Everything That is Wrong With Modern Science

[seasmith]

[Plasmatic]

The ignorance lies in equating pragmatism with nihilism.

The ignorance lies in equating your opinions with truth and other opinions with lack of knowledge.

"Reasons" are imaginary and exist only in the opinions of individuals. There are no absolutes and no "cosmic meaning." That's all just airy-fairy.

Unfortunaltely both are bankrupt philosophies. Its very sad to see the "practical" veneer that gives such a pretense of respectability and "balance" attempting to undergird such a revolutionary movement as the E.U. Of course thats just my opinion! "There are no absolutes" is an absolute assertion or claim to meaning. The "no belief belief system"....... Is i guess alot less annoying than the pervasive mystical nonsense everywhere.Plus Im an ex choir member on both accounts anyway.

But I am greatful for your contribution to the cause! [not as though I might add to you by saying so! ]

[ColdCowboy]

About the Eye of Horus, I found a nice connection to Phi, the Golden Number.

Look, Phi geometry on the rings of Saturn! Cool!http://www.phimatrix.com/examples.htm


With the sum of the 6 Horus fractions being 63/64 or 0.984375, I realized that this number subtracted from 1(the whole) is precisley 1/64 or .015625 which is the 6th horus fraction, and represents the sense of Touch and hence the Earth. Why is this number/sense the gap between the sum of the parts and the whole, does anyone know the meaning to this?

Back to my little find about the sacred geometry connection between Horus and Phi (this is the only math adventures that excite me! ) I will keep it real by limiting numbers to 6 digits past the dot, just how Horus would like...

1.618033 (phi)
- 0.984375 (Horus)
= .633658 is this number worthless, not so fast! Subtract it from Phi and magical things happen...

1.618033
- 0.633658
= 0.984375 Hah it leads us back to Horus!

I know this is uber noob stuff and only touches the tip of the pyramid, but I was pleased (but not shocked) that my hunch yielded the suspected link. Like I said I'm not a super math-minded guy so I only like the geometry based fun stuff, but funny enough, this area encompasses many profound things not only related to history and engineering/architecture, but also the contructs of order, magnitude, and symmetry in the universe.

[ColdCowboy]

Hello StefanR, I have not had the opportunity to read any works of Boethius, but now you have inspired me to find out just what insights I might share with the ancient sage. On Wiki it says his feast day in the Roman Catholic Church is Oct.23, and my b-day is Oct.24! Maybe a transmigration of souls has occured?
Also pulled this of Wiki, To quote V.E. Watts on Boethius, God is like a spectator at a chariot race; He watches the action the charioteers perform, but this does not cause them. This is exactly how I have always felt about the issue, when people ask things like "If God is real then why is there evil and suffering" or "Why doesn't God just show himself and prove to us that he is there?" Because that would spoil the experiment!!!

This kinda stuff stems from the old determinism vs. freewill debate, which I believe that people make a mistake to view reality in stark terms of black or white. Rather, both sides come into play in a persons life. You are free to make a variety of choices in your life, be them smart, dumb, or weird. Those choices you made Determine what your next set of Free Will choices will be, and so on, its like navigating a series of tunnels. Sometimes the tunnels lead to big rooms with many doors, or in circles, or narrow down into a dead end. Choose wisely and have fun!

But seriously though, I will make an effort to pick up Boethius' "Consolation on Philosophy" when I get the time. I much appreciate the suggestion.

[Plasmatic]

God is like a spectator at a chariot race; He watches the action the charioteers perform, but this does not cause them. This is exactly how I have always felt about the issue, when people ask things like "If God is real then why is there evil and suffering" or "Why doesn't God just show himself and prove to us that he is there?" Because that would spoil the experiment!!!

This is a common misintegration of mystics. The above assertion describes the "omniscience " attributed to the concept of god but forgets that it contradicts the "omnipotence" asserted. The question of " if God is real then why is there evil and suffering"? pertains to omnipotence not omniscience.

[Grey Cloud]

God is like a spectator at a chariot race; He watches the action the charioteers perform, but this does not cause them. This is exactly how I have always felt about the issue, when people ask things like "If God is real then why is there evil and suffering" or "Why doesn't God just show himself and prove to us that he is there?" Because that would spoil the experiment!!!

This is a common misintegration of mystics. The above assertion describes the "omniscience " attributed to the concept of god but forgets that it contradicts the "omnipotence" asserted. The question of " if God is real then why is there evil and suffering"? pertains to omnipotence not omniscience.

