The future
#101
09-15-2014 | 03:54 PM
Recovery Vehicle
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 115
From: Traverse City, MI
This is one of the best threads I've ever read or been involved in. We are getting to see the flipside of the dime here as well. My brain cells are aching so much so I need to realign my three cells of grey matter to build up for the next round as it's so fascinating. It's a pity there aren't more participants on both sides but religion, spirituality and politics are oft the subjects of a 'no go area' for many. Pity 
#102
09-15-2014 | 04:10 PM
Thread Starter
|
Baja
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 5,845
Likes: 368
From: Near Bordeaux, France
Ahhh.. but that is where the divide comes between us my friend. Do you realize that, like me, you are also pointing out your beliefs on the same forum but you require me to prove my disposition before you'll grant me the time of day? You want proof and all I can give you is 'poof' because, at the moment, no one can prove or disprove spirituality & religion. Perhaps that is why science is considered a different category than religion and it isn't a black and white answer. Have I asked you if you can prove that it doesn't exist? No. Have I told you that you have nothing to offer me in this conversation? No. I merely respected your views and stated that I don't hold the same views. Nothing wrong with that at all. The brain scan study is interesting and perhaps it is leading the way to bigger and better finds toward understanding why some people are spiritual and others are not. Does it change my viewpoint right now? No, it does not.
Many scientists are divided on the subject. - I probably could do a poll where I work and we'd be divided 50/50. Many of us have the attitude that if we can't disprove it then we won't rule it out. I know a lot of us have experienced mystical moments in our lifetime and we weren't smoking crack. Just because I'm a scientist doesn't mean that I can't imagine the possibility of knowledge being created by something larger than all of us alongside the process of evolution. I'd be interested in studying this further, yes. But for the time being (until I am otherwise proven absolutely incorrect) I am happy to coexist with my spiritual side and trust the intuitiveness and consciousness that it provides me. No one can take spirituality away from another. As I said before, to me, it comes from within those that experience it and shows itself in many different forms. I don't know if it will ever be defined.
I have enjoyed this conversation - very much so. Thank you.
Many scientists are divided on the subject. - I probably could do a poll where I work and we'd be divided 50/50. Many of us have the attitude that if we can't disprove it then we won't rule it out. I know a lot of us have experienced mystical moments in our lifetime and we weren't smoking crack. Just because I'm a scientist doesn't mean that I can't imagine the possibility of knowledge being created by something larger than all of us alongside the process of evolution. I'd be interested in studying this further, yes. But for the time being (until I am otherwise proven absolutely incorrect) I am happy to coexist with my spiritual side and trust the intuitiveness and consciousness that it provides me. No one can take spirituality away from another. As I said before, to me, it comes from within those that experience it and shows itself in many different forms. I don't know if it will ever be defined.
I have enjoyed this conversation - very much so. Thank you.
Whilst Paul is more vehement in his scientific synopsis and assertions with which I concur in total, I think (some goes a bit over my head I'm afraid), one has to accept the differences in individuals spiritualism and perceptions of the same. Where I cannot subscribe is radicalisms and extremisms, Islamic, Opus dei et al and also where religions unfairly influence the very young, vulnerable and impressionable or incite religious hatreds or acts against humanity etc.
Last edited by OffroadFrance; 09-15-2014 at 04:12 PM.
#103
09-17-2014 | 12:50 PM
TReK
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,306
Likes: 163
From: CT
Ahhh.. but that is where the divide comes between us my friend. Do you realize that, like me, you are also pointing out your beliefs on the same forum but you require me to prove my disposition before you'll grant me the time of day? You want proof and all I can give you is 'poof' because, at the moment, no one can prove or disprove spirituality & religion. Perhaps that is why science is considered a different category than religion and it isn't a black and white answer. Have I asked you if you can prove that it doesn't exist? No. Have I told you that you have nothing to offer me in this conversation? No. I merely respected your views and stated that I don't hold the same views. Nothing wrong with that at all. The brain scan study is interesting and perhaps it is leading the way to bigger and better findings toward understanding why some people are spiritual and others are not. Does it change my viewpoint right now? No, it does not.
