Re: Humanism in 2006


Scott wrote:
> "Joseph H" <joseph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1137969346.650375.166760@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > Scott wrote:
> >> "Joseph H" <joseph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >> news:1137805923.240764.155750@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> >
> >> > Scott wrote:
> >> >> "Joseph H" <joseph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >> >> news:1137701702.078409.326940@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Roger Johansson wrote:
> >> >> >> Mani Deli wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > > I
> >> >> >> > >believe the scientific-method all too often channels us down a
> >> >> >> > >particular form of only-verifiable knowledge to the exclusion of
> >> >> >> > >a
> >> >> >> > >wider understanding, and appreciation, of the complex nature of
> >> >> >> > >existence.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Biology tells us more about the complex nature of existence than
> >> >> >> > any
> >> >> >> > mystical speculation or spiritual mumbo jumbo.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> We probably need som knowledge about history and the psychology of
> >> >> >> religion to understand "the complex nature of existence".
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I wonder about that. I think religion, as you suggest below, more
> >> >> > often
> >> >> > than not muddies the nature of existence. My point, really, was that
> >> >> > we
> >> >> > need to know about religion to understand the complex nature of the
> >> >> > human being. Why this need for belief? Why the wish for value? Why
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > attraction for mysticism? Will rational solutions always play second
> >> >> > fiddle to the lure of magic and the transcendant? I hope not. My
> >> >> > hope
> >> >> > for the future is dependent on our eventually firming up on an
> >> >> > acceptance and valuation of our unique place in nature and our
> >> >> > potential as the eyes and ears and the voice of the universe.
> >> >>
> >> >> "unique place in nature... as the eyes and ears and the voice of the
> >> >> universe"? You see? Anthropomorphism. There is no unique place in the
> >> >> universe. The universe is relative.
> >> >
> >> > Relative, relative...that still doesn't mean that we can't have a
> >> > unique place. What possible relevance is "relative" to that? .
> >>
> >> If existence is meaningless as atheists scientists believe then your
> >> "unique
> >> place" is fantasy and only exists in your mind.
> >
> > I am an atheist, but I do not believe existence is meaningless - which
> > is not to say that I believe that there is an inherent meaning in life.
> > Confused? Let me explain: I feel that the search for meaning is linked
> > with a pre-modern mindset, one that cannot conceive of existence
> > without either a creator or some preset "scientific" dialectic or
> > progress. I think even many atheists find it difficult to free
> > themselves of these preconceptions. There's always a hankering after
> > inbuilt purpose. I don't believe in any such purpose. For me the
> > inquiry is pointless. But to say that something has no inherent meaning
> > or purpose is not to say that it is "meaningless" That particular word
> > has a pajoritive connotation. It adds something to the neutrality of
> > the earlier observation. To say something is without inherent purpose
> > is not to say that it is without value. Life for most of us is full of
> > value. We cling to it for....dear life! Also, in a wider sense, we are
> > part of a process. An event occurred some billions of years ago - and
> > our existence is a consequence of that event. In my view it is a
> > far-reaching consequence. After some twelve billion years of ceaseless
> > permutation matter - within our brains - has finally been configured in
> > a way that allows knowledge of and reflection on the entiure process. I
> > say, therefore, that we are the mind of matter. It is not, of course,
> > literally true. Matter is not an entity with a mind. But it is true to
> > say that we possess the only known configuration of matter with the
> > properties we associate with "mind". Because of this I also say that we
> > are unique. I still can't say how this can be seen as mystical. It
> > might well be wrong. There may be other beings with minds out there. So
> > what? We are definitely unique on this planet; we are unique in the
> > solar system; and we seem to be unique in this corner of the universe.
> > How far do we have to go before we cease to be unique? Where does
> > mysticism enter into this simple observation?
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle
>
> http://www.crisismagazine.com/april2004/feature2.htm
> "It is almost irresistible for humans to believe that we have some special
> relation to the universe, that human life is not just a more-or-less
> farcical outcome of a chain of accidents reaching back to the first three
> minutes, but that we were somehow built in from the beginning.. It is hard
> to realize that this all [i.e., life on Earth] is just a tiny part of an
> overwhelmingly hostile universe. It is even harder to realize that this
> present universe has evolved from an unspeakably unfamiliar early condition,
> and faces a future extinction of endless cold or intolerable heat. The more
> the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless." -
> Steven Weinberg.

Sorry, sorry.......just to make a few things a little clearer.

I don't believe that we have any special relation to the universe. The
universe certainly doesn't "know" of our existence and we most
definitely owe our existence to an immeasurable chain of accident and
circumstance. But then, so do gold and oil and rubber...and all of
these have been discovered to possess particular properties which do
immense service to us as a species. My claim is that we also possess
particular properties, capabilities, in our case - not because nature
ordained it so but because of a particular series of events or crises
in the past that favoured these capabilities. Regardless of how the
universe began and how it is going to end we still at this moment in
time possess these capabilities. I say, of course, that we are the mind
of matter. It is a ludicrous claim, is it not? No, not really. Matter,
as we know it, has, I'm sure, taken countless forms since the beginning
of our universe. It just so happens that the matter lodged in our
brains displays the properties and capabilities we associate with mind.





>
> >>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I keep
> >> >> > being told this is mysticism etc. It is not.
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't know who told you that (David maybe?) but yea they were right.
> >> >> It
> >> >> is
> >> >> mysticism. I like the mystics
> >> >
> >> > Sorry, Scott, not mystical.
> >> >>
> >> >> It is simply taking on
> >> >> > board a role made possible for us because of our intelligence. If we
> >> >> > do
> >> >> > not take on board this role we will (a) fritter our achievements,
> >> >> > technological etc, away on baubles and (b) allow the sensible
> >> >> > management of life and the planet itself go amiss by default.
> >> >>
> >> >> Genesis: Man's has dominion... Would make a nice metaphor.
> >> >
> >> > ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
> >>
> >> IOW would make an appropriate metaphor for you. See? you are into
> >> mysticism.
> >
> >
> > What's IOW?
>
> "In other word"

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: "The Arrow of Time"
    ... The tendency for all matter and energy in the universe to evolve toward a state of inert uniformity. ... Time only exists because you need a way to track your memories, and build your predictions. ... You never defined the term *exists* Secondly, in the context of this debate, the existence of factual evidence is that which is under debate, and therefore, has not been established except that you've asserted it. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Re: More Crap from you Darwinians
    ... Discover the naturalistic process by which the universe came into ... Conclude that there is no objective meaning to life other than the ... Conclude that all morality is nothing more than subjective desires ... implies the existence of a lifeform which has moral authority over ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: French And CERN Build Massive Particle Accelerator (Black Hole Generator) Unknown Planetary Risk
    ... universe for its existence. ... which predates our present stabile existence. ... negative in value wrt regular matter. ... antimatter was experimentally discovered or verified a time reversal ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Is everything inevitable?
    ... kind of perfervid energy with a tendency to produce matter. ... correspondent says existence is eternal. ... thing there is no-thing and the universe did not come from no-thing. ... of intuition - if intuition has a face - not to believe it. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Is everything inevitable?
    ... kind of perfervid energy with a tendency to produce matter. ... correspondent says existence is eternal. ... thing there is no-thing and the universe did not come from no-thing. ... consider the zen riddle my sister was fond of as a kid: ...
    (talk.origins)