It makes human, yearning, passionate, literary sense. You love your children each 110%. I’ve only lost God, child of my mind, in my mid-60s. I don’t yearn for the chaos of my ruined life that intruded in the small hours again this morning. I yearn for the strange epic I accreted.
Sorry. Oasis.
Well they are into banning Conversion Therapy. It’s a start.
You have a way with words.
Pure poetry
Do NOT encourage me. It can only end in tears.
I can imagine it all too well.
My lips are sealed, my pen is locked away, oh, but wait, what do I have here . . . qwerty
You do know the Puter is getting suspicious of us meeting like this. Keep it under your hat.
1 Like
Very very nice answer. Refers to most things! Thank you!
Not sure how you figure that.
Also, to be sure we don’t misunderstand each other, that’s poetry, religion, philosophy
and makes no presumption to being any sort of science.
Cheers and welcome to CFI
Anything but science!
OH BUT I AM CHALLENGING YOU TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING OF MORE SUBSTANCE THAN YOUR USUAL INSCRUTABLE ONE-LINERS.
Can you come off of your cloud long enough to do that?
“Anything but science,” is that supposed to be saying something?
LFB, do you have anything to offer?
Do you think science is like every other human endeavor? Why? Or, why not?
I was being poetic. Science is a human endeavor. Maybe the most supreme. Enlightening. Made by humans to understand everything else. Basically humans made everything. What they see, is what they have made. Of which Science is the Ist philosophy (was metaphysics). Science explains and also explains that it cannot explain. I like that part about Science. No bullshit.
Me too, that why I thought it was worth getting down to specifics and thank you for humoring me with a real response, now I figure I owe you my take.
I appreciate that science grew out of philosophy - but that was then and this is now. The way I like to think of science is that its about studying the observable world around us - with a set of rules focused on objectively measuring and recording (demonstrable and repeatable), and intentionally focused on minimizing human bias,
1 Like
A great definition. I wonder if people are happy with the science of their times. As a relative mechanism. So discoveries were made when we really grew up. When we got tired of not knowing. So there must be a period of not caring enough to know more. Are we in that zone now? Do we know enough? Do we really care? Are we using science to get a McDonald’s in space? Or would we like inner engineering? Maybe commerce wins.
Sure seems that way. They’ve also lost a sense of soul.
In a way that’s what my Earth Centrism ideas is all about, recognizing a more down to Earth way of looking at the human perspective. But, it requires honest curiosity, good faith learning based on legitimate scientific inquiry, doing one’s homework.
That’s the problem. What is there to care about these days? I’ve been struggling with those sort of questions a long time and finally managed to put much of it into a cohesive package.
You might find it interesting and I’m always hoping for some solid critique.
1 Like
So……
I always thought little about myself and my leanings, as in Theo or atheist or what. As I started here I realised I may be a Humanist. I now realise I am not as Earth comes first! It’s an interesting read. People need directions and a way to realise that there is more than materialism. Nothing wrong with materialism though. We are chatting because of it. But the content needs to be corrected. I wonder if a naturalist is common to ECentrism. I shall go through all the links. But I must share with you: the underlying construct of my system is the Law of Karma and everything rests on that.
Unless you give the Law of Karma qualities it doesn’t possess. Everything originates in Chaos where the earliest patterns form via “quantum superposition” mechanics.
An example of a physically observable manifestation of the wave nature of quantum systems is the interference peaks from an electron beam in a double-slit experiment. The pattern is very similar to the one obtained by diffraction of classical waves.
Now I will have to study this. And my terminals are coming. Shall try. Thankyou
I don’t think that’s fair. It doesn’t acknowledge how hard it was to figure out things like planetary motion for the first time. Most people were struggling just to feed themselves, they didn’t have time to devote to staring at the stars.
That’s true. Must have been a tremendous sacrifice to pursue science and in those times to defy the norm.
Well, yes. Galileo is the most famous case, but he came near the end of the long struggle. There are some interesting stories in the Muslim world, that I read years ago, so I don’t remember names and dates, but they went through a renaissance period in the 13th century and did things like calculating the size of the earth. Then there was a fundamentalist resurgence with Al-Ghazali.
So really, it’s been up and down. There have been periods when reasoned-based exploration was encouraged, even in the Vatican. We are living in a time when the rational approach has been proven and it is implemented worldwide. However, each new person must find it again for themselves. If they are not surrounded by examples of it, and by people who connect the dots from discoveries to the technology that touches them, then they don’t see that proof. They might not even understand what “proof” means.
1 Like
Look at Hypatia, the first woman astronomer atheist, literally torn apart by warrior priests on the step of a building known as the Kaisarion , a former pagan temple and center of the Roman imperial cult in Alexandria that had been converted into a Christian church. There, the mob stripped Hypatia naked and murdered her using ostraka, which can either be translated as “roof tiles” or “oyster shells”.
Hence the term “ostracize”; banish by decree written on potsherds.
Even before then the great library of Alexandra was torched by religious zealots.
Religion does not tolerate science. Science is the mortal enemy of religion.
1 Like