Many scientists are divided on the subject. - I probably could do a poll where I work and we'd be divided 50/50. Many of us have the attitude that if we can't disprove it then we won't rule it out. I know a lot of us have experienced mystical moments in our lifetime and we weren't smoking crack. Just because I'm a scientist doesn't mean that I can't imagine the possibility of knowledge being created by something larger than all of us alongside the process of evolution. I'd be interested in studying this further, yes. But for the time being (until I am otherwise proven absolutely incorrect) I am happy to coexist with my spiritual side and trust the intuitiveness and consciousness that it provides me. No one can take spirituality away from another. As I said before, to me, it comes from within those that experience it and shows itself in many different forms. I don't know if it will ever be defined.
I have enjoyed this conversation - very much so. Thank you.
Many scientists are divided on the subject. - I probably could do a poll where I work and we'd be divided 50/50. Many of us have the attitude that if we can't disprove it then we won't rule it out. I know a lot of us have experienced mystical moments in our lifetime and we weren't smoking crack. Just because I'm a scientist doesn't mean that I can't imagine the possibility of knowledge being created by something larger than all of us alongside the process of evolution. I'd be interested in studying this further, yes. But for the time being (until I am otherwise proven absolutely incorrect) I am happy to coexist with my spiritual side and trust the intuitiveness and consciousness that it provides me. No one can take spirituality away from another. As I said before, to me, it comes from within those that experience it and shows itself in many different forms. I don't know if it will ever be defined.
I have enjoyed this conversation - very much so. Thank you.
Let me use an example to show you the difference between religion and science. For a long time there was speculation within the scientific community of something called the god particle (frankly, a silly name). This particle, is more formally know as the Higgs Boson. Time and again, experiments failed to find evidence of this particle. Yet, because of the physics involved, all signs pointed to its existence. So, instead of using the "EoA” argument and shutting down all experiments, the science was used and tests continued.
Ultimately, something was found that fit many, but not all, of the models that were expected. Was what was found an example of Higgs Boson. We don’t know yet but the difference between “belief” and science is that where one is moving towards quantifiable evidence the other is simply expecting we have more “faith."
You can’t tell me that people of “faith” are really trying to establish an evidentiary case for the existence of god. Instead, at least what I see is a greater and greater reliance on less and less that hasn’t been fully explained by science. I am confident that at some point the tests mentioned in the articles I cited will point more conclusively to why and how we humans experience certain feelings. Ultimately, I am also confident (while simultaneously concerned) that we humans will figure out how to enable silicone based beings to feel the same things.
Yes, there are scientists who believe in god and many more that don’t. I would venture to say there are fewer believers today than 200 years ago, fewer than 100 years ago and more than there will be in 50 years. Overall, as I mentioned in an earlier post, it is my opinion that more and more people are moving towards a more secular life every day. I view this as a positive and something of a necessity as humanity may very well experience an enormous evolutionary jump within the next 100 years. Rather our “faith” be lodged in something that can provide concrete, reproducible evidence than what I see offered by religion or spirituality.
As far as giving your or your ideas the time of day, I have spent a major portion of my 54 years on this planet thinking long and hard about these very issues. I have spent a good bit of time thinking and responding, in detail, to your posts. Seldom have they been brief, flip responses even though you may have felt they were. To me, words and thoughts matter greatly. Perhaps, the stridency of my position with regard to god, religion and spirituality come from a far deeper involvement than you might think.
I have studied religions and belief systems ranging from Asia to the Americas. If you like, we can talk about the philosophies of Gnostics (one of my favorite early Christian movements), Gurdjieff’s the “Fourth Way,” Theosophy or any other esoteric Christian based belief system. Or, perhaps we could look at some of the amazing writings of the Chinese such as Han Fei, and Lao Tzu. I already mentioned that I used Vedantic technique for conducting breathing exercises during meditation. Not to be a smart *** but the Upanishads are breathtaking.
I guess the point that I’m getting at is my negation of religion, spirituality and faith comes from two distinct places. Personal experience and scientific awareness.
#104
09-17-2014 | 12:57 PM
TReK
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,306
Likes: 163
From: CT
Whilst Paul is more vehement in his scientific synopsis and assertions with which I concur in total, I think (some goes a bit over my head I'm afraid), one has to accept the differences in individuals spiritualism and perceptions of the same. Where I cannot subscribe is radicalisms and extremisms, Islamic, Opus dei et al and also where religions unfairly influence the very young, vulnerable and impressionable or incite religious hatreds or acts against humanity etc.
#105
09-17-2014 | 09:42 PM
Recovery Vehicle
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 115
From: Traverse City, MI
KD, are you trying to get me to use the old “Evidence of Absence” argument? Sorry, but that is not at all what I am saying, nor is it an argument a reasonable scientist would employ.
Let me use an example to show you the difference between religion and science. For a long time there was speculation within the scientific community of something called the god particle (frankly, a silly name). This particle, is more formally know as the Higgs Boson. Time and again, experiments failed to find evidence of this particle. Yet, because of the physics involved, all signs pointed to its existence. So, instead of using the "EoA” argument and shutting down all experiments, the science was used and tests continued.
Ultimately, something was found that fit many, but not all, of the models that were expected. Was what was found an example of Higgs Boson. We don’t know yet but the difference between “belief” and science is that where one is moving towards quantifiable evidence the other is simply expecting we have more “faith."
You can’t tell me that people of “faith” are really trying to establish an evidentiary case for the existence of god. Instead, at least what I see is a greater and greater reliance on less and less that hasn’t been fully explained by science. I am confident that at some point the tests mentioned in the articles I cited will point more conclusively to why and how we humans experience certain feelings. Ultimately, I am also confident (while simultaneously concerned) that we humans will figure out how to enable silicone based beings to feel the same things.
Yes, there are scientists who believe in god and many more that don’t. I would venture to say there are fewer believers today than 200 years ago, fewer than 100 years ago and more than there will be in 50 years. Overall, as I mentioned in an earlier post, it is my opinion that more and more people are moving towards a more secular life every day. I view this as a positive and something of a necessity as humanity may very well experience an enormous evolutionary jump within the next 100 years. Rather our “faith” be lodged in something that can provide concrete, reproducible evidence than what I see offered by religion or spirituality.
As far as giving your or your ideas the time of day, I have spent a major portion of my 54 years on this planet thinking long and hard about these very issues. I have spent a good bit of time thinking and responding, in detail, to your posts. Seldom have they been brief, flip responses even though you may have felt they were. To me, words and thoughts matter greatly. Perhaps, the stridency of my position with regard to god, religion and spirituality come from a far deeper involvement than you might think.
I have studied religions and belief systems ranging from Asia to the Americas. If you like, we can talk about the philosophies of Gnostics (one of my favorite early Christian movements), Gurdjieff’s the “Fourth Way,” Theosophy or any other esoteric Christian based belief system. Or, perhaps we could look at some of the amazing writings of the Chinese such as Han Fei, and Lao Tzu. I already mentioned that I used Vedantic technique for conducting breathing exercises during meditation. Not to be a smart *** but the Upanishads are breathtaking.
I guess the point that I’m getting at is my negation of religion, spirituality and faith comes from two distinct places. Personal experience and scientific awareness.
Let me use an example to show you the difference between religion and science. For a long time there was speculation within the scientific community of something called the god particle (frankly, a silly name). This particle, is more formally know as the Higgs Boson. Time and again, experiments failed to find evidence of this particle. Yet, because of the physics involved, all signs pointed to its existence. So, instead of using the "EoA” argument and shutting down all experiments, the science was used and tests continued.
Ultimately, something was found that fit many, but not all, of the models that were expected. Was what was found an example of Higgs Boson. We don’t know yet but the difference between “belief” and science is that where one is moving towards quantifiable evidence the other is simply expecting we have more “faith."
You can’t tell me that people of “faith” are really trying to establish an evidentiary case for the existence of god. Instead, at least what I see is a greater and greater reliance on less and less that hasn’t been fully explained by science. I am confident that at some point the tests mentioned in the articles I cited will point more conclusively to why and how we humans experience certain feelings. Ultimately, I am also confident (while simultaneously concerned) that we humans will figure out how to enable silicone based beings to feel the same things.
Yes, there are scientists who believe in god and many more that don’t. I would venture to say there are fewer believers today than 200 years ago, fewer than 100 years ago and more than there will be in 50 years. Overall, as I mentioned in an earlier post, it is my opinion that more and more people are moving towards a more secular life every day. I view this as a positive and something of a necessity as humanity may very well experience an enormous evolutionary jump within the next 100 years. Rather our “faith” be lodged in something that can provide concrete, reproducible evidence than what I see offered by religion or spirituality.
