String theory, Relativity, and angels

by onacruse 133 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

funkyderek

Sirona:
What reality is that? Santa may exist somewhere, even if it is in the minds of millions of children. That, IMHO, gives him a form of existence - and before anyone starts talking about pink unicorns, this goes for those too. This does not mean that I'm deluded enough to think Santa is walking around somewhere in Lapland (excluding the santa wannabes LOL), it just means that I accept the influence of the image of Santa and don't think that closing my mind to such images is to be preferred.
Of course Santa exists, but only in the sense that any fictional character exists; as a concept, an idea. He does not exist in the same way that, for example, Britney Spears exists. There is a very real, qualitative difference between the two types of existence. I think this is self-evident.
Again, what is this "reality"? Quoting the matrix "what is real?" Why is an exclusive acceptance of things purely physical and testable the ultimate aim?
The only way we can know something really exists (in the Britney Spears, Eiffel Tower, Horsehead Nebula sense) is by measuring and testing it. The reason this is "the ultimate aim" is because it gives us real and useful information about the world we live in. Without distinguishing between this kind of existence and that of Santa Claus, Sherlock Holmes and free lunches we would not survive very long.
Now if the only claim that you make for your gods (or goddesses, pixies, djinns, invisible pink unicorns etc.) is that they exist in peoples minds, then I certainly have no argument. If you are saying they are real in a really real sense, then prove it. And if you're saying there's another - non-trivial - sense in which something can be real, then I'd like to hear it.
funkyderek

myauntfanny:
So you're saying that since we have no criteria for measuring mystical experiences, we should believe and behave as if they must necessarily signify nothing?
If we can't measure them, they are indistinguishable from nothing.
We can't measure emotions either, but they often signify very important things, or so it seems to me.
Of course we can measure emotions. Dogs can measure emotions.
Sirona

Now if the only claim that you make for your gods (or goddesses, pixies, djinns, invisible pink unicorns etc.) is that they exist in peoples minds, then I certainly have no argument. If you are saying they are real in a really real sense, then prove it. And if you're saying there's another - non-trivial - sense in which something can be real, then I'd like to hear it.

Well I'll attempt to explain what I mean. A thought often preceeds something being created, such as when someone thinks about an invention. Once that thought exists, I think that the universe will never be the same as it was before that thought ever was there. I see thoughts as being influential on a physical level within the individual, but also I believe that collectively our thoughts have an effect on the universe in some way, because our conscious and unconscious self produces an effect upon the things around it. Jung's collective unconscious is largely what I'm talking about and I don't believe that the images therein are insignificant.
Santa is such an image, existing in a mythological way but having a very real influence in our lives and I believe in our unconscious. I'd be a different person if I'd never believed in Santa, so Santa produced a tangible effect in the physical world.
Just because something exists in the realm of our mind and our unconscious self doesn't mean that it doesn't have a tangible effect upon the larger universe, IMHO. The reason I believe this is entirely subjective, so I'm fully expecting you to come back with the "prove it" argument.
This is related to a belief in God. Since we cannot comprehend the ALL (ultimate Divinity) we as humans construct mental images of what the divine is. These images have a very powerful effect and IMO exist due to our collective belief. This doesn't mean that God doesn't exist, it just means that our images of God are based upon our own thoughts.
Many more philosophical polytheists come to regard their multiplicity of gods as representing aspects or facets of a greater divine unity: not a personal god as in the monotheistic religions, but an ultimate reality of the divine. The best known example is Brahman in Hinduism. Modern Neopagan polytheists also often follow this model.
http://www.fact-index.com /p/po/polytheism.html
Sirona
Sirona

Derek
Of course we can measure emotions. Dogs can measure emotions.
What an "unscientific" comment! How do dogs "measure" emotions? Human beings cannot give a measurement of emotion because emotion is entirely subjective. Someone could say "I'm happy" but how do we know they're not purely giving the response they've been conditioned to give in a certain circumstance? Sirona
myauntfanny

Of course we can measure emotions. Dogs can measure emotions.
Um, how? You can measure some physiological effects and say they correlate to the emotions, but I don't see how you can measure emotion. Not empirically anyway, only anecdotally. But heck, maybe I missed a new development. Edited to add:
If we can't measure them, they are indistinguishable from nothing
I can't see how this statement can be supported. I can be standing in front of a mountain and simply not have the tools to measure it. You might say, but the tools exist. And I would answer that the mountain existed before the tools existed, or could have.
funkyderek

A thought often preceeds something being created, such as when someone thinks about an invention. Once that thought exists, I think that the universe will never be the same as it was before that thought ever was there.

Technically that's true, as the thought is a function of a brain, which is part of the universe, and is altered by the process of having the thought. The changes in the brain may cause other changes in the behaviour of the organism (such as building the invention or talking about it), which in turn can have knock-on effects. I have a feeling you mean something more than that though.
I see thoughts as being influential on a physical level within the individual, but also I believe that collectively our thoughts have an effect on the universe in some way, because our conscious and unconscious self produces an effect upon the things around it. Jung's collective unconscious is largely what I'm talking about and I don't believe that the images therein are insignificant.
I think the "collective unconscious", to the extent that it exists, is a function of a certain amount of hard-wiring in our brain due to natural selection.
Santa is such an image, existing in a mythological way but having a very real influence in our lives and I believe in our unconscious. I'd be a different person if I'd never believed in Santa, so Santa produced a tangible effect in the physical world.
No, the idea of Santa produced that effect. I will concede that temporarily and locally, the effects may be indistinguishable from those of a real Santa-type entity, but all this really tells us is that it's possible to fool people (especially children) by feeding them false information and planting phony evidence.
This is related to a belief in God. Since we cannot comprehend the ALL (ultimate Divinity) we as humans construct mental images of what the divine is. These images have a very powerful effect and IMO exist due to our collective belief. This doesn't mean that God doesn't exist, it just means that our images of God are based upon our own thoughts.
I think most people's ideas of god(s) are based on the culture they were most exposed to, i.e. the "collective belief" is based on the "images", rather than the other way around, although I certainly think it is possible that there are "psychological archetypes" in the human unconscious that may encourage beliefs in certain types of deities.
What an "unscientific" comment! How do dogs "measure" emotions?
Mostly by smell. They're pretty good at it.
Human beings cannot give a measurement of emotion because emotion is entirely subjective.
I disagree. There is overwhelming evidence that emotions are due to electrochemical reactions in the brain. Altering the concentrations of chemicals in different parts of the brain can affect the emotions.
Someone could say "I'm happy" but how do we know they're not purely giving the response they've been conditioned to give in a certain circumstance?
This probably comes down to definitions of emotion. Is somebody happy because they appear to be happy or because they're showing increased levels of certain neurotransmitters? I would have to go for the latter (although we are very complex biological machines and simply appearing happy can cause us to actually feel happy, but again, this involves measurable electrochemical processes). Most people are actually pretty good at reading emotions, and it can be very hard to fool people. The fact that people can be fooled sometimes does not mean that emotions - suitably defined - cannot, in principle, be objectively measured.
funkyderek

If we can't measure them, they are indistinguishable from nothing
I can't see how this statement can be supported. I can be standing in front of a mountain and simply not have the tools to measure it. You might say, but the tools exist. And I would answer that the mountain existed before the tools existed, or could have.
I don't understand this. How would you know if you were standing in front of a mountain?
LittleToe

Derek:
Altering the concentrations of chemicals in different parts of the brain can affect the emotions.

Or alternatively, they send you to sleep
funkyderek

Or alternatively, they send you to sleep

Oh sure, fall back on that when you haven't got an argument.
Next time, I'll bring extra chemicals to make sure I stay awake!
Terry

WOW!
So much to respond to; so little time!
Let me say this. Anybody who has a problem with the idea, the word or the concept of REALITY scares me!
Something which is real (like real estate or an apple tree) is there whether you acknowledge it or not. Something which is not real (like Bigfoot) has been foisted on people's mind by the planting of false evidence. (The perpetrator has been revealed).
Distinguishing real from unreal marks the very boundry of our SANITY!
I want to be sane. I'm sure you do too. Sanity has a practical value even in a crazy world. The value of knowing what is real gives us survival advantages. We won't, for example, waste our time on unprofitable pursuits. We can devote ourselves to reaping real world benefits.
There are two kinds of mental concepts or categories of things: TRUE and FALSE. We discover which is which by testing.
Santa Claus is a false entity. The impact of a false entity is very real. If I have a heart attack because I think there is a ghost in my closet, then, I may die even if the ghost isn't real. Would you not say that dying of a heart attack BECAUSE of a false belief is avoidable?
Unfortunately in this string of discussion we have mixed apples and oranges with chalk and cheese! Let us separate our items and clarify them before we smother in this muddle.
1.We detect real things by how they can be measured. The "joy" of a child on Christmas is a real joy but the belief in Santa is false. Sooner or later the child will have to face that fact. Just as all of us faced our religion as being Santa Claus and had to face that it was false. Measure the "joy", the "disillusionment", the "disappointment" and you see the power of an idea. We conclude the EFFECT is real and not that SANTA is real.
2.If you work for wages you expect payment. You don't want your hourly wage "reinterpreted" to a lower amount. Ask yourself, "why?" Our survival depends on having clear, precise and accurate expectations as to the actual vs the changeable or non-existent.
3.Reserve as many categories of mythical being as you like. Just don't confuse them with real beings. Locally, in Texas, a religious mother heard warnings from god that Satan would take her children to hell. She drowned her children to "save" them. She thought she should obey the voice of god. After all, Abraham was willing to do the same. Now I ask you---does this illustrate the danger of losing track of True vs False?
4.Science can afford the luxury of postulating the existence of "maybe" existing things. Why? Then it can test to see if they are real. Why? So that they may discover uses for them. Why? So that knowledge of practical improvements in the human condition might be made.
5.Religion postulates the existence of "maybe" existing things and then demands we change our lives and live serving them. Has the human race improved as a result?
6.Emotions reflect chemical changes in our physical body. Hormone changes cause a woman to experience all sorts of physical and mental reactions. Hormones are physical and the chemistry of the body is real. Some animals, such as a dog, can SMELL the chemistry such as fear.
7.Measurement is the tool of logic. Logic is the art of non-contradictory measurement. The standard of measurement is consistency with result and uniformity. My bathroom scale tells me I weigh 210 pounds. If, tomorrow, it tells me I weigh 250 pounds I can assure you I won't ignore it. I will test the scale for accuracy and then I will test myself by going to a doctor!!
8.Mysticism deals with unprovable things, hidden things, pretended "realities" and gives people a sense of wonder, amazement, a thrilling sense of possibility. So what is wrong with that? Nothing as long as you don't LOSE TRACK of the unproven aspects. Masturbation can be a pleasant relief. The mind pretends certain stimulating thoughts and a physical result ensues. That isn't harmful unless a certain line is crossed and real relationships with actual partners are discarded in preference.
9.Looking at the history of humanity we find much damage has been wrought by false reality. Error in thinking leads to false reality. The impact of a false belief is as real as the impact of a true belief. All the more reason to distinguish them!
10.We only have a finite amount of time. We use our time wisely or we waste it. If we improve our lives, increase our assets, enlarge our sphere of influence, expand our circle of true friends, provide security for ourselves and our loved ones it can only come from CLEAR thinking. Clear thinking distinguishes important reality from unimportant fantasy. To get those two things mixed up has an impact. Look at a person's life and you'll immediately see the quality of their thinking!
Terry

String theory, Relativity, and angels

Share this