Do Your Beliefs Matter?

Some people put their philosophy above science, not recognizing why the latter is true while the former is simply arbitrary.

Sometimes I ask myself "So Science - in effect, at least circa 2017 - basically understands the nature of reality, which happens to be fundamentally at odds with "free-market libertarianism".

How do we deal with this? Did Francis Bacon - Merchant and philosopher, not get where the scientific enterprise would ultimately lead to: the understanding of how we work, how we emerged (evolution), and the nature and function of matter?

Did he think, or do todays free market libertarians think, that science somehow supports capitalism or individualism? Do they really think understanding function - or how organisms, systems, etc, work - doesn't necessarily entails a relational logic - a logic of "systems", with resonance, coherence, symmetry, and complementarity, regulating the material emergence of all things, including our selves and our own observing minds?

No. Science - or the study of empirical cause and effect - has brought Humans to the "age of emergence", which follows the darkness of the 18th-20th century dogma of the "age of reductionism". Alfred North Whitehead, an important philosopher writing at the beginning of the quantum revolution, understood that all things were in effect "flashing in and out" at the smallest scale, yet generating and maintain structure at largest scale through "emergent" relationships - where a higher stability regulates the flow of energy at the quantum scales.

Libertarianism,

This mythology needs to end. As stupid as evangelical Christianity, fundamentalist Islam, and fundamentalist Judaism can seem, so to any other fundamentalist dogma based in an irrational faith of your particular brand of meaning. Satanism seems to be that - emerging and growing because of a fetishization of the "liberty to act" - to do what I want, and ignore or pretend consequences don't shoot off from every action you take. No matter - theology, or a kabbalistic/metaphysical 'theory of emanation' imagines that will is 'higher' than feeling - and so, ergo, "obviously", I am acting from a higher place when "my will" directs my action.

Yadayada. No matter how nonsensical that looks to psychologists, philosophers and other academics, poorly educated (or myopically educated) minds working from limited information 'totalize' their assumptions as if nothing were missing from their knowledge-base, and even more disconcerting, since this religion expects complete obedience to the doctrine, even if new information were encountered, like any bleeding-heart devotee of an irrational religion, they will close their eyes and pretend that nothing bad just happened.

By "bad", I simply mean "as if your brain isn't completely structured by dynamical rules". Reality is felt by these people to be "inchoate", or unexplainable. It 'flows', inchoate, like a river. The logic of this approach derives from the perception-action cycles that orient the expression of affect/meaning - like aligning crystals, expressing the same light, so to does the mind remain tightly coupled to its ontological attractor (existential 'way of being you').

That reality "flows", for us, of course, may lead one to assume that the flow is "one", as opposed to made-up of reiterated "moments" which swimmingly combine to generate a unified experience of self. But in reality, there are two 'poles', that are actually organized in ways as to demarcate their "oppositeness". Perception - or vision in Humans - is at the back of the brain, at the occipital cortex. Hearing - a secondary sense organ, is located to the sides - the 'temporal cortex'. Primary perception - such as vision, occurs in the back of the brain, yet is dynamically "tethered" to the limbic system mid-brain and lower-brain dynamics which regulate homeostasis within the body, vis-à-vis the "meaning" of signals coming in from the environment. Thus, say out there in the environment is that liberal hippy know-it-all - me - posting on this here ATS, writing as if he knows everything. If such a feeling-relation applies to you, your brain has a whole 'history' of reasons that is literally built up as your neurological architecture. In such a situation, your amygdala would sense upon seeing who made this thread - astrocyte - that it was bad. A negative affect would be produced phenomenologically (in your embodied experience), while your visual processes would incline to scan in particular ways as that relates to the cognitive-centers of your forebrain. The visual centers at the back are guided by the acute sensitivities of the amygdala (affect) striatum (habitual modes of cognizing and feeling) as well as the wider ventral, lateral, and dorsal areas of the forebrain, which 'extend' the mind out into complex abstractive processes which are heavily reliant upon language and social references to compute the value of something.

Is there not a fundamental cause-effect in how such cognizing/affect works? Habit determines the persons feeling-relations, and the forebrains "moral absence", is maintained by a larger scale "egotism", whereby cognitive forebrain dynamics are leveraged to justify the secondary-processes that "branch off" from the initial perception of threat. The fact that you are threatened - i.e. implicitly recognizing your vulnerability to being hurt, should - and would - normally inform the Humans consciousness that they should communicate that knowledge of self so that maybe a negotiation of that reality could be created, and made semantically valuable as a 'general truth' of our condition. There's good reason to believe this is how we emerged in the first place.

Cause and Affect, and so, morality, in Humans, is about how we understand our emotions, our affect, and whether or not we allow ourselves to unjustly dysregulate the experience of other people. This is what karma is: the quantum/material entanglement of experiencing subjects/agents who mutually influence one another's form of existence. Every act - every radiation from our agency, goes into someone else, into the structuring of their body-mind, activating the same cause-effect molecular and supramolecular dynamics that underlie our brain and psychological behavior. No one is "outside" - a fact that should be celebrated rather than disdained - as if your disdain isn't fundamentally an existential rebellion against existence itself.

