Can/should we Skeptics in Modern Science?

[Kumar]

There is no concept of salvation in the Yogic mysticism represented in the book to which I refer. Enlightenment is viewed as it's own reward and while one can never attain perfect enlightenment it is rewarding to achieve ever greater enlightenment. As a sceptic, I equate this with attaining ever greater though always imperfect knowledge and understanding. No destiny is implied and a one of the main points of the journey is the journey itself. In mountain-climbing terms, you climb the mountain "because it's there".

Throg,

Good saying. I think, it is related to Buddism philosphy. How can you differenciate between Enlightenment & salvation/Nirvana/Libretion/Moksha?

While surprised to read your above referance, it indicate no destiny/goal BUT perfectly matches with scepticism & modern attitude i.e. "one can never attain perfect enlightenment". I call it as "absoluteness", which is never agreed by skeptics & pro-modern systems people. Salvation...is also one kind of "absoluteness", which is indicated in some mythology, as "can't be attained during current age". I don't see any 'The End' to it.

 

[Throg]

Throg,

Good saying. I think, it is related to Buddism philosphy. How can you differenciate between Enlightenment & salvation/Nirvana/Libretion/Moksha?

My understanding of salvation is that it implies that one is saved from something. I will admit that these may be a product of my primarily Christian culture.

Nirvana has always seemed to me a concept which is open to a virtually endless range of interpretations; the closest I can come to understanding spiritual enlightenment from my sceptical point of view, is something like moral understanding which I suspect is a very poor fit.

Libretion is a completely new term to me so I can't comment.

Moksha is certainly part of the belief-system of the Yogic mysticism with which I am familiar. I should make it clear, that I do not share any of the beliefs of Yogic mysticism I merely find the imagery pleasing and motivational. To me enlightenment is about acquiring knowledge and understanding and acting in accordance with that understanding. There is no mystical dimension to my version of enlightenment.

While surprised to read your above referance, it indicate no destiny/goal BUT perfectly matches with scepticism & modern attitude i.e. "one can never attain perfect enlightenment". I call it as "absoluteness", which is never agreed by skeptics & pro-modern systems people. Salvation...is also one kind of "absoluteness", which is indicated in some mythology, as "can't be attained during current age". I don't see any 'The End' to it.

I think one of the reasons that you encounter resistence amongst sceptics to your use of the term "absoluteness" is that it is probably not a very good translation of what you are trying to say. It has mystical connotations in our culture which are going to cause a lot of us to switch off before we give much attention to what you are trying to say. In general, I think it is a bad idea to try and reduce complex ideas to a single word such as absolutness even in one's own primary language but when you try to do it in another language you just don't know what cultural baggage your'e going to end up with.

The only mythology I am familar with in which salvation "can't be attained during current age" is that of the various Yugas in Hinduism (I think we are supposed to be living in Kali Yuga). Are there mythologies with a similar structure?

 

[Kumar]

My understanding of salvation is that it implies that one is saved from something. I will admit that these may be a product of my primarily Christian culture.

Salvation means deliverance from the power and effects of sin. I think, "Salvation/Nirvana/Libretion/Moksha" all are same. The real meaning of this can be;

'to free your soul & body from all bondages, as bondages may be real cause of existances in bonded, arrested, concentrated or combined conditions instead of complete free & independant state--so real reason of pain/sin etc.

Nirvana has always seemed to me a concept which is open to a virtually endless range of interpretations; the closest I can come to understanding spiritual enlightenment from my sceptical point of view, is something like moral understanding which I suspect is a very poor fit.

a Nirvana should be salvation, & enlghtwnments is final blessed state marked by the absence of desire or suffering & to provide (someone) with moral or spiritual understanding or enlighten people from this ultimate knowledge. In one language this ultimate knowledge is called as "Keval-gyan".

Libretion is a completely new term to me so I can't comment.

It is also alike salvation, means libretion of soul & body from all bondages.

Moksha is certainly part of the belief-system of the Yogic mysticism with which I am familiar.

Alike salvation, libretion, nirvana only.

I should make it clear, that I do not share any of the beliefs of Yogic mysticism I merely find the imagery pleasing and motivational. To me enlightenment is about acquiring knowledge and understanding and acting in accordance with that understanding. There is no mystical dimension to my version of enlightenment.

