simple usages?
So, the subject of the Writings and Science will get more attention. That is, what types of support can found in what is provided by Revelation for our pursuits of knowledge? One might immediately go to rules and axioms. Yes, can these be listed, as a start? What other types might we consider?
---
Another theme will be the system person, on the one hand, and the autodidact on the other. Now, there may be other ways to characterize this, as one person may have many different roles in this regard.
Remarks:
05/09/2011 -- We need a constructive re-look.
03/21/2011 -- On Blaise. Will we not see his wager shown to have strong applicability?
Modified: 05/09/2011
Which is? Return.
Aside: Thoughts on the day of commemorating St. Patrick. From this, we can look more closely at the following. Yes, audacity (without arrogance) is important.
----
The theme manifests itself several ways that ought to be of interest to science (that is, any reasonable mindset that is not thwarted by scientism).
The mental powers have motivations (yes, one of the Groups) that are spiritual. How does this work? Well, it is for us to work out and understand. The only limitation? We cannot ever reduce to the core, nor can we completely comprehend this; there are other characterizations that we'll get to, eventually.
Koran (The Believers): When death overtaketh one of the wicked, he saith, "Lord, send me back again, That I may do the good which I have left undone." "By no means." These are the very words which he shall speak: But behind them shall be a barrier, until the day when they shall be raised again.
Is not "send me back again" asking for a return? Of course. In this context, we ought to remember the argument proposed by Blaise, a few centuries later. Which argument, by the way, is still scoffed at by some of the brights.
---
Now, there was an allusion to recurrence which can be observed, many places, in natural phenomena. Who said that 'return' had simple usages?
So, the subject of the Writings and Science will get more attention. That is, what types of support can found in what is provided by Revelation for our pursuits of knowledge? One might immediately go to rules and axioms. Yes, can these be listed, as a start? What other types might we consider?
---
Another theme will be the system person, on the one hand, and the autodidact on the other. Now, there may be other ways to characterize this, as one person may have many different roles in this regard.
Remarks:
05/09/2011 -- We need a constructive re-look.
03/21/2011 -- On Blaise. Will we not see his wager shown to have strong applicability?
Modified: 05/09/2011
Monday, March 7, 2011
Enlightenment, again
Month, Day: 167, Loftiness, Mercy (Perfection)
This year, there was an Enlightenment theme (which will continue).
One topic? The Cave (Sufficiency, by necessity)
Remarks:
01/25/2012 -- Yes, still at it. Ready to be more audacious. What we're looking for has to do with mind; at some point, it will be allowed by science that we can observe effects (actually, predict, to boot - one step forward will be a more insightful mathematics).
03/10/2011 -- Names are to be understood.
Modified: 01/25/2012
This year, there was an Enlightenment theme (which will continue).
One topic? The Cave (Sufficiency, by necessity)
Remarks:
01/25/2012 -- Yes, still at it. Ready to be more audacious. What we're looking for has to do with mind; at some point, it will be allowed by science that we can observe effects (actually, predict, to boot - one step forward will be a more insightful mathematics).
03/10/2011 -- Names are to be understood.
Modified: 01/25/2012
Friday, November 26, 2010
Mentors, again
Month, Day: 167, Speech, Grandeur (Independence)
Can anyone really claim to be an autodidact? That is, be mentor-less during development.
Well, not really, except for the Manifestation. Then, all else have some type of mentor or another. That, essentially, is God's system.
Now, we know, too, about Independent Investigation of the Truth and its important role (Questions is coming up soon). So, there must be some usefulness for autodidact-ism.
What about this being a counter balance to central tendencies? What is that and those? Something that will be discussed further while pursuing the enlightenment quest.
Remarks:
04/04/2011 -- We'll be looking at things like foreknowledge.
12/05/2010 -- Is it not true that extreme positions on the axis of the mindful can lead to a god-like state-fulness?
11/27/2010 -- One thrust will be to look at the Manifestation's relationship to history. That will consider more than the issue of return, albeit this concept is very important.
Modified:04/04/2011
Can anyone really claim to be an autodidact? That is, be mentor-less during development.
Well, not really, except for the Manifestation. Then, all else have some type of mentor or another. That, essentially, is God's system.
