“…all the ancient philosophers and religious thinkers and scientists would have held vastly different opinions (about self, the nature of things) if they had the knowledge that we now have of the quantum world and its many implications….” – se
Well Simon, of course I do not know. I would guess that a few might modify their words and/or views. Since there has been an enormous wealth of varying views, my guess is that many would hold to their underlying epistemology too. Here, I will add for clarity of my inner sense about these things that the majority of today’s ‘science’ results mainly in data and/or belief systems. In fact, some of ancient (and modern) Vedanta at its core is remarkably similar if not the same as much of current day cosmology and/or ‘quantum world’. With enough research, this can be confirmed. So, apparently ‘they’ (just people like us…with different social dogmas and cultural views) were able to ascertain the nature of the cosmos without using all of our external technological instruments…or any, in fact. Perhaps their inner technology was more advanced? Again, the differing theories about the microcosms is also quite similar. A most obvious example would be to look at the origin of the word ‘atom’. If you are addressing things like ‘charm’, this too has some, although as best as I can tell, not quite direct analogies as much of the rest. If you are talking string or M-Brane theory, again, these are but mental gymnastics and have little or nothing to do with either the world of appearances or the world of science…at least for now. Overall, the later is based on 19th century math. So, when you mention ‘implications’, I can only guess at what you mean. For me, there is almost nothing that would change core apprehensions about the nature of reality. I guess I could reverse the question and ask how you would act and/or how your opinions would differ IF you studied for years the cosmology and philosophy of the past and applied it to your life and reality as it is today? My guess is that the innate ‘you’ wouldn’t change at all and the ego/relative ‘you’ would focus more on these more ancient notions of what self and consciousness are than on scientific studies and/or experiments and/or today’s physics. As interesting as scientific inquiry is today, it does little when it comes to answering ultimate questions. Western philosophy overall is at a dead end, having taken some 'wrong' turns over the centuries. On Sep 6, 4:54 am, Simon Ewins <[email protected]> wrote: > > “And yet you still feel there is a non-material aspect to > > consciousness? Why is that?” – SM > > > Because I am not talking about ‘spiritual’ sensations nor basing my > > comments on feelings alone (“And yet you still FEEL…[caps mine]”). > > Nowhere in my comments did I mention spirit, did I? If so, I don’t > > remember doing so. > > Sorry for the confusion, I used 'feel' as synonymous with believe or accept. > > Thanks for the background on your journeys, I find it immensely > interesting to discover how others arrive at their conclusions. > > The only thought of relevance that I have at the moment is to ask you > if you do not think that all the ancient philosophers and religious > thinkers and scientists would have held vastly different opinions > (about self, the nature of things) if they had the knowledge that we > now have of the quantum world and its many implications. > > I honestly think that the majority of great thinkers from ancient > times and cultures would not have said what they said if they kne what > we know. On Sep 6, 4:54 am, Simon Ewins <[email protected]> wrote: > > “And yet you still feel there is a non-material aspect to > > consciousness? Why is that?” – SM > > > Because I am not talking about ‘spiritual’ sensations nor basing my > > comments on feelings alone (“And yet you still FEEL…[caps mine]”). > > Nowhere in my comments did I mention spirit, did I? If so, I don’t > > remember doing so. > > Sorry for the confusion, I used 'feel' as synonymous with believe or accept. > > Thanks for the background on your journeys, I find it immensely > interesting to discover how others arrive at their conclusions. > > The only thought of relevance that I have at the moment is to ask you > if you do not think that all the ancient philosophers and religious > thinkers and scientists would have held vastly different opinions > (about self, the nature of things) if they had the knowledge that we > now have of the quantum world and its many implications. > > I honestly think that the majority of great thinkers from ancient > times and cultures would not have said what they said if they kne what > we know. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
