Page 4 of 5

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:48 am
by Walker
But look at all that you got in place of what you were looking for, which really wasn't much.

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:11 am
by Greta
Age wrote: Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:03 am
Greta wrote: Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:44 am There are a LOT of SHOUTED words here which makes the text BLOODY hard to read once you have LARGE tracts of text.

Just SAYIN'.
If this was directed at me, and you see them as shouted words and that, in of itself, makes it hard for you to read, then I apologize, profusely.

I do not mean them as shouted words, and I am not exactly sure how by capitalizing some letters and words makes it harder for you to read, but each to their own. Is there some particular reason why doing this makes reading in larger tracts of text harder?

I now know not to capitalize any words when replying to you. Thank you for the feedback.
Thanks Age for taking the critique graciously.

Yes, caps are almost universally interpreted as shouting online. Capitalised words blare at a reader, and the uniform tops and bottoms of the letters impact on readability, which is why caps are effective in headings but usually avoided a text body. Italics have less ooomph than CAPS, but it's easy to overuse the latter and dilute the effect.

On the plus side, you break your text into paras rather than hitting readers with huge slabs of thought, so that's helpful. The older I get the more of a readability Nazi I become :)

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:45 am
by Age
Greta wrote: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:11 am
Age wrote: Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:03 am
Greta wrote: Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:44 am There are a LOT of SHOUTED words here which makes the text BLOODY hard to read once you have LARGE tracts of text.

Just SAYIN'.
If this was directed at me, and you see them as shouted words and that, in of itself, makes it hard for you to read, then I apologize, profusely.

I do not mean them as shouted words, and I am not exactly sure how by capitalizing some letters and words makes it harder for you to read, but each to their own. Is there some particular reason why doing this makes reading in larger tracts of text harder?

I now know not to capitalize any words when replying to you. Thank you for the feedback.
Thanks Age for taking the critique graciously.

Yes, caps are almost universally interpreted as shouting online. Capitalised words blare at a reader, and the uniform tops and bottoms of the letters impact on readability, which is why caps are effective in headings but usually avoided a text body. Italics have less ooomph than CAPS, but it's easy to overuse the latter and dilute the effect.

On the plus side, you break your text into paras rather than hitting readers with huge slabs of thought, so that's helpful. The older I get the more of a readability Nazi I become :)
I am glad you are. The more critique and the more feedback I receive then the more I able to learn, and understand.

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:41 pm
by Nick_A
Age
If you would care to "elaborate" on the concept of 'Mind', then that in and of itself will SHOW how the or your misusing of WORDS prevents you, human beings, from OPENING up to NEW understanding. The VERY things that human beings do in the year 2018 is WHAT IS stopping them from OPENING up and learning new things and thus NOT gaining NEW understandings.
Your post was very inclusive which is good but hard to respond to without writing a book so I’ll concentrate on what I consider to be the key questions.

Universal mind as I see it is the interactions of universal laws. Life within the great universe consists of many living machines of differing qualities which react to these laws in accordance with the nature of their being. For example, a vegetable reacts according to its being while a worm reacts in accordance with its quality of being. Each creature of reaction acts in accordance with its quality of being defined by its level of inclusion of universal laws. Man is unique in that animal Man is a creature of REACTION with the evolutionary potential of becoming conscious Man: a creature capable of conscious ACTION.
As soon as you LEARN WHY you, human beings, are so closed, then you can PREVENT that from happening again, and thus WILL just remain completely OPEN, always. And, then you will be ABLE TO LEARN what True consciousness actually IS, and also what from True Conscious contemplation can also achieve.
Do you consider yourself human? If you do you must have experienced the human condition yourself. I know I’ve experienced what St. Paul describes in Romans 7:
21 So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; 23 but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. 24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? 25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature[d] a slave to the law of sin.
Sin in this sense is just “missing the mark.” We begin with an aim but it is lost to other desires so we’ve lost our aim.
So what? 'Heart' can refer to other things also. YOUR question was; What prevents the mind and heart from opening to new understanding of what should be normal for human "being?"

I see you asking, What prevents HUMAN BEINGS from opening to new understanding of what WILL BECOME normal, or NEW, understanding, or KNOWLEDGE for THE EVOLVED PAST human SPECIES of "beings".


The foundation for me is the recognition that I am a plurality lacking inner unity. Each moment is dominated by either thoughts, negative emotions, or bodily desires. These three are often unaware of each other. New understanding is impossible under these circumstances. Our understanding remains the same because it is created by the quality of imagination which reconciles the opposing demands of thought, emotions, and bodily desires. When imagination replaces consciousness the only thing that changes is conditioning. Indoctrination is not understanding

Bodily desires are natural as are thoughts. They should be reconciled by emotional quality. We have forgotten what it means. The problem isn’t physical desires but our fallen emotional nature which perverts them. We’ve even lost the capacity to experience the human attribute of objective conscience.
1948
"One never goes wrong following his feeling. I don’t mean emotions, I mean feeling, for feeling and intuition are one.” Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 95. – conversation on September 14, 1948)

"We must make the individual man aware of his conscience so that he understands what it means that only a few will survive the next war. This man will be the cosmic man." Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 99.)
Conscious evolution for Man is the the evolution of plurality into a quality of inner unity in which the conscious intellect, human feelings, and bodily abilities function as a unified whole. The fallen nature of emotional quality when dominant assures everything remains the same for the Great Beast. Only individuals with the need and courage to admit the human condition within themselves can begin on the path to conscious evolution. Humility isn’t hip.

Such ideas are hated by the world which worships self justifying imagination. The great teachers of the past like Plato tried to show the world the dangers of attachment to the superficial at the expense of psychologically opening to a universal perspective and what it deprives us of. That is why you will never read Plato’s cave discussed on secular sites without it being torn apart during the worship of fragmentation. The fallen human condition must be justified as the epitome of human intellect as opposed to being consciously experienced for what it is for us: when dominant that which creates attachments which pin people to existence in Plato’s cave.

Of course there are modern attempts to expand on the idea of inner unity made possible in a conscious higher level of reality but only a small minority will be open to them. It’s a shame but why not just support the small minority regardless of the growls it promotes?
The condition within human beings that appears to be upside down is just THE WAY human beings look at things. They do NOT look from a completely OPEN perspective. When they do look from a completely OPEN perspective, then ALL things become much, much clearer. Everything is the RIGHT way up and IS seen and UNDERSTOOD crystal clear.
Try it and tell me if you can do it. I know as a plurality I cannot be completely open since I struggle against myself.
Besides this is NOT just about human meaning, there is NO thing less, nor more, important than a human being, the fact is one does NOT have to consciously OPEN up, one just has to LEARN HOW to be always OPEN, first. Once that is LEARNED and thus KNOWN, then they can remain OPEN always, very simply and easily.
How did you learn to be always open? It is easy to say but for most when they try they experience how quickly they sink back into business as usual.

Basarab Nicolescu’s Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity is ahead of its time. It is too insulting to be taken seriously at a time when the glory of fragmentation is dominant

http://www.esoteric.msu.edu/Reviews/NicolescuReview.htm
After reading Nicolescu's Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity, it is hard to imagine how any thinking person could retreat to the old, safe, comfortable conceptual framework. Taking a series of ideas that would be extremely thought-provoking even when considered one by one, the Romanian quantum physicist Basarab Nicolescu weaves them together in a stunning vision, this manifesto of the twenty-first century, so that they emerge as a shimmering, profoundly radical whole.

Nicolescu’s raison d’être is to help develop people’s consciousness by means of showing them how to approach things in terms of what he calls “transdisciplinarity.” He seeks to address head on the problem of fragmentation that plagues contemporary life. Nicolescu maintains that binary logic, the logic underlying most all of our social, economic, and political institutions, is not sufficient to encompass or address all human situations. His thinking aids in the unification of the scientific culture and the sacred, something which increasing numbers of persons, will find to be an enormous help, among them wholistic health practitioners seeking to promote the understanding of illness as something arising from the interwoven fabric—body, plus mind, plus spirit—that constitutes the whole human being, and academics frustrated by the increasing pressure to produce only so-called “value-free” material…………….
I’ve had to admit that the Great Beast is as it is and won’t change. War is just proof of our stupidity. However individuals can change and consciously develop. Their influence may tend to minimize the harmful cycles of life in Plato’s Cave.

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:06 pm
by Nick_A
It is beginning. Greta will be ecstatic. Nietzsche wrote that God is dead and wondered what will replace God. Now we know it will be AI

https://www.4conservative.com/dailystar ... i-messiah/

The end of GOD? Claims humans will ‘worship AI Messiah’
Excerpt: Speaking about the advent of this technology, the Da Vinci Code writer said: “Humanity no longer needs God but may with the help of artificial intelligence develop a new form of collective consciousness that fulfils the role of religion. “Are we naive today to believe that the gods of the present will survive and be here in a hundred years?” According to Daily Galaxy, MIT physicist and cosmologist Max Tegmark also said that once this new superintelligence is vastly greater than that of a human, the fate of mankind will depend on it. PRAYER: Superintelligence could see robots becoming far superior to humans (Pic: GETTY) FUTURE: The world could be dominated by intelligent robots in the future (Pic: GETTY) He explained: “The real risk with artificial general intelligence isn’t malice but competence. “A superintelligent AI will be extremely good at accomplishing its goals, and if those goals aren’t aligned with ours, we’re in trouble.”
Those drawn to the conscious calling of Universalism will be made to sacrifice their soulful human needs in order to glorify secular life in Plato's Cave and in the process become complete automatons: the glory of Man. Ptolemy will be proven right at least psychologically after all. The universe will be declared to revolve around the machine and conscious evolution will be declared a meaningless fantasy.

There will only remain institutions of human understanding hidden underground unknown by the guardians of the great machine. The fortunate will find them. The rest will be reeducated. Progress?

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:28 pm
by Dubious
Re AI, every opinion is simply a projection since no one has foggiest what's its ramifications are. Also, as created by humans, AI has as much soul in it as its creators ever had meaning nil, none and zilch. Even now humans are only functional based on their programming, AI appearing to be its more advanced less faulty edition.

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 3:07 am
by Greta
Nick_A wrote: Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:06 pmIt is beginning. Greta will be ecstatic. Nietzsche wrote that God is dead and wondered what will replace God. Now we know it will be AI

https://www.4conservative.com/dailystar ... i-messiah/
conservative.com ... good to see you quoting outlets other than Fox. This shows just how open your mind is to alternative ideas, always ready to expand your horizons.

There will certainly be significant lashback against machines and technology when they are overtly running the show. Space based terrorism is a common prediction.

However, in only one billion years - less than the last 20% of the Earth's lifespan - the oceans will have boiled away. Given the issues we have with just a 1.5C rise in global temperatures, humans and other chordates will be extinct a very long time before the oceans evaporate. It will be a matter of millions of years, or less.

The question is, when survival challenges become ever greater, what happens to these relatively low tech pockets of resistance against The Great Machine, those who refused empowerment for the sake of autonomy? This is not a judgement of choosing autonomy BTW. Given the weirdly cartoonish impression you have of me and other non-religious non-conservatives you would be surprised that I have always chosen autonomy over membership and empowerment.

So I simply make the - very obvious - observation that humans will most likely be outlasted by intelligent machines and cyborgs, even if the latter work hard to keep us alive. If we don't kill ourselves, our planet and star will do the job. Thus will end the human story, as did the great dynasties of dinosaurs and trilobites, and this will lead to the next phase of existence.

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:11 am
by Nick_A
Dubious wrote: Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:28 pm Re AI, every opinion is simply a projection since no one has foggiest what's its ramifications are. Also, as created by humans, AI has as much soul in it as its creators ever had meaning nil, none and zilch. Even now humans are only functional based on their programming, AI appearing to be its more advanced less faulty edition.
It seems that according to you and those who believe as you do that human spiritual aspiration is meaningless since there is no seed of higher life to grow. Our future is as automatons tied to the earth and forever arguing opinions. Since you consider yourself a living reacting machine it is natural to want to be governed by the ultimate machine and the god of Plato's cave