It has nothing to do with either omniscience or omnipotence; it pertains to (human) free will.
'God' could be aware of the evil and choose to ignore it or 'God' could have the power to to stop it but choose to allow it.
The issue, in any case, only arises with the Abrahamic notion of 'God', i.e. a 'God' who is separate from 'His' creation.
And you might want to define 'evil'.

[terrykali]

There is a lot of wrong thinking with "modern" science - £-$ etc and stupid assumtions.

[Plasmatic]

GC the question of free will has everything to do with omnipotence [if one cosiders the assertion even worth reviewing!]. If you can choose then "god" cant stop you or force you so theres something "god" cant do. But were off topic here.

And you might want to define 'evil'.

Its not my words so you might ask cowboy to do that for you.

[seasmith]

ColdCowboy wrote:

Why is this number/sense the gap between the sum of the parts and the whole, does anyone know the meaning to this?

The Wedjat Eye is intimately connected to the 64-part Hekat, a volumetric measure.

The hekat, considered as a unit of capacity for the measure of grains (thus of a lunar character), is divided into sixty-four parts. The symbols used to to express these subdivisions are derived from the ancient myth according to which the eye of Horus was fragmented by Seth.

from:
Schwaller de Lubicz T.O.M.

Later, Thoth (ibis) miraculously made the eye once again whole.

R.A. doesn't come out and say it, but i reckon the missing (or unifying) 1/64 is the volume equivalent of the musical "Limma", ( approx ratio 13/256 ) .
That part missing when going around the the 'Harmonic Circle of Fifths' ; ie: an octave up and an octave down and they don't quite meet full circle.

The one is based upon a volumetric ratio of a Perfect Sphere to a cylinder or square- barrel or box
(the pyramid builders always based their geometry on volume and then derived their planes, edges and points from the 'whole');
and the other based on linear lengths of string (or Chinese pipes),
but both necessary to Unity.

~

[Grey Cloud]

Not to detract from Seasmith's very interesting answer but the pupil of the eye is missing.

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Plasmatic,
The issue of good and evil exists independently of the notion of an Abrahamic god. Atheists and cultures which have a different idea of deity still wrestle with the problem. Likewise free will.

[Plasmatic]

Indeed GC, I'm not disputing this at all.

[StefanR]

I have not had the opportunity to read any works of Boethius, but now you have inspired me to find out just what insights I might share with the ancient sage. On Wiki it says his feast day in the Roman Catholic Church is Oct.23, and my b-day is Oct.24! Maybe a transmigration of souls has occured?
Also pulled this of Wiki, To quote V.E. Watts on Boethius, God is like a spectator at a chariot race; He watches the action the charioteers perform, but this does not cause them. This is exactly how I have always felt about the issue, when people ask things like "If God is real then why is there evil and suffering" or "Why doesn't God just show himself and prove to us that he is there?" Because that would spoil the experiment!!!

Hi ColdCowboy, just to illustrate a little bit what made me got a recollection of Boethius, I quoted a little that is apllicable.
I found it a fun book, of course one has to understand it in it's historical and cultural background. There are also differences between translations in style, but that is because it has a poetical influence. Perhaps objections can be raised to it's arguments, but it is fun in the distictions it makes and the evil it negates. And that for a guy who is in jail
Also I personally think you should not take those designations like God and Divine too much according to the notions of the modern religious way. I hope I didn't derail the thread too much, as your text just made me remember, but that is just fate or not ....

For there come within its scope the questions of the essential simplicity of providence, of the order of fate, of unforeseen chance, of the Divine knowledge and predestination, and of the freedom of the will. How heavy is the weight of all this thou canst judge for thyself.
..........
Then, as if making a new beginning, she thus discoursed : ' The coming into being of all things, the whole course of development in things that change, every sort of thing that moves in any wise, receives its due cause, order, and form from the steadfastness of the Divine mind. This mind, calm in the citadel of its own essential simplicity, has decreed that the
method of its rule shall be manifold. Viewed in the very purity of the Divine intelligence, this method is called providence ; but viewed in regard to those things which it moves and disposes, it is what the ancients called fate. That these two are different will easily be clear to
anyone who passes in review their respective efficacies. Providence is the Divine reason itself, seated in the Supreme Being, which disposes all things ; fate is the disposition inherent in all things which move, through which providence joins all things in their proper order. Providence embraces all things, however different, however infinite ; fate sets in motion separately individual things, and assigns to them severally their position, form, and time.