Yes, it is ok, but people just like these, directly or indirectly



I think one of the reasons that you encounter resistence amongst sceptics to your use of the term "absoluteness" is that it is probably not a very good translation of what you are trying to say. It has mystical connotations in our culture which are going to cause a lot of us to switch off before we give much attention to what you are trying to say. In general, I think it is a bad idea to try and reduce complex ideas to a single word such as absolutness even in one's own primary language but when you try to do it in another language you just don't know what cultural baggage your'e going to end up with.

I think, it is natural that people here don't like this word "absoluteness" i.e. free from imperfections due to 'current age/yuga' effects & entitlements. It is alike "GOD", "SALVATION", Enlightenment etc. which are ultimate.

The only mythology I am familar with in which salvation "can't be attained during current age" is that of the various Yugas in Hinduism (I think we are supposed to be living in Kali Yuga). Are there mythologies with a similar structure?

Yes, you are right.. In Kaliyuga(present age), "salvation can't be attained" & "true basic knowledge of sastras(reputed books) can't be known/understood by "Brahmanas"(Learned people)". @nd one is by a curse of Godess Laxmi(Godess of money & luxuary)--which can mean, Due to the effect of money & luxuries, true basic knowledge can't be known by learned people. However, some exceptions are there to these mentionings. I feel & find, somewhat alike it.

 

[Rolfe]

No, Kumar really does believe that the things he dreams up are great insights. 26/50 votes i.e. 52.00%.

Is Kumar winding us up?

People belived in this. They do really understand me well. Thanks, it has raised my confidance in others. I think, I also voted for this in the begning. You see, how accurate are my calculations. Btw,what you had desired to get & voted for?

Ah. Of course. Kumar believes that opinion polls actually determine the truth. If mass.... existing.... declare that Kumar is sincere, that of course proves it is true!

I see the good grammar fairy struck again, troll.

Rolfe.

 

[Donks]

No, Kumar really does believe that the things he dreams up are great insights. 26/50 votes i.e. 52.00%.

Is Kumar winding us up?

People belived in this. They do really understand me well. Thanks, it has raised my confidance in others. I think, I also voted for this in the begning. You see, how accurate are my calculations. Btw,what you had desired to get & voted for?

I voted for you being sincere. But I don't see how this should raise your confidence in anyone. That I think you are sincere in no way means I think you are right about anything. The alternative to you being an utter troll is you being an utter fool, I don't know why you are so happy with that position.

 

[Kumar]

I voted for you being sincere. But I don't see how this should raise your confidence in anyone. That I think you are sincere in no way means I think you are right about anything. The alternative to you being an utter troll is you being an utter fool, I don't know why you are so happy with that position.

When mass people, may be of any communty, interact with any one, may be in whatever type, for long--shows something different & dynamic, is/can be there, you accept or not. If not, then they can be indicating themselves & others, as fool, troll, with no other work, aimless, without any goal/destiny or otherwise. So just don't put your own words in your name. WHY so much & for too long interactions were/are/will prefered or practiced inspite, every told repeatedly in past? Don't comment/insult, as bad, to what you eat, take or experiance regularily--for so long & so much? People don't appreciate these by heart/brain, as their sixth sense, inherited real natural knowledge/logic/GOD etc. may be indicating somethig dynamic/possible. By mouth, it may not be of much importance, as it can be a formal/dim/apperant/illusion/ego/vested interest Etc.

So just give a natural thought to it & behave accordingly, to avoid loss. Don't comment this post, furthur.

 

[Donks]

When mass people, may be of any communty, interact with any one, may be in whatever type, for long--shows something different & dynamic, is/can be there, you accept or not. If not, then they can be indicating themselves & others, as fool, troll, with no other work, aimless, without any goal/destiny or otherwise. So just don't put your own words in your name. WHY so much & for too long interactions were/are/will prefered or practiced inspite, every told repeatedly in past? Don't comment/insult, as bad, to what you eat, take or experiance regularily--for so long & so much? People don't appreciate these by heart/brain, as their sixth sense, inherited real natural knowledge/logic/GOD etc. may be indicating somethig dynamic/possible. By mouth, it may not be of much importance, as it can be a formal/dim/apperant/illusion/ego/vested interest Etc.

So just give a natural thought to it & behave accordingly, to avoid loss. Don't comment this post, furthur.

Too bad the grammar fairy didn't hit this post. There are much better ways to say this, something like:
"Agree with me or shut up."

 

[Throg]

Too bad the grammar fairy didn't hit this post.

Donks, this is bordering on bigotry. Kumar has made it quite clear that his primary language is similar to Hindi which has a very different grammar to English. He posts in our language as best he can and you fault him for this. To disagree with his reasoning or his ideas is one thing but to pick on him because of his foreignness is pitiful.

 

[Mojo]

Donks, this is bordering on bigotry. Kumar has made it quite clear that his primary language is similar to Hindi which has a very different grammar to English. He posts in our language as best he can and you fault him for this. To disagree with his reasoning or his ideas is one thing but to pick on him because of his foreignness is pitiful.

The point I think Donks and others have been making here is that Kumar appears to be able to post in perfectly intelligible English when he wants to, but doesn't do this most of the time. There was an idea that the intelligible bits were cut and pasted from other sites, but a couple of his recent posts are so specific to their context that he must have written them himself. His ability to write intelligible English often seems to be in inverse proportion to the amount of pressure his current argument is under.

 

[Kumar]

The point I think Donks and others have been making here is that Kumar appears to be able to post in perfectly intelligible English when he wants to, but doesn't do this most of the time. There was an idea that the intelligible bits were cut and pasted from other sites, but a couple of his recent posts are so specific to their context that he must have written them himself. His ability to write intelligible English often seems to be in inverse proportion to the amount of pressure his current argument is under.

Why I will write in un-intelligible English or with language errors? It appears, there is some problem of putting comas. Moreover, I have to manipulate, be serious, check & recheck, in case of serious replies--which I try best. Sometimes there is a big load due to many people interacting with me at one time OR sometimes I am in hurry. Lastly, sometimes & am not so serious due to 'this & that type' talks or just waste of time--so I just take it lightly. But one thing is correct as Throg has indicated that English is my foreign language & I have to manipulate, think, correct it in case of serious replies. Just see how much editing I do.

 

[Throg]

His ability to write intelligible English often seems to be in inverse proportion to the amount of pressure his current argument is under

Which would make perfect sense. My French and German go completely to pieces when I'm under pressure.


Actually, my English suffers too and that is my primary language.

 

[Rolfe]

It's more complicated than that. He seems to be able to post non-contentious comments quite well, but constantly dresses his wild and woolly theories up in the most bizarre and impenetrable terminology. One thing which would help a lot would be simply to figure out how to express the concepts he repeats like a broken record in mutually understandable vocabulary. But he never does. I'm beginning to think he's being deliberately obfuscatory in order not to have to give in and learn anything.

His English is also significantly better on the homoeopathy believers boards.

Frankly, I've given up. In the past I've spent a great deal of time explaining basic scientific concepts to Kumar. I've looked things up in books (about silica in the body, among other things) and typed them out for him. I've recommended useful text-books he could read to get the sort of basic knowledge he needs before he can meaningfully tackle the things he's attempting to tangle with.

No joy. He refuses to learn, even to read anything, because he's afraid he might read something that would weaken his faith in his ideas (yes, he did say this). He comes here only to demand that we find scientific explanations for the delusions he refuses to relinquish. Nothing will make him examine the possibility that his delusions might be just that.

If we explain how the things he believes are impossible, and how he is mistaken, then this is our "miss" or "weakness", usually due to "vested interests". Kumar demands that we stop these negative discussions, and have only positive ideas based on the unquesitoning premise that he is right.

I'm still amused by following his persistence, but I won't waste any more time under the delusion that he wants to learn anything.

But don't let that stop you. Please carry on.

Rolfe.

 

[Throg]

It's more complicated than that. He seems to be able to post non-contentious comments quite well, but constantly dresses his wild and woolly theories up in the most bizarre and impenetrable terminology.

Well, as this thread is the only time I have interacted with Kumar, this is the only one I can really comment on. I will say that I have had very little difficulty understanding him though I think it is clear we have very different cultural backgrounds and beliefs.