However there are some who may go outside on a dark night and consciously contemplate as they look at the sky. There is a virtual infinity of stars and the person my wonder what purpose it all serves and if they are also a tiny part of this collective purpose. Something in them is drawn to feel this reality that seems to offer greater meaning than what the mechanics of societal life provides. They may feel what Simone Weil did:
"...It is not for man to seek, or even to believe in God. He has only to refuse to believe in everything that is not God. This refusal does not presuppose belief. It is enough to recognize, what is obvious to any mind, that all the goods of this world, past, present, or future, real or imaginary, are finite and limited and radically incapable of satisfying the desire which burns perpetually with in us for an infinite and perfect good... It is not a matter of self-questioning or searching. A man has only to persist in his refusal, and one day or another God will come to him."
-- Weil, Simone, ON SCIENCE, NECESSITY, AND THE LOVE OF GOD, edited by Richard Rees, London, Oxford University Press, 1968.- ©
You don't feel what she felt so are content to accept being governed by a machine unaware of higher human needs the World opposes. It is your way - not mine.

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 8:56 am
by Dubious
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:11 am However there are some who may go outside on a dark night and consciously contemplate as they look at the sky. There is a virtual infinity of stars and the person my wonder what purpose it all serves and if they are also a tiny part of this collective purpose.
All very nice, but if the universe doesn't have a purpose then nothing within it has one either.
" A man has only to persist in his refusal, and one day or another God will come to him."
-- Weil, Simone, ON SCIENCE, NECESSITY, AND THE LOVE OF GOD, edited by Richard Rees, London, Oxford University Press, 1968.- ©
None of the connoted gods who came to us so far accomplished anything...and here I'm being kind. I don't expect other avatars that may follow to be any better.
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:11 am You don't feel what she felt...
Obviously not and why would that even be necessary?
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:11 am ...so are content to accept being governed by a machine unaware of higher human needs the World opposes
Then why am I not happy?
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:11 am It is your way - not mine.
Which only implies that your programming is different from mine!

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:40 pm
by Nick_A
Dubious
Nick_A wrote: ↑
Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:11 am
However there are some who may go outside on a dark night and consciously contemplate as they look at the sky. There is a virtual infinity of stars and the person my wonder what purpose it all serves and if they are also a tiny part of this collective purpose.

D. All very nice, but if the universe doesn't have a purpose then nothing within it has one either.
Quite true. The question becomes if it is more logical to begin with the premise of a universal purpose or accidental creation? Is it more logical that a functioning machine of such complexisty has no purpose or that you are unaware of it?
" A man has only to persist in his refusal, and one day or another God will come to him."
 Weil, Simone, ON SCIENCE, NECESSITY, AND THE LOVE OF GOD, edited by Richard Rees, London, Oxford University Press, 1968.- ©

D. None of the connoted gods who came to us so far accomplished anything...and here I'm being kind. I don't expect other avatars that may follow to be any better.
Simone is referring to the inner experience of revelation. When a person is free of attachment, their inner need can attract “help from above.” She experienced it.
Nick_A wrote: ↑
Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:11 am
You don't feel what she felt...

D. Obviously not and why would that even be necessary?
It isn’t. it is only necessary for those who need the experience of objective meaning.
Nick_A wrote: ↑
Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:11 am
...so are content to accept being governed by a machine unaware of higher human needs the World opposes

D. Then why am I not happy?
Are you happy when you are content? Nietzsche wrote of wretched contentment. Did that make him happy? Plato defined Man as a being in need of “meaning.” He didn’t say ether happiness or contentment. Plato’s cave offers temporary happiness and temporary contentment. Those like Simone need the “pearl of great price” they need the experience of objective meaning and purpose.
Nick_A wrote: ↑
Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:11 am
It is your way - not mine.

Which only implies that your programming is different from mine!
Maybe so but I still believe that conscious evolution will produce Man capable of conscious choice. You can believe that you are limited to being a programmed thing. Those like Einstein and Simone could never accept this. They believe that Man worthy of the name, is of a greater objective quality and not just a slave of programming..

