Quizzes & Puzzles23 mins ago
Is There Something Beyond?
I am a vet. Yesterday I had the horrible duty of putting down my own pet. Over the deacades of my workI have searched for the answer to my question by reading many scientific texts beyond my own specialisation. Most of them affirm the positive steps we humans have made in our understanding of the (at the quantum level) somewhat shaky understanding of reality.
It seems to come down to spacetime and the new discoveries of cosmic inflation after the big bang.
When I dug her grave and planted a rose tree over her corpse I asked myself what do we really know, except perhaps an ever-expanding awareness of our ignorance.
It seems to come down to spacetime and the new discoveries of cosmic inflation after the big bang.
When I dug her grave and planted a rose tree over her corpse I asked myself what do we really know, except perhaps an ever-expanding awareness of our ignorance.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Colmc54. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Jim, My case remains rested.
Khandro, from your link. //Rebirth is conditioned by the karmas (actions of body, speech and mind) of previous lives; good karmas will yield a happier rebirth, bad karmas will produce one which is more unhappy.//
I would have thought most people with an interest in religion are aware of that, but how much more feasible do you think that is than the usual notion of reincarnation - and why?
Khandro, from your link. //Rebirth is conditioned by the karmas (actions of body, speech and mind) of previous lives; good karmas will yield a happier rebirth, bad karmas will produce one which is more unhappy.//
I would have thought most people with an interest in religion are aware of that, but how much more feasible do you think that is than the usual notion of reincarnation - and why?
I have to say that what I assumed about Buddhism was correct, namely that some element of the self lingers in what my SF favourite Peter F, Hamilton would find some name for like 'exotic transitional space' after the brain dies.
All the major belief systems in the world are challenged by the advance of science, and technology it's most obvious interface with humanity.
Somewhere, recently, science perhaps abandoned it's sensitivity towards it's beneficiaries.
These days science is devoid of a personality or persona. Reading Nature every week and seeing the huge lists of endless names above the abstracts from all corners of the world I think about science fiction's prediction that an elite among us will try to become post-human and give the rest of us the proverbial finger.
Is there something beyond? Yes in the case of my cat who's decomposing carbon is coming back to life in the form of the rose bush I replanted over her grave. Of her fearlessness and her affection towards anyone who cared to befriend her I can only say that her life lives on in the hearts (emo speak for brains) of everyone that became part of her journey through life.
Is there something beyond? Who would really want it? But that's not to say within the bounds of improbability and uncertainty that.....I'm sorry I really don't know how to finish the sentence.
All the major belief systems in the world are challenged by the advance of science, and technology it's most obvious interface with humanity.
Somewhere, recently, science perhaps abandoned it's sensitivity towards it's beneficiaries.
These days science is devoid of a personality or persona. Reading Nature every week and seeing the huge lists of endless names above the abstracts from all corners of the world I think about science fiction's prediction that an elite among us will try to become post-human and give the rest of us the proverbial finger.
Is there something beyond? Yes in the case of my cat who's decomposing carbon is coming back to life in the form of the rose bush I replanted over her grave. Of her fearlessness and her affection towards anyone who cared to befriend her I can only say that her life lives on in the hearts (emo speak for brains) of everyone that became part of her journey through life.
Is there something beyond? Who would really want it? But that's not to say within the bounds of improbability and uncertainty that.....I'm sorry I really don't know how to finish the sentence.
colmc54, Please forgive the late post. May I offer condolences for your loss and just add my thoughts on the subject.
By comparison the "multiverse theory" and some of the strange behaviour of particle physics- both of these seem much stranger and more "far fetched" than an afterlife and the existence of ghosts or spirits. So why are scientists so quick to condemn the beliefs of those who "know" there is some sort of afterlife?
I don't have the intellect to argue in a logical manner with jim360 and I don't wish to be critical of any members of the scientific community- they work very hard and have made fantastic advances to the benefit of mankind. I do agree with Khandro and Naomi based on my personal experiences that there is a possibility of the beyond. I do think I'm open minded and trust I always will be.
I genuinely feel that quantum particles and a multiverse are stranger and at least as fascinating as the afterlife!
By comparison the "multiverse theory" and some of the strange behaviour of particle physics- both of these seem much stranger and more "far fetched" than an afterlife and the existence of ghosts or spirits. So why are scientists so quick to condemn the beliefs of those who "know" there is some sort of afterlife?
I don't have the intellect to argue in a logical manner with jim360 and I don't wish to be critical of any members of the scientific community- they work very hard and have made fantastic advances to the benefit of mankind. I do agree with Khandro and Naomi based on my personal experiences that there is a possibility of the beyond. I do think I'm open minded and trust I always will be.
I genuinely feel that quantum particles and a multiverse are stranger and at least as fascinating as the afterlife!
Despite reports to the contrary, I don't look down on anyone. I don't really agree that I've "condemn"ed the beliefs of anyone either. I'm just incredibly sceptical.
The best way I can put the difference between the strangeness of the afterlife and the strangeness of particle physics is that we "understand" (to an extent) the strangeness in particle physics. It has a known origin. Despite the weirdness, we can work with it, calculate, make predictions. At least for the moment, we can't do any of that with any ideas of an afterlife. They are both, certainly, weird. But in physics you can quantify the weirdness.
Naomi is right. You shouldn't put yourself down.
The best way I can put the difference between the strangeness of the afterlife and the strangeness of particle physics is that we "understand" (to an extent) the strangeness in particle physics. It has a known origin. Despite the weirdness, we can work with it, calculate, make predictions. At least for the moment, we can't do any of that with any ideas of an afterlife. They are both, certainly, weird. But in physics you can quantify the weirdness.
Naomi is right. You shouldn't put yourself down.
Let me try to finish my sentence that I couldn't before.
Increasingly we see, even within species like cats that the degree of folding of the cerebral cortex is an indicator of advanced intelligence. In fact with domestication our moggies have actually reduced their degree of cortical folding compared to their wild relatives. This as a result of our domestication of them, horrifyingly when you think about it, within less than a blink of evolutionary time.
When our species was repeatedly challenged our cerebral cortex was challenged like no other part of our body. In a short time our craniums expanded to meet the need for extra capacity. That got us to civilisation, superstition, and the rise of the psychopathic spectrum. Then came an unlikely phenomenon, reason. 'I think therefore I am'...
What I would have had to say in my last comments would have been something reconciliatory along these lines;
Because of the unique way we as a species have been challenged by the evolutionary pressures this planet creates we now have a higher degree of cortical folding than any species that has ever lived on this planet. This has allowed us, almost despite ourselves, to create science and the massive, incontrovertible progress we have made in the understanding of reality.
Because this has happened in a blink of time's eye it is not unreasonable to respect the concepts and beliefs that got us through a journey where we were continually beset by huge existence threatening challenges, the main one of which was, of course, other humans.
I was brought up as a Christian. I try to live my life according to the Christian teachings. Am I a Christian? No, because I am a 'show me the peer reviewed evidence' scientist. But yet I have to acknowledge that humanity needed faith to get us to where science was able to emerge. And faith too should not feel so threatened or intimidated by science.
A mind that blanks out the things that contradict what it has been indoctrinated into blanking out is more likely to evolve a less convoluted cerebral cortex than the minds that are allowed to think freely and travel where they will in the search for understanding.
Think and let think, and don't let our precious cortical folds disappear over time.
Increasingly we see, even within species like cats that the degree of folding of the cerebral cortex is an indicator of advanced intelligence. In fact with domestication our moggies have actually reduced their degree of cortical folding compared to their wild relatives. This as a result of our domestication of them, horrifyingly when you think about it, within less than a blink of evolutionary time.
When our species was repeatedly challenged our cerebral cortex was challenged like no other part of our body. In a short time our craniums expanded to meet the need for extra capacity. That got us to civilisation, superstition, and the rise of the psychopathic spectrum. Then came an unlikely phenomenon, reason. 'I think therefore I am'...
What I would have had to say in my last comments would have been something reconciliatory along these lines;
Because of the unique way we as a species have been challenged by the evolutionary pressures this planet creates we now have a higher degree of cortical folding than any species that has ever lived on this planet. This has allowed us, almost despite ourselves, to create science and the massive, incontrovertible progress we have made in the understanding of reality.
Because this has happened in a blink of time's eye it is not unreasonable to respect the concepts and beliefs that got us through a journey where we were continually beset by huge existence threatening challenges, the main one of which was, of course, other humans.
I was brought up as a Christian. I try to live my life according to the Christian teachings. Am I a Christian? No, because I am a 'show me the peer reviewed evidence' scientist. But yet I have to acknowledge that humanity needed faith to get us to where science was able to emerge. And faith too should not feel so threatened or intimidated by science.
A mind that blanks out the things that contradict what it has been indoctrinated into blanking out is more likely to evolve a less convoluted cerebral cortex than the minds that are allowed to think freely and travel where they will in the search for understanding.
Think and let think, and don't let our precious cortical folds disappear over time.
colmc: Interesting, informative clarity on evolutionary biology, but I'm not so clear with your, "Am I a Christian? No, because I am a 'show me the peer reviewed evidence' scientist."
In my opinion, religion and science are not talking about the same sort of things, therefore science is not capable of dismissing religion anymore than religion is able to dismiss science - (despite examples of it historically trying to do so).
Christopher Hitchens makes this mistake in his 'God Is Not Great' saying, "thanks to the telescope and the microscope, religion no longer offers an explanation of anything important." But true Christianity was never meant to be an explanation of anything in the first place. It tries as do as other religions to show the way to lead your existence on Earth.
To say that it is not scientifically provable and can therefore be swept aside, is like saying, thanks to the invention of the Kenwood mixer, we can now forget about Chekhov.
In my opinion, religion and science are not talking about the same sort of things, therefore science is not capable of dismissing religion anymore than religion is able to dismiss science - (despite examples of it historically trying to do so).
Christopher Hitchens makes this mistake in his 'God Is Not Great' saying, "thanks to the telescope and the microscope, religion no longer offers an explanation of anything important." But true Christianity was never meant to be an explanation of anything in the first place. It tries as do as other religions to show the way to lead your existence on Earth.
To say that it is not scientifically provable and can therefore be swept aside, is like saying, thanks to the invention of the Kenwood mixer, we can now forget about Chekhov.
@Khandro
I like the "How we should live our lives" element of one or two faiths, so agree with that part of your post.
However, if people are being nice to others purely to curry favour with their deity and book their ticket into heaven, then I fear for the day when religion is swept away by science, even though I don't buy into it myself.
People who are nice to others but profess that there is no afterlife; what do you make of them? What do you think they are they up to? Is it that they expect people to be nice to them, in return? An attempt to have heaven before death?
@colmc
sorry for your loss. Thanks for starting another interesting thread.
I like the "How we should live our lives" element of one or two faiths, so agree with that part of your post.
However, if people are being nice to others purely to curry favour with their deity and book their ticket into heaven, then I fear for the day when religion is swept away by science, even though I don't buy into it myself.
People who are nice to others but profess that there is no afterlife; what do you make of them? What do you think they are they up to? Is it that they expect people to be nice to them, in return? An attempt to have heaven before death?
@colmc
sorry for your loss. Thanks for starting another interesting thread.
I often reflect that belief systems, religious and otherwise all seem to tap into a moral code, a deep sense of how it is right for us to behave if we wish to survive, that I suspect is deep in our genome from our pre-civilization past.
Studies with young children have shown that empathy and altruism are there at an early stage before the effects of 'civilization' bear down on them.
Belief systems including religions hi-jack these deep tribal, ancestral moral modes and try to attribute them to whatever religious or otherwise belief system they are peddling.
Jesus may or may not, for all kinds of regrettable but understandable reasons, may never be acknowledged by historians as being a de-facto historical certainty. But his teachings about how people should treat each other resonate with most open-minded people perhaps because they resonate with a sense of morality that predates religion itself.
Today I see a world where humans, whether it is the materialistic pseudo-culture of the 'West' or the independent thought-crushing oppression of Islam et cetera as a direct threat to all that allowed us to get here in the first place namely human intelligence.
The less we think for ourselves as individuals the more our cerebral cortex will atrophy like they have been shown to have done with the domestication of our pet animals.
That possibility worries me and I suspect signs of it are emerging already.
Studies with young children have shown that empathy and altruism are there at an early stage before the effects of 'civilization' bear down on them.
Belief systems including religions hi-jack these deep tribal, ancestral moral modes and try to attribute them to whatever religious or otherwise belief system they are peddling.
Jesus may or may not, for all kinds of regrettable but understandable reasons, may never be acknowledged by historians as being a de-facto historical certainty. But his teachings about how people should treat each other resonate with most open-minded people perhaps because they resonate with a sense of morality that predates religion itself.
Today I see a world where humans, whether it is the materialistic pseudo-culture of the 'West' or the independent thought-crushing oppression of Islam et cetera as a direct threat to all that allowed us to get here in the first place namely human intelligence.
The less we think for ourselves as individuals the more our cerebral cortex will atrophy like they have been shown to have done with the domestication of our pet animals.
That possibility worries me and I suspect signs of it are emerging already.
colmc; //The less we think for ourselves as individuals the more our cerebral cortex will atrophy//
Well, you know more about morphology than I, but it seems to me that in a society based on individualism, advancement could not succeed. The development of homo sapiens has been based on achievements arrived at by the collective dissemination of discovery and information.
Well, you know more about morphology than I, but it seems to me that in a society based on individualism, advancement could not succeed. The development of homo sapiens has been based on achievements arrived at by the collective dissemination of discovery and information.
Yes, the collective ideal like other moral concepts probably pre-dates contemporary civilization.
When they excavated Skara Brae in Orkney the archaeologists were amazed that in the Neolithic times everyone had a living space that was the same as any other. There wasn't a palace on the hill, everyone there appeared to be collectively equal.
In contrast I see a young generation today that around the world is being subjected to unprecedented pressures to abandon their own precious right to use their cerebral origamy to think for themselves and hand their minds over to the control of others.
If this trend is real and not a figment of my imagination I fear that human intelligence probably peaked in 1905 and is now on a downward path. Puppet-masters and billions of dumbed down people they play around with. Is that our future, or even already our present day?
When they excavated Skara Brae in Orkney the archaeologists were amazed that in the Neolithic times everyone had a living space that was the same as any other. There wasn't a palace on the hill, everyone there appeared to be collectively equal.
In contrast I see a young generation today that around the world is being subjected to unprecedented pressures to abandon their own precious right to use their cerebral origamy to think for themselves and hand their minds over to the control of others.
If this trend is real and not a figment of my imagination I fear that human intelligence probably peaked in 1905 and is now on a downward path. Puppet-masters and billions of dumbed down people they play around with. Is that our future, or even already our present day?
Latest Posts
ChatterBank90 mins ago
Crosswords159 mins ago
Body & Soul170 mins ago
Connections #324 Tuesday 30 April
Quizzes & Puzzles184 mins ago
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|