How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 A Different Cosmological View   [ Page: 1  2  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

A Different Cosmological View

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


25 posted 10-08-2007 08:09 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

quote:
You mentioned something in an earlier thread that completely went past me at the time(I’ll blame my philosophical rustiness on kids … just wait … you’ll see what I mean).


My favorite line.
oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


26 posted 11-10-2007 12:17 AM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Hi Serenemous!  There is nothing to get.  "Belief" is an entirely irrelevant construct.  

If one "believes" that the sun is going to come up in the morning, it probably will, though it has nothing to do with what one believes.

If one "believes" that the sun will NOT come up in the morning, it probably will anyway, and has nothing to do with one's beliefs.

Similarly, if (generic) you believe God exists, God either does, or doesn't and it has nothing to do with (generic) you.

Eastern traditions are similar.  You can "believe" in the pantheon of Hindu Gods, or in the demons associated with Tibetan Buddhism, but "belief" in no way affects the Gods or the demons.

Belief is like "trying."  You can try all you want to pick up a telephone book, but if don't PICK UP the telephone book, trying has nothing to do with it.

Just testing out an aphorism:  The harder something is to explain, the less likely it is to be "so."

I'm surprised that the Zen notion of "suchness" hasn't come up yet.  I think it is as reasonable (therefore highly suspect) notion as anything else proposed.

Best, Jim
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


27 posted 11-10-2007 03:01 AM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

I'll take time to read this.  I already knew what Stephen said was correct before I even read the details.

Tomtoo
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


28 posted 11-10-2007 08:29 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

TomMark,

Just make sure you're not making a "hasty induction" fallacy.     It's good to read first, and conclude last.

Stephen
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


29 posted 11-11-2007 07:39 AM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

Stephen, do you mean that you did not say the correct thing?

That post was for Sir Brad to read and he might have found he had changed his Cosmological view a little bit since  5 years of true life had past

Tomtoo
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


30 posted 11-11-2007 07:45 AM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

No, It's not to say that at all.  I still believe that none of us are in the "can't know" category about God.  It just struck me as hasty, to say that you were sure about me before reading what I had to say.  


Stephen
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


31 posted 11-11-2007 08:18 AM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

Oh, kind Stephen, do you truly belive that I have not read any? I did. (And I have read many of your posts so I have some guesses on what you are going to say).  

Anyway, I just want to tease Sir  Brad. He might want to review what  he have said 5 years ago and now, he might say "Stephen, you are right!".  

  
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


32 posted 11-12-2007 08:48 AM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

Dear Sir Brad
----"In traditional Chinese cosmology there is little evidence for a personalized, anthropomorhized God."

Not true. They worship something up there high with mighty power.

----"it just means that ultimate truth is out of reach."

What do you mean by "ultmate truth"?

Your mind can not stop your heart beat..this is truth.

-----"It can be a little staggering at first but really once you get used to it, you get more fascinated with the types of 'worlds' that humanity has created and will create in the future."

Not true. many people don't get used to it and that is why there is general election every 4 years.

----"it simply argues that we don't know, that we can't know and still be human. By human, I mean an historically situated individual that can't get outside of that dilemma."

You were very right. To be a human is  defined by birth, not by knowledge or exclusion.


----"I really don't understand the necessity of personifying cause and effect. If a leaf is blown off a tree, do I have to personify it in order to explain it? You can of course but I don't see why? If a meteorite hits the Russian tundra do I need the arachnids from Starship Troopers to explain it?"

How unpoetic talking! "Blown" here meant wind. Wind means flowing of the air...flowing of the air means hot air goes up and cold air comes down. and what behinds that?  natural-law....this is what you meant  by "personify".... A "concret" understandable cause.
You simply wanted to say that  you have to have a logic to personify,  not by imagination.


---"I would consider it a coincidence."

A leaf blown off tree.  You wanted to say that other might think that wind, fate, God did it while you consider it a coincidence. Co with what incidnece? may I ask. There must be something behind it.  YOu may not want to personify it but you must want to materialize it or fomulerized it or calculate it or human-logic analize it.


====="That is, cause and effect does not have to lead to an absolute beginning or an absolute God or an absolute moral compass. Understanding cause and effect does not have to lead to ascribing intent to material objects or metaphysical forces -- communication does and any form of explanation will imply intent in order for it to be communicable."

Curiosity is build-in charactor. Curiosity will lead you to search for the begining and the end. can't help. and communicating or not, the fact is there and the cause-effect is there. So, communication has no role on the truth of cause/effect.


==="Every example I use from another culture is not intended to show a 'better' way to think how the world is constructed but simply to show that there are different ways to construct the world and if there are different ways to construct the world then who is to say which is better and which isn't?"

Ask Sir Ron. He knows the answer. He said "Poetry is Changing the World". He must know how.    


======'In the earlier post you said that an atheist cannot argue that Hitler was wrong (a strange way of phrasing it by the way but I don't want to go there). Why not? An atheist can apply the exact same principles that you have without having to argue a moral absolute somewhere out there.'

Do you mean that there is a build-in law in every human being?  you are right.


======"My sole interest there is the necessity of anthropomophising deities or believing that a conscious mover is necessary."

What do you mean by necessary?
as food/drink  for life
or game for fun?
or poem for release feelings?
or smoking for comforting?
or  pain killer for pain?
or drug for drug dealer?


Many need it. Does it make a necessary?

No matter how many people need it or how many personified objects human created, or how many kinds of conmological view form human eyes or mind, there is something that can not be manupulate...the truth.

Calling a rock spirit does not make it walking.
Calling a car "Darling" does not make it fires itself

but why we still lie to ourselves?  A hungry soul will take anything in, not necessarily  soul food. Chewing gum satifies mouth, tongue but can not meet stomach and body needs.

Personified object is like chewing gum to spirit or soul.

my thought

Not finished yet.

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


33 posted 11-12-2007 04:12 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Have my views change since I wrote this?

Not much. If anything, they've become stronger over the years.

There is one difference, however. I now see the whole "you can't know" approach as an epistemological trick: you set up the rules so that it can't be done and then argue that it can't be done.

Doubt is an essential aspect of knowledge, but it can never overcome knowledge for without knowledge you can't doubt.

On Chinese cosmology lacking anthropomorphistic characteristics:

quote:
Not true. They worship something up there high with mighty power.


Well, I never meant to deny that there weren't gods (though 'gods' is a tricky word when used here) nor did I mean that the Chinese don't worship something higher. My point is that, traditionally, the groundless ground is not someone but something.

You said the same thing.

If you disagree, you'll just have to show me.

quote:
What do you mean by "ultmate truth"?


Yeah, I don't know. This is one of the things I've changed on. Ultimate truth is a ruse. Ultimate truth isn't 'out of reach', it doesn't even make sense.

On human-created worlds:

quote:
Not true. many people don't get used to it and that is why there is general election every 4 years.


Not quite. My point is that the world is filled with a staggeringly diverse amount of imaginative description. I see no reason not to explore it.

On the human dilemma concerning knowledge"

quote:
You were very right. To be a human is  defined by birth, not by knowledge or exclusion.


See above. I no longer see this as a dilemma. Or rather I see humanity as defined by action. That's a loaded thing to say and I may have to explain later, but I'll leave it for now.

On personification:

quote:
How unpoetic talking! "Blown" here meant wind. Wind means flowing of the air...flowing of the air means hot air goes up and cold air comes down. and what behinds that?  natural-law....this is what you meant  by "personify". A "concret" understandable cause.
You simply wanted to say that  you have to have a lodic to personify,  not by imagination.


No, not exactly. I see no reason to constantly have to go back to the 'infinite regress'. It's still there, and it should be explored -- ad infinitum perhaps -- but that isn't going to change how I live.


On coincidence:

quote:
A leaf blown off tree.  You wanted to say that other might think that wind, fate, God did it while you consider it a coincidence. Co with what incidnece? may I ask. There must be something behind it.  YOu may not want to personify it but you must want to materilize it or fomulerized it or calculate it or human-logic it.


Well, no. Sometimes there is something behind it and sometimes it's just a coincidence (that is, we see a connection that is not in fact there). We do this all the time.

On metaphysical cause and effect:

quote:
Curiosity is build-in charactor. Curiosity will lead you to search for the beginning and the end. can't help. and comunicating or not, the fact is there and the cause-effect is there. So, communication has no role on the truth of cause/effect.


This is a big one. Yes and no.

On change and judgement:

Sorry, I didn't quote you here. Forgive me,   Ron. But I've changed my views here. Who is to say? Who is to judge? I am. You are. We are.

That was already implicit in the original post by the way.  

On human nature:

quote:
Do you mean that there is a build-in law in every human being?  you are right.


Yes and no. You may be right that there really is something like a universal human nature. I'm not sure. I do think that generalizations can be made and I do think that we all, for the most part, see things the same way. It's not easy and it's not always fruitful, but, and we have to be careful here.

That does not mean that you should do what I do or that you should believe what I believe or vice versa.

In fact, I would argue that that is the last thing we should ever hope for.

TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


34 posted 11-12-2007 04:50 PM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

oh, dear Sir Brad, this is philosophy 101. YOu have your grand cosmological views and I can question it, can't I?  I have my views and I can state it , right?