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:09 am
by surreptitious57
ken wrote:
When you write things like :

Free will is not possible because the sub conscious preempts decisions by the conscious

And you use the words NOT POSSIBLE are you saying that that could be WRONG or NOT WRONG

If that means you are NOT WRONG then that certainly goes against what you are saying now

But if that means you could be WRONG then WHY pose it as an absolute certain True FACT
The evidence is that free will is not possible for the reason already given

However if at some future point this is then contradicted or disproven by newly discovered evidence I will accept that instead

Evidence in science is always provisional unless it leads to falsification but other than that it should not be treated as absolute

So I am not treating what I stated as an absolute certain true fact at all

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:24 am
by surreptitious57
ken wrote:
If you REALLY are prepared to being OPEN to what you write and say as actually could be WRONG then would you like Me to question you in a way
so that you can DISCOVER and SEE for your Self WHERE and WHAT and WHY the WRONG IS in what you write OR would you prefer instead for Me
to just point out YOUR WRONG for you ? Or would you prefer some thing else ?
How or what you wish to write is none of my business so I cannot answer any of these superfluous questions
Write however you want about whatever you want which you can easily do without any input from me at all

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:32 am
by Dubious
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:40 pmQuite true. The question becomes if it is more logical to begin with the premise of a universal purpose or accidental creation? Is it more logical that a functioning machine of such complexisty has no purpose or that you are unaware of it?
If a question forever remains a question it is more logical to conclude that the question reveals itself as meaningless.
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:40 pm Simone is referring to the inner experience of revelation. When a person is free of attachment, their inner need can attract “help from above.” She experienced it.
"Help from above" seemed to be in short supply as confirmed by her early death which may have been intentional.
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:40 pm Those like Simone need the “pearl of great price” they need the experience of objective meaning and purpose.
"Objective meaning and purpose" is an oxymoron if it must first be created by those who wish to acknowledge it as such.
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:40 pm You can believe that you are limited to being a programmed thing. Those like Einstein and Simone could never accept this. They believe that Man worthy of the name, is of a greater objective quality and not just a slave of programming..
One is limited regardless of whether one thinks of himself as programmed or not. What Einstein thought aside from his theories is also of no consequence.

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 5:30 pm
by Nick_A
Dubious wrote: Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:32 am
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:40 pmQuite true. The question becomes if it is more logical to begin with the premise of a universal purpose or accidental creation? Is it more logical that a functioning machine of such complexisty has no purpose or that you are unaware of it?
If a question forever remains a question it is more logical to conclude that the question reveals itself as meaningless.
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:40 pm Simone is referring to the inner experience of revelation. When a person is free of attachment, their inner need can attract “help from above.” She experienced it.
"Help from above" seemed to be in short supply as confirmed by her early death which may have been intentional.
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:40 pm Those like Simone need the “pearl of great price” they need the experience of objective meaning and purpose.
"Objective meaning and purpose" is an oxymoron if it must first be created by those who wish to acknowledge it as such.
Nick_A wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:40 pm You can believe that you are limited to being a programmed thing. Those like Einstein and Simone could never accept this. They believe that Man worthy of the name, is of a greater objective quality and not just a slave of programming..
One is limited regardless of whether one thinks of himself as programmed or not. What Einstein thought aside from his theories is also of no consequence.
The attraction of our being to "remember" objective meaning and purpose is what invites universalism. If there is nothing but subjective meaning and purpose, why bother contemplating anything beyond secular pragmatism? It doesn't matter if we do live in self deception as described by Plato. If that is all life is, just make the best of it.

We can graduate from Ptolemy to Copernicus in science but why bother in psychology if it just causes trouble. Look what speculation about a greater reality did to Jesus and Socrates? It just led to expressions of secular intolerance and they were killed so why bother.

However, I'd like to ask a personal question. Since you do not believe in human objective meaning and purpose much less universal, why are you attracted to philosophy as the love of wisdom? Just create your own reality and be done with it. Without objective meaning, that is wisdom. What is there to ponder?

Are you really attracted to philosophy or putting ourselves and our species within a higher conscious perspective in order to experience objective meaning or just the psychology of self justifiction?

Re: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Secularism, and Universalism

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:12 pm
by Arising_uk
Nick_A wrote:... Socrates was killed primarily because he proved no one knew what piety is and he was corrupting the youth of Athens by creating doubt. This is obviously too intolerable to be allowed. Has it changed? No. ...
Although he could have just left?

https://www.cam.ac.uk/news/socrates-was ... as-charged

The irony of course is that you are exacty proposing to put in place a religious metaphysic that will brook no impiety or doubt.