Bill, Obviously the whole of reality is not contained in science or human mental models of it. Nevertheless if science and human mental models of reality were not sufficiently accurate representations of reality humans could not exist, nor could science produce the enormous volume of successes it has...
This is self evident.... Edgar On Apr 30, 2013, at 9:35 PM, Bill! wrote: > Edgar, > > I would describe the evolution of scientific thought more as 'continually > tweaking conceptual models to produce the expected results until there are so > many tweaks that a new model is produced, and then the process continues, ad > infinitum... > > Here is an analogy of the problem: > > Reality is amorphous. Conceptual models, being logical, are square. > > It's impossible to put an amorphous shape into a square hole without" > 1. making the square hold so large is accepts the entire amorphous shape but > has a lot of empty space that is unused, unnecessary. In the case of a > conceptual model this is misleading - in other words inaccurate. > 2. forcing the amorphous shape into a square hole which cannot accommodate > all of it causing some of the shape to be either undefined or ignored. In the > case of a conceptual model this is misleading - in other words inaccurate. > > Reality not rational, not logical and therefore cannot be contained in > (defined by) a rational conceptual model - like science. > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > > > William, > > > > That is true and in fact actually proves that reason progressively grows > > closer and closer to an accurate description of reality... > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > On Apr 30, 2013, at 12:11 PM, William Rintala wrote: > > > > > > > > In college I had a Philosophy professor, an Existentialist, who was fond > > > of saying about Science "it is impossible to place a quantitative value > > > on a phenomenological realm". So it would seem that Phenomenologists and > > > Exitentialist agree with both of you. He was also fond of quoting A.N > > > Whitehead "the (scientific) truths that we hold most dear today will, in > > > the future, be found to be false or be found to be so inconsequential as > > > to be trivial". > > > > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@...> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Tue, April 30, 2013 10:00:34 AM > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Someone Else's Opinion on What is Real and What is > > > Not... > > > > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > The word you're using below that's problematic for me is 'accurate'. I'd > > > accept 'rational' of course, or even 'useful', but not accurate. > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > Sure science is "human mental models of what reality might be". But > > > > what is the reality that science so accurately models if it itself is > > > > not equally complex or more? > > > > > > > > How could a complex mental model actually accurately model something > > > > that was not equally complex or more? > > > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 30, 2013, at 8:13 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > > > > > You're right about science, but it's not reality. It's human mental > > > > > models of what reality might be. It's the human insistence on trying > > > > > to define reality by using rational mental models that makes it so > > > > > complex. > > > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Bob, > > > > > > > > > > > > One can have a simple life, a simple relationship with reality, but > > > > > > reality itself, its workings, is enormously complicated.... This is > > > > > > well known by anyone who has seriously studied the sciences. > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 29, 2013, at 8:33 PM, bobthomas564 wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Edgar - I don't want to open up a new battle front, you and > > > > > > > Bill are having a lot of fun, BUT I always thought that > > > > > > > 'Marvellous, chopping wood and fetching water' was about the > > > > > > > simplicity of reality? and some of the enlightenment poems point > > > > > > > to the simplicity of it all. It must be simple if Hui Neng, with > > > > > > > no training, could undo some of the most complex questions based > > > > > > > on his enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you disagree? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bob, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reality IS complicated... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 2013, at 9:07 PM, bobthomas564 wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Edgar - You remind me of a line from a favourite rock n > > > > > > > > > roll song of > > > > > > > > > mine by a group called Garbage. the line is "I'm only happy > > > > > > > > > when it's > > > > > > > > > complicated" . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From "Only happy when it rains" if you like rock n roll > > > > > > > > > here's' the > > > > > > > > > utube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esEdC0c3YI4 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another great line is 'pour your misery down on me' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill and Merle, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here Bill is arguing against something I've never said so > > > > > > > > > > he's not > > > > > > > > > arguing against me, he's arguing against his own demons... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apparently Bill is continually beset by naughty little Zen > > > > > > > > > > demons > > > > > > > > > whispering he's wrong that he can't quite manage to exorcise! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill, when you realize that all demons are actually Buddhas > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > disguise you will understand! > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 2013, at 7:52 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes. I'm afraid we have a fundamental disagreement here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think zen practice empties out your mind, and you think > > > > > > > > > > > it fills > > > > > > > > > it up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you want to Rock/Paper/Scissors for it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..Bill! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen edgarowen@ > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As usual you contradict the Zen teachings which I > > > > > > > > > > > > support.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 26, 2013, at 9:38 PM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I see your problem now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You think progress in zen is measured in ADDING ON > > > > > > > > > > > > > things - like > > > > > > > > > knowledge. It's not. You progress in zen by TAKING AWAY > > > > > > > > > things until you > > > > > > > > > get down to Just THIS! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You don't progress from Level 2 to Level 3. You > > > > > > > > > > > > > progress from > > > > > > > > > Level 2 to Level 1 and then to Level 0 which is actually > > > > > > > > > no-level - > > > > > > > > > Buddha Nature. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You're trying to fill you cup up instead of emptying > > > > > > > > > > > > > it...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's Niels, not Neal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Go back to stage one and get it right. Do NOT pass > > > > > > > > > > > > > > go! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 26, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *** Sorry, I misread your post below and Replied > > > > > > > > > incorrectly. I erased that but if you get the posts by email > > > > > > > > > you might > > > > > > > > > have received it. If you did please disregard. My corrected > > > > > > > > > post is *** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you mean Stage Three? Neal and I are done > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with Stage > > > > > > > > > Two and and now ready for Stage One! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the quote in which Bohr correctly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > expresses > > > > > > > > > stage two "mountains are no longer mountains". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stage three is when those unreal illusory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things are > > > > > > > > > realized to be the true reality. Then mountains become > > > > > > > > > mountains again.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Both Bill and Bohr haven't reached that stage > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yet... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 26, 2013, at 5:38 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe Edgar will listen to him... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