Do I hope anything? No. so no arguement is necessary

have a nice day sir!
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


35 posted 11-12-2007 05:13 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Brad:
quote:
That does not mean that you should do what I do or that you should believe what I believe or vice versa.

In fact, I would argue that that is the last thing we should ever hope for.


There is a truth in this ... that diversity (generally speaking) can be good.  But that doesn't preclude that there is a "way" to live, or a virtue to be had that is transcendent of culture also.  

The Garden of Eden gives a picture of diversity and limitation. They were bidden to eat of all the trees of the garden freely, and yet to also acknowledge a proper limit, much smaller, but important to the whole.  Recognizing a universal necessity divinely given to human nature (ethical and spiritual) does not have to diminish diversity.  There are many trees to be explored.


So I would agree that we shouldn't hope for homogeneity.  The Judeo-Christian worldview does not propose that, only a recognition of sin and an openness to repentance and redemption.


You yourself recognize some of the same principles.  Do you not secretly (or not so secretly) wish that religious zealots would quit trying to promote their dogmas by force and bloodshed?  If so, then you can at least recognize what I'm talking about.  You're right.  Though you would hesitate here ... your distaste of zealotry and jingoism is not just another example of diversity, it is an expression of truth as embodied in the words of Christ.  


Stephen  
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


36 posted 11-12-2007 05:39 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

quote:
Do you not secretly (or not so secretly) wish that religious zealots would quit trying to promote their dogmas by force and bloodshed?


Now, that's funny. Yes. I wish they would stop ringing my doorbell -- sometimes during a snowstorm -- as well.

quote:
If so, then you can at least recognize what I'm talking about.  You're right.  Though you would hesitate here ... your distaste of zealotry and jingoism is not just another example of diversity, it is an expression of truth as embodied in the words of Christ.


I agree, it's not just another example of diversity, it's the precondition for diversity's existence.

TomMark,

No argument, just clarification -- attempted clarification.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


37 posted 11-12-2007 05:42 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


And just how many angels are there on the head of a pin,
(or pen)?

Brad,  I think nothingness should be written as “no-thingness”
more to do with an aspiration to in-distinction than annihilation;
like individual waves falling back into the sea.

Still so much of this is based on speculations that have their
origins in a past of incredible ignorance I don’t see why we should
give it much credence.  
.
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


38 posted 11-12-2007 05:44 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

quote:
I agree, it's not just another example of diversity, it's the precondition for diversity's existence.


But severely limiting diversity, is just another form it.  If, as you say, "we are the judge", then so are they.  


Stephen
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


39 posted 11-12-2007 05:57 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

John:

We appreciate the one more angel you added to the pen.  

quote:
Still so much of this is based on speculations that have their
origins in a past of incredible ignorance I don’t see why we should
give it much credence.


So more current ideas are better simply because they are more current?  Its still true that ideas should be accepted or rejected on their merit, not chronological snobbery.


"It is difficult to resist the conclusion that twentieth-century man has decided to abolish himself. Tired of the struggle to be himself, he has created boredom out of his own affluence, impotence out of his own erotomania, and vulnerability out of his own strength. He himself blows the trumpet that brings the walls of his own cities crashing down until at last, having educated himself into imbecility, having drugged and polluted himself into stupefaction, he keels over a weary, battered old brontosaurus and becomes extinct." (Malcolm Muggeridge)

I didn't post this quote to unfairly criticize modern thinking, or to be pessimistic ... but only to suggest that we are open to criticism perhaps more than our more ignorant predecessors.  The world of modern literature attests to that.  But perhaps you'll only say that our increased intelligence has lead to the uncanny ability to complain better.    


Stephen
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


40 posted 11-12-2007 06:51 PM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

My dear sir Brad

====="Am I really lying here? Is it really so farfetched that animism is alive and well in the everyday world we live in? Have you ever hit a vending machine when the coke or candy bar didn't come out? Ever try to coax your car with soothing words, "C'mon baby, you can do it," or give one a name. What about the superstitions of sailors and astronauts? What about that 'feeling' one gets in the middle of the forest with a slight breeze?"

I love to read this. if you had visited a psychiatric ward, you would write more because you would find a true world of animism.

the "bresze",  every poet knew that it is the the talking of the wind. But, imgiantion is imgination.  Truth is truth.


==="Being open to animism and other forms of religion doesn't necessarily mean I take it hook, line, and sinker but I think it's worth listening to."

You do have a lots of time, don't you? read to your children.  


====="I have a world of different cultures and different histories to choose as counter-examples "

Did you realy mean that your cosmological view were through other people's eyes? (live and died)


===="If you ask a 500BC Chinese person, where these principles come from, you would probably get a blank stare"

not true. he would tell you that it was from conscience. You may ask Stephen where conscience comes from.

