RE: Ego-- harmful delusion or pragmatic necessity?
April 29, 2015 at 3:27 pm
(This post was last modified: April 29, 2015 at 3:28 pm by henryp.)
(April 28, 2015 at 7:01 pm)bennyboy Wrote: Well, if science is our best path toward truth, and is based on honest and accurate observation, then the point would be to completely remove bias and delusion from the process of observation, therefore resulting in the purest possible science, and the most efficient pursuit of truth.
I'm not so sure that an egoless person would be a tree. Such a person would still be able to interact with the world: talk, walk, think, observe.
(April 28, 2015 at 12:51 pm)wallym Wrote: If you aren't going to change how you live based on the scientific conclusions, what's the point of pursuing the issue? Makes more sense just to live in ignorance and not worry about it.
That's the thing that mystifies me-- how rarely the scientific process is turned toward the self. We want to know every little thing about the universe, but have so little understanding of what it is like to be ourselves.
Perhaps it's an issue of motivation. Some wish to know to satisfy a natural impulse they have. But the "I fucking love science" crowd is only satisfying their impulse to mimic the praised behavior of understanding the universe/ourselves?
I think the science/philosophical arguments are happening, it just hasn't gotten the stigma of being 'intellectual' yet to draw in people who wish to believe they are intellectuals.
Unfortunately, for now, the discourse seems to be very Theistic-like, in that it's "I have a 'feeling' of how things are, and will look to create a reality that leads to that conclusion." Even if it involves believing in a few imaginary non-scientific things.