One thing which would help a lot would be simply to figure out how to express the concepts he repeats like a broken record in mutually understandable vocabulary

Do you really think the onus is entirely on Kumar to find a "mutually understandable vocabulary"? Given that you find the word mutual worthy of inclusion, doesn't that imply that some of the effort should come from us. The alternative, that it is entirely down to "the foreigner" to make himself understood is ethnocentric at best.

 

[Rolfe]

Well, as this thread is the only time I have interacted with Kumar, this is the only one I can really comment on.

I really think you should have a look at a few of the many other threads during which Kumar has driven most of us into consulting our ignore lists. There are a couple going on in the Science forum right now.

He's been in much the same place for about a year and a half. TRS "works". Yes, it does. No, it is not possible to contemplate that this might not be so, due to mass....existing.... (If you need a translation of that last bit, apply to Kumar.)

It is your duty to tell me the science of how it works. Please tell if [insert latest wacky and impossible idea] is bit relevant.

We then go round the wacky idea for many pages, until Kumar gets tired and gives up, and surfaces ten minutes later with a new thread either about the same wacky idea (but of course all the discussion we've already had doesn't count, and he hopes that there might be some newbies who won't notice), or a new one.

"Cephalic phase effect" was a good one for a while - he even got as far as posting on the H'pathy board that he knew that was how remedies work. "Part excitations" is a newer one.

Earlier today, on one of the Science Forum threads, he posted an extremely basic biochemistry question about energy sources in the body. Understanding that aspect of biochemistry is of course an absolute pre-requisite for any of the theories Kumar is peddling. But he hasn't a clue. He has asked before, and people have tried to tell him. They have also pointed him to books where he could read all about it. He actually said he didn't want to study in case he learned things that would contradict his beliefs. However, apparently he can hear all sorts of things here that contradict his beliefs, with no problem, because he just ignores them, or calls them "this&that type discussions", which in Kumar speak means talking pointless sense.

Now, after a sufficient time has passed, he's just popped up with the same basic question again, obviously hoping that he'll get an answer he likes better, or can be better twisted to suit his ends. Well, I've stopped playing. He can go read a book, or make it up for himself. I'm not typing any more basic science for him not to read.

But don't let me stop you, feel free....

Rolfe.

 

[Throg]

I really think you should have a look at a few of the many other threads during.

I don't intend this to be insulting or dismissive but, really, why should I care? So long as he interacts with me in a meaningful way on this particular occasion why should it matter to me if he does not always do so?

There are times when I am utterly incapable of interacting with people in a meaningful way (lack of sleep, abundance of alcohol spring to mind). At other times I am quite capable of interacting in a meaningful way. If I come across Kumar when he appears to be sleepy or drunk (philosophically speaking) then I won't try to have a discussion with him. When his posts seem sober and his voice is unslurred, why not have a discussion with him?

 

[MRC_Hans]

Donks, this is bordering on bigotry. Kumar has made it quite clear that his primary language is similar to Hindi which has a very different grammar to English. He posts in our language as best he can and you fault him for this. To disagree with his reasoning or his ideas is one thing but to pick on him because of his foreignness is pitiful.

Quite. And that is not what people do. The picking comes mainly for two reasons:

1) Kumar's command of English is very context sensitive; when he really wants to get a message through, or, like in your case, finds someone he wants to communicate with, he writes a fairly good and understandable English. When he is cornered, and his arguments have been shredded, he writes gibberish.

2) Kumar is not just a poor English speaker, he is also an extremely sloppy writer. While I basically agree that what he has one prior to your interactions with him is irrelevant to you, I can tell you that a number of Kumar's misspellings and silly wordings have persisted for over a year. It is one thing to have a poor command of English, but to insist on misspelling words, in spite of corrections, is sloppy at best, provokative at worst.

However, do form your own opinion. Just don't say you weren't warned. You have a long climb ahead of you .

Hans

 

[Rolfe]

I don't intend this to be insulting or dismissive but, really, why should I care? So long as he interacts with me in a meaningful way on this particular occasion why should it matter to me if he does not always do so?

There are times when I am utterly incapable of interacting with people in a meaningful way (lack of sleep, abundance of alcohol spring to mind). At other times I am quite capable of interacting in a meaningful way. If I come across Kumar when he appears to be sleepy or drunk (philosophically speaking) then I won't try to have a discussion with him. When his posts seem sober and his voice is unslurred, why not have a discussion with him?

