|
Post by zazeniac on May 18, 2022 19:07:06 GMT -5
Tells me that scientists like freeway drivers come in many flavors. "Herd of cattle?" I hear that a lot nowadays. It's always a judgement, never a confession. "Those folk over there are cattle, not me." Makes me smile. Talk about delusion! Like Hedderman likes to say "the party sucks, cause 'I' keep showing up." Peace. Don't be mad at me, zazeniac. I am just pointing out that regardless of spiritual "flavors", everybody gets smacked on the pavement when jumping off a building. Reality is that monolithic no matter what your spirit tastes like on the astral plane.
To me, reality and spirituality are not mutually exclusive dimensions. A Buddhist or Hindu physicist needs his head checked for loose screws. In the east, the ancients had integrity. No double talk. They were lucky. Reality was yet to be screwed up by science. The mischief began when some idiot managed to win the argument that it was the Earth that was spinning around the Sun and not the other way round. There was no turning back when we landed on the moon. Science became the hegemonic God of all mankind. Religion which was central to human life became an elective subject. Yeah, various flavors. Take your pick. Gravity is monolithic even for the Mahaguru deep in eternal nature on a Boeing 737 flying from Mumbai to New York.
I am the one who insist that our consensus worldview, which informs our perception of reality, is monolithic. But I am not part of the herd. I know why we perceive reality the way we do. I am the herd and the herd is me. But I am not cattle. Or should I say, I am not a human being living on planet Earth. Do you get the drift?
Mooooo....
|
|
|
Post by sree on May 18, 2022 21:39:57 GMT -5
I like you. Medium rare. With a hearty Barolo.
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on May 19, 2022 7:32:39 GMT -5
I like you. Medium rare. With a hearty Barolo. So bourgeois. This is what I know: if happiness hangs in the balance of an outcome, then your head is in your ass. Good luck, my friend.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 19, 2022 9:32:58 GMT -5
I like you. Medium rare. With a hearty Barolo. So bourgeois. This is what I know: if happiness hangs in the balance of an outcome, then your head is in your ass. Good luck, my friend. Does our happiness therefore hang on the outcome of us not hanging our happiness on an outcome? (I'm just being mischievous)
|
|
|
Post by lolly on May 19, 2022 9:37:23 GMT -5
Thing is (and I know this doesn't follow 1:1 directly from this post of yours, but I've been reading along) that even a science based on the primacy of consciousness over matter, is still, well, science. I think that's Schrodinger's point. That a science of consciousness is not possible. What I'm saying is that there are scientists who realize the limitations of science. That they are not all logical positivists. That they believe there are truths that are unprovable.There's actually a proof for that.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 19, 2022 9:49:59 GMT -5
I think that's Schrodinger's point. That a science of consciousness is not possible. What I'm saying is that there are scientists who realize the limitations of science. That they are not all logical positivists. That they believe there are truths that are unprovable.There's actually a proof for that. They can prove that some truths are unproveable? That sounds interesting. On what basis do they consider these 'truths' to be 'true' then? Or perhaps a better question is....what is their definition of 'truth'? I guess I assumed that maths folks usually define 'truth' as 'what is provable'....?
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on May 19, 2022 12:57:07 GMT -5
I think that's Schrodinger's point. That a science of consciousness is not possible. What I'm saying is that there are scientists who realize the limitations of science. That they are not all logical positivists. That they believe there are truths that are unprovable.There's actually a proof for that. Yes. I had the Incompleteness Theorem in mind. Godel. Einstein's good friend.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on May 19, 2022 22:43:44 GMT -5
There's actually a proof for that. They can prove that some truths are unproveable? That sounds interesting. On what basis do they consider these 'truths' to be 'true' then? Or perhaps a better question is....what is their definition of 'truth'? I guess I assumed that maths folks usually define 'truth' as 'what is provable'....? I read about it, but ain't good enough at maths to understand it properly.
Truth in maths ultimately requires a complete set of consistent axioms, but it has been proven that this is not possible. Somewhere in that it is proven that there are truths which can't be proven. Hence we know that maths can't account or everything. The pure math folks like Bertrand Russel back in the day were very distraught about this.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 19, 2022 23:06:31 GMT -5
They can prove that some truths are unproveable? That sounds interesting. On what basis do they consider these 'truths' to be 'true' then? Or perhaps a better question is....what is their definition of 'truth'? I guess I assumed that maths folks usually define 'truth' as 'what is provable'....? I read about it, but ain't good enough at maths to understand it properly. Truth in maths ultimately requires a complete set of consistent axioms, but it has been proven that this is not possible. Somewhere in that it is proven that there are truths which can't be proven. Hence we know that maths can't account or everything. The pure math folks like Bertrand Russel back in the day were very distraught about this.
(** muttley snicker **)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2022 9:54:40 GMT -5
There's a thing in computer science that is similar to Gödel's theorem. It's the "halting problem", along with the proof that it is undecidable or non-computable. The weird thing about all these theorems is that they involve self-reference. With Gödel's there is a mathematical statement like "This statement is not provable", which leads to the contradiction. And with the halting problem proof you have programs running in their own code is input.
|
|