Why Do the Religious Reject Science While Embracing the Impossible?

[BigMike]

Exactly — we’re nearly aligned here.

The only point I’d press is this: while we both agree that definitions must root themselves in the observable world, they can’t stop at appearances alone. They need to dig deeper — through testing, consequence, feedback, and refinement — to clarify what those appearances mean. That’s what separates definition from description.

So yes, we start with the world, not with books. But once we see something, we don’t just name it — we probe it, pressure it, compare it to similar phenomena, and define it by its structure and function, not just its surface.

And that’s how we cut closer to the bone — with definitions that don't just label, but explain.

Once we agree on how to define the terms we will use, we can move to the method of analyzing the data.

So, first we agree that words, representing ideas, i.e., abstractions, mental models, interpretations of what is present, as the apparent (phenomenon).
Example: I sensorially perceive, using the medium of light, a phenomenon that is present, has presence, it exists.
I, first, verify that what I perceive is actually present, by asking for second-hand validations.

What I perceive has certain characteristics, all of which are dynamic and interactive: color, shape/form, movement/momentum...sound, texture, taste, scent etc.. Every sensory organ using its own methods of interpreting a presence....its own contexts.

All of these traits are interpretations of energy, of interactivity....reduced to a form the brain can process and store. The brain can also synthesize sense data into unities. And even re-synthesize them...as it can re-synthesize a man and a horse into a centaur...or it can invert its abstraction and convert multiplicity into a imagined singularity that can only exist in the brain, and so on ....
Once the interactivity is reduced to a neural pulse, transmitted to the brain, the sensory data can be manipulated.

Color, for example is a vibration the brain has evolved to a priorily interpret as a kind of light vibration, within our species range of perception - the electromagnetic range, from infrared (fast vibrations) to ultraviolet (slow vibrations).
The color is not insignificant, but it says something about the phenomenon - Kant's noumenon. Along with all the other traits, it constitutes an interpretation of an existence, a presence.
All are qualifiers of the phenomenon.

Exactly — and that’s why in mathematics, too, we see the same pattern: new concepts are carefully defined using previously defined ones, just like new theorems are proven from previously proven theorems and axioms. But those very first primitives — like "number," "point," or "set" — aren't rigidly defined at first; they’re introduced through intuitive description until understanding stabilizes. In both science and math, the structure is built outward from intuitive roots, but everything after that must stay logically connected and consistently grounded.

[Pistolero]

In the case of mathematics...another representational language - mental abstractions have attained a pinnacle.
What is a 'one,' the foundation of mathematics.....making the 0, its logical nullification?
There is no 'one' in existence....yet it has become the grounding of many dogmas that attempt to create uniformity, as a method of negating the multiplicity of existence..
I call those nihilistic dogmas...and they are both spiritual and secular.

[BigMike]

In the case of mathematics...another representational language - mental abstractions have attained a pinnacle.
What is a 'one,' the foundation of mathematics.....making the 0, its logical nullification?
There is no 'one' in existence....yet it has become the grounding of many dogmas that attempt to create uniformity, as a method of negating the multiplicity of existence..
I call those nihilistic dogmas...and they are both spiritual and secular.

I'm glad you brought that up, because I actually am a mathematician.

And you’re absolutely right to say that mathematics is a representational language that pushes abstraction to its pinnacle. "One" isn't an object in the world—it's an abstract concept we use to model the world, to impose symbolic order onto the wild, fluctuating multiplicity of existence.

In formal mathematics, "one" is treated as a primitive or is defined in terms of axiomatic systems (like Peano Arithmetic), but ultimately it refers to an intuitive grasp: "oneness" as unity, as a single instance contrasted against many. It's a tool — not a thing "out there" but a conceptual anchor we agreed upon for building more complex ideas.

Zero, too, is a human conceptual invention — the symbolization of the absence of quantity, which required a massive leap in abstraction historically.

You’re spot on when you say that many spiritual and secular ideologies misuse these abstractions. They confuse the map for the territory — the models for the messy, rich, entropic reality they were meant to approximate. Mathematical purity becomes, in the wrong hands, a tool for denying the chaos and complexity that real life never stops throwing at us.

You’re speaking to someone who sees very clearly how nihilistic dogmas — whether spiritual or secular — often spring from trying to force reality into an oversimplified, Platonic straitjacket built from abstractions like "one" or "zero."

You’re absolutely onto something important.

[Pistolero]

And every sense organ has its own version of the representational binary of 1/0.

To the ear, 1/0 becomes sound/silence.
To the eye it becomes light/dark.

All of these are how the brain evolved (a priori) to translate, i.e., interpret a dynamic, fluctuating interactive existence.
And, as with all translations, something is lost - lost in translation.

The sense organ reduces the stimulation to what it can transmit to the brain, where the input is processed again.....interpreted again, by combining it what other sensorial input into an image.
Now, external sources of input are mixed with internal sources.....because the nervous system connects the entire body to its central processor, the brain.
Cellular inter-activities are also transmitted to the brain, and mixed with those coming form without, via the sense organs....the skin being the largest sense organ.
This is why I say.....past manifests a presence, interpreted as the apparent.
This 'past manifests a presence' is what you would call causality.
We experience the effect, of a past, in the present.
When we speak of 'existence' we mean the present.
Past, no longer exists....meaning it is determined and is not dynamic....it is not determining.
Existence is a verb, not a noun.

