Hey again all,
I fear that I am sounding a little more like a crazy person than I intended.
To Kyu, my thanks for your reply.
About the sciences... I think it is like the overall god argument, we are not meant to see eye to eye on this subject. I am personally not very fond of what the 'scientific journals' have to say. Like I said earlier, a simple and fundamental failure to recognize the importance of the intent behind the method. Science is really good at controlling, or learning out of a need to control. I think very strongly that that is unhealthy. Trying to control things you cannot is impossibly stressful, and very dangerous in the long term. Realizing and being humble about the things you cannot control is much better for your quality of life.
The strain that modern sciences and medicine is two-fold. It is not adapting fast enough for the exponential growth curve of human society and civilization. And, either as a result of or causing the adaptation issue, people realizing there is a far better way to think about medicine/physics/reality. By better I mean more honest, healthy, based in reality and 'true' in it's best sense. I see that strain very clearly, but we are standing in different parts of the world.
A flawless rendition of the entirety of the reality we all share would pop our heads off. I know that for a fact, I've seen it happen. I don't know what the epitome of reality is, and I am lead to doubt that you (or ANYone) does. I also don't tell myself that the level of general human knowledge at this point is perfect, that we are done learning.
I don't think we have the same definitions for some of these words. I think of allopathic medicine as the school of treating symptom, from the beginning a failure to think about what is best. I assume naturopathic is based on the root word natural. I put a lot more faith in the natural medicinal solutions than modern. I could go into why, but it seems unimportant. In my life I have seen pharmaceutical medicine destroy very much more than it has created. I have felt what it is like to be under their control (the pharms, not the doctors per se) and cannot call it healthy in any way. All in all though, all I have is opinions.
I would not try to convert you in those shoes. I think you are wrong, but I do not want to make you live what I call is 'right'. One of my rules I didn't mention when I trailed off. Never tell anyone what to do. Makes it very clear who stands on which side. I already wrote that it seems really foolish to me to say that the process of evolution created the process of evolution. If I am seeing things that aren't there, you may be seeing processes that are not.
I thank you for you time, and await your reply.
Quickly to EvF then. Thank you as well for your note. I feel more so that I am getting a little circular in the posts we share. I am only trying to show what I beleive in, in detail, withouot actually trying to convince you. I don't want to talk about evidence, because (like I said to Kyu) I don't think it will be very constructive. My goal is not to convince you that I am right.
In that light, the fact that god personally makes sense to me is a good reason... to me. I believe in two ideas of god. There is (to only me) undeniable evidence and proof that there are forces much larger than I at play here. That is the universal god, yes. I don't know too much for sure about it, and I don't tell myself I know things about it that I do not. Oh yeah, and by it I mean 'they' because I cannot support monotheism. Then there is my depiction of god that is very personal and does exist only in my head. She is my best attempt to relate to the one true god (to use an old term), but is admittedly an imperfect effigy. Much like my distorted personal reality, as mimicry or misunderstanding of the most real reality we all share. So god exists, and an imaginary friend I happen to have named god and representing the real god also exists. One in truth, and one only true in my own head. That is the longest way of saying 'yes and no'.
My assumption of reason is not based on whether or not I want there to be reason. I tried for a long, long time to look at the world free of what I wanted to see, or what I wanted it to be. I think there has to be reason because all of this (being alive, and all the other life around me) would be far to complex, careful and extravagant to just so have happened. There being no reason for life is a terrible reason for life. I don't want there to be intent or meaning, I just am pretty sure there is.
I appreciated this question the most. I am thinking from the bottom up, not the top down. There does not have to be a reason why 'it happened this way', but it happened this way 'for a reason'. Something didn't intend for life to be this way in particular, but I think someone intended for life to be. Another way, the 'way things are now' has a cause in the momentum of past cause and effect relationships. That is a meaning, a reason. Not a human intent, but just a reason within the workings of the machine (of life). I could not agree more that there are a lot of fucked up things in this world. I don't blame god for those things though. I blame free will. You want no evil? Then you don't get to make any choices or mistakes. The world is fucked, but it is still the most magnificent thing we know. If god made it, we are destroying it (and her?). I don't think us being alone in the universe is very believable anymore. It's about adapting to new information as it becomes available. There is more and more information to suggest we are the furthest thing from alone out here. It is a waste, yes. But also the greatest story ever told. Good and bad, coexisting to make a shade of grey. That god would make a world in which she could cease to exist (makes me smile).
I hope I am making a shred of sense. My biggest thing is that I don't want to argue towards converting you or anyone. I don't want to talk about my evidence, I want to talk about my thoughts and ideas. I want to hear your thoughts and ideas. Not about control, just along for the ride. Thank you very kindly for your time in writing, and especially reading this gargantuan post. Until next time.
"There must be some kind of way out of here,"
-Pip
I fear that I am sounding a little more like a crazy person than I intended.
To Kyu, my thanks for your reply.
Quote:After all that just means you believe it is better, it's just your opinion.About the level of value or worth in any given theology or mythology... I said that I try to judge the moral messages and ideas within a book against my best model of a 'healthy' state-of-mind or way of living. With my mind. Your quote above is one of my points. All I think I have is my opinion, and I am never hesitant to divulge so. I can say 'To me, the Tao is much better for your life than the Necronomicon', but not that it just is (and has to be for everyone) better. If you can think of a better way for me to judge the value of these works, I would be curious to hear. A process that does not result in me reaching my own conclusions through the best of my understanding...
