Re: FW: Re fwd - How science is really done
Sorry Ray, I cannot possibly deal with long
posts like this. The few paragraphs I did read were
totally incomprehensible to me... Oncc I retire
I'll have more time... meanwhile, if it is not
possible to sum it up, I have to leave it...
(I have to make a living... If anyone offers me some
money for discussing stuff on the net full-time,
please do, I think I just found my true vocation...)
Eva
Eva Durant wrote:
reality is a word symbol for what we believe is out there.
no, it was/is/will be there whether we believe it or not.
By reality I mean the physical world and all it's past
present and future variable permutations.
We have different perceptions and beliefs, but
as we are getting better at communication,
the overlapping bits are approximating the
real thing better and better.
When we die does
that universe we believe continue or does the "out there" that may or may
not be what we believe continue? If you call that reality then you must
call what you believe it to be something else, right?
Never occured to me to call reality all the
different beliefs people have, though hopefully
these converge to the reality I defined above
with time.
Eva
Thanks Eva,
well said,
just a few things stirred by your words.
Sounds to me like you are saying "your 'word' and 'reality' are 'one' and the
'word' is eternal."
We say "the 'word' was the beginning for human consciousness and all words are
human, including the word and concept 'reality'." What we call "reality" is
a construct of the human consciousness to try to make some kind of system of
that which seems external to us according to our senses.
The word "reality" for me is the same as Plato's Cave.When we come out of
the Cave we construct whole civilizations in "ideas" like clouds but the
remnant from the Cave (the belief in objectivity) keeps us from being
comfortable living in the clouds.
The Christians construct a Heaven in the Clouds but then make it out of
concrete. But the metaphor of the clouds speaks for a different state of
being than the word "reality" defines. In that "reality" there is "object"
relations.
Amongst my people, life is a relationship that is not (human life vs. object)
but (alive-alive) with different states of 'aliveness.' Each being master of
their own consciousness. If you plant a human in the earth, like a carrot,
the human dies but we call a carrot an object without consciousness because it
can't talk. One of the problems I have on this list, sometimes, is that it
feels like everyone is expected to be "carrots."
For me, the whole concept of "objectivity" only has meaning as a transitional
phase of pedagogy when humans break things apart to articulate them before they
put them back together again. We do the same with the so-called "systems" of
anatomy in the body when in "reality" (there's that word again) they are not
separate and in fact the lymph system is so contrary even to the idea of
systems that we ignore it's rules at our peril being much more comfortable with
systems that stay in their own channels and don't mix. Of course apprentice
Doctors make their mistakes on cadavers while apprentice economists practice on
us. (As my pedagogy instructor said in college, "An MD's failures are left on
the table while your's meets you in the streets, you had better learn your
craft and succeed at it!")
I think all we can say about what you seem to be calling "eternal reality" is
that it seems, according to all human consciousness and exploration to "exist"
i.e. that it "is."But beyond that everything is "up for grabs." I tend to
accept the belief that the only way that existence can be described is
metaphorically because anything you say about it is ultimately both true and
untrue.
So where does that put science? Truths are what you all have built your lives
upon from your traditions. Truths are how you define your reality, (not
necessarily the same as mine). Truths can be changed but must be moved slowly
and with great respect. They are the "legs" for the stage where you dance your
life. Balance is crucial.Truth is the realm of the Sacred. (The English
word "Sacred" comes from the same root as "Sacrifice.") It is the struggle
and the sacrifice that makes human life have growth and meaning and is
intensely personal i.e. individual. It is this "will to grow and have
meaning" that is the way we participate in the Sacred, a relationship, a dance
if you will.
Religion is not the same as the Sacred but constitutes a mass production
('scale' for all you economists) of individual facts so that groups can
participate on the Truth level.However, there is an inherent oxymoron in
the words Sacred Theology.That is why I love the Iroquois "Great Law."
It begins by everyone admitting that this theology is an agreement between the
people as to a group
Re: FW: Re fwd - How science is really done
I don't quite understand you. Whether sooner or later we can describe accurately all the mechanisms in our brain that makes up our consciousness is not relevant to the existance of reality, it existed before us and if as for Jay's insistence we die out, it will exist without any conscious observers again. And the same goes for other alleged little green observers... Eva This is drifting off-topic, but an important point has to be made here. The psyche _is_ reality. It is the only thing we really know for sure. The external universe of physical objects and forces, while remarkably testable and consistent, is nevertheless only known via inference from the data we receive through the intermediary of our senses. To be true to the scientific method of questioning all assumptions, and testing all hypotheses, and striving to see the world only as it really is, we must recognize this fundamental fact. Consciousness is prior to all our knowledge of the mechanisms of the world, while being invisible to all but incisive introspection. Like water to fishes, something so fundamental and pervasive is necessarily of profound significance, and at some point in the future will yield to our investigations, revealing some unimaginable profound insights into the nature of reality, while doubtless vindicating some of the insights wrested from it by the dodgy methods of research employed by traditonal introspection schools. Researchers in the orthodox western tradition of hard science, who seek the truth by whatever means works, are by no means blind to this aspect of the world - which does not mean that they currently pursue it. The reason for the limited research into the nature of consciousness is that there is currently a lack of effective mechanisms for getting a handle on it. Like the Mulla Nasrudin searching for his keys under the lampost half a block from his darkened doorstep where he dropped them, we do our work in the areas where our methods produce immediate results. -Pete Vincent (at the TRIUMF particle physics lab) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FW: Re fwd - How science is really done
Eva Durant wrote:
reality is a word symbol for what we believe is out there.
no, it was/is/will be there whether we believe it or not.
By reality I mean the physical world and all it's past
present and future variable permutations.