' So the unfolding of this temporal order unified into the foreview of the Divine mind is providence, while the same unity broken up and unfolded in time is fate. And although these are different, yet is there a dependence between them ; for the order of destiny issues from the essential simplicity of providence. For as the artificer, forming in his mind beforehand
the idea of the thing to be made, carries out his design, and develops from moment to moment what he had before seen in a single instant as a whole, so God in His providence ordains all things as parts of a single unchanging whole, but carries out these very ordinances by fate in a time of manifold unity.
.....
that providence is the fixed and simple form of destined events, fate their shifting series in order of time, as by the disposal of the Divine simplicity they are to take place. Whereby
it is that all things which are under fate are subjected also to providence, on which
fate itself is dependent ; whereas certain things which are set under providence are above the chain of fate viz., those things which by their nearness to the primal Divinity are steadfastly fixed, and lie outside the order of fate's movements.
....
For as the innermost of several circles revolving round the same centre approaches the simplicity of the midmost point, and is, as it were, a pivot round which the exterior circles turn, while the outermost, whirled in ampler orbit, takes in a wider and wider sweep of space in proportion to its departure from the indivisible unity of the centre while, further, whatever joins and allies itself to the centre is narrowed to a like simplicity, and no longer expands vaguely into space even so whatsoever departs widely from primal mind is involved more deeply in the meshes of fate, and things are free from fate in proportion as they seek to come nearer to that central pivot ; while if aught cleaves close to supreme mind in its absolute fixity, this, too, being free from movement, rises above fate's necessity. Therefore, as is reasoning to pure intelligence, as that which is generated to that which is, time to eternity, a circle to its centre, so is the shifting series of fate to the steadfastness and simplicity of providence.
....
And this order, by its intrinsic immutability, restricts things mutable which otherwise would ebb and flow at random. And so it happens that, although to you, who are not altogether capable of understanding this order, all things seem confused and disordered, nevertheless there is everywhere an appointed limit which guides all things to good.
Verily, nothing can be done for the sake of evil even by the wicked themselves ; for, as we abundantly proved, they seek good, but are drawn out of the way by perverse error ; far less can this order which sets out from the supreme centre of good turn aside anywhither from the way in which it began.
.....
So, shouldst thou see anything in this world happening differently from thy expectation, doubt not but events are rightly ordered ; it is in thy judgment that there is perverse confusion.

http://www.archive.org/details/consolat ... 00boetiala

[webolife]

GC,
You suggested that the Abrahamic notion of God is that He is separate from His creation...
Where does this notion of yours come from? Not from the story of Abraham, I'm sure.
Abraham was accredited with righteousness based on his faith in God's miraculous intervention into his [Abraham's] affairs, ie. that He would provide offspring "as numerable as the stars in the sky" through a man nearly 100 and a barren wife of 90.
This model for faith underlies the entire Judaeo-Christian and Islamic traditions. Faith is a connection between God and His creation, not the separation between them. One of the main things I think is wrong with modern science [actually faith is an underpinning of modern science, a la Galileo through the late 19th Century and into the 20th Century], rather post-modern science, is that "we" refuse to accept the possibility that God is still connected to the creation... "we" want the creation to create and perpetuate itself, and have invented all sorts of fantastical operators in the material world to try and account for this, eg. dark matter and energy, black holes, the big bang, etc. Some here would I'm sure attribute the EU to eternal self-creating and perpetuating matter and energy, but that is not required for the EU to take its place as the next major scientific paradigm...

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Webolife,
I meant separate in the sense of 'physically' separate, i,e, God is over there and his creation is over here, or we are down here and God is up there looking down and judging.
In the non-Abrahamic traditions creator and created are the same thing. Even in Buddhism where there is no God the same basic idea holds.
(You are the thought of a thought as U.G. Krishnamurti put it.)
Following the on from this then there is no judgement; for who or what is to be judged by who or what?
With regard to the story of Abraham, I'm not one for reading the Bible literally. Incidentally, a-brahm means not a brahmin.

The problem with postmodern anything is that it is entirely soulless (in any and every sense of the word). It is a bastard hybrid of consumer capitalism and cultural marxism. I loathe it with a passion. It has destroyed everything it has touched and replaced it with nothing of any worth to anything worthy of the name of humanity. But to quote Fred Hoyle out of context, in the end Nature will have its say.
IMO the EU cannot become a new paradigm, at best it will become a revision of the existing paradigm. The EU has nothing to say about how the Universe originated or how life came into it. The SM has the Big Bang and Darwinian evolution. I suppose the EU could come up with the Big Arc or something.