current mathematical models of the universe involve what is termed 'hyper-dimension.".
ever read the book flatland?
it describes how a 2-dimensional being would perceive the intersection of a 3-dimensional object in "their" universe.. a flatlander would never be able to comprehend a sphere.
frankie, sunnygal, Sirona, et al. :
I just don't agree with dogmatism no matter it's form. There are fundamentalist theists and there are fundamentalist atheists/materialists. Truth generally lies in between two extremes and it is hubris to think we have reality in our back pockets like some form of personal possession.
B.
current mathematical models of the universe involve what is termed 'hyper-dimension.".
ever read the book flatland?
it describes how a 2-dimensional being would perceive the intersection of a 3-dimensional object in "their" universe.. a flatlander would never be able to comprehend a sphere.
Terry,
I understood what you said clearly and I agree. I would go further, though. Theoretical physicists are just as in the dark as the layman as to what their mathematical theories actually are like in their ontology. How can anyone get their mind around the fact, and I mean really feel it, that light is both a wave and a particle? Or that electrons "jump" from one orbit to a higher or lower orbit without actually crossing the space in between? Who was it, Arthur Eddington I believe, who said that 'anyone who says they understand quantum physics hasn't really studied it.'?
In the end, we make our own subjective reality. Others can be of assistance, but a truly empirical mindset will go with what we personally experience. If that includes a religious dimension, so be it.
And there's so much we just don't have a damn clue about, even the best and brightest of us.
Bradley
current mathematical models of the universe involve what is termed 'hyper-dimension.".
ever read the book flatland?
it describes how a 2-dimensional being would perceive the intersection of a 3-dimensional object in "their" universe.. a flatlander would never be able to comprehend a sphere.
funkyderek,
It's clearly both imaginable and conceivable - but not really likely.
How would you know that it is not likely? Would you care to put a probablity on it?
If these dimensions exist, it seems they are "rolled up" so small that nothing could live in them or travel through them.
And, you've been there, have you? If you are refferring to biological life your statement would make sense, since these dimensions are far smaller than organic molecules. But what if life can also be arranged in a completely different manner, one that is wholly unlike anything that we can presently imagine.
They are not gateways to other realities or sci-fi type "dimensions".
First you say that onacruse's philosophical speculation is "clearly both imaginable and conceivable" and then you make the categorical statement as I have copied above. You meant to say that you do not currently believe that the extra dimensions of string theory are gateways to other realities, and that modern science has yet to give us reason to believe so. It would be rather unscientific to feign knowledge in the absence of evidence one way or the other.
We are creatures that love to believe that we have everything nicely figured out, or at least the most important things. The theist goes under the assumption that there is a God and a spiritual reality and the atheist is quite comfortable working from a completely materialist paradigm. The fact of the matter is that there is so much we simply to not understand and it would be the height of arrogance to proclaim as reality that which is only speculation as well as dismiss as unreal what is only imaginatively hypothetical. Science is, and should be, a conservative enterprise, but it is interesting to note that many of the great advances in our knowledge have come from those who pushed the boundaries of what is "proper" science. Not too long ago anyone who might have described subatomic reality the way modern quantum physicists do would have been laughed at with derision and been proclaimed a believer in the occult.
A hundred years from now people will be rather amused at what we believe is not possible.
Bradley
What does spirituality mean? Well, what does spirit mean? Some define spirit as a disembodied personage of some sort. "Spirit" in Hebrew is the word ruach which simply means breath or wind. What comes to your mind when you think of wind? Is it something that is tangible like a rock? Can you really put your mind around what wind is?
Spirituality is a very difficult concept to define, as it is intangible and ethereal. Personally, it's kind of like defining pornography. As a famous Supreme Court Justice put it, "I can't really define it, but I know it when I see it."
B.
setting aside dogma, taking the comments of augustine to a deeper level ("unity in what is essential.
freedom in what is not essential.
charity in everything"), i'd like to share an observation.. i don't know if i can articulate it properly, and i know it'll open me up for some abuse, but so be it.