Now, we know, too, about Independent Investigation of the Truth and its important role (Questions is coming up soon). So, there must be some usefulness for autodidact-ism.
What about this being a counter balance to central tendencies? What is that and those? Something that will be discussed further while pursuing the enlightenment quest.
Remarks:
04/04/2011 -- We'll be looking at things like foreknowledge.
12/05/2010 -- Is it not true that extreme positions on the axis of the mindful can lead to a god-like state-fulness?
11/27/2010 -- One thrust will be to look at the Manifestation's relationship to history. That will consider more than the issue of return, albeit this concept is very important.
Modified:04/04/2011
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Enlightenment
Month, Day: 167, Grandeur, Mercy (Glory)
We'll have a theme this year, for several reasons.
For one, last year's was looking at the Groups. Then, we ought to ponder this: prior to the events of the Manifestations, the western world underwent a transformation, of several sorts.
Since there are Teleological implications to consider, we'll let that Group (we're now in the Transcendent) be the focus. As we know, the Group starts with Light which has so many aspects. Actually, just as electromagnetic theory likes its Hilbert notions, so too do the spiritual characteristics exist unbounded.
And, we'll use the American side for focus for this analysis (which age followed en-light-en-ment). Consider, universal education was a tenant (and ideal) of the en-light-en'd Puritanical view.
Also, the whole issue of Audacity (major theme here), and its non-mentor'd parallel (except, the only ones of this state truly are the Manifestations), will be re-framed using metaphorically motivated (another Group) notions from the Enlightenment's contributions as the core.
Note that the temporal flavor is an artifact (which are allowed for illustration, see SAQ and Valley Four) that will be superimposed upon the Writings. Or, is it that the Writings are the superposed? There is more to consider than 'propositional' concerns.
You see, the arguments concerning use of the Writings for foundational purposes remain open to demonstration. How? And, to what extent? And, at what point does there need to be overview through the workings of the Administrative order? Plus, 'light' and its basis, for computation and imagination and more, are on the table.
To what depth can all this be penetrated this year?
Modified: 05/23/2010
We'll have a theme this year, for several reasons.
For one, last year's was looking at the Groups. Then, we ought to ponder this: prior to the events of the Manifestations, the western world underwent a transformation, of several sorts.
Since there are Teleological implications to consider, we'll let that Group (we're now in the Transcendent) be the focus. As we know, the Group starts with Light which has so many aspects. Actually, just as electromagnetic theory likes its Hilbert notions, so too do the spiritual characteristics exist unbounded.
And, we'll use the American side for focus for this analysis (which age followed en-light-en-ment). Consider, universal education was a tenant (and ideal) of the en-light-en'd Puritanical view.
Also, the whole issue of Audacity (major theme here), and its non-mentor'd parallel (except, the only ones of this state truly are the Manifestations), will be re-framed using metaphorically motivated (another Group) notions from the Enlightenment's contributions as the core.
Note that the temporal flavor is an artifact (which are allowed for illustration, see SAQ and Valley Four) that will be superimposed upon the Writings. Or, is it that the Writings are the superposed? There is more to consider than 'propositional' concerns.
You see, the arguments concerning use of the Writings for foundational purposes remain open to demonstration. How? And, to what extent? And, at what point does there need to be overview through the workings of the Administrative order? Plus, 'light' and its basis, for computation and imagination and more, are on the table.
To what depth can all this be penetrated this year?
Modified: 05/23/2010
Friday, April 30, 2010
Transcendent Independence
Month, Day: 167, Beauty, Beauty (Independence)
The third of the Transcendent group (first use of these) has started.
Firstly, a notion of the Station.
Aqdas (#142): Verily, He revealed certain laws so that, in this Dispensation, the Pen of the Most High might have no need to move in aught but the glorification of His own transcendent Station and His most effulgent Beauty. Since, however, We have wished to evidence Our bounty unto you, We have, through the power of truth, set forth these laws with clarity and mitigated what We desire you to observe. He, verily, is the Munificent, the Generous.
To none is given this, even royalty and peerage (a new thing to study, given its importance to what we see in the economic domain).