Ultimately, this fetishization of liberty without an equal emphasis on responsibility, will lead to a fundamental change in Human understanding, and hopefully, Human conversations. You don't force people through law - but through reason, science, and studying reality i.e. through attunement, understanding, and kindness - so that people are convinced and made aware that the options before us are limited - and fantasies and other unreal things that imperil the one reality we live and know - whether it be luciferian/Islamic/jewish/Christian - whatever, such fantasies must be recognized as self-regulation devices made by people who have extended themselves too deeply into material 'things' - who now worship ideas/constructs that serve in someway to keep alive some superficial capital - social, or material - and not the only capital that matters and is relevant to our existence: wellbeing. Change hurts, but it is good to change for the better.

Only to the point, of what you're willing to die for? Then, yes. My "beliefs matter". OP: More important, do your beliefs matter? Nobody asks such a silly/stupid question without personal gain.

I think any tool of man should be tempered.

Be it one creation called science, another tool called politics with higher reasoning like philsophy.

WE are more than both, and to philosophy at least in my opinion creates self reflection.

Are we using our tools correctly?

Most of the time NO we aren't.,

Do my beliefs matter ?

No more than anyone elses.

Fundamental basis of that word equality.

They matter too you as much as you believe . No more , no less .

Your beliefs are yours, that means they matter only to you, they wouldn't be beliefs if they didn't.

originally posted by: Astrocyte

Sometimes I ask myself "So Science - in effect, at least circa 2017 - basically understands the nature of reality, which happens to be fundamentally at odds with "free-market libertarianism".

Wow. No need to go any further here. There is no proof that science "understands the nature of reality"--at all! What hubris for "science" or anyone else to actually believe that. Does this not remind you of the proclamations of the scientific elite in the late 19th century? They thought (and published) that science just about had it covered, just about had everything figured out. Except for dotting some "I's" and crossing some "T's" it was a done deal. The Universe was a vast clock. Someone may (or may not) have set it in motion to begin with, but literally everything responded with precision to the angles of the pool table balls and reacted predictably every single time. There wasn't anything really hidden about the Universe. It was just a bit complex is all. And although likely apocryphal, we have the story of the patent office official who quit "because there was nothing left to invent."

Today we laugh in a superior manner at those quaint thoughts and chalk them up to naivety. Since the educated these days are at least passingly familiar with statistics, quantum mechanics, and relativity, and even string theory, we think of those nineteenth century fellows as just kind of simplistic in their thinking, if not simpletons altogether. And here we are again proclaiming science "understands the nature of reality." And now that you have "established" that "science knows everything," i.e.: 'understands the nature of reality," off you go on a polemic that attempts to claim science "is at odds with" free-market libertarianism.

I see what you did there. It's the same thing those 19th century folks did, like Marx did for communism. "Ideas so good that they are mandatory." And if you don't like the ideas, we'll kill a few million of you to make sure our ideas are implemented. But there's no need to go too deeply into that, especially since it is religious territory anyway. The basic premise of it is wrong. Science has NOT figured out the nature of reality at all. It is still stuck in the 19th century physical, attempting to explain everything by those billiard balls. Tesla had an interesting take on this. He said,

“The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.”

In other words, science has failed to explain consciousness, has failed to explain the meaning of life, has failed to explain what we are supposed to be doing while we’re here on Earth. And in that sense, no, your beliefs don’t matter at all. They have been formed because of your environment, because of your personal history. To put it in simple terms, if you were born into a Muslim family, you believe in Allah. If you were born into a Christian family, you believe in Jesus. There is no reality there at all. Jesus and Allah (and all the rest) do not have an independent existence apart from your beliefs. The same is true of your political leanings. All they show is how thoroughly brainwashed you have been in whatever political reality you deem to be superior.

a reply to: Astrocyte

To the people who have all the capital it's anything but superficial. The people with money simply do not listen to people like you. Most people with a good amount of money are too busy spending it to even think about philosophy.

a reply to: Astrocyte

I think you've lost yourself in the intellectualization of your own belief system.

1) Science and the laws of nature are not the same. Science is man's limited observation of the laws of nature/reality. As far as we know, the universe could be infinite, thus by comparison, our observations could be infinitely limited. Many of our theories work under the conditions of our relatively localized environment, but out side of our local environment, it could be a whole different ball game.

2) Ecologically speaking, Free-market Libertarianism does seem to fit our scientific observations. Supply vs demand, competition vs value...the flow of money does seem to mimic the delicate balance of an ecosystem. When that balance is disrupted by Federalist Regulationism, it falls apart as an ecosystem would under deforestation.