We have different perceptions and beliefs, but
as we are getting better at communication,
the overlapping bits are approximating the
real thing better and better.
When we die does
that universe we believe continue or does the "out there" that may or may
not be what we believe continue? If you call that reality then you must
call what you believe it to be something else, right?
Never occured to me to call reality all the
different beliefs people have, though hopefully
these converge to the reality I defined above
with time.
Eva
Thanks Eva,
well said,
just a few things stirred by your words.
Sounds to me like you are saying "your 'word' and 'reality' are 'one' and the
'word' is eternal."
We say "the 'word' was the beginning for human consciousness and all words are
human, including the word and concept 'reality'." What we call "reality" is
a construct of the human consciousness to try to make some kind of system of
that which seems external to us according to our senses.
The word "reality" for me is the same as Plato's Cave.When we come out of
the Cave we construct whole civilizations in "ideas" like clouds but the
remnant from the Cave (the belief in objectivity) keeps us from being
comfortable living in the clouds.
The Christians construct a Heaven in the Clouds but then make it out of
concrete. But the metaphor of the clouds speaks for a different state of
being than the word "reality" defines. In that "reality" there is "object"
relations.
Amongst my people, life is a relationship that is not (human life vs. object)
but (alive-alive) with different states of 'aliveness.' Each being master of
their own consciousness. If you plant a human in the earth, like a carrot,
the human dies but we call a carrot an object without consciousness because it
can't talk. One of the problems I have on this list, sometimes, is that it
feels like everyone is expected to be "carrots."
For me, the whole concept of "objectivity" only has meaning as a transitional
phase of pedagogy when humans break things apart to articulate them before they
put them back together again. We do the same with the so-called "systems" of
anatomy in the body when in "reality" (there's that word again) they are not
separate and in fact the lymph system is so contrary even to the idea of
systems that we ignore it's rules at our peril being much more comfortable with
systems that stay in their own channels and don't mix. Of course apprentice
Doctors make their mistakes on cadavers while apprentice economists practice on
us. (As my pedagogy instructor said in college, "An MD's failures are left on
the table while your's meets you in the streets, you had better learn your
craft and succeed at it!")
I think all we can say about what you seem to be calling "eternal reality" is
that it seems, according to all human consciousness and exploration to "exist"
i.e. that it "is."But beyond that everything is "up for grabs." I tend to
accept the belief that the only way that existence can be described is
metaphorically because anything you say about it is ultimately both true and
untrue.
So where does that put science? Truths are what you all have built your lives
upon from your traditions. Truths are how you define your reality, (not
necessarily the same as mine). Truths can be changed but must be moved slowly
and with great respect. They are the "legs" for the stage where you dance your
life. Balance is crucial.Truth is the realm of the Sacred. (The English
word "Sacred" comes from the same root as "Sacrifice.") It is the struggle
and the sacrifice that makes human life have growth and meaning and is
intensely personal i.e. individual. It is this "will to grow and have
meaning" that is the way we participate in the Sacred, a relationship, a dance
if you will.
Religion is not the same as the Sacred but constitutes a mass production
('scale' for all you economists) of individual facts so that groups can
participate on the Truth level.However, there is an inherent oxymoron in
the words Sacred Theology.That is why I love the Iroquois "Great Law."
It begins by everyone admitting that this theology is an agreement between the
people as to a group approach to the Sacred.This is where I believe
Westerners with their Creeds ("This I believe") miss the boat. It is another
Oxymoron. Group belief is not eternal but the Sacred or the Great Mystery is.
There are many words for the Sacred, the Great Mystery, and we each
participate, both as individuals and as groups through traditions that go back
to the beginning of time (truths). This is a relationship that is highly
significant in our individual and group paths, but ultimately
Re: FW: Re fwd - How science is really done
Pete, take one step back from the word(concept) 'consciousness' and you bump into language. And I am not talking at all about the linguistics of Chomsky and friends. What is more familiar to fish than water? What is more familiar to us than language? What do we have but language to look at language? Wittgenstein attempts to make the familiar strange. Once it becomes strange we might notice it and then... Pete in part wrote: "Consciousness is prior to all our knowledge of the mechanisms of the world, while being invisible to all but incisive introspection. Like water to fishes, something so fundamental and pervasive is necessarily of profound significance, and at some point in the future will yield to our investigations, revealing some unimaginable profound insights into the nature of reality, while doubtless vindicating some of the insights wrested from it by the dodgy methods of research employed by traditonal introspection schools. Researchers in the orthodox western tradition of hard science, who seek the truth by whatever means works, are by no means blind to this aspect of the world - which does not mean that they currently pursue it. The reason for the limited research into the nature of consciousness is that there is currently a lack of effective mechanisms for getting a handle on it. Like the Mulla Nasrudin searching for his keys under the lampost half a block from his darkened doorstep where he dropped them, we do our work in the areas where our methods produce immediate results." ** * Brian McAndrews, Practicum Coordinator* * Faculty of Education, Queen's University * * Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 * * FAX:(613) 533-6307 Phone (613) 533-6000x74937* * e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]* * "Ethics and aesthetics are one"* * Wittgenstein * ** ** **
Re: FW: Re fwd - How science is really done
Durant wrote: I don't quite understand you. Whether sooner or later we can describe accurately all the mechanisms in our brain that makes up our consciousness is not relevant to the existance of reality, it existed before us and if as for Jay's insistence we die out, it will exist without any conscious observers again. And the same goes for other alleged little green observers... Eva reality is a word symbol for what we believe is out there. When we die does that universe we believe continue or does the "out there" that may or may not be what we believe continue? If you call that reality then you must call what you believe it to be something else, right? REH