Aqdas (#72): It is forbidden you to trade in slaves, be they men or women. It is not for him who is himself a servant to buy another of God’s servants, and this hath been prohibited in His Holy Tablet. Thus, by His mercy, hath the commandment been recorded by the Pen of justice. Let no man exalt himself above another; all are but bondslaves before the Lord, and all exemplify the truth that there is none other God but Him. He, verily, is the All-Wise, Whose wisdom encompasseth all things.
There will be an economic flavor, as modern corporate life, for the many, is not much more than a type of bondage. That is, for all, except the CEO and a few others.
The trouble is that the lessening of any grasp of the real Operational aspects, through the advancement of mathematics via computation, has bound us all into some type servitude. The epitome of this? Zombies willingly attuned to elsewhere and when (the opposite of the here and now) via addiction to the electronic beasts and their cloud'd overseer.
Another topic will deal with Independence for us, mainly Independent Investigation of the Truth.
The third of the Transcendent group (first use of these) has started.
Firstly, a notion of the Station.
Aqdas (#142): Verily, He revealed certain laws so that, in this Dispensation, the Pen of the Most High might have no need to move in aught but the glorification of His own transcendent Station and His most effulgent Beauty. Since, however, We have wished to evidence Our bounty unto you, We have, through the power of truth, set forth these laws with clarity and mitigated what We desire you to observe. He, verily, is the Munificent, the Generous.
To none is given this, even royalty and peerage (a new thing to study, given its importance to what we see in the economic domain).
Aqdas (#72): It is forbidden you to trade in slaves, be they men or women. It is not for him who is himself a servant to buy another of God’s servants, and this hath been prohibited in His Holy Tablet. Thus, by His mercy, hath the commandment been recorded by the Pen of justice. Let no man exalt himself above another; all are but bondslaves before the Lord, and all exemplify the truth that there is none other God but Him. He, verily, is the All-Wise, Whose wisdom encompasseth all things.
There will be an economic flavor, as modern corporate life, for the many, is not much more than a type of bondage. That is, for all, except the CEO and a few others.
The trouble is that the lessening of any grasp of the real Operational aspects, through the advancement of mathematics via computation, has bound us all into some type servitude. The epitome of this? Zombies willingly attuned to elsewhere and when (the opposite of the here and now) via addiction to the electronic beasts and their cloud'd overseer.
Another topic will deal with Independence for us, mainly Independent Investigation of the Truth.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Mentors
Month, Day: 166, Dominion, Splendour (Beauty)
There was an earlier suggestion that we need to think about, though we cannot comprehend, the various states of the Manifestations, who are Key, since we have been allowed Questions (science).
Notice SAQ #25: In the Gospel of John, in speaking of the Promised One Who was to come after Christ, it is said in chapter 16, verses 12, 13: “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth: for He shall not speak of Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak.” Then, there is an explanation.
How does this happen? Is there any similarity with normal human existence? That is, are we allowed any semblance of knowing.
What about action? We all have some notion about puppetry. Is this not the motivation behind indoctrination?
These questions are such as an autodidact would bring forward; independent investigation of the truth necessitates the autodidact which essentially consists a mentor-less state.
Yet, how can one actually be mentor-less? Our parents are our first mentors (SAQ #57). In fact, they set the stage for our lives, in many ways that are permanent. If they have done a good job, it leaves one in a condition of standing on the shoulders of giants (thanks, Isaac).
In this regard, too, the counsel of God loving those who works in groups (paraphrase) applies from several perspectives. One that needs further explanation is foundational (the future - psychether).
By the way, have you thanked your parents lately (SAQ #62)?
Consider that the Glory's parents died early so that he was raised by his uncle which resulted in a different mentoring situation. Teleologically important? Reducing a type of influence? Perhaps, it was a grace to them, disallowed any erroneous motions (free will, this side).
In any case, the usual 'mentor' dynamic, of the normal human experience, did not happen. However the operational aspects unfolded, we can only know pieces. One important thing? No matter how real any similar circumstance may appear to be, it cannot be the case, according to the thousand year rule.