====" But that doesn't prove an absolute law, does it? It proves that our current theories align pragmatically with what happens in everyday life (and most people knew what would happen if they jumped off a ten storey building before the law of gravity was figured out)."

Do all the countries use same way to send satelite up to sky?

[This message has been edited by TomMark (11-12-2007 07:32 PM).]

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


41 posted 11-12-2007 07:55 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


"So more current ideas are better simply because they are more current?  Its still true that ideas should be accepted or rejected on their merit, not chronological snobbery."

Stephen.

Not at all;  I’m convinced . . .
Even as I write I am negotiating,
(at a fair price), a bull for sacrifice
to Zeus

It's not merely chronology but better knowledge,
or is the world still flat and held up by
Atlas or a giant turtle?


John

.
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


42 posted 11-12-2007 11:53 PM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

Sir John,
It is on elephant, on elephant, sir!

TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


43 posted 11-13-2007 12:52 AM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

Dear sir Brad,

====="As long as  there are other options available, it is not clear from a human point of view that it is an absolute or obvious to everyone."

A HUMAN POINT VIEW....do you mean that how Sir Balladeer views Bush? You can't even agree with him. I don't agree with him either. So how do you weigh other people's view?


==========="A person can be hungry or not hungry, can know or not know where the food is, can
know what a pantry is or not but all of these are contingent, not absolute, statements. "

Hungry is absolute ...low blood suger.

===="if something explains everything, it doesn't explain anything."

Do you mean that nucleus and electron make matters but do not solve matters?


===="Furthermore, I don't think individuals are all that consistent -- I think they contradict
themselves all the time dependent on the social context in which they are working, in
the way that words are used, and what particular age they may be in (to name a few)
-- I think they do this consciously and unconsciously all the time. I don't believe in
the unified or essential individual, I believe in change (but not absolute change)."

Are you included in the "individuals"?

And what do you mean by "absolute change" ?
Change is absolute. But if you have a category, then you limited yourself. Such as a worm in an apple does not make it an orange. A worm in an Apple is a change. An apple turning into an orange is an absolute change. Is that what you mean?


--======"Arguing that nothing is certain isn't a death blow to any argument because it implies that the 'nothing is certain' is also uncertain."

A mind of "nothing is certian" indeed is living in a  world of certainty.

==========“(and I reserve the right to change my mind).”

No you are not allowed here. If you change to how I think then I shall have no words to say      

======"Do you know what's going to happen tomorrow?
I don't."

Oh, My dear sir Brad, you can't make yourslef sound this silly (you are not).  

You are quite sure that you will be still you
You will not be a  fine girl tomorrow
You'll write uncleared fancy poem of Jiju
Even if you dream a clear pragmatic dream
Wind will blow, earth will still turns and sun moves
Food will fill your stomch and wine will please
And entertain you again  and again.
Of course you are sure about all of this.
There're thing that you try to ignore
to support your cosmological view
What you are talking about is accident
Not the beautiful life you are in now.
  

===="I try to make a guess and live my life according to what I want short term
and long term."

do you make guess in morning or evening? before meal or after meditation?  
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


44 posted 11-13-2007 10:37 AM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

John:
quote:
... I am negotiating,
(at a fair price), a bull for sacrifice
to Zeus ... is the world still flat and held up by Atlas or a giant turtle?


Well now you're mentioning easily refuted particulars, whereas before, only a generality that you hoped would cover other not-so-easily debunked ideas.  When discussing cosmological views (whether supernatural or natural) it pays to differentiate between mythology and cosmology ... and even mythology and religion.  The overlap is granted.  

When discussing science one could criticize early misconceptions and still not take an anti-scientific stance.  The same is true in the area of religion.  Non-religious ideas are not superior to religious ones simply because of the time table ... and much less because they are non-religious.


And personally, I think those who proposed a turtle were closer to the mark than those who now propose mere abstract principles such as chance and time.


Stephen      
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


45 posted 11-13-2007 12:46 PM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

Dear Sir Brad,
======"Perhaps you see these examples as trivial and perhaps they are but it's these little episodes that, to me, show that nothing should ever be taken for granted."

But you indeed take "commom sense" for granted.

So what is common sense and why there is a common sense?


==========="Simply put, I can never know for sure what you truly believe so in making decisions, I will look at your actions, not your beliefs."

Actions...are you holding a zoology to see who behaves like a monkey or who more is like a Panda?

Or an Anatomy to judge which one is more well built?

Or with an psychoanalysis measurement?

Or I shall truly ask on what moral standard that  you are judging people's action? You can't use Bible, can you? YOu can't use Easten culture to measure wester behavior right?  Can you create your own criteria?
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> A Different Cosmological View   [ Page: 1  2  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors