Mytho-poetic? There is enough beauty and poetry in science as it is. We don't need made up stories. Giovanni
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree that secularism is in crisis, but this doesn't mean we must > return to a theocratic rule which is the danger implied by movements > like radical orthodoxy. > Secularism neeeds a more anthropological (mytho-poetic) foundation > rather than the narrow structures of a particular science or religion. > > Harry > > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote: > > FYI > > > > Seevn part radio show called Myth of the Secular. This about part six. > > > > > http://www.cbc.ca/ideas/episodes/2012/10/29/the-myth-of-the-secular-part-6/ > > > > <<In 1990 British theologian John Milbank published a > > five-hundred-page manifesto called Theology and Social Theory: Beyond > > Secular Reason. The book argued that theology should stop deferring to > > social theories that are just second-hand theology and declare itself, > > once again, the queen of the sciences. The book led, in time, to a > > movement called "Radical Orthodoxy." IDEAS producer David Cayley > > profiles John Milbank. > > The English poet William Blake once wrote that humanity must and will > > have some religion - the only question is which religion. British > > theologian John Milbank agrees. A purely secular society, in > > Milbank's view, is simply not viable. The only choice in our time, he > > says, is between religion and nihilism. But religion for him means > > something more than just a private moment with God on a Sunday morning > > - it means a way of life. Milbank belongs to a movement called Radical > > Orthodoxy. Under its banner, he and a group of like-minded colleagues > > have argued that modern Western societies have lost touch with > > authentic Christianity and, as a result, are now living in a > > spiritually flattened world.>> > > > > > > Harry > > > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> You've made my point better than I. For when you are studying the ones > and > >> zeros wherever they may persist, you are in fact studying the software. > The > >> ones and zeros are not hardware, they're software. > >> > >> Much like the soul. We can spend a hundred lifetimes studying neuron > >> chemical reactions, electrical impulses, cellular structure of brain > cells > >> and other psychological theories and mumbo-jumbo; we will never > understand > >> how Human consciousness works. To understand the human soul, one needs > to > >> understand its creator. Much like studying the software requires an > >> understanding of Microsoft Software Engineer's design methods and > >> techniques, in fact, a understanding of the man himself. > >> > >> Tell me, can you reverse engineer the entire windows operating system > from > >> the ones and zeros of machine code? Doesn't understanding windows > require > >> understanding of its design at a higher level? not at the machine code > >> level? possibly by interviewing the designer and studying his work? > Why > >> would one think he can understand the human soul by studying the > individual > >> ones and zeros of the neurons? > >> > >> You see, this issue goes deeper than just discussions about the human > soul. > >> This issue involves our humanistic prederilection to avoid > acknowledging the > >> creator. We try our best to understand ourselves without studying the > human > >> blueprint. Such efforts are always doom to fail, much like the > fallacies of > >> Darwinian Evolution. > >> > >> > >> > >> Jojo > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: Patrick Ellul > >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > >> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 1:43 PM > >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Quantum Soul? > >> > >> If I studied close enough the inside of a computer that has MS Windows > >> installed on it, without ever switching it on, I can still see and > >> understand the expected behaviour. The software program is persisted as > ones > >> and zeros on a memory device. > >> > >> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Any psychological/psychiatric/philosophical attempt to understand the > soul > >>> is doom to failure from the onset. > >>> > >>> Let says you're a hardware/ASIC/Electronics/IC engineer who designed > the > >>> Pentuim chip. Without understanding of the software, can you discern > the > >>> operation of a PC from your understanding of the > >>> hardware/Chips/IC/CPU/GPU/etc? At best, you understanding would be > severely > >>> incomplete and faulty. Software is the intangible thing that controls > the > >>> behavior of the computer. Software controls the hardware. > >>> > >>> On the same token, experts in > >>> Psychology/Psychiatry/Philosophy/Sociology/Humanism/etc, can never > hope to > >>> completely understand the Human Soul. It is that intangible entity - > the > >>> soul, that controls the hardware consisting of your brain > cells/neurons, > >>> etc. The Software soul is what needs to be understood for us to > understand > >>> the behavior of man. You need to study the soul, not the brain. The > brain > >>> is simply a mechanism that the soul controls much like the CPU chip is > the > >>> mechanism that MS Windows controls. The analogy is apt and accurate. > >>> > >>> Hence, one is wasting their time trying to study all the ideas of these > >>> philosophers/psychologists/psychiatrists/etc. They are at best > severely > >>> incomplete, at worst gravely misleading. > >>> > >>> If you want to understand the spiritual soul, go to the one who wrote > the > >>> software soul. Study his book - the Bible to have a better > understanding of > >>> human behavior. > >>> > >>> > >>> Jojo > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry Blanton" <hohlr...@gmail.com > > > >>> To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 10:15 PM > >>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Quantum Soul? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> I think Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff have the best explanation of > >>>> consciousness to date. It's called Orchestrated Objective Reduction, > >>>> or Orch-OR. The two actually developed the idea separately, Sir > >>>> Penrose being a physicist and Hameroff being a physician who > >>>> specialized in anesthesia and cancer research. Roger was seeking a > >>>> model of the brain that did not require computation. Hameroff wanted > >>>> to know how anesthesia worked and where the conscious went when under. > >>>> Penrose theorizes that spacetime is granular at the size of the > >>>> Planck length and that quantum superposition is linked to the > >>>> curvature. Orchestrated Reduction is the collapse of the > >>>> superposition. > >>>> > >>>> Hameroff brought in the neuron microtubles which provide the > >>>> structure. He sees a synchronous oscillation in neural MT can > >>>> influence other neurons. Together they see these electrons as a sea > >>>> embedded in the geometry of spacetime. > >>>> > >>>> Needless to say, they have many critics. :-) > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Patrick > >> > >> www.tRacePerfect.com > >> The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect! > >> The quickest puzzle ever! > >> > >
