That double negative indicates non-dogmatic uncertainty and moderate skepticism. I too, am uncertain about The Hard Problem of Consciousness, because the (yes/no) empirical & reductionist scientific method is inadequate to the task of objectively observing the subjective (self-conscious) observer. Yet some scientists & philosophers are using holistic (both/and) methods to make sense of the simplicity in complexity, and the order in chaos*1*2. They hope to shed light on the mystery of how Life & Mind emerged from the random roilings of matter.However, I am not sure that the energy from the moment of the Big Bang is not also a unifying energy evolving into self-consciousness. — Athena
Book Overview
There can be no doubt that as a matter of fact a religious life, exclusively pursued, does tend to make the person exceptional and eccentric. I speak not now of your ordinary religious believer, who follows the conventional observances of his country, whether it be Buddhist, Christian, or Mohammedan. His religion has been made for him by others, communicated to him by tradition, determined to fixed forms by imitation, and retained by habit. It would profit us little to study this second-hand religious life. We must make search rather for the original experiences which were the pattern-setters to all this mass of suggested feeling and imitated conduct. These experiences we can only find in individuals for whom religion exists not as a dull habit, but as an acute fever rather. But such individuals are "geniuses" in the religious line; and like many other geniuses who have brought forth fruits effective enough for commemoration in the pages of biography, such religious geniuses have often shown symptoms of nervous instability. Even more perhaps than other kinds of genius, religious leaders have been subject to abnormal psychical visitations. Invariably they have been creatures of exalted emotional sensibility. Often they have led a discordant inner life, and had melancholy during a part of their career. They have known no measure, been liable to obsessions and fixed ideas; and frequently they have fallen into trances, heard voices, seen visions, and presented all sorts of peculiarities which are ordinarily classed as pathological. Often, moreover, these pathological features in their career have helped to give them their religious authority and influence.
That double negative indicates non-dogmatic uncertainty and moderate skepticism. I too, am uncertain about The Hard Problem of Consciousness, because the (yes/no) empirical & reductionist scientific method is inadequate to the task of objectively observing the subjective (self-conscious) observer. Yet some scientists & philosophers are using holistic (both/and) methods to make sense of the simplicity in complexity, and the order in chaos*1*2. They hope to shed light on the mystery of how Life & Mind emerged from the random roilings of matter. — Gnomon
I too have developed a philosophical theory, based primarily on Information Science (Complexity, Systems, Holism, etc). It postulates that the "unifying energy" of evolution is a combination of Information (direction) and Causation (Energy) : like a guided missile instead of an aimless bomb. It's not Deterministic (absolute certainty), but Probabilistic (optional). The theory has little to do with proving the existence of God. But it does point toward the necessity of a First Cause/Prime Mover/Programmer of some kind to light the fuse of the Big Bang bomb. :smile: — Gnomon
I just came across this video ("synchronicity?")Of course, I know that I am so influenced by Jung, as you are with Spinoza. I wonder how can the Jungian worldview can be compared and contrasted with that of Spinoza? — Jack Cummins
At times, I side with theists and at times with atheists and some agnostics. I find that the idea of 'God' and what it means for such a being to exist to be one of the most extremely perplexing philosophy problems. — Jack Cummins
Consider 2 scenarios:whether or not one believes in God does affect one's approach and interpretation of all that happens in life. — Jack Cummins
Modern Holistic thinking began in the 20th century along with Quantum physics : entanglement is holistic. But most scientists avoid the term "holism" due to its association with New Age "nuts". Other related terms are Cybernetics (control & communication in complex systems) ; General Systems Theory (interrelated parts that work together as a whole) ; Complexity Theory (systems that are too complicated to understand by analysis into parts) ; Emergence (novel features of whole systems that are not found in the parts) ; Synthesis (combining isolated elements into interrelated systems) ; Synergy (energetic interaction to produce an effect that is more than the sum of parts).Wow, that is delicious. I have a big problem with binary thinking. I did not know that holistic thinking is being practiced by some scientists. That makes me hopeful. — Athena
And to which God should one pray?This is so different from the idea of a personal relationship with God which is held by many religious believers. The idea of prayer only makes sense from that perspective. — Jack Cummins
Whether one's ideas about reality are 'delusions' or not is culture dependent. The standard idea of delusion is if one's ideas are not shared by others. For example, if someone believes oneself to be a Messiah it is usually thought to be delusional. Generally, those with unusual beliefs are regarded as eccentric, or referred to a psychiatrist.
Even within psychiatry, mental health professionals ideas vary, ranging from fundamentalists to hardcore atheists. This affects the way the professionals interpret the ideas of psychosis and delusions. Nevertheless, one common ground is thinkers about the impact of the ideas. If a person is seen as a risk to oneself or others there is more concern about delusional beliefs.
Of course, it is possible for people in power or an entire nation to be delusional, in a 'harmful' way. Politics involves ideas about reality, ranging from leaders fighting for religious beliefs to Marxism based on dialectical materialism. — Jack Cummins
According to Epicurus, while death is final, "the gods or God" represent moral ideals to aspire to and live by (re: aponia, ataraxia ... "bliss").That is because if one doesn't continue in any form what is the significance of God in relation to one's own personal identity. — Jack Cummins
"Personal pain and suffering" define you?How would I know who I am without my personal pain and suffering? — Athena
E.g. friendship (vide Epicurus), solidarity (vide Camus) ...What would give my life purpose and meaning?
Well, unless you're an Advaita Vedantist, you are not "God", so ...What would hold me separate from God?
You're welcome, though I don't believe I've explained anything. Anyway, I do agree with Spinoza that understanding makes one "free" and Einstein's quip "Any fool can know; the point is to understand". :wink:Thanks for the explanation of being free. I think I will pursue knowledge.
"Personal pain and suffering" define you? — 180 Proof
The thought of an afterlife is certainly appealing, but wishful thinking seems to me a poor guide to truth. And AFAIK, there's no evidence of it (unless you buy into claims about houses being haunted). Still, believing in an afterlife is not usually harmful (unless it leads one to risk or forgeit his life, or that of others), and it could be emotionally beneficial. — Relativist
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.