Charles Darwin did not invent the concept of evolution. In fact, he himself acknowledged that the idea, however loosely defined, had a history dating back to Aristotle. And despite the general impression offered by most scientists today, it wasn’t always a materialistic notion either. In its modern incarnation, the concept of evolution can be traced directly to Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who viewed the evolutionary process as an act of God.
At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the notion that the evolutionary process is ultimately driven by a spiritual impulse is continuing to gain traction, with a growing number of progressive philosophers, scientists, and mystics exploring its implications. To many, it is simply a compelling philosophy, uniting the revelations of science and spirituality in a way that no other theory can. But others, like Aurobindo before them, are beginning to reach beyond a theoretical discussion to wonder: What might human life and culture look like if we fully took to heart the reality of this view? Freed from the mythic dogmatisms of premodern religion, transcending the materialistic biases of modern scientific thought, and liberated from the narcissistic self-absorptions of postmodernity, what kind of new world could human beings aligned with the trajectory of a spiritually evolving cosmos actually create?
"Heard termed this phase 'Leptoid Man' (from the Greek word lepsis: "to leap") because humans increasingly face the opportunity to 'take a leap' into a considerably expanded consciousness, in which the various aspects of the psyche will be integrated, without any aspects being repressed or seeming foreign. A society that recognizes this stage of development will honor and support individuals in a "second maturity" who wish to resolve their inner conflicts and dissolve their inner blockages and become the sages of the modern world. Further, instead of simply enjoying biological and psychological health, as Freud and other important psychiatric or psychological philosophers of the “total-individual” phase conceived, Leptoid man will not only have entered the “second maturity” of the complete individual but will become: a human of developed spirituality, similar to the mystics of the past; and a person of wisdom.
But we are still in the transitional phase, not really beyond the super-individualistic fourth, "humanic" phase. Heard's views were cautionary about developments in society that were not balanced, about inappropriate aims of our use of technological power. He wrote: "we are aware of our precarious imbalance: of our persistent and ever-increasing production of power and our inadequacy of purpose; of our critical analytic ability and our creative paucity; of our triumphantly efficient technical education and our ineffective, irrelevant education for values, for meaning, for the training of the will, the lifting of the heart, and the illumination of the mind.
Omega point is a term invented by French Jesuit Pierre Teilhard de Chardin to describe the maximum level of complexity and consciousness to which the universe seems to be evolving. Teilhard postulates that Omega Point bears the resemblance of the Christian Logos; Christ, who draws all things into himself. In this theory, the universe is constantly developing towards higher levels of material complexity and consciousness, a theory of evolution that Teilhard calls the Law of Complexity/Consciousness. For Teilhard, the universe can only move in the direction of more complexity and consciousness if it is being drawn by a supreme point of complexity and consciousness. Thus Teilhard postulates the "Omega Point" as the supreme point of complexity and consciousness, which is not only as the term of the evolutionary process, but the actual cause for the universe to move in the direction of complexity and consciousness. In other words, Omega Point exists as supremely complex and conscious, independent of the evolving universe. I.e. Omega Point is transcendent. In interpreting the universe this way, Teilhard kept Omega Point within the orthodox views of the Christian God, who is transcendent (independent) of his creation.
Accordingly, a religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance and loftiness of those superpersonal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation. They exist with the same necessity and matter-of-factness as he himself. In this sense religion is the age-old endeavor of mankind to become clearly and completely conscious of these values and goals and constantly to strengthen and extend their effect. If one conceives of religion and science according to these definitions then a conflict between them appears impossible. For science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be, and outside of its domain value judgments of all kinds remain necessary. Religion, on the other hand, deals only with evaluations of human thought and action: it cannot justifiably speak of facts and relationships between facts. According to this interpretation the well-known conflicts between religion and science in the past must all be ascribed to a misapprehension of the situation which has been described.
What might human life and culture look like if we fully took to heart the reality of this view? Freed from the mythic dogmatisms of premodern religion, transcending the materialistic biases of modern scientific thought, and liberated from the narcissistic self-absorptions of postmodernity, what kind of new world could human beings aligned with the trajectory of a spiritually evolving cosmos actually create?
"Change merely creates an illusion of time, with each individual moment existing in its own right, complete and whole. He calls these moments "Nows". It is all an illusion: there is no motion and no change. He argues that the illusion of time is what we interpret through what he calls "time capsules," which are "any fixed pattern that creates or encodes the appearance of motion, change or history."
[Socrates] He will then proceed to argue that this is he who gives the season and the years, and is the guardian of all that is in the visible world, and in a certain way the cause of all things which he and his fellows have been accustomed to behold?
[Glaucon] Clearly, he said, he would first see the sun and then reason about him.
[Socrates] And when he remembered his old habitation, and the wisdom of the cave and his fellow-prisoners, do you not suppose that he would felicitate himself on the change, and pity them?
[Glaucon] Certainly, he would.
[Socrates] And if they were in the habit of conferring honors among themselves on those who were quickest to observe the passing shadows and to remark which of them went before, and which followed after, and which were together; and who were therefore best able to draw conclusions as to the future, do you think that he would care for such honors and glories, or envy the possessors of them? Would he not say with Homer,
"Better to be the poor servant of a poor master,"
and to endure anything, rather than think as they do and live after their manner?
...a cumulative increase of the beauty and universal perfection of the works of God, a perpetual and unrestricted progress of the universe as a whole must be recognized, such that it advances to a higher state of development.
- Gottfried Liebniz, quoted in the article linked above
the quality or state of being spiritual
of, relating to, consisting of, or affecting the spirit
What is Emotional Intelligence?
Emotional intelligence (EI) refers to the ability to perceive, control, and evaluate emotions. Some researchers suggest that emotional intelligence can be learned and strengthened, while other claim it is an inborn characteristic
Science is the art of describing shadows. It may be useful, fun, etc. And I love and enjoy it. But it is still the describing of shadows. Science is not where you go to find gnosis. Gnosis is where science goes to learn more about the shadows.
Originally posted by solomons path
Merriam Webster says spirituality is
the quality or state of being spiritual
so what is "spiritual"
of, relating to, consisting of, or affecting the spirit
1: an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical organisms
2: a supernatural being or essence; b: soul; c: an often malevolent being that is bodiless but can become visible
3: temper or disposition of mind or outlook
4: the immaterial intelligent or sentient part of a person
5 a: the activating or essential principle influencing a person ; b: an inclination, impulse, or tendency of a specified kind : mood
6 a: a special attitude or frame of mind; b: the feeling, quality, or disposition characterizing something
7: a lively or brisk quality in a person or a person's actions
8: a person having a character or disposition of a specified nature
9: a mental disposition characterized by firmness or assertiveness
10 a: distillate; b: a usually volatile organic solvent
11 a: prevailing tone or tendency ; b: general intent or real meaning
12: an alcoholic solution of a volatile substance
13: enthusiastic loyalty
Originally posted by schrodingers dog
OK, first let me say that I am agnostic, thus I have no particular position when it comes to the ongoing debate between atheists and creationists as to issues of origins and deity.
As I have declared in many threads I find this debate to have become repetitive and boring as I see the two sides essentially throwing the same talking points at each other over and over. www.abovetopsecret.com...