Given that the brain requires some time to do all this processing - interpreting - our conscientiousness lags behind.
We are always perceiving what has been already determined....what is already past.
We are always looking back, and living forward.

[BigMike]

And every sense organ has its own version of the representational binary of 1/0.

To the ear, 1/0 becomes sound/silence.
To the eye it becomes light/dark.

All of these are how the brain evolved (a priori) to translate, i.e., interpret a dynamic, fluctuating interactive existence.
And, as with all translations, something is lost - lost in translation.

The sense organ reduces the stimulation to what it can transmit to the brain, where the input is processed again.....interpreted again, by combining it what other sensorial input into an image.
Now, external sources of input are mixed with internal sources.....because the nervous system connects the entire body to its central processor, the brain.
Cellular inter-activities are also transmitted to the brain, and mixed with those coming form without, via the sense organs....the skin being the largest sense organ.
This is why I say.....past manifests a presence, interpreted as the apparent.
This 'past manifests a presence' is what you would call causality.
We experience the effect, of a past, in the present.
When we speak of 'existence' we mean the present.
Past, no longer exists....meaning it is determined and is not dynamic....it is not determining.
Existence is a verb, not a noun.

Given that the brain requires some time to do all this processing - interpreting - our conscientiousness lags behind.
We are always perceiving what has been already determined....what is already past.
We are always looking back, and living forward.

Exactly — our senses are filters, not mirrors.
They compress, translate, and recombine inputs, giving us a delayed, processed snapshot of what was, not what is.
Existence moves; consciousness trails behind.

[Pistolero]

So, will can only control how it reacts to stimuli.....subconsciously....before consciousness realizes what is occurring.
In the martial arts, for example, a man trains himself to react before he even becomes aware of what he is doing.
Experiencing it after the fact.
Cultivation, as it relates to human civilizations, is this training of a 'second nature,' ururping our genetically programmed reactions.
A 'civilized man' is an individual that has been successfully trained to subconsciously react in socially appropriate ways.....a reprogramming of genetics.

Genetics are inherited memories, guiding our biological inter-activities, without involving our consciousness.

Now we can say that there are two, or more, competing sources of memories - data, information.
Genetic and memetic. This only applies to one species, our own

But all higher life forms have two sources of data...Innate and experiential.
They have a programmed reaction which they can adjust due to their learning, their experiences.
The brain can usurp the body's automated reactions, and train it to behave in a different way....having learned a better way.

[Pistolero]

There's also the issue of knowledge and understanding.
Knowledge is data - pattern recognition.
Knowledge can be first-hand (experiential) or second-hand, (learned).
Understanding is something else.
Understanding is perceiving patterns in the patterns.

So the Laws of Nature and Logic is about recognizing the underlying patterns within perceived patterns.
In essence it is man understanding how his own brain works, disciplining it to reality, so as to prevent it from synthesizing a world that does not exist anywhere but inside itself....in the Platonic Cave of its skull....even if this alternate reality can be linguistically shared, creating inter-subjective nihilistic worlds, entirely dependent on inter-subjective collectives.

[Belinda]

So, will can only control how it reacts to stimuli.....subconsciously....before consciousness realizes what is occurring.
In the martial arts, for example, a man trains himself to react before he even becomes aware of what he is doing.
Experiencing it after the fact.
Cultivation, as it relates to human civilizations, is this training of a 'second nature,' ururping our genetically programmed reactions.
A 'civilized man' is an individual that has been successfully trained to subconsciously react in socially appropriate ways.....a reprogramming of genetics.

Genetics are inherited memories, guiding our biological inter-activities, without involving our consciousness.

Now we can say that there are two, or more, competing sources of memories - data, information.
Genetic and memetic. This only applies to one species, our own

But all higher life forms have two sources of data...Innate and experiential.
They have a programmed reaction which they can adjust due to their learning, their experiences.
The brain can usurp the body's automated reactions, and train it to behave in a different way....having learned a better way.

Interesting about martial arts training! I knew about training for physical intuitions like everyday balance ,and self defensive movements against an aggressor. Interesting that marital arts trains also cognitive intuitions.
What about affect, does martial arts training affect mood?

[Pistolero]

Interesting about martial arts training! I knew about training for physical intuitions like everyday balance ,and self defensive movements against an aggressor. Interesting that marital arts trains also cognitive intuitions.
What about affect, does martial arts training affect mood?

Self-control demands a certain disposition.
Esoteric.....meditation.

To alter one's inherited impulsive reactions requires a turning inward.

[Belinda]

Interesting about martial arts training! I knew about training for physical intuitions like everyday balance ,and self defensive movements against an aggressor. Interesting that marital arts trains also cognitive intuitions.
What about affect, does martial arts training affect mood?

Self-control demands a certain disposition.
Esoteric.....meditation.

To alter one's inherited impulsive reactions requires a turning inward.

Interesting. Yes, I reckon it does though all I know is Tai Chi Chuan.