Philosophy of electric universe

What is a human being? What is life? Can science give us reliable answers to such questions? The electricity of life. The meaning of human consciousness. Are we alone? Are the traditional contests between science and religion still relevant? Does the word "spirit" still hold meaning today?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:26 pm

Reality is those things that don't go away if you stop believing in them...


I'm reminded of story I once read about someone asking a well-educated lady from Ireland whether or not she believed in Leprechauns.
Her reply was 'Of course not, but they exist nevertheless'.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby Plasmatic » Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:27 pm

Do you believe then that "atheism" is not a faith base, a paradigm, or Grey Cloud's "religion"? Do you further believe that this atheistic perspective does not inform your conclusions regarding the EU or other aspects of your life? If the answer to either of these two queries is "yes", then I submit that you are still "mis-integrating".



Which brings us back to where we started , and the recognition that well have to agree to disagree. ;)

Atheism is a lack of belief in any god. For me because it is a concept that "requires" faith , or acceptance of unprovable ,contradictory concepts.
"Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification"......" I am therefore Ill think"
Ayn Rand
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Aristotle
Plasmatic
 
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:14 pm

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby Plasmatic » Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:59 pm

First of all, you err in suggesting I do not believe in objective "non-contradictory" reality.


Say Web , I just wanted to point out for the sake of understanding between us , I didnt say you dont believe in objective reality. I cant seem to see why you thought so?
"Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification"......" I am therefore Ill think"
Ayn Rand
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Aristotle
Plasmatic
 
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:14 pm

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby webolife » Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:55 pm

I may have misunderstood. I thought it was implied in this statement of yours:
"Both of these quotes sum up the qualities that make one a skeptic in the philisophical sense. The belief that one cannot excape their imperfect sensory perceptions and therefor all concepts or "paradigms" ar essentially equally invalid because objectivity is not possible."
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:08 pm

webolife wrote:I may have misunderstood. I thought it was implied in this statement of yours:
"Both of these quotes sum up the qualities that make one a skeptic in the philisophical sense. The belief that one cannot excape their imperfect sensory perceptions and therefor all concepts or "paradigms" ar essentially equally invalid because objectivity is not possible."


If I may be permitted to adjudicate, I would declare it a draw and award you both one point each.

A point to Plasmatic for the first sentence of his quote in that I see Weboflife as a skeptic in the philosophical sense, i.e. one who is convinced only by irrefutable logic or direct personal experience. Socrates was known as the Great Skeptic.

A point to Weboflife as the second sentence of Plasmatic's quote refers more to a sophist or cynic. The former would profess whichever concept or paradigm brought the fattest paycheck and the latter wouldn't give a damn about anything. Neither of which would apply to Weboflife methinks.

Honours even and harmony restored to the Dao.
Goodnight all.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby Plasmatic » Thu Apr 17, 2008 7:59 pm

Say , G C I appreaciate the change of gears and such. You may find this info on philosophical Scepticism revealing.


However, philosophical doubt - or global scepticism - seems to deny the possibility of there being any conclusive way of finding out. For instance, if in regard to the question of life on some other planet someone argued, "We can never really know that there is not life on another planet because it may be undetectable to us," then that person is a sceptic.

This sort of doubt is largely responsible for the reputation which philosophy seems to have in some quarters of being absurd and unrealistic. "Do you think that table is really there?" the philosopher asks. "You think you are talking to me, but what proof do you have?" However, the underlying point is a serious one: how can we ever really know something with absolute certainty? Remember, no matter how certain we are, there is always room for doubt. Even something like science, which uses experiment to prove theories, sometimes finds new truths which seem to contradict old ones (Einstein's theory of Relativity, for example).

In summary, scepticism attacks certain beliefs that most of us hold to be true:

It is sometimes possible to be certain about something.
Our senses are mostly trustworthy.
We can eventually find out whether we have been mistaken or not.
It is possible to experience reality as it really is.



More here:


http://www.philosophyonline.co.uk/tok/scepticism4.htm
"Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification"......" I am therefore Ill think"
Ayn Rand
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Aristotle
Plasmatic
 
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:14 pm

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby webolife » Fri Apr 18, 2008 9:04 am

Plasmatic wrote:
In summary, scepticism attacks certain beliefs that most of us hold to be true:

It is sometimes possible to be certain about something.
Our senses are mostly trustworthy.
We can eventually find out whether we have been mistaken or not.
It is possible to experience reality as it really is.


Well, that sums it up then. I wholeheartedly and full-mindedly ascribe to these four statements,
therefore I must not be a skeptic. Read my post on page 3, 1st post, of "Question about current powering the sun" thread and see if this does not confirm my "un-skepticism."
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby Plasmatic » Fri Apr 18, 2008 9:42 am

Ok Web , Im gonna need you to help understand how your statements on that thread arent contradictions to these:

It does not matter whether you have certain facts to support your view, or I have certain facts to support mine... all facts available will be seen to support either view, depending on the faith of the viewer. Likewise the conclusions drawn by each viewer are predetermined (predictable) from an understanding of each one's faith base.
This is what makes science such a tentative endeavor, and why paradigms persit only for so long, until overthrown by another paradigm.
It is also why it is so important that we keep in dialogue with opposing viewpoints. Each person is compelled by inevitable bias (your naturalistic, materialistic, deterministic bias is clearly evident) to draw conclusions reflective of that bias, no matter how "objective" their observations of reality are. Assuming each person is using sound methodologies and impeccable logic, their conclusions must differ.
This is the way of science, and why debate must accompany every claim.


Skepticisms whole point is that we cannot excape our own "bias" both intellectually and perceptually.
If "what we see is what we get" then how do we need "faith" to believe in the facts of reality we are "seeing"
"
Im sure im not too far off by supposing your familiar with "the evidence of things NOT seen" ;)
"Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification"......" I am therefore Ill think"
Ayn Rand
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Aristotle
Plasmatic
 
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:14 pm

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby webolife » Fri Apr 18, 2008 12:11 pm

You may not like my answer to this, Plasmo.
Knowledge comes from study, study is limited by each researcher's time and focus. Focus is clearly determined by the expectation of a particular result (or perhaps the expectation of contradiction of some other presupposition). Hypothesis drives research drives conclusions drives further hypotheses. I'm sure you don't dispute this. Now what level of expectation one may bring to one's study certainly corresponds to a measurable degree of "faith". If we could just "see" it right out, then why study further? However, the fullness of our vision is severely and irreparably limited by our perspective, hence the absolute necessity of dialoguing with others of differing perspectives. If there were no order in the universe, what value would there be in the pursuit of a "theory of everything?" If I believe that that order is absolute yet my view of it is limited, how does that contradict with the idea that I can believe what I see? I trust it because I know it is limited! If I begin to believe I see all, then I frustrate and deceive myself. If I believe that there is one who does see all and is the originator/designer of the universal order, it may focus my faith more in that direction, than perhaps in a direction of eternal matter and energy explaining all structures and functions in the universe. Still I see the universe as knowable, despite my own limitations. I see the Truth as absolute, despite my knowledge of it being partial. I'm sure I'm not too far off by supposing you're familiar with, "For now I see in part, and know in part, but when the perfect is come, then I shall know as I am known"?
Thank you for the privlege of your question.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby Plasmatic » Fri Apr 18, 2008 2:15 pm

Ahh... so your a skeptic only until "that which is perfect has come " I get it ...... :lol: ;) Lets table it ,Its been fun.
"Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification"......" I am therefore Ill think"
Ayn Rand
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Aristotle
Plasmatic
 
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:14 pm

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby whitenightf3 » Thu Sep 11, 2008 6:20 am

You, Weboflife and I are, say looking at a red car. It doesnt matter that it is a car, it's just a 3D object. Let us further assume that we all have 20/20 vision, are all the same distance away and that all else is equal. We 'look' at the car and pick up the light being relected from it. The light comes through the eyes, travels aloong the optic nerve to the cerebral cortex and is passed to the area of the brain which deals with visuals (your graphics card). There the image is re-assembled and we see the car. But that is taking part in our brains yet we 'see' the car on the other side of the street (or where ever). Do we all see the same car? (Is the car we each see identical to that which the other two see?)

Your explanation is quite good but they do say a picture is worth a thousand words this short film really elucidates the points you make in your post:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... &plindex=0


All are but parts of one stupendous whole, whose body is nature is, and God the soul.
Alexander Pope
whitenightf3
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 4:30 am

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby webolife » Thu Sep 11, 2008 12:56 pm

You've picked up on a very old thread, whiteknight.
The car [or whatever] is real and integral with itself.
We see it from different vantage points, however, so the discussion of our differing perspectives is important to the understanding of the whole [car]. No one person can claim to see the whole, but our understanding is aided by the more perspectives entering the discussion. Our faith, assumptions, presumptions, define our vantage point and therefore our conclusions, regardless of how scientific or "objective" our observation techniques are. This is why Plasmatic labeled me a skeptic, but I do not equate my conclusions with the reality I am observing...[the car] is real and whole, and there's simply way more to it than what I can see. At the same time, however I acknowledge an absolute reality [of the car], unlike the classical skeptic, whose idiosyncratic conclusions are his reality.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby whitenightf3 » Fri Sep 12, 2008 12:27 pm

It is sometimes possible to be certain about something.
Our senses are mostly trustworthy.

This statement is a logical fallacy any Philosopher will tell you that, in fact our senses are constantly lying to us, which is why we can never know the nature of reality I think you should read Nagel's book What's it like to be a bat.
Most people who are not aware of the philosophical arguments regarding reality always appeal to the Cogito even if they have never heard of it LOL. I was on a forum once and some idiot did just that, you ask them to prove that the world is real and 99% of the time they appeal to the senses. Any Philosopher (even those who understand where Nagel is coming from) will tell you that you are employing circular logic which is a logical fallacy!
I wish we had more profound thinkers in this world and we would not have this big mess.

Reality 90% Illusion 10% Confusion
Albert Einstein
whitenightf3
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 4:30 am

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby webolife » Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:37 pm

Well, Whiteknight, this thread drifted far afield of it's topic long ago...
Clearly however, you are the skeptic, and I am not.
Modern modern science, what I suppose most call post-modern science, has also drifted far from the objectivity which characterized "modern" science since the 16th Century, leaving a gap that may someday be filled by the EU.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Philosophy of electric universe

Unread postby whitenightf3 » Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:44 pm

LOL when you make Statements like you are a sceptic you should qualify it and say in what way you perceive me to be sceptical. I would say I have gone past that stage and am now a Gnostic.
whitenightf3
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 4:30 am

PreviousNext

Return to The Human Question

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests