Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

How is science having an effect on our spiritual self?

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Phage....just for the record...tis usually the ignorant members of the scientific community who engage me in debate, not the other way round. I am happy to acknowledge a difference of opinion. They, usually, are not. Present company excepted. Of course.

Cait




posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
Ah, melatonin! I was wondering when you would show up, and I do hope you are well.


Hey, and you too



As for my definitions of the two types of science, I meant exactly what I said. I trust in science quite a bit. I excelled in every scientific class I took throughout my academic career (and there were quite a few), and I actually do research on private projects in my spare time.


Cool.


What I do not have trust in is when someone who is not a scientist, and clearly does not understand the science they are speaking to (as witnessed by consistent errors) tells me I have to change my ways for the 'good of the planet'. Then the single greatest hope they can spell out for me to do is to pay more money to them.


Is this the argumentum ad fatius Goreus?

Heh, I think I've noted numerous times that I don't appreciate his interference that much myself. But it's not as if he's the only one saying such things.


As one possible example, given that historic CO2 emissions trail historic temperature rises by a few years, it seems completely plausible that the rise in CO2 levels actually helped to abate the warming trends, as a self-correcting mechanism of the natural structure of the planet's ecosystem. If that were true, then by reducing CO2 levels, we could actually be compounding any warming trend.


I really don't get this reasoning. So rising CO2 might actually be offsetting warming, rather than producing it?

Or in other words, releasing a greenhouse gas could cause cooling? Not really supported by physics though. Indeed, this would suggest that instead of GHGs warming the planet, they are cooling it. This would be a whole new physics.


Now I am not saying I believe that. But it does serve to show how dangerous a lack of knowledge can be when coupled with a belief that we have all the knowledge. Arrogance can be deadly, and many of the present scientific 'consensuses' (see my first post for the translation) are frothing with arrogance.


This bit of physics you are talking about readily fits into the category one of your terminology. The spectroscopic properties of molecules are pretty well understood.


So, in answer to your accusation, you did not understand me correctly. Perhaps you understood what you wished to understand?


You never know, maybe that was the case.


Oh, and so you'll know, I never considered myself a Libertarian, although I do agree with some of their platform. I consider myself an educated individual... and a redneck.


TheRedneck


That's cool. Although you might want to brush up on the physics.

Take care man.

Anyway, this sort of outlines what I mean. But I promised to leave and allow discussion wiithout a nasty sceptic materialistic atheist realist.


Originally posted by Frankidealist35
reply to post by melatonin
 

I find it shocking that you would call someone with a different set of beliefs than yours a woo and by doing that you are proving the idea that scientists are ignorant to be correct. Being a materialist is not the right way, and not the best way, for anyone to be. It is obvious that metaphysical concepts like magic and spiritual selves do exist. It is less obvious to scientists that only see what they want to see and look for other explanations with things through scientific methods rather than taking methods to prove other observations about the world in other ways.


Yes, it's dreadful. And yes, it obvious.

Have fun!

[edit on 16-8-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
Aw, don't leave. This is just getting interesting... besides, the point I made to cait is also applicable to you.


The explanation I made as to CO2 and lowering temperatures was no more than a thought, but one which could be possible, given that we do not understand all of the workings of a very chaotic system. I won't go deeper into the possible physics behind this here, but I am sure we will find a thread to cover it in.


The point was not to instigate a new debate over Global Warming/Cooling/Change/weather/climate/whatever, but rather to show that it is very possible to poke holes in such a theory with a modicum of thought. This is not science. If it is ever proven that Global Warming exists in dangerous levels and that it is man-made, it will require much more consistent research on the subject. Until that time comes, it is simply supposition, admittedly by many people who are schooled in the science, but supposition nonetheless.

Supposition is cause for more investigation. It is not cause for public panic, nor for sweeping social/financial agendas.

And here again, I steer this thread back onto subject (maybe I need to change my title line?
). If we are talking about true science, which is supported by peer-reviewed independent verification of all concerned facts, in an open environment where everyone is allowed to state their findings and professional opinions, then true science will not conflict with true spirituality. Indeed, each will, each must, by definition, uphold the other. If this is not the case, one or both are flawed and require more investigation. UFOTECH said this very well.

So I end this post with a more detailed definition of my first post:

  • True science is that science which is peer-reviewed in an open environment, where anyone concerned can openly present arguments and empirical data without regard to agenda, financial or political.
  • Pop science is that scientific thought which does not welcome peer review or dissent, and which usually carries with it some sort of financial or political agenda to benefit those who are behind it


Yes, I was referencing Mr. Gore.

I believe my understanding of physics is up to date as much as anyone's. Specialties in Chemistry, Electric/Electronic, Magnetics, Metallurgy, and Structural/Mechanical/Electronic Engineering.

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
reply to post by melatonin
 

Being a materialist is not the right way, and not the best way, for anyone to be.


Hmmm. Ok. So much for live and let live.

"I'm right and you're wrong."

I thought you wanted to talk about "How is science having an effect on our spiritual self?"



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 07:43 PM
link   
Science was once used to help man understand things to a greater degree and to help ourselves to be more mentally and physically fit.

Science today is being used to control the masses, keep them dumb and distract them, much like religion is used. Science, to me, is a beautiful thing, but the people with evil intent turn science, something that is supposed to be a friend, to foe.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

I did, but, I wanted to talk about how science was having an effect on our spiritual self. I don't want to debate about separate sets of beliefs. One user came in here and called a group of people woo's, and said that being a materialist was the best way to be, and I just was saying that it isn't the best way to be. I'm not saying science is ruining our lives... what I'm trying to measure is how much of an effect that science has on our spiritual self like our souls and our emotional side. I didn't ask for someone to claim we were being psuedoscientific woo's.

[edit on 16-8-2008 by Frankidealist35]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdrawkcabII
Science, to me, is a beautiful thing, but the people with evil intent turn science, something that is supposed to be a friend, to foe.


Are you suggesting that spiritual ideals have not been used for evil? People with evil intent will use whatever works. Any form of power or information can be used to the benefit or detriment of mankind.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
reply to post by Phage
 

I'm not saying science is ruining our lives... what I'm trying to measure is how much of an effect that science has on our spiritual self like our souls and our emotional side. I didn't ask for someone to claim we were being psuedoscientific woo's.


I suggest that you cannot "measure" any effect on our spiritual selves. Have I lost 10% of my spirituality? 20%? Sounds a bit scientific.

That's my point, you are mixing the two. "Here be dragons."

Edit to add: Yes, it is affecting our spiritual side. If we're bothered by it. If we let it.

[edit on 16-8-2008 by Phage]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
I didn't ask for someone to claim we were being psuedoscientific woo's.


I didn't say you were. But you can class yourself thus if you want.

Redneck, I'll catch you around, dude. Too many thin skins in here.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
I'll be here.


If you're allergic to thin skins, though, might I suggest some cream or something? Looks like we have a bumper crop this year.

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 09:53 PM
link   
The spiritual and mystical has nothing to fear from science if there is truth in it. The mems within the mystical ideas that mankind holds to that are not truth will in the end fall away as the truth of the matter is revealed by science.

Quantum mechanics has already revealed very strange things to be truth. Action at a distance by quantum entanglement for instance has been proven.

2 photons that were quantum entangled demonstrated that they communicated information about each other at instantaneous speed while being 18 miles apart. Now think about twins that were children of the same egg that have a proven psychic bond. Does the fact that these twins were formed from the same original egg mean that they were composed of atoms that were quantum entangled? Perhaps or perhaps there is some mystical connection but I suspect that the twins have a quantum level connection not some mystical bond.

Science will in the end confirm what is truth within spiritual and mystical awareness and what is just the imaginings of people

I am reminded of another area of potential quantum mechanical weirdness. It is often called the 100th monkey effect in which a learned behavior spreads instantaneously from one group of monkeys to all related monkeys once a critical number is reached. This also can be explained by a quantum entanglement of the atoms that make up their DNA. This said I think it is clear that when we are capable of effective and accurate quantum level circuitry as nano-technology improves our ability to see the very small we will find the answers to these mystical awareness.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage

Originally posted by sdrawkcabII
Science, to me, is a beautiful thing, but the people with evil intent turn science, something that is supposed to be a friend, to foe.


Are you suggesting that spiritual ideals have not been used for evil? People with evil intent will use whatever works. Any form of power or information can be used to the benefit or detriment of mankind.


sdrawkcabII: "Science today is being used to control the masses, keep them dumb and distract them, much like religion is used. Science, to me, is a beautiful thing, but the people with evil intent turn science, something that is supposed to be a friend, to foe."

Read my entire post before you comment on it, otherwise, you'll just be asking questions that I've answered prior to you asking them.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by sdrawkcabII
 


I did read your entire post. It was pretty concise.

If your objection is to my omission of the clause regarding religion; I don't consider religion and spirituality to be identical. If you do then I indeed parsed your meaning incorrectly. Since there had been only one mention of religion as separate from spirituality previous to your post I assumed you were also citing it as separate. Perhaps I was too concise in my question.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:27 AM
link   
I think UFOTECH said it best, just because modern mainstream science appears to be mainly antagonistic towards spirituality I don't think it necessarily needs to be.

We should be trying to expand our mental horizons to the point where scientists are able to enter the field of spiritual study and try to come up with some tangible results which may help the more "mentally experimental" to further their own evolutionary paths.

I do agree that currently its much better to try and practice spirituality in a natural setting and that modern convinces if you like can detract from that, but I think it would be possible to create a spiritually harmonious society if the two could work hand in hand.

Scientists spend their lives trying to unravel the millions of complex laws which govern creation, and then try to deny an intelligent creator of any sort ? Come on who are you trying to kid. Now lets start again shall we.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:01 AM
link   
Aroint thee, rude mechanical!

Let us be frank.

The effect of science on people's 'spiritual selves' is to threaten, frighten and anger them.

These effects are readily demonstrated wherever spiritual folk gather. They have been regularly demonstrated on this thread from the OP onwards.

And this is perfectly understandable.

There is a word for people who are in constant touch with their spiritual selves. They are called believers. Their beliefs are an important part of their self-concept, so they cherish them.

But we live in the age of science.

What science does is: it proves and disproves things. Which means it proves and disproves beliefs. Cherished beliefs.

For a person who values his spiritual side, proof and disproof are equally damaging. There's no believing in something that's already been proved, because after it's proved you know it's real. Belief is no longer in the picture. And of course there's no more believing in something that has been disproved, either, for reasons that should be too obvious to need spelling out.

To obtain the spiritual benefits of belief, therefore, you have to believe in something that hasn't been either proved or disproved... yet.

But we live in an age of science.

In this age of science, this age of busybodies with tunnelling electron microscopes and hadron colliders, the number of things which haven't either been proved or disproved once and for all is forever dwindling.

Leaving less and less for believers to believe in.

Less and less nourishment, if you like, for their spiritual selves.

No wonder believers hate science.

No wonder the effect of science on their spiritual selves is so negative.

No wonder poor melatonin got his shoelaces so thorougly worried in this thread.

But (the thing is) we live in an age of science.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by caitlinfae
Frank, I completely agree....I've had so many heated arguements with ignorant scientists, who insist that if it can't be measured, it doesn't exist, and our familiarity and comfort with technology today makes us think, often, that science is infallible.


That statement is rather full of hyprocisy. You are having a go at a person because they can't see, taste, smell or otherwise prove something exists? The hypocrisy is that it could easily be reversed and far easier to say that you can't prove anything you're saying exists and so you're the ignorant one.

Note this was not me actually calling you ignorant, just pointing out that your arguement is kind of flawed and a little unfair to call someone ignorant just because they won't believe in something without proof.

As for science being infallible, that depends how you mean. Science constantly fixes itself, so in the end science is like a dusty diamond, flawless underneath but you have to clean off all the dust first


I've heavily into the good old science belief and yet i'm deeply spiritual. Spirituality doesn't mean you need to belive in a god, natural alternative energies existing or anything else. Spirituality can be as simple as looking at a sunset and feeling connected to your enviroment, realising it's beauty and wanting to see more of it.

[edit on 17-8-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:38 AM
link   
Actually, I wasn't calling anyone here ignorant...just talking about my past experiences in this kind of debate on other forums, which make this look like a stroll in the park. I chose not to be part of this any more because I have other things to do with my time, and I can't stand the bullying that discussions like this one frequently degrade to...again that's not aimed at anyone here, so please don't take it personally. I would love to investigate the links between science and spirituality, but have never found the right place or group of people to do that with...And there is something about me that makes the science bods more defensive and argumentative than they would be otherwise....maybe the witchcraft issues, I dunno. It's not that I have a thin skin, but that I feel I ruin the debate for other people by causing it to sidetrack. The OP has a really good idea for a thread, and it's all gone a bit pearshaped. I chose not to spend time in it, that's all, but I'm still reading and watching what happens.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:51 AM
link   
The effect of science on people's 'spiritual selves' is to threaten, frighten and anger them.

To an extend this is true. I've found, and this is only my experience, that scientists (and I'm osrry to lump everone into this category together) argue in a way that pulls things apart, possible quite rightly, and will disect a discussion line by line, but without seeing the possibility of a bigger picture that may have other colours in it. I've often encountered this technique and it drives me nuts...picking one line or a phrase from a post and not hearing the whole point. It does make me angry, I will admit.


But we live in an age of science.

We also live in an age in intense spiritual growth.


No wonder believers hate science.

Well, this believer doesn't....a huge and very wrong assumption. I want to know more about it from people who don't dismiss my beliefs as woo.


Cait





[edit on 17-8-2008 by caitlinfae]



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by caitlinfae
Frank, I completely agree....I've had so many heated arguements with ignorant scientists, who insist that if it can't be measured, it doesn't exist, and our familiarity and comfort with technology today makes us think, often, that science is infallible. We know *nothing*, compared to what there is to know, and cannot rule out what we perceive in other more spiritual ways as wrong, misguided or superstitious. Our love affair with technology has dulled our senses, and we need to rediscover what it feels like to be human in a world that is not techology loaded.

Having natural food, heating our homes differently, even allowing ourselves to be cold sometimes, switching off as much electrical stuff as we can and just allowing ourselves not to be constantly entertained will go a long way towards re-establishing a connection.

Cait


I had much the same argument recently on another site, with one poster in particular. He constantly demanded empirical validated proof, belittled those who thought differently from him, and claimed his superior inttelligance justified his obvious bias and provocation towards others. He also cherry picked, misquoted and generally dissected every single comment to avoid adressing the bigger question, all the while claiming his logic was unquestionable and unnasailable, not once getting the fact he'd taken logic to the extreme of stupidity. It's depressing that logic and empircism have become the new weapons of fundamentalist scientism worshippers.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
No wonder poor melatonin got his shoelaces so thorougly worried in this thread.

But (the thing is) we live in an age of science.


And the problem is that some fawn over the calls of 'scientific' spangled drongos, and expect others to do the same.





new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join