As far as giving your or your ideas the time of day, I have spent a major portion of my 54 years on this planet thinking long and hard about these very issues. I have spent a good bit of time thinking and responding, in detail, to your posts. Seldom have they been brief, flip responses even though you may have felt they were. To me, words and thoughts matter greatly. Perhaps, the stridency of my position with regard to god, religion and spirituality come from a far deeper involvement than you might think.
I have studied religions and belief systems ranging from Asia to the Americas. If you like, we can talk about the philosophies of Gnostics (one of my favorite early Christian movements), Gurdjieff’s the “Fourth Way,” Theosophy or any other esoteric Christian based belief system. Or, perhaps we could look at some of the amazing writings of the Chinese such as Han Fei, and Lao Tzu. I already mentioned that I used Vedantic technique for conducting breathing exercises during meditation. Not to be a smart *** but the Upanishads are breathtaking.
I guess the point that I’m getting at is my negation of religion, spirituality and faith comes from two distinct places. Personal experience and scientific awareness.
Hi Paul,
I am not using the ‘ol’ evidence of absence’ argument with you – I am making a point that you’re being slightly one-sided in your view in that you cannot think outside of the box. It’s a double standard. Your thinking is cut and dry, black and white, no meeting in the middle. If there isn't fact to back up what we feel than it doesn't exist. I don't need to believe anything that is force fed to me but I will believe that there can be something other than nothing....
Can you prove to me that you love your wife? Can anyone prove that love exists?.. What is love and why do we feel it? Is it really definable?....some people don’t believe in love and are cold hearted fish. Do I tell them that they can’t think that way? No. I just prefer not to buy into their view and I merrily move on. I think that spirituality can be thought of in the same context. It is unique for different individuals and doesn’t require proof because it comes from within.
The origin of this thread was based on ‘the future’ and robotics. Paul, you mentioned Ray Kurzweil early on in this thread and his name popped up again today at work.You may find this podcast interesting if you haven’t already listened to it (Offroad, I think you will enjoy it – Luddite discussion at its best and even the smallest mention of the French).
‘The end of work’ with Ray Kurzweil, Andrew McAfee, Chris Lydon [UPDATE: podcast available] | KurzweilAI
He makes a good point that, in the past, many jobs have been created with the exploration of something new. I can see where you have a more optimistic look on the future after reading Kurzweil, Paul – this podcast calmed me down quite a bit. It is a balanced approach to the future – not abysmal or dismal in the least.
I have to tell you that this conversation of spirituality has really made my blood boil, so much so that I walked around the office and started a ‘not the done thing’ informal poll of my officemates. It was quite enlightening.. conversations with five male scientists, regarding their thoughts on the Universe, spirituality and singularity. The consensus was an astounding ‘we will not rule out the possibility that something else exists’. It was rather refreshing and stimulating and educational as I learned tidbits about my colleagues that I hadn’t known before.
For instance, the most surprising and intriguing conversation was with a former independent scientist who contracted with NASA to study artificial intelligence. In his many travels he worked with a gentleman named Stephen Thaler who, in the early 90s, created artificial neural nets in order to study the effects of near death experiences. After randomly destroying neurons he concluded that the neural nets relived all of their experiences (i.e., life review) and then, within the advanced stages of destruction, generated novel experience. Interesting to say the least and if true, leading toward a discovery in something...
Does it change my viewpoint? No. It’s not black and white, yet.
And when asked if my colleague believed in coincidences we were led into yet another conversation regarding spirituality and he agreed that coincidences are hard to explain. He couldn’t explain them and neither can I. We both agreed that serendipity is interesting and thought provoking all the same and just could be coincidences from another Universe.
Just for the record, I didn’t think your posts to me were flip but a bit so for Senormac. I can see that you have given your responses much thought and consideration. For that I thank you. I think we should just agree to disagree on this topic, is that fair?
As far as Higgs Boson is concerned.... isn’t he on the forum and from your neck of the woods?.....
Last edited by KernowDiscovery; 09-18-2014 at 07:46 PM.