A very interesting thread indeed.
I think it is very easy to identify certain cardinal attributes within a person; in the case of Jesus it was sacrificial love. I don't have any problem with that, or in calling oneself a follower of Jesus or Buddha, as long as we recognize that we are embarking on a train of thought which is not akin to our everyday, matter of fact way of thinking about things. Did Jesus really walk on water? Did he really give the Sermon on the Mount the way it is recorded in the Bible? To dogmatically state in the affirmative misses the whole point of spirituality, in my opinion. As long as we do not confuse metaphor with reality we are fine.
Here's a more poetic way of putting it. The Christ is more than Jesus.
Bradley
about a year ago i started attending meetings of my college newspaper and soon became romantically involved with a staff member.
she -- "h." -- was the first real girlfriend i had ever had, being a "good jw" before this.
we went out for a few months, had gobs of ecstatic sex and otherwise did not get along at all (strange, isn't it?).
Thanks for the encouragement, Czar. Of course, I'd like to think she masturbates nightly to the sight of my picture but, hey, she probably is over me.
about a year ago i started attending meetings of my college newspaper and soon became romantically involved with a staff member.
she -- "h." -- was the first real girlfriend i had ever had, being a "good jw" before this.
we went out for a few months, had gobs of ecstatic sex and otherwise did not get along at all (strange, isn't it?).
Hello again,
About a year ago I started attending meetings of my college newspaper and soon became romantically involved with a staff member. She -- "H." -- was the first real girlfriend I had ever had, being a "good JW" before this. We went out for a few months, had gobs of ecstatic sex and otherwise did not get along at all (strange, isn't it?). When I broke up with her I left the newspaper staff for I could not see staying in such close proximity to this brainless beau.
Recently I got an email from the editor asking me to come back for next year. I really want to write for the paper again as it looks good on my academic record and is actually quite fun. I loathe the thought of seeing "H.", especially since I am currently totally flat relationship-wise.
I've never had to deal with being around, hell, working around, someone I once had a "thing" with. Advice? Suggestions? Jokes?
Bradley
PS...after a three week haiatus I've figured out that I'm pretty damn over the JW's, but CERTAINLY not over my woman troubles. Beautiful Chicagoan ex-JW girl where art thou?
folks,.
well, i'm done with the whole witness thing.
i've had my catharsis and have noticed the jws slowly fading from my consciousness.
Hope you can stick around and give us some further insights as to how you got so damn over it.
Read widely, read often. Develop fortitude. Be ruthless with yourself (and others) if you need to. Develop a hobby. Exercise. Have tons of mind-blowing sex with Logansrun (hot women only).
folks,.
well, i'm done with the whole witness thing.
i've had my catharsis and have noticed the jws slowly fading from my consciousness.
confusedjw,
I left the JWs two years ago. I was doubting for two years previous to that. I've been "over" the JWs many times. Each time I get closer to being truly "over" it.
Sure, memories and ideas will always be there. Just like the memory I have of the bully who picked on me in sixth grade. Does he affect me now? Hell no.
I'm at a new level. Basically, the JWs don't exist anymore.
B.
folks,.
well, i'm done with the whole witness thing.
i've had my catharsis and have noticed the jws slowly fading from my consciousness.
Folks,
Well, I'm done with the whole Witness thing. I've had my catharsis and have noticed the JWs slowly fading from my consciousness. There's nothing left for me say about them.
In a way, I'm glad it's worked out this way. I'm happy I was once a Jehovah's Witness. You see, if it wasn't for them I wouldn't have conquered them. I have come to believe an evil overcome is better than not having overcome an evil because of it's non-existence. Like a person born blind and deaf who learns how to play the piano, I have overcome the defect I was born into. Any growth for me lies in the future, not the past. For me, the Watchtower is dead. I killed it. Rest in peace.
I need to go cultivate my garden.
Bradley
