RE: Freedom of Religion
February 8, 2012 at 7:38 pm
(This post was last modified: February 8, 2012 at 7:53 pm by Abracadabra.)
Ok, Genkaus, I own you my deepest apologies.
You are absolutely correct. I haven't been reading your posts in detail. I've been skimming over them very quickly, because I'm reading other threads and trying to carry on too many conversations at once.
I've gone back and re-read your presentation in more detail. However I have heard these kinds of philosophical and purely "epistemological" arguments before. And I have disagreements with them as well. So I'll address that in this post.
Actually you are depending on scientific ideas far more than you realize. And I'll cover that after the next quote. In the meantime I'd like to explain very briefly what I thought you were arguing originally. After all you did ask me what I arguing against.
I thought you were attempting to demand that objective reality must come before consciousness based on scientific observations. In other words, I thought you were arguing that it's clear from what we already know from the physical universe that it must have existed before anyone evolved to think about it.
That's why I addressed the issues of how shaky our knowledge truly is concerning both the nature of that spacetime fabric, and far more importantly about what TIME even means with respect to that fabric.
Ok, having explained why I sometimes act like an asshole, let me move on to address your actual concerns:
The reason that you cannot hold your conclusions out as being absolutes for other people is because you have already made your own arbitrary premises before you've reached your conclusion.
Look at what you are demanding here specifically:
You're totally assuming to have complete and absolute knowledge of what the nature of any "Spiritual World" must be like.
In other words you're limiting it to only one of two possiblities. It's either "physical" in some sense, or it must be pure consciousness without any physics associated with it at all.
I'm not claiming that a "Spiritual World" must necessarily be "non-physical" in the sense of having absolutely no structure of any kind whatsoever. That wouldn't make any sense to me either.
So you can rule out #2 altogether as being nonsensical. I'm all for that.
If there exists a "Spiritual" essence to reality, then it must have some type of 'structure'. Otherwise what sense would it even make to say that it "exists"?
So we're stuck with something along the lines of #1, but not as you have it written.
You say,"Which means, there is a waking world which is independent of our consciousness".
Why? Why does it need to be independent of our consciousness?
That's a totally arbitrary demand on your part.
If there is a spirit world, the structure of that world and the consciousness of that world may indeed be totally inseparable.
It just is what it is.
And that entity (whatever it is) is precisely what we are calling "God".
That is more along the lines of how I imagine things to be.
You seem to be taking the stance that it must be one or the other, but that it can't be a interdependent combination of both.
I ask you, "Why can't it be both?"
What's your argument of why it can't be both?
~~~~~~~
My fundamental philosophy is that "spirit" (whatever spirit might be) does indeed have structure.
In other words, it's "physical" in some sense. Perhaps not in the sense of spacetime physics.
As far as I'm concerned the cosmic mind (i.e. spirit) can exist in the ocean of quantum fields somehow.
It gives rise to all of spacetime, and we are it.
Everything we are is it.
Our bodies.
Our minds.
Our conscousness.
Tat t'vam asi, - We are it.
That's the idea.
You're claiming to be able to rule that idea out?
I don't see where your epistemological argument ruled anything out.
Your argument is built upon totally arbitrary premises and axioms that you totally made up.
(i.e. reality is either pure consciousness, or pure form) but it can't be both.
Why can't it be both?
Who are you to demand how God must be limited.
Well I finally did address Genkaus' epistemology. I misunderstood precisely where he was coming from the first time, but in the end it didn't make much difference, his argument still didn't stand.
In fact, Genkaus seems to think that I haven't thought through my philosophies very much or something. But I've already considered the kinds of objections that he's been raising. In fact, it's extremely rare to find anyone who can offer an idea that I haven't already considered before. Life is almost becoming boring because of this.
Well, a very slight clue.
As I pointed out in my post concerning the concept of time. We may have a wonderful theory in General Relativity. But in truth, when it comes right down to fully understanding the nature of time, that theory only raises more problems than it solves.
Now we are stuck having to realize that there can be no such thing as a concrete "absolute now" and from this we are forced to realize that multiple different "nows" must simultaneously exist! And from that it follows that all of the entire past, and future must also exist at all times!
Yikes!
Talk about an incomprehensible irrational idea. This implies that life may be like a movie film with all the 'nows' already created and sitting on frames somewhere. In fact there are scientists who actually believe that this must necessarily be the case.
That's a pretty weird thought I think.
So witches don't exist, but cosmic movie projector operators do?
And that's "rational"?
Christian - A moron who believes that an all-benevolent God can simultaneously be a hateful jealous male-chauvinistic pig.
Wiccan - The epitome of cerebral evolution having mastered the magical powers of the universe and is in eternal harmony with the mind of God.
Atheist - An ill-defined term that means something different to everyone who uses it.
~~~~~
Luke 23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.
Clearly Jesus (a fictitious character or otherwise) will forgive people if they merely know not what they do
For the Bible Tells us so!
Wiccan - The epitome of cerebral evolution having mastered the magical powers of the universe and is in eternal harmony with the mind of God.
Atheist - An ill-defined term that means something different to everyone who uses it.
~~~~~
Luke 23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.
Clearly Jesus (a fictitious character or otherwise) will forgive people if they merely know not what they do
For the Bible Tells us so!