#106
09-17-2014 | 10:40 PM
Rock Crawling
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 308
Likes: 3
This is one of the best threads I've ever read or been involved in. We are getting to see the flipside of the dime here as well. My brain cells are aching so much so I need to realign my three cells of grey matter to build up for the next round as it's so fascinating. It's a pity there aren't more participants on both sides but religion, spirituality and politics are oft the subjects of a 'no go area' for many. Pity
I was questioned about my faith in another forum a number of years ago and below is a copy of my response. It's my own testimony of conversion (short version) to faith in God and Christ. That night impacted my life so completely that no part was left untouched. And it continues to this day. He intersects my life at times... often unexpected. I'm not a brilliant thinker. I'm not a scientist, doctor or engineer. I'm just a regular guy. I like to draw, listen to music, and brew beer. I work for the utility company and my back ground is POP culture. My grandparents were farmers and servicemen (NAVY). Any direction that I had been going in when this occurred took a sharp turn towards Him. I offer it here as a free gift. At least you will have some idea as to where I'm coming from.
#108
09-18-2014 | 05:46 AM
Thread Starter
|
Baja
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 5,845
Likes: 368
From: Near Bordeaux, France
I will happily state, for at least the third time in this thread, a person is free to believe anything they like. I am of the opinion that if they believe something to the firmament (how's that for a word within the context of this thread) of their being they should be able to explain why. I am open to anything provide a substantive argument can be made on its behalf. I just have a hard time when asked to have "faith" in someone else's "faith" and don't understand why that's difficult to understand.
#109
09-18-2014 | 07:57 AM
TReK
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,306
Likes: 163
From: CT
#110
09-18-2014 | 02:56 PM
Thread Starter
|
Baja
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 5,845
Likes: 368
From: Near Bordeaux, France
Hi Paul,
I am not using the ‘ol’ evidence of absence’ argument with you – I am making a point that you’re being slightly one-sided in your view in that you cannot think outside of the box. It’s a double standard. You're thinking is cut and dry, black and white, no meeting in the middle. If there isn't fact to back up what we feel than it doesn't exist. I don't need to believe anything that is force fed to me but I will believe that there can be something other than nothing....
Can you prove to me that you love your wife? Can anyone prove that love exists?.. What is love and why do we feel it? Is it really definable?....some people don’t believe in love and are cold hearted fish. Do I tell them that they can’t think that way? No. I just prefer not to buy into their view and I merrily move on. I think that spirituality can be thought of in the same context. It is unique for different individuals and doesn’t require proof because it comes from within.
The origin of this thread was based on ‘the future’ and robotics. Paul, you mentioned Ray Kurzweil early on in this thread and his name popped up again today at work.You may find this podcast interesting if you haven’t already listened to it (Offroad, I think you will enjoy it – Luddite discussion at its best and even the smallest mention of the French).
‘The end of work’ with Ray Kurzweil, Andrew McAfee, Chris Lydon [UPDATE: podcast available] | KurzweilAI
He makes a good point that, in the past, many jobs have been created with the exploration of something new. I can see where you have a more optimistic look on the future after reading Kurzweil, Paul – this podcast calmed me down quite a bit. It is a balanced approach to the future – not abysmal or dismal in the least.
I have to tell you that this conversation of spirituality has really made my blood boil, so much so that I walked around the office and started a ‘not the done thing’ informal poll of my officemates. It was quite enlightening.. conversations with five male scientists, regarding their thoughts on the Universe, spirituality and singularity. The consensus was an astounding ‘we will not rule out the possibility that something else exists’. It was rather refreshing and stimulating and educational as I learned tidbits about my colleagues that I hadn’t known before.
For instance, the most surprising and intriguing conversation was with a former independent scientist who contracted with NASA to study artificial intelligence. In his many travels he worked with a gentleman named Stephen Thaler who, in the early 90s, created artificial neural nets in order to study the effects of near death experiences. After randomly destroying neurons he concluded that the neural nets relived all of their experiences (i.e., life review) and then, within the advanced stages of destruction, generated novel experience. Interesting to say the least and if true, leading toward a discovery in something...
Does it change my viewpoint? No. It’s not black and white, yet.
And when asked if my colleague believed in coincidences we were led into yet another conversation regarding spirituality and he agreed that coincidences are hard to explain. He couldn’t explain them and neither can I. We both agreed that serendipity is interesting and thought provoking all the same and just could be coincidences from another Universe.
Just for the record, I didn’t think your posts to me were flip but a bit so for Senormac. I can see that you have given your responses much thought and consideration.F or that I thank you. I think we should just agree to disagree on this topic, is that fair?
As far as Higgs Boson is concerned.... isn’t he on the forum and from your neck of the woods?.....