Now, this discussion mainly points to the time when science (ah, Brights?) will have accepted some categorical difference between humans and other creatures and when they try to attempt to use this knowledge. Somehow, limits must be fully described and supported scientifically. As mentioned earlier, for those things not in the Writings (and we do not know this yet),
the Universal House of Justice will be central.
Remarks:
02/24/2010 -- Ascendant to Transcendent.
Modified: 03/11/2010
There was an earlier suggestion that we need to think about, though we cannot comprehend, the various states of the Manifestations, who are Key, since we have been allowed Questions (science).
Notice SAQ #25: In the Gospel of John, in speaking of the Promised One Who was to come after Christ, it is said in chapter 16, verses 12, 13: “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth: for He shall not speak of Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak.” Then, there is an explanation.
How does this happen? Is there any similarity with normal human existence? That is, are we allowed any semblance of knowing.
What about action? We all have some notion about puppetry. Is this not the motivation behind indoctrination?
These questions are such as an autodidact would bring forward; independent investigation of the truth necessitates the autodidact which essentially consists a mentor-less state.
Yet, how can one actually be mentor-less? Our parents are our first mentors (SAQ #57). In fact, they set the stage for our lives, in many ways that are permanent. If they have done a good job, it leaves one in a condition of standing on the shoulders of giants (thanks, Isaac).
In this regard, too, the counsel of God loving those who works in groups (paraphrase) applies from several perspectives. One that needs further explanation is foundational (the future - psychether).
By the way, have you thanked your parents lately (SAQ #62)?
Consider that the Glory's parents died early so that he was raised by his uncle which resulted in a different mentoring situation. Teleologically important? Reducing a type of influence? Perhaps, it was a grace to them, disallowed any erroneous motions (free will, this side).
In any case, the usual 'mentor' dynamic, of the normal human experience, did not happen. However the operational aspects unfolded, we can only know pieces. One important thing? No matter how real any similar circumstance may appear to be, it cannot be the case, according to the thousand year rule.
Now, this discussion mainly points to the time when science (ah, Brights?) will have accepted some categorical difference between humans and other creatures and when they try to attempt to use this knowledge. Somehow, limits must be fully described and supported scientifically. As mentioned earlier, for those things not in the Writings (and we do not know this yet),
the Universal House of Justice will be central.
Remarks:
02/24/2010 -- Ascendant to Transcendent.
Modified: 03/11/2010
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Leaders and followers
Month, Day: Words, Speech (Beauty)
As the Bard wrote, don't be a lender or a borrower (expressed more flowery than this, of course). We can alter that slightly to neither a leader nor a follower be. That is, I may not want to cast a shadow yet don't appreciate that your need to do so (think of this in terms of those who interpose themselves between people and God). This usage is partly motivated by the comment in the Aqdas that no one, when the human race matures, would want to step up to be king. Of course, we all would be king, yet we would not subject others; rather we would serve others willingly.
Now, in terms of audacity and the autodidact, we can think of our cognitive states as a place to start looking at this dilemma. Why? Explaining the mind is puzzling to any but the most strident views. The SAQ #56 offers a model that has some power when considered via reflection in this context. That is, we have a common faculty that maps from the senses to our spiritual powers.
These spiritual powers are, in a sequence from the SAQ #56 example: imagination, thought, comprehension, memory. An interesting thing to ponder is that light is handled by the eye, but there maybe more involved. For instance, does light have attributes that are handled via the imagination? See below for further discussion on how to handle.
The SAQ #56 example pertained to our perception of an external situation or object. Now, the sequence could be any permutation, such as some cognitive state arising from memory. This SAQ-based model ought to (and can) be looked at from the context of modern cognitive science. We're in the mode where our physical entities are being probed by science continually, yet, no place within the framework allows that any motive, or will, arises via our spirit. It is asked: how can science do that?
As with any modern view, the stress of reductionism and materialism keeps any attempt at a new integrative view from seeing light. That the Writings can offer a basis for such attempts has been said many times here.
Now, that statement brings in the Attribute classes, namely Transcendent, Teleological, Operational, Motivation, Ascendant. We are now in the second, dealing with Words. Up next is Perfection.
