A New Creation

Thomas said:
Oh good grief ... are you of the opinion that if there is a God He/She?It/They must be accessible to the physical sciences?
Click to expand...
No. But if the god isn't accessible to the physical sciences, it doesn't have any relevance.
 
RJM said:
To materialist life and death , you mean?
Click to expand...
Yes, we are material things.

If something exists outside of materialism, it has no relevance to us. If it interacts with the material world, it would be accessible to the physical sciences.
 
Naturalist said:
Yes, we are material things.

If something exists outside of materialism, it has no relevance to us. If it interacts with the material world, it would be accessible to the physical sciences.
Click to expand...
What makes a nuclear physicist better than a Kalahari bushman, gazing at the stars when the great reaper comes to gather up?
 
Last edited:
Naturalist said:
Without a brain, there would be no knowledge of the existence of the Universe..
Click to expand...
How so? Can't knowledge be stored on a computer?
I read lots of wikipedia articles .. it's a good source of knowledge. :)

I think you mean, without a brain there is no awareness..
..but that is just your opinion .. a guess.
 
RJM said:
What makes a nuclear physicist better than a Kalahari bushman, gazing at the stars when the great reaper comes to gather up?
Click to expand...
The nuclear physicist can make predictions based on her knowledge of physics, that that the bushman can't.

The nuclear physicist understands how the stars develop, how they give off light, and how they'll extinguish. She knows the vast numbers of them, the various types, etc. The bushman doesn't.
 
muhammad_isa said:
How so? Can't knowledge be stored on a computer?
I read lots of wikipedia articles .. it's a good source of knowledge. :)

I think you mean, without a brain there is no awareness..
..but that is just your opinion .. a guess.
Click to expand...
Knowledge on a computer is just a string of bits. That string of bits represents knowledge to a brain who can interpret it. It also took a brain to craft the computer. Same thing with a book. A book contains a bunch of characters which represents knowledge. But it takes a brain to write the book and read the book.
 
RJM said:
But lives the interconnectedness of nature and spirit?
Click to expand...
(I thought you were logging out!)

If by that interconnectedness you mean they both stand in awe of nature, I agree.

I find the more I understand nature, the more I'm in awe.

When I was first introduced to some of the counter-intuitive aspects of physics, I started thinking that it sounds a lot like religion, but physics had the supporting evidence. That really had me in awe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
Naturalist said:
The interactions of energy and matter over space-time.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. So is the universe limited to space and time? Or is that a human limitation of physical measurement and perception?

Are there no human perceptions that pierce beyond 'the veil' of space and time? Are there no humans who possess a 'sixth sense' ability, in greater or lesser degree?

Why should someone dismiss the validity of any such intuition?

The correct answer should be: "I just don't know," and not: "I need to correct you, because it just does not exist."
IMO
 
Last edited:
RJM said:
Correct. So is the universe limited to space and time? Or is that a human limitation of physical measurement and perception?

Are there no human perceptions that pierce beyond 'the veil' of space and time? Are there no humans who possess a 'sixth sense' ability, in greater or lesser degree?

Why should someone dismiss the validity of any such intuition?

The correct answer should be: "I just don't know," and not: "I need to correct you, because it just does not exist."
Click to expand...
We shouldn't dismiss any intuition, we should analyze it. Having analyzed it, we can state that we have evidence to support the intuition or not.

If there is no evidence to support it, then there's no evidence required to dismiss it.
 
Naturalist said:
We shouldn't dismiss any intuition, we should analyze it. Having analyzed it, we can state that we have evidence to support the intuition or not.

If there is no evidence to support it, then there's no evidence required to dismiss it.
Click to expand...
Ok so I get a 'warning' in a dream to avoid getting into a certain position, and I follow the warning when the situation presents itself, and so escape the consequence of not accepting the dream warning -- how do YOU find evidence to dismiss it?
 
RJM said:
Ok so I get a 'warning' in a dream to avoid getting into a certain position, and I follow the warning when the situation presents itself, and so escape the consequence of not accepting the dream warning -- how do YOU find evidence to dismiss it?
Click to expand...
To dismiss what?
 
RJM said:
The validity of my intuition
Click to expand...
According to your post, you had a dream, you acted on it, and presumably escaped negative consequences.

You analyzed your intuition (ie tested it) and got the results you expected. Why would I dismiss it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top