My argument against materialism

[tsig]

Along the "spiritual path", of course...

Teh path that leads to the horizon of the formless.

 

[dafydd]

Teh path that leads to the horizon of the formless.

The event horizon of the formless. We must be precise about these matters. What does that mean,punshhh? Why won't you answer that one?

 

[Belz...]

If one is going to "know thyself", one is required to establish a position of understanding of reality and one's position therein, one's own nature and limitations* and a system of reasoning which can be tested through personal experience. Thus establishing a personal philosophy which is continually added to and refined by experience.

*By limitations I refer to the necessity to tackle the peculiarities of one's own personality and emotions and metaphorically rise above one's personal psyche into an intellectual state of clear (relatively) thought.

Now THAT is what I call a delicious word salad !

 

[PixyMisa]

For example, humanity tends to assume that reality is what can be detected by experience. This is not necessarily so, the reality we perceive may be a reflection of a peculiarity of our own nature.

Could be. Ain't.

I sometimes adopt the position that other entities may perceive reality in a very different way to us. While coexisting and interacting as in a common understanding of experience.

Things still do what they do. No matte how you perceive it, the equations remain the same.

 

[PixyMisa]

On the whole I agree with this, I would point out that science can only test what is conceivable by humans.

What is that even supposed to mean?

If something happens, it happens. If it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen. If it happens, science can test it.

If one is considering what cannot be tested by science, one must use glasses or mirrors and be aware of ones limitations.

If one is considering what cannot be tested by science, one must first make some kind of sense.

 

[dafydd]

Now THAT is what I call a delicious word salad !

The words are English but that's about it. We can all do it. We must integrate our personal spiritual interface,establish indwelling realities,see through the form into the formless,seek the pathless path.....etc....etc...

 

[PixyMisa]

If one is going to "know thyself", one is required to establish a position of understanding of reality and one's position therein, one's own nature and limitations* and a system of reasoning which can be tested through personal experience.

Nope. That's been tried. Doesn't work. That's why we have science now.

 

[dafydd]

Nope. That's been tried. Doesn't work. That's why we have science now.

And why we ignore the event horizon of the formless.

 

[devnull]

Thankyou, I remember the point you made about bananas near the beginning of the thread*.

I dont recall it.

So do you agree with me that materialists (not scientists) see existence through monkey tinted glasses?

I dont even know what that means?

 

[punshhh]

I dont recall it.



I dont even know what that means?

I recall you pointing out that humans where well adapted for reaching for bananas.

My point is that our evolutionary adaptations colour our understanding of our world.

 

[punshhh]

The Hopis believe that the world was created by the Spider Woman. Should I start there and in which direction would that take me?

A spider woman sounds quite a good idea to me, better than turtles or the great brown chicken.
She (mother nature) weaves the web (materialism) of existence on which we all dwell.

I heard your claim that spiritual traditions contradict each other, I disagree.
If one studies such traditions in depth, they generally teach the same principles.

 

[dafydd]

A spider woman sounds quite a good idea to me, better than turtles or the great brown chicken.
She (mother nature) weaves the web (materialism) of existence on which we all dwell.

I heard your claim that spiritual traditions contradict each other, I disagree.
If one studies such traditions in depth, they generally teach the same principles.

I didn't quite get your explanation of "the event horizon of the formless". If you want to study fairy stories,go ahead,it's a nice hobby but they have nothing to do with reality.

 

[Belz...]

I recall you pointing out that humans where well adapted for reaching for bananas.

And yet bananas were not well adapted to us.

I'm not sure even you know what you're saying, Punshhh.

 

[devnull]

I recall you pointing out that humans where well adapted for reaching for bananas.

My point is that our evolutionary adaptations colour our understanding of our world.

I doubt I said any such thing, as the modern banana is the result of relatively recent agriculture and artificial selection.......

Science is a great way to overcome our evolutionary deficiencies....

 

[Bad vibe]

I heard your claim that spiritual traditions contradict each other, I disagree.
If one studies such traditions in depth, they generally teach the same principles.

Thats probably because even ancient societies had far more extensive links than many people realised including exchanges of ideas, They aren't all tapping into some hidden universal font of woo their simply pinching each others ideas and making them their own.

 

[dafydd]

Thats probably because even ancient societies had far more extensive links than many people realised including exchanges of ideas, They aren't all tapping into some hidden universal font of woo their simply pinching each others ideas and making them their own.

And getting it completely wrong in the process.

 

[laca]

A spider woman sounds quite a good idea to me, better than turtles or the great brown chicken.

How come?

She (mother nature) weaves the web (materialism) of existence on which we all dwell.

No.

I heard your claim that spiritual traditions contradict each other, I disagree.

You have no basis to disagree. It's a fact.

If one studies such traditions in depth, they generally teach the same principles.

No. Unless by "the same principles" you actually mean "nothing".

 

[Belz...]

You have no basis to disagree. It's a fact.

Amazing the number of people who disagree with facts, isn't it ?

 

[Robin]

Perhaps we should return to the OP, I have no argument against materialism.

I would point out though that materialism only appears to describe the physical processes of "matter" and apart from this little else about existence.

Materialism does not describe things, as I pointed out earlier, science does.

Do you mean that science only appears to describe physical processes and little else about existence?

Can you give an example of something that cannot - at least in principle - be described by science?

 

[dafydd]

Materialism does not describe things, as I pointed out earlier, science does.

Do you mean that science only appears to describe physical processes and little else about existence?

Can you give an example of something that cannot - at least in principle - be described by science?

The event horizon of the formless.