On 17 Jan 2014, at 13:34, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Is it a coincidence that:
-During the cold war the image of the universe and the theory that
explained it was an inmense nuclear explosion?
-In the world dominated by the multicultural ideology and computers,
it is a multiverse and/or a computer simulation the preferred
paradigm?
That is not fortuitous for me. That is what I was trying to say with
the "canal effect" post time ago.
For me the deepest question is not what is true about the ultimate
reality.
I think it is the only deep question worth of interest.
That is a question that never ever can be answered without
faith.
I totally agree with you.
Thus, that question it is not scientific even in the broadest
meaning that scientific inquiry might be considered.
I totally disagree with you.
The question is scientific.
May be the answer is not scientific.
That is why I love comp, it shows this, in some sense.
Normal machine have faith.
The real mystery is why they can lost faith. That is the complex
process, somehow.
With comp, like in plotinus, souls fall. The fall of the soul, and the
rise of the matter, is basically the same phenomenon, seen from two
different perspective.
The deepest
question that puzzles me the most is the psychology of men across
ages asking themselves about the ultimate reality from which religion
of any kind derives, including the modern secularist ideologies.
People tries theories. The real progress are in the means of
justification.
Yesterday:
Theorem 4: God made it all
Proof: easy, because if you don't say so we will burn you alive with
your kids.
Today:
Theorem 4: God made it all.
Proof: easy, because if you don't say so, you will not be published.
Of course we are still in the dark age.
Science has not yet begun, because science still deny the faith it
needs, vitally.
Enlightenment has been only half enlightenment, with theology kept by
"politics".
Half-enlightenment might be worst that no enlighnment, because it
provides the technology without the faith. It provide the science
without the conscience. That is a promise for catastrophes, and
catastrophes merchandising. It is the culprit for making bandits into
power.
And for the psychology of men shaped by natural selection can not and
will never be separated from a form of expected _good_ for him and/or
for their society. That good can derive from many sources that are of
two kinds: either the good for himself or alternatively, the good for
the society as a whole, with a middle, that promote the good
exclusively for the initiated ones of a reduced group .
The goods of the first kind are whatever idea that increase self
power, self worship. The second group correspond with what promotes
predictive power over the environment and in general, self
confidence in the community, as well as good moral rules.
Whathever ultimate explanation is ever created by the Mytopoetic
faculty of the mind, that was shaped by natural selection that faculty
match truth and good (and how believable can be by others) That is my
hypothesis.
We just build lanterns to look at the Unknown.
That faculty construct and/or accept a myth about oneself, their
society and the nature of the ultimate reality. It does not matter if
the mythic speculation depart from an scientific or properly mythic
inquiry. Because the last step in the nature of ultimate reality need
a leap on faith. This leap is produced by the mytopoetic, unconscious
element that match Truth and Good.
Is it not Truth and God. The truth we search, because we have faith
in, not the one we pretend to have find it (which is always a lie,
provably so in the comp theory).
On creating myths about oneself, the mythopoesis produces whatever
that favours oneself that is at the same time credible by others. That
is corroborated by scientists. The same happens with the mythos
produced for the own society and for the nature of the reality (in
which he and his society must have a teleological mission to be
coherent).
Teleological mission? You mean "goal"?
Whatever of the possible goods for oneself or the society is more
considered in the mythic elaboration depend on each one´s aims and
personality, and the zeitgeist of the age. The good for oneself can be
a great evil for the rest.
Really? Not sure.
But first your mythos must be believed by
others, to be believable by others, the result of the mytopoesis
should be fashionable.
You can not talk about daemons in the internet age. but you can make
believable your mytopoesis talking about "science" "energies" and
ovnis instead of religion spirits and miracles respectively. So you
can have your seat in the university or a chord of young women after
you, the privileged messenger of the creator aliens.
Should each one consider the nature of the goodness of their myths
that you, no doubt, have.
Yeah... I believe in the myth that 2+2=4.
It is the myth that some human dislike, but that's because they have
been terrorized at school, I think.
Bruno
--
Alberto.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
