I see it as his British style wit. I get the same thing chatting with a
Welsh friend at Starbucks. ;-)
Also taking a "peek" at "The Peak" I see our esteemed moderator is
hanging out there more than here! :-D
On 12/18/2014 02:03 AM, TurquoiseBee [email protected]
[FairfieldLife] wrote:
*/Just wanted to step in and thank you once again for the clarity of
your posts, Salyavin.
/*
*/
/*
*/Back in the Bad Old Days when reading this form was for me always
combined with the idea that doing so would force me to wade through
dozens of posts trying to "get" me personally to get to the occasional
gem of wisdom, your posts provided sufficient gems to make it worthwhile.
/*
*/
/*
*/Now that most of those who churned out the stuff I had to wade
through are gone, your posts are still pretty gem-like. I may not
always have something to say in response to them, but that's most
often because you've said them so well there is nothing more to add.
Thanks.../*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* salyavin808 <[email protected]>
*To:* [email protected]
*Sent:* Thursday, December 18, 2014 7:42 AM
*Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Marco Polo Arrives
---In [email protected], <s3raphita@...> wrote :
Any sort of god must be immune to entropy. And that would need an
impressive explanation.
The Absolute is outside time and space. Entropy is a theory about
phenomenal change.
I think you meant to say "The absolute, if it exists, is outside space
and time" ;-)
We should take comfort from the fact that everything is explainable
and that everything has turned out to have a simple explanation.
Science limits itself to the measurable.
Everything is measurable, or how do you know it exists at all? Even if
we discover that the world cannot be without some other phenomena we
will know some of its attributes and will thus have made a measurement
of sorts.
Watch what's flowing through your mind right at this instant. How much
- or rather how little - of that variety and novelty can you express
in language or quantify?
If my mind had a pause button I could express all of it.
Imagine a situation involving guilt or shame; or feeling how ephemeral
and fragile our lives are. In fact, try to picture what it must be
like in those last moments for a man facing a firing squad. Could that
inner "final judgement" be captured in a scientific report?
Yes. Its bound to be a mixture of guilt, terror, regret, mania, maybe
even laughter caused by shock. All these things can be understood as
both physical, hormonal responses and the subjective stuff we know and
love. How they interface is the mystery here.
---In [email protected], <[email protected]> wrote :
---In [email protected], <s3raphita@...> wrote :
Re salyavin808: The problem here is the metaphors taking themselves
too seriously. You probably think that's ducking the question but it's
just avoiding getting pulled into the endless cycle of ever more
mysterious sophistry. We won't work it out how minds work from the
inside, at least no one ever has, so it's probably be a good idea to
hang five and work out how it's all actually put together and start
again from there.
Yeah, but . . . it's the "actually put together" bit that is soaked in
metaphysical assumptions. The type of person who tells us he's a
hard-nosed, down-to-earth, "just the facts ma'am" type is saying that
*the real world* must conform to his IDEAL view that the world is
no-nonsense sensible.
I agree about not taking metaphors too literally.
We can't escape from the language trap.
Then we have to be sure we haven't created one for ourselves. Hence
the building of "my" world relies on nothing other than the simplest
explanation of the data and not on assuming things we simply think -
or want - to be true. So I exclude everything that doesn't fit in with
the cornerstones of knowledge, most importantly the theory of
evolution by natural selection. This applies to everything and not
just us. If consciousness is some sort of eternal being that survives
us after death and is even some sort of quantum god thing, then
Darwinism has to go out of the window.
Physics would have to be completely rewritten too, I imagine the laws
of thermodynamics would be the first in the bin, which is a shame as
they work rather well, but any sort of god must be immune to entropy.
And that would need an impressive explanation.
So if we assume the universe is a no-nonsense sensible place that
works according to fathomable laws rather than for the convenience of
invisible creators wecan get an ideal that allows for the further
research needed to explain what we don't know rather than one where
things are assumed to be beyond us and where our interpretations are
seen as just as valid as demonstrable theories. I worry that a lot of
intelligent people are continually looking in the wrong place for
their gods and that they will get all the publicity and research money
because their answers are what people want to hear. The net is full of
crap research funded by some religion or other with an agenda to push.
Trouble is, we are still in a 'god of the gaps' situation with
consciousness and intelligence but not enough to be able to say that
they are part of some sort of extra-material reality of which we
currently know nothing. We should take comfort from the fact that
everything is explainable and that everything has turned out to have a
simple explanation that requires no add-on supernatural powers but we
like to reserve them for everything unexplained all the same. The
human condition I suppose.
So my "ideal" is based on what we can see and the knowledge that we
are great at inventing stories and so everything that doesn't fit in
with the known laws of nature is most likely our imagination. I
convert for evidence though...
