Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "True science" must include God?
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 16 of 47 (212491)
05-29-2005 11:19 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by crashfrog
05-29-2005 11:02 PM


Crashfrog, I submit the superluminal realm is substantiation of the spiritual and so-called supernatural realm.
Seems like it went right over your head, but super would mean above,right?
So a realm beyond, faster than the speed of light, could by definition be called supernatural.
Also, different contexts means exactly that. Natural means something in a science context, a food context, a cosmetic context....you get the drift. Don't be asinine. You got my point and said you agree with it somewhat.
I am stating if it's real, it's part of reality, regardless of the term we call it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by crashfrog, posted 05-29-2005 11:02 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by crashfrog, posted 05-29-2005 11:38 PM randman has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 17 of 47 (212506)
05-29-2005 11:38 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by randman
05-29-2005 11:19 PM


Crashfrog, I submit the superluminal realm is substantiation of the spiritual and so-called supernatural realm.
Since that realm is not populated by ghosts, nor spirits, nor is capable of gifting humans with magic or paranormal powers, I submit that claim is a priori ridiculous. You might just as coherently assert that Cleveland is substantiation of the spirital realm.
So a realm beyond, faster than the speed of light, could by definition be called supernatural.
As a realm governed by physical law, and capable of being affected by and affecting the world of matter we're familiar with, that realm, by definition, is natural, not supernatural.
I am stating if it's real, it's part of reality, regardless of the term we call it.
If it's real, part of reality, and it's something we can detect, then it's part of the natural world, by definition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by randman, posted 05-29-2005 11:19 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by randman, posted 05-30-2005 12:02 AM crashfrog has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 18 of 47 (212519)
05-30-2005 12:02 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by crashfrog
05-29-2005 11:38 PM


Fine, it's part of the natural world. The spiritual world is part of the natural world, by definition.
You wrote.
"Since that realm is not populated by ghosts, nor spirits, nor is capable of gifting humans with magic or paranormal powers, I submit that claim is a priori ridiculous. "
We have no idea in terms of the science what that realm is populated by. All we have at this stage is evidence it exists, and is fundamental to the structure of the universe, and that probably consciousness interacts with that realm.
Consciousness in the broader sense includes "spirit" by any definition of that term so we do in fact have some evidence that realm is populated by spirit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by crashfrog, posted 05-29-2005 11:38 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by crashfrog, posted 05-30-2005 12:11 AM randman has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 19 of 47 (212525)
05-30-2005 12:11 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by randman
05-30-2005 12:02 AM


We have no idea in terms of the science what that realm is populated by.
Ignorance can never be the foundation of an argument.
Consciousness in the broader sense includes "spirit" by any definition of that term so we do in fact have some evidence that realm is populated by spirit.
Er, no, we don't. Our consciousness resides in this realm, not that one, remember?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by randman, posted 05-30-2005 12:02 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by randman, posted 05-30-2005 1:18 AM crashfrog has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 20 of 47 (212538)
05-30-2005 1:18 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by crashfrog
05-30-2005 12:11 AM


You and I must have different definition of spirit. The Bible says we all have a spirit and a soul, and our spirits must by definition reside in a spiritual realm.
You may be confusing the use of the term spirits in reference to ghosts.
Anyway, a hypothesis starts out with a certain level of knowledge and a certain level of ignorance. My hypothesis is that judging by near complete similarities to the biblical view of physics if you would or how the world really works to quantum physic's principles, so much so I cannot find a principle in disagreement, and the fact the quantum physics specifically agrees with spiritual principles on the nature of reality in terms of existence here on earth, I submit the idea that quantum physics is touching on the realm called spiritual.
This message has been edited by randman, 05-30-2005 01:19 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by crashfrog, posted 05-30-2005 12:11 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by crashfrog, posted 05-30-2005 1:42 AM randman has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 21 of 47 (212542)
05-30-2005 1:42 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by randman
05-30-2005 1:18 AM


The Bible says we all have a spirit and a soul
I don't know what those things are, and I certainly don't have either one.
What I do have is a consciousness, and it resides in my brain (loosely speaking), in the physical world.
My hypothesis is that judging by near complete similarities to the biblical view of physics
I'm sorry, "Biblical view of physics?" If physics is right there in the Bible how come it took 2000 years to figure it out? Isn't it rather suspicious that nobody was able to decode physics from the Bible until after we'd figured it out without the Bible's help?
if you would or how the world really works to quantum physic's principles, so much so I cannot find a principle in disagreement, and the fact the quantum physics specifically agrees with spiritual principles on the nature of reality in terms of existence here on earth, I submit the idea that quantum physics is touching on the realm called spiritual.
I submit that you're fooling yourself - you looked for something so hard that you found it wherever you looked. Just like the Law of Fives.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by randman, posted 05-30-2005 1:18 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by randman, posted 05-30-2005 2:34 AM crashfrog has replied
 Message 29 by 1.61803, posted 05-31-2005 2:58 PM crashfrog has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 22 of 47 (212555)
05-30-2005 2:34 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by crashfrog
05-30-2005 1:42 AM


"What I do have is a consciousness, and it resides in my brain (loosely speaking), in the physical world."
What constitutes the physical world?
Also, I suggest you study up some on QM before assuming I am merelt looking very hard for something and imagining it is there. It's a little hard to discuss this with you since you don't know much about QM, but I can guarantee you this, I was not looking for physics to tell me anything about spirituality, nor were the men like Max Planck, Anton Zellinger, and John Wheeler.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by crashfrog, posted 05-30-2005 1:42 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by crashfrog, posted 05-30-2005 10:01 AM randman has not replied
 Message 25 by AdminAsgara, posted 05-30-2005 10:42 AM randman has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 23 of 47 (212592)
05-30-2005 8:14 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by randman
05-29-2005 2:39 PM


quote:
If it's part of reality, it is part of reality, period, and we can perhaps address it via science. It may be, like string theory, that we lack the technology to test for it, but the idea that what we call the supernatural is off-limits arbitrarily is, imo, somewhat silly.
Well, how can we tell the difference between a naturalistic phenomena that we do not understand, and may not ever have the technological sophistication or the plain ol' smarts to ever understand, and a supernaturally caused phenomena?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by randman, posted 05-29-2005 2:39 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by randman, posted 05-30-2005 1:12 PM nator has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 24 of 47 (212604)
05-30-2005 10:01 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by randman
05-30-2005 2:34 AM


What constitutes the physical world?
The smallest closed system that can encapsulate all phenomena that we observe.
Also, I suggest you study up some on QM before assuming I am merelt looking very hard for something and imagining it is there.
Been there, done that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by randman, posted 05-30-2005 2:34 AM randman has not replied

  
AdminAsgara
Administrator (Idle past 2303 days)
Posts: 2073
From: The Universe
Joined: 10-11-2003


Message 25 of 47 (212616)
05-30-2005 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by randman
05-30-2005 2:34 AM


randman,
I think everyone would appreciate if you'd use the forum quote functions when you reply to others. It makes posts much easier to follow.
quote:
here is one type of quote
here is another
randman writes:
here is how you personalize the quote
Please click the peek button on the far bottom right of each post (not page) to see how this is formatted.
Also, when you reply to a post, on the left of the reply window are three links:
In my signature box are other links that are helpful to know, including our Forum Guidelines.

AdminAsgara Queen of the Universe

http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by randman, posted 05-30-2005 2:34 AM randman has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 26 of 47 (212641)
05-30-2005 1:12 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by nator
05-30-2005 8:14 AM


Thank you AdminAsqara. I'll try it out with this one.
Well, how can we tell the difference between a naturalistic phenomena that we do not understand, and may not ever have the technological sophistication or the plain ol' smarts to ever understand, and a supernaturally caused phenomena?
I submit that the difference is aritrary, and the distinction should not be made between "natural" and "supernatural" phenomena. If there is a phenomena, then it is real and part of reality and should be accepted as such. Of course, that doesn't mean there are not areas of science and research we lack the technological ability to test for, such as string theory for example, but there is no need, from a science perspective, to categorize reality into separate parts.
When we want to discuss references to phenomena or ideas that come from outside of science, then of course we will have to see where they would fit as far as reality. In this discussion, I think it is germane to consider where and if spirituality fits into reality. Most spiritual traditions share some common features about their view on reality.
In the past, it was not so possible to scientifically determine if those ideas had merit, but quantum physics has begun, for 80s years now, to accidentally verify the exact same principles, which is powerful evidence that the realms QM effects involves are what certain traditions have called "spiritual."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by nator, posted 05-30-2005 8:14 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by nator, posted 05-31-2005 8:52 AM randman has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 27 of 47 (212798)
05-31-2005 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by randman
05-30-2005 1:12 PM


quote:
I submit that the difference is aritrary, and the distinction should not be made between "natural" and "supernatural" phenomena. If there is a phenomena, then it is real and part of reality and should be accepted as such.
How is the supernatural testable or falsifiable?
If the "supernatuiral" obeys physical laws, then it wouldn't be supernatural, it would be natural.
If the supernatural does not obey natural law, then we cannot make predictions about a supernatural phenomena, nor can a supernatural phenomena be falsifiable if it does not obey natural law.
so, I fail to see how we can address the supernatural with the tools of science.
quote:
Of course, that doesn't mean there are not areas of science and research we lack the technological ability to test for, such as string theory for example, but there is no need, from a science perspective, to categorize reality into separate parts.
If we cannot predict or falsify a supernatural event, how can the investigative tools of science be used to understand it?
Wouldn't it just end up being subjective experience of individuals?
quote:
When we want to discuss references to phenomena or ideas that come from outside of science, then of course we will have to see where they would fit as far as reality. In this discussion, I think it is germane to consider where and if spirituality fits into reality. Most spiritual traditions share some common features about their view on reality.
In the past, it was not so possible to scientifically determine if those ideas had merit, but quantum physics has begun, for 80s years now, to accidentally verify the exact same principles, which is powerful evidence that the realms QM effects involves are what certain traditions have called "spiritual."
Well, if true (and I am not convinced that QM verifies anything of the sort) then I would conclude that what certain traditions have called "spiritual" have not been spiritual at all, but natural in origin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by randman, posted 05-30-2005 1:12 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by randman, posted 05-31-2005 1:14 PM nator has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 28 of 47 (212837)
05-31-2005 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by nator
05-31-2005 8:52 AM


The answer is it is not supernatural necessarily, from a scientific perspective. It may be merely something that entails a process we have not observed yet, or involved principles that we have not understood yet.
In other words, even if it is something that "God did", there is no reason to dismiss it as out of the realm of science since it may be we can discover how God did it, and perhaps even duplicate it. The mechanism for creation may, in other words, be embedded within the creation.
If it is some sort of direct engineering of reality, which could be involved in either special creation or intervention into a process, we should expect it to involve the study of patterns and information as the program for something, and that this would be more fundamental to physical reality than the physicality of the object itself, and we see this in quantum physics.
We should expect to see some sort of direct connection between matter and the appearance of that pattern into a physical form and intelligence and consciousness, and we see that, or that has been the dominant interpretation of what we see in quantum physics.
We should expect to see suggestions of a dimension beyond and working outside the parameters of what we once considered space-time, the physical world that moves slower or at the speed of light so that it has been observed, and we now have strong evidence with the principle of entanglement that the structure of the universe contains a superluminal realm where information transfer occurs superluminally.
The aspects most ascribe to God, consciousness and Intelligence, or an Intelligent Force, etc,....and what one would logically assume would be involved if one were to begin to uncover the creative mechanism's God uses, well, we are seeing that discovered in quantum physics in my opinion.
Of course, physicists despite noticing the parallels from time to time are not in the field of trying to prove theological or spiritual claims. It is happening because they are just going where the evidence leads, which is what all of science is suppossed to be doing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by nator, posted 05-31-2005 8:52 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by nator, posted 05-31-2005 9:59 PM randman has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 29 of 47 (212867)
05-31-2005 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by crashfrog
05-30-2005 1:42 AM


crashfrog writes:
What I do have is a consciousness, and it resides in my brain (loosely speaking),. in the physical world.
You have a consciousness? cool can I see it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by crashfrog, posted 05-30-2005 1:42 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by crashfrog, posted 05-31-2005 8:17 PM 1.61803 has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 30 of 47 (212922)
05-31-2005 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by 1.61803
05-31-2005 2:58 PM


You have a consciousness?
I'm honestly not sure about that. Sure seems like I do.
If I have a consciousness, it's only in the same sense that I have an idea, or an opinion. As far as it's possible to have any of those things, I have a consciousness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by 1.61803, posted 05-31-2005 2:58 PM 1.61803 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024