The power of this grouping, though it is only one of many, is that subsequent timeframes build on the others. In fact, the idea of cycle is central to the theme (small analog of Progressive Revelation). As an aside, it's interesting that just as we might think that we're getting some handle on this, along comes the Ascendant group which leads to Loftiness and, of course, to the new iteration.
Can the Operational group (Names, Might, Will, Knowledge) provide some hint at both descriptive and explanatory means which would be supported by experimentation? That the experiments are limited to thought types, in the beginning, is no argument against the attempt, as quasi-empiricism in mathematics suggests just that sort of thing (see Lakatos).
As a final thought, we need to bring the 4 Valleys into the discussion, too, as they can map to the message of SAQ #56.
Remarks:
10/11/2009 -- Will, an operational imperative for science.
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).
08/16/2009 -- The Operational group is approaching, and ontology is primal. One area of focus, as suggested by this post, will be mind-body studies. Somehow, insights from the Writings ought to have importance, teleological and operational.
Modified: 10/11/2009
As the Bard wrote, don't be a lender or a borrower (expressed more flowery than this, of course). We can alter that slightly to neither a leader nor a follower be. That is, I may not want to cast a shadow yet don't appreciate that your need to do so (think of this in terms of those who interpose themselves between people and God). This usage is partly motivated by the comment in the Aqdas that no one, when the human race matures, would want to step up to be king. Of course, we all would be king, yet we would not subject others; rather we would serve others willingly.
Now, in terms of audacity and the autodidact, we can think of our cognitive states as a place to start looking at this dilemma. Why? Explaining the mind is puzzling to any but the most strident views. The SAQ #56 offers a model that has some power when considered via reflection in this context. That is, we have a common faculty that maps from the senses to our spiritual powers.
These spiritual powers are, in a sequence from the SAQ #56 example: imagination, thought, comprehension, memory. An interesting thing to ponder is that light is handled by the eye, but there maybe more involved. For instance, does light have attributes that are handled via the imagination? See below for further discussion on how to handle.
The SAQ #56 example pertained to our perception of an external situation or object. Now, the sequence could be any permutation, such as some cognitive state arising from memory. This SAQ-based model ought to (and can) be looked at from the context of modern cognitive science. We're in the mode where our physical entities are being probed by science continually, yet, no place within the framework allows that any motive, or will, arises via our spirit. It is asked: how can science do that?
As with any modern view, the stress of reductionism and materialism keeps any attempt at a new integrative view from seeing light. That the Writings can offer a basis for such attempts has been said many times here.
Now, that statement brings in the Attribute classes, namely Transcendent, Teleological, Operational, Motivation, Ascendant. We are now in the second, dealing with Words. Up next is Perfection.
The power of this grouping, though it is only one of many, is that subsequent timeframes build on the others. In fact, the idea of cycle is central to the theme (small analog of Progressive Revelation). As an aside, it's interesting that just as we might think that we're getting some handle on this, along comes the Ascendant group which leads to Loftiness and, of course, to the new iteration.
Can the Operational group (Names, Might, Will, Knowledge) provide some hint at both descriptive and explanatory means which would be supported by experimentation? That the experiments are limited to thought types, in the beginning, is no argument against the attempt, as quasi-empiricism in mathematics suggests just that sort of thing (see Lakatos).
As a final thought, we need to bring the 4 Valleys into the discussion, too, as they can map to the message of SAQ #56.
Remarks:
10/11/2009 -- Will, an operational imperative for science.
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).
08/16/2009 -- The Operational group is approaching, and ontology is primal. One area of focus, as suggested by this post, will be mind-body studies. Somehow, insights from the Writings ought to have importance, teleological and operational.
Modified: 10/11/2009
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
The autodidact
Month, Day: Beauty, Splendour (Grace)
Month, Day: Beauty, Names (Justice)
For whatever reason that might be the prime cause behind the phenomenon (whether natural, social, or purely accidental), the existence of the autodidact ought to be celebrated for its contributory potential. Ah, institutions do not want that.
Slogan 1: the tenured position is not equivalent (no way) to that established by the truly autodidactic.
Slogan 2: the existential reality for the autodidact can be abandonment.
In terms of principle, this whole thing has to do with Independent Investigation of the Truth (a basic Principle of the Baha'i Faith) which is a very hard subject. Actually very hard, look at the Brights (yes, Dawkins, et al) as peers beat one down (physical threats, psychological torture, social pressures, ...) in many, many ways.
Hah, they haven't the power or the number of troops required for this (Tablet of Ahmed), and the unlearned don't know better (therefore, not knowing is foregivable in some circumstances).
It will be a major theme to fill in the void. Wiki has a start.
As I was reminded recently by an expert, a PhD has to be autodidactic in anything outside his/her field if he/she does not want to just play patsy to those who are verbal (and abusive) about what they know and to those who think that everyone ought to follow them (neither a leader nor follower be, to misquote William S).
Example (4 horsemen).
Slogan 3: math does not talk to (or for) God, as is believed by the physicist, who speaks for the chemist, who establishes the framework for the materialism of the biologist who ...
Slogan 4: There are many autodidacts to whom we can point in a manner to set the proper tone for this type of inquiry (nope, use not motivated by Bush or the Jesuits).
Remarks:
04/14/2012 -- Thornton Chase.
05/17/2011 -- Stephen gets press.
05/09/2011 -- We need a constructive re-look.
04/04/2011 -- We'll be looking at things like foreknowledge. As well, autodidacticism for everyone.
12/05/2010 -- Is it not true that extreme positions on the axis of the mindful can lead to a god-like state-fulness?
11/16/2010 -- What can science know?
10/01/2010 -- Irritation.
04/30/2010 -- The autodidact cannot ascend to Transcendence.
12/06/2009 -- The Motivational implies goals and actions.
10/11/2009 -- Will and Questions. Gifts, both.
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.
05/29/2009 -- The Transcendent baffles.
Modified: 04/14/2012
Month, Day: Beauty, Names (Justice)
For whatever reason that might be the prime cause behind the phenomenon (whether natural, social, or purely accidental), the existence of the autodidact ought to be celebrated for its contributory potential. Ah, institutions do not want that.
Slogan 1: the tenured position is not equivalent (no way) to that established by the truly autodidactic.
Slogan 2: the existential reality for the autodidact can be abandonment.
In terms of principle, this whole thing has to do with Independent Investigation of the Truth (a basic Principle of the Baha'i Faith) which is a very hard subject. Actually very hard, look at the Brights (yes, Dawkins, et al) as peers beat one down (physical threats, psychological torture, social pressures, ...) in many, many ways.
Hah, they haven't the power or the number of troops required for this (Tablet of Ahmed), and the unlearned don't know better (therefore, not knowing is foregivable in some circumstances).
It will be a major theme to fill in the void. Wiki has a start.
As I was reminded recently by an expert, a PhD has to be autodidactic in anything outside his/her field if he/she does not want to just play patsy to those who are verbal (and abusive) about what they know and to those who think that everyone ought to follow them (neither a leader nor follower be, to misquote William S).
Example (4 horsemen).
Slogan 3: math does not talk to (or for) God, as is believed by the physicist, who speaks for the chemist, who establishes the framework for the materialism of the biologist who ...
Slogan 4: There are many autodidacts to whom we can point in a manner to set the proper tone for this type of inquiry (nope, use not motivated by Bush or the Jesuits).
Remarks:
04/14/2012 -- Thornton Chase.
05/17/2011 -- Stephen gets press.
05/09/2011 -- We need a constructive re-look.
04/04/2011 -- We'll be looking at things like foreknowledge. As well, autodidacticism for everyone.
12/05/2010 -- Is it not true that extreme positions on the axis of the mindful can lead to a god-like state-fulness?
11/16/2010 -- What can science know?
10/01/2010 -- Irritation.
04/30/2010 -- The autodidact cannot ascend to Transcendence.
12/06/2009 -- The Motivational implies goals and actions.
10/11/2009 -- Will and Questions. Gifts, both.
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.
05/29/2009 -- The Transcendent baffles.