About the sciences... I think it is like the overall god argument, we are not meant to see eye to eye on this subject. I am personally not very fond of what the 'scientific journals' have to say. Like I said earlier, a simple and fundamental failure to recognize the importance of the intent behind the method. Science is really good at controlling, or learning out of a need to control. I think very strongly that that is unhealthy. Trying to control things you cannot is impossibly stressful, and very dangerous in the long term. Realizing and being humble about the things you cannot control is much better for your quality of life.
The strain that modern sciences and medicine is two-fold. It is not adapting fast enough for the exponential growth curve of human society and civilization. And, either as a result of or causing the adaptation issue, people realizing there is a far better way to think about medicine/physics/reality. By better I mean more honest, healthy, based in reality and 'true' in it's best sense. I see that strain very clearly, but we are standing in different parts of the world.
A flawless rendition of the entirety of the reality we all share would pop our heads off. I know that for a fact, I've seen it happen. I don't know what the epitome of reality is, and I am lead to doubt that you (or ANYone) does. I also don't tell myself that the level of general human knowledge at this point is perfect, that we are done learning.
I don't think we have the same definitions for some of these words. I think of allopathic medicine as the school of treating symptom, from the beginning a failure to think about what is best. I assume naturopathic is based on the root word natural. I put a lot more faith in the natural medicinal solutions than modern. I could go into why, but it seems unimportant. In my life I have seen pharmaceutical medicine destroy very much more than it has created. I have felt what it is like to be under their control (the pharms, not the doctors per se) and cannot call it healthy in any way. All in all though, all I have is opinions.
I would not try to convert you in those shoes. I think you are wrong, but I do not want to make you live what I call is 'right'. One of my rules I didn't mention when I trailed off. Never tell anyone what to do. Makes it very clear who stands on which side. I already wrote that it seems really foolish to me to say that the process of evolution created the process of evolution. If I am seeing things that aren't there, you may be seeing processes that are not.
I thank you for you time, and await your reply.
Quickly to EvF then. Thank you as well for your note. I feel more so that I am getting a little circular in the posts we share. I am only trying to show what I beleive in, in detail, withouot actually trying to convince you. I don't want to talk about evidence, because (like I said to Kyu) I don't think it will be very constructive. My goal is not to convince you that I am right.
In that light, the fact that god personally makes sense to me is a good reason... to me. I believe in two ideas of god. There is (to only me) undeniable evidence and proof that there are forces much larger than I at play here. That is the universal god, yes. I don't know too much for sure about it, and I don't tell myself I know things about it that I do not. Oh yeah, and by it I mean 'they' because I cannot support monotheism. Then there is my depiction of god that is very personal and does exist only in my head. She is my best attempt to relate to the one true god (to use an old term), but is admittedly an imperfect effigy. Much like my distorted personal reality, as mimicry or misunderstanding of the most real reality we all share. So god exists, and an imaginary friend I happen to have named god and representing the real god also exists. One in truth, and one only true in my own head. That is the longest way of saying 'yes and no'.
My assumption of reason is not based on whether or not I want there to be reason. I tried for a long, long time to look at the world free of what I wanted to see, or what I wanted it to be. I think there has to be reason because all of this (being alive, and all the other life around me) would be far to complex, careful and extravagant to just so have happened. There being no reason for life is a terrible reason for life. I don't want there to be intent or meaning, I just am pretty sure there is.
Quote:Why do you assume it has to be THIS way for a reason? It's not like it's been perfectly created. There are a lot of fucked up things in the world - and as far as we know, so far, out of all the known planets in the universe - ours is the only one with life on it - what a waste eh?
I appreciated this question the most. I am thinking from the bottom up, not the top down. There does not have to be a reason why 'it happened this way', but it happened this way 'for a reason'. Something didn't intend for life to be this way in particular, but I think someone intended for life to be. Another way, the 'way things are now' has a cause in the momentum of past cause and effect relationships. That is a meaning, a reason. Not a human intent, but just a reason within the workings of the machine (of life). I could not agree more that there are a lot of fucked up things in this world. I don't blame god for those things though. I blame free will. You want no evil? Then you don't get to make any choices or mistakes. The world is fucked, but it is still the most magnificent thing we know. If god made it, we are destroying it (and her?). I don't think us being alone in the universe is very believable anymore. It's about adapting to new information as it becomes available. There is more and more information to suggest we are the furthest thing from alone out here. It is a waste, yes. But also the greatest story ever told. Good and bad, coexisting to make a shade of grey. That god would make a world in which she could cease to exist (makes me smile).
I hope I am making a shred of sense. My biggest thing is that I don't want to argue towards converting you or anyone. I don't want to talk about my evidence, I want to talk about my thoughts and ideas. I want to hear your thoughts and ideas. Not about control, just along for the ride. Thank you very kindly for your time in writing, and especially reading this gargantuan post. Until next time.
"There must be some kind of way out of here,"
-Pip