It's your time, feel free. If you don't want to learn from the bitter experience of people who approached Kumar with that attitude 18 months ago, that's your prerogative.

Our comments were intended as a friendly warning. Pass the popcorn, someone.

Rolfe.

 

[Donks]

Donks, this is bordering on bigotry. Kumar has made it quite clear that his primary language is similar to Hindi which has a very different grammar to English. He posts in our language as best he can and you fault him for this. To disagree with his reasoning or his ideas is one thing but to pick on him because of his foreignness is pitiful.

Sorry you feel this way. In my view, Kumar gets what he deserves. He has treated me and many others in quite a bit more insulting ways than that.

 

[Kumar]

I don't intend this to be insulting or dismissive but, really, why should I care? So long as he interacts with me in a meaningful way on this particular occasion why should it matter to me if he does not always do so?

There are times when I am utterly incapable of interacting with people in a meaningful way (lack of sleep, abundance of alcohol spring to mind). At other times I am quite capable of interacting in a meaningful way. If I come across Kumar when he appears to be sleepy or drunk (philosophically speaking) then I won't try to have a discussion with him. When his posts seem sober and his voice is unslurred, why not have a discussion with him?

Throg, while thnking you, I must accept/comment that, you have strong immunity.

Have you heard about "Tulsidas" story? He was very anxious to meet his wife in her house & was involved in her, too much. By got irritated by that, she said, if you could have dedicated/devoted so much in GOD, probably you could get his grace & it would have done all of your good. By feeling that, he started involved in religion & written most famous & reputed work even today--Ramayna. Alike, if few people here, who are involved in contradictions, back bitings, blaiming/claiming, this & that types of talks, could got involved in real dynamic & matrialistic type of talks, mostly, they could have got & given less or more to others. I don't understand, what they gain from this unless some vested interests are there.

Anyway I know, we can't stop basic methodlogy of GOD of creation, maintainance & destructions to balance the nature, for which HE might have divided all of us, grossly, in these three groups & made our constitutional mentalities, accordingly. I therefore, don't mind & back bite, usually, in view of this, as I understand some of HIS calculations-- astrologically, spritually, homeopathically(TRS) or otherwise.

Inspite of my appx. 15 months trial, I couldn't get awnser of simple biochemisty question from Rolfe, how mostly similar salts are/were found in several specimens of differant parts of humans bodies, on dry/burned ash analysis? Dr. Sch.'s TRS, got indications for deciding 12 tissue salts by looking at this analysis. Whatever Rolfe & I say, is beyond our heads or just do this & that discussions etc. So, we just left interacting with each other much, but still, I do try on some suitable atmosphere. I have so many topics of his/her interest, but I just ignore.

 

[Throg]

Quite. And that is not what people do. The picking comes mainly for two reasons:

1) Kumar's command of English is very context sensitive;

Of course it is. So is mine and so is yours but we each get lots of practice using English everyday. We are very good at using English. It's like we began learning the rules from the moment we were born and incorporating them at the most fundamental level of the learning process. When the standard of our English slips because of an unfamiliar context, we go from very good to able.

I am merely o.k at speaking French and German. I can get by and even participate in conversations so long as the subject matter is not too esoteric or complicated. Once I try to express complex thoughts, especially abstract ones I begin to sound like I've had large portions of my brain removed. French and German are languages that have a great deal more in common with English than Hindi does.

Maybe you are an exceptionally talented polyglot such that you lack sympathy for the enormous problems that expressing complex ideas in a foreign language presents for most people. Not everyone is so gifted.

When he is cornered, and his arguments have been shredded, he writes gibberish

You mean when he's under pressure and taking his ideas to limits he had not previously considered? That is exactly what one should expect of someone using a foreign language.

Kumar is not just a poor English speaker, he is also an extremely sloppy writer

There is no way to judge one independently of the other. Your reference to Kumar being a poor English speaker again suggests a startling lack of sympathy for his position. That will be down to your innate linguistic facility again, I imagine. I repeat, we are not all so gifted.

I can tell you that a number of Kumar's misspellings and silly wordings have persisted for over a year. It is one thing to have a poor command of English, but to insist on misspelling words, in spite of corrections, is sloppy at best, provokative at worst

Trivial and ironic given your misspelling of the word "provocative".