Modified: 04/14/2012
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Belief and delusion
Month, Day: Speech, Beauty (Grace)
Aqdas #183: Say: This is the infallible Balance which the Hand of God is holding, in which all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth are weighed, and their fate determined, if ye be of them that believe and recognize this truth. Say: This is the Most Great Testimony, by which the validity of every proof throughout the ages hath been established, would that ye might be assured thereof. Say: Through it the poor have been enriched, the learned enlightened, and the seekers enabled to ascend unto the presence of God.
So, if we choose to believe, then the Pascal challenge is fulfilled (that is, for us, there is the other side). We can take this a step further such that there can be knowledge and certainty despite the misgivings of the Brights, et al.
Audacity, then, becomes the mode, as, there are operational effects that we'll be able to demonstrate.
Some modern views (such as those represented by Dawkins, see The God Delusion) ought to be seen as very instructive to us in this regard. All arguments ought to be read and understood within their own framework.
There is much to consider, and the SAQ is a good place to start.
Too, it may be that what may appear as delusional may very well have substance behind it. That is something that cannot be addressed by science without a little paradigmatic shift. Of course, one question would be whether such a shift would have value.
Depends upon to whom you talk, in part.
Remarks:
01/25/2012 -- Yes, still at it. Ready to be more audacious. What we're looking for has to do with mind; at some point, it will be allowed by science that we can observe effects (actually, predict, to boot - one step forward will be a more insightful mathematics).
05/17/2011 -- Stephen gets press.
05/09/2011 -- We need a constructive re-look.
12/05/2010 -- Is it not true that extreme positions on the axis of the mindful can lead to a god-like state-fulness?
11/16/2010 -- What can science know?
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).
05/29/2009 -- The Transcendent baffles.
05/06/2009 --We need to consider the contributions of the autodidact who has escaped abandonment.
Modified: 01/25/2011
Aqdas #183: Say: This is the infallible Balance which the Hand of God is holding, in which all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth are weighed, and their fate determined, if ye be of them that believe and recognize this truth. Say: This is the Most Great Testimony, by which the validity of every proof throughout the ages hath been established, would that ye might be assured thereof. Say: Through it the poor have been enriched, the learned enlightened, and the seekers enabled to ascend unto the presence of God.
So, if we choose to believe, then the Pascal challenge is fulfilled (that is, for us, there is the other side). We can take this a step further such that there can be knowledge and certainty despite the misgivings of the Brights, et al.
Audacity, then, becomes the mode, as, there are operational effects that we'll be able to demonstrate.
Some modern views (such as those represented by Dawkins, see The God Delusion) ought to be seen as very instructive to us in this regard. All arguments ought to be read and understood within their own framework.
There is much to consider, and the SAQ is a good place to start.
Too, it may be that what may appear as delusional may very well have substance behind it. That is something that cannot be addressed by science without a little paradigmatic shift. Of course, one question would be whether such a shift would have value.
Depends upon to whom you talk, in part.
Remarks:
01/25/2012 -- Yes, still at it. Ready to be more audacious. What we're looking for has to do with mind; at some point, it will be allowed by science that we can observe effects (actually, predict, to boot - one step forward will be a more insightful mathematics).
05/17/2011 -- Stephen gets press.
05/09/2011 -- We need a constructive re-look.
12/05/2010 -- Is it not true that extreme positions on the axis of the mindful can lead to a god-like state-fulness?
11/16/2010 -- What can science know?
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).
05/29/2009 -- The Transcendent baffles.
05/06/2009 --We need to consider the contributions of the autodidact who has escaped abandonment.
Modified: 01/25/2011
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
How we know
Month, Day: Glory, Questions (Justice)
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, in the SAQ #40, notes how we know a couple of different ways which need to be better understood as both are important to human affairs.
The first way is familiar to anyone who has taken a course in an educational institute (which will be predominately all humans, at some point) or who has worked mechanically or who has performed scientific experiments. It is a way of effort, not necessarily in the form of a cramming session.
The second way is intuitive and has fallen out of favor in modern times. This latter way is how the Manifestations know, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá says.
The first method is "the outcome of effort and study," whereas the second method " is an existing thing; it is an absolute gift." Both are required for a balanced science. The prior post discussed how our study of Creation must be augmented by UHJ input. Essentially, this input would be of both types. It will be interesting to look at this further.
Since we know that another Manifestation will not be here for several 100s of years (with 1000 years being the most usual separation), the intuitive method will have limits for the individual and for groups, except that the UHJ limits will be lessor (think of infallibilities as being nested just like topologies).
Both types of methods can be used to resolve issues related to our 'quasi-empirical' limitations.
Remarks:
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).
08/16/2009 -- The Operational group is approaching, and ontology is primal. One area of focus, as suggested by this post, will be mind-body studies. Somehow, insights from the Writings ought to have importance, teleological and operational.
05/29/2009 -- The Transcendent baffles.
Modified: 09/06/2009
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, in the SAQ #40, notes how we know a couple of different ways which need to be better understood as both are important to human affairs.
The first way is familiar to anyone who has taken a course in an educational institute (which will be predominately all humans, at some point) or who has worked mechanically or who has performed scientific experiments. It is a way of effort, not necessarily in the form of a cramming session.
The second way is intuitive and has fallen out of favor in modern times. This latter way is how the Manifestations know, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá says.
The first method is "the outcome of effort and study," whereas the second method " is an existing thing; it is an absolute gift." Both are required for a balanced science. The prior post discussed how our study of Creation must be augmented by UHJ input. Essentially, this input would be of both types. It will be interesting to look at this further.
Since we know that another Manifestation will not be here for several 100s of years (with 1000 years being the most usual separation), the intuitive method will have limits for the individual and for groups, except that the UHJ limits will be lessor (think of infallibilities as being nested just like topologies).
Both types of methods can be used to resolve issues related to our 'quasi-empirical' limitations.
Remarks:
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).
08/16/2009 -- The Operational group is approaching, and ontology is primal. One area of focus, as suggested by this post, will be mind-body studies. Somehow, insights from the Writings ought to have importance, teleological and operational.
05/29/2009 -- The Transcendent baffles.
Modified: 09/06/2009
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Creation based science
Month, Day: Glory, Words (Grace)
Of course, science deals with Creation, and we can allow for many other terms for the physical existence that we all share (Nature, Life, ..., ). The quasi-empirical issue, though, addresses how we, as part of what we study, cannot separate ourselves, even through mathematics.
If we leave aside for the moment that science can deal with how we know God, we, basically, need to base our science on what we can study. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, in the SAQ #16, notes a couple of things that could help found the basis, namely "in exterior existence there is nothing that is not material" and "in the exterior world there is nothing that is not sensible" .
So, the Creation that we'll study is both material and sensible. That is, we can know it, even if the method of knowing is remote via sensors and computation. Too, though, the intuition of the human will come into play, including that which is Divinely-inspired (UHJ's contribution to the ontology).
Those arguments related to Creationism can be left aside, too, as what we can study is there; for much of the case, as we've already seen, questions of origin are 'immaterial' (pun intended).
Remarks:
09/17/2010 -- God's gift of science.
02/24/2010 -- Ascendant to Transcendent.
10/11/2009 -- Will, an operational imperative for science.
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.
05/29/2009 -- The Transcendent baffles.
Modified: 09/17/2010
Of course, science deals with Creation, and we can allow for many other terms for the physical existence that we all share (Nature, Life, ..., ). The quasi-empirical issue, though, addresses how we, as part of what we study, cannot separate ourselves, even through mathematics.
If we leave aside for the moment that science can deal with how we know God, we, basically, need to base our science on what we can study. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, in the SAQ #16, notes a couple of things that could help found the basis, namely "in exterior existence there is nothing that is not material" and "in the exterior world there is nothing that is not sensible" .
So, the Creation that we'll study is both material and sensible. That is, we can know it, even if the method of knowing is remote via sensors and computation. Too, though, the intuition of the human will come into play, including that which is Divinely-inspired (UHJ's contribution to the ontology).
Those arguments related to Creationism can be left aside, too, as what we can study is there; for much of the case, as we've already seen, questions of origin are 'immaterial' (pun intended).
Remarks:
09/17/2010 -- God's gift of science.
02/24/2010 -- Ascendant to Transcendent.
10/11/2009 -- Will, an operational imperative for science.
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.
05/29/2009 -- The Transcendent baffles.
Modified: 09/17/2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