3) Individual beliefs absolutely do matter. Like minded people tend to congregate together. That shifts the balance of influence. That sways elections and changes laws.

Definition of your

1:  of or relating to you or yourself or yourselves especially as possessor or possessors your bodies, agent or agents your contributions, or object or objects of an action your discharge

2:  of or relating to one or oneself when you face the north, east is at your right

3—used with little or no meaning almost as an equivalent to the definite article the your typical teenager

www.merriam-webster.com...

Given its literal meaning?

Why should your beliefs matter?

a reply to: Astrocyte


Just out of personal curiosity?


Do you consider yourself a, "Descendant of Abel"?

originally posted by: TREESNAKE1111
They matter too you as much as you believe . No more , no less .

Bingo!

Music break...

a reply to: DarkvsLight29

Thats just not true- if a belief is held it is acted upon. Once you act, you create unalterable ramifications for the people, and the world, around you.

If I believe, punching you means hi, that invariably has an. Effect- getting punched- on someone outside of you.

originally posted by: LucidWarrior
a reply to: DarkvsLight29

Thats just not true- if a belief is held it is acted upon. Once you act, you create unalterable ramifications for the people, and the world, around you.

If I believe, punching you means hi, that invariably has an. Effect- getting punched- on someone outside of you.

Not all beliefs are acted upon most are just wishful thinking and kept in your own mind, the ones acted upon are more extreme beliefs that are held by the one that believes​ if they don't act then it's ether their fault or because someone told them to, now they have consequences.

Buffalo Woman Comes Singing

One of the most powerful aspects of Native spirituality in its myriad forms among many different tribes is that it is a mystical tradition, rather than a priestly one. Let me explain the difference as I see it.

In a priestly tradition there is a human lineage down through which the teachings and powers are passed. Perhaps it began with one especially enlightened being, and it has come down through time via the spoken or written word. Lineage holders are acknowledged by certain initiations such as the laying on of hands. This kind of religion has a priesthood of men and/or women, and these special ones are the spiritual teachers and authorities. Often in this kind of religion, a common person must come to the priests or priestesses for intercession with God, or the gods. They are told they cannot communicate directly, or recieve directly from Spirit. Often, the enlightened one at the beginning of the lineage has spoken or written of the way. Over time, this becomes the given word. Anyone presuming to communicate with Spirit thereafter is often seen as an imposter.

Mystical religion, on the other hand, understands that the Great Spirit lives within each and every thing, Earthly or otherwise, and so teaches that communication with Great Spirit/Source/God is a completely natural part of all beings. Those who are especially trained or experienced in spiritual matters can provide a roadmap or a model of what has worked for them - and has perhaps worked for others seeking communion with the Great Spirit. They become like elder brothers or sisters on the path. They can guide and assist others, yet would never presume to require another person to go through them to reach Spirit. Their calling is to assist, rather than to intercede. Their intent is empowerment, not disempowerment.

The mystical peoples realize that God speaks to each of us, if we will but listen; and that, in fact, God often speaks through one of us to all other people. Thus, the "Bible" is continually being written. It is a living, growing revelation; it is not a closed book. For example, the old-time Lakotas listened to the vision of Black Elk, which he received when he was only nine years old, and literally danced it into their mythology - their ever-growing "Bible". It was a revelation not only for them, but for people of all races upon Mother's breast. Rather than being excluded by a structured and "complete" past, this new vision was honored and made a part of the vital, living tradition.

a reply to: Michet



Could not have said it better

Next time though do not use quotes unless you are discussing something another person wrote.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Emergence is reductionism but in a different direction. To see systems and categories where there are only things and their movements is headed in the wrong direction in my opinion.

If people are motivated by the content of their beliefs, then yes, beliefs matter.

Of course "beliefs" matter…or rather our actions based upon those beliefs...
Beliefs are better defined by the word "morality"..and morality is inherent to our species…
It's encoded in our DNA....morality is timeless and unequivocal...
It's black and white, right and wrong, good and evil....

Ignoring inherent morality is the domain of the bereft moral relativist...

There is only morality and relative morality...
One is good, right and true while the other is simply evil...

-Chris

For the sake of adaptation to any situation or adversity? I prefer not to have any at all... in a be like water sort of state. It fits or fills any situation, when frozen can crack solid rock, even condensate to the outside of a glass and bye bye...

Eventually even the largest mountain will reduce down to a mars like equanimity on the surface the atmosphere blown away and when it is time after all rolls and tills inwards the dynamo will restart when enough heat builds back up electromagnetic poles restart and begin rebuilding the bubble of waves to rebuild the bubble for the atmosphere. Then the heat and bubble like a terrarium, starts reactivating the life and the weather and the hard shell will crack the poles seep rain crack heat and microbes and the inner liquid that saturated the soil will bloom.

No big deal...

Sugar bears in space nom nom nom

Our beliefs matter.