Asperger's Syndrome and The Third Eye

Page 9 of 12 [ 189 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Deltaville
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 941
Location: SystemShock Universe

27 Mar 2016, 3:08 am

naturalplastic wrote:

ZenDen wrote:

I'm suggesting NP is on an endless task because the argument he expresses can not be proved.

First: I am not making ANY "argument".

I am simply asking the obvious question: why is it that the overwhelmingly lifeless and sterile Universe we see before us is evidence that a god designed it to be "life friendly".

Neither of you has answered it.

Second: what part of what I said "can not be proven"? No matter how many life baring planets they discover in the future its not gonna change the fact that most of Universe is lifeless. So overwhelmingly lifeless that for practical purposes its a sterile Universe.

As mentioned the obvious existence of billions upon billions of life authorizing planets breaks apart your argument.

You claim that the anthropic principle is nonsense yet have failed to disprove the first two premise to the repose of your argument? Why are you not addressing them? It is after all "nonsense," so I do not anticipate you will face any difficulty refuting then promptly. A life permitting universe (by the unimaginably precise exact calibration of the laws of physics) is incomprehensibly more rarer than one that cannot host life of any sort.

I have offered you the examples of the razor edge fine tuning of the lambda-CDM cosmological constant for the existence of ANYTHING... Why are you not addressing that "nonsense."

_________________
Sebastian

"Don't forget to floss." - Darkwing Duck

NoahYates
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Mar 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 545
Location: Kentucky

27 Mar 2016, 7:19 am

So guys (and gals)... yesterday was an incredible day. I had an experience that for me goes beyond coincidence. Let me just tell a little story. Since my AS diagnosis, I have been doing nothing except reading books / listening to/ watching videos about philosophy, spirituality, and mysticism. I have been engaged in discussions on the topic on this thread and elsewhere like never before. I have also ordered in the last month 12 books on philosophy, theology, and mysticism as part of my new passion for collecting books.

Yesterday I was poking around my grandparents barn, where our entire family has been storing our junk over the decades. Well... I was digging through a pile of our children's books and toys scattered around the barn loft covered in dusty dirt, mouse nests, dead insects, p*ss, and sh*t, when I began to uncover some very old books mixed in with the children's stories. I kid you not... the books I found consisted of a library of esoteric occult books!! !! These books belonged to my Dad's best friend from high school's grandmother. I will post a list (and maybe a picture) of them when I get them all sorted out and cleaned up. Seriously.... this is an untold treasure... especially considering I had never heard of these books/ideologies until I found these. If someone like my uncle had come along and decided to "clean out the barn" and burn these books or throw them away (as has been discussed in the past) it would have been a tragedy of epic proportions. There is something to me finding these books... especially given my "interest" in the occult and rare books as of late. Just for a taste of what I found... one of the first books I picked up was "A Treatise on Cosmic Fire."

_________________
“In the same way that you see a flower in a field, it’s really the whole field that is flowering, because the flower couldn’t exist in that particular place without the special surroundings of the field; you only find flowers in surroundings that will support them. So in the same way, you only find human beings on a planet of this kind, with an atmosphere of this kind, with a temperature of this kind- supplied by a convenient neighboring star. And so, as the flower is a flowering of the field, I feel myself as a personing- a manning- a peopling of the whole universe. –In other words, I, like everything else in the universe, seem to be a center… a sort of vortex, at which the whole energy of the universe realizes itself- comes alive… an aperture through which the whole universe is conscious of itself. In other words, I go with it as a center to a circumference.”~ Alan Watts

NoahYates
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Mar 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 545
Location: Kentucky

27 Mar 2016, 7:41 am

My story sounds like pure fiction does it not?! This is why it is so surreal for me. There is something going on here.

Claradoon
Supporting Member

Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,966
Location: Canada

27 Mar 2016, 9:34 am

When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.

Dinosaw
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: 8 Mar 2011
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 255
Location: Raleigh, NC

27 Mar 2016, 1:59 pm

Deltaville wrote:

I can recall when I communicated him a fact that two leading astrophysicist, both of whom are atheists, made a clear point that in face of overwhelming fine tuning, if you do not want God, you better have a multiverse. He then retorted in the most unscientific manner possible: So we live in a multiverse.

Multiverse? Yep. In our heads.

Every person's mind is their own personal Universe. Multiple dementias. /snarc

Everyone thinks their (sic) god

_________________
"Alpha males are for monkeys"
"If you cannot say what you mean...you will never mean what you say"

Dinosaw
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: 8 Mar 2011
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 255
Location: Raleigh, NC

27 Mar 2016, 2:09 pm

Claradoon wrote:

When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.

Yes.

I'll see your koan and raise you a metaphor.

To study "spiritual" realms, the scientist may need be the instrument

Any thing is in your head

_________________
"Alpha males are for monkeys"
"If you cannot say what you mean...you will never mean what you say"

Dinosaw
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: 8 Mar 2011
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 255
Location: Raleigh, NC

27 Mar 2016, 2:22 pm

NoahYates wrote:

... one of the first books I picked up was "A Treatise on Cosmic Fire."

Yes. That is synchronistic. Considering that you're (sic) brain "on fire" for gnosis.

A. Cleansing fire.

B. Consumed.

C. Truth.

D. Mented.

E. Gads.

F. In.

G. Noses.

_________________
"Alpha males are for monkeys"
"If you cannot say what you mean...you will never mean what you say"

AspE
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

28 Mar 2016, 1:02 pm

Deltaville wrote:

NoahYates wrote:

I went back to re-read the conversation on God, and I think i may have put words in AspE's mouth. I recant my claim that he does not believe his cognitive faculties to be reliable... I think that was someone else. I apologize for that. Is that irony?! hahaha... I will say that given materialism and naturalism (the ontology in which there is no God or anything like God) and evolution (defined as natural selection operating on (random) genetic variation over time), it can be argued that the probability that one's cognitive faculties would be reliable is low. And I read some other quotes from AspE regarding gnosticism and zen buddhism that make me think he has a deeper understanding of theology than I give him credit for. I just wish he would have brought that to the table in these threads. For the record I think AspE is clearly a very intelligent person. I just find that our definitions are so incongruent most of the time that its hard to communicate. And it doesn't help that according to my own personal, esoteric theology if one really knows the secret then there is nothing left to say. In fact its taboo to even utter it. It is a secret for a reason.... that is why zen masters "do not have anything to teach." It is something that must be realized in a sort of noetic lightning of intuition. Once you achieve that state of awareness you just Go So perhaps he already understands that ;-)

The main issue that I take with AspE is that he defends a predetermined conclusion and utterly ignores any other evidence to the contrary.

I can recall when I communicated him a fact that two leading astrophysicist, both of whom are atheists, made a clear point that in face of overwhelming fine tuning, if you do not want God, you better have a multiverse. He then retorted in the most unscientific manner possible: So we live in a multiverse.

Afterwards, he quickly edited his post when he realized his folly. He is a nice guy, and we are both of Jewish origin, and I respect his opinion on God and religion, although I certainly do not share it.

First of all, the opinion of scientists on God doesn't mean more than any other opinion. The appearance of fine-tuning may be an artifact of our present incomplete knowledge. Most forces in nature are related, it would be unlikely that these constants are arbitrary and unrelated. And finally, the multiverse is the more parsimonious explanation, and proposes nothing supernatural. So it's better. Scientifically.

I don't recall what you are talking about with regard to changing my post.

ZenDen
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,730
Location: On top of the world

28 Mar 2016, 3:22 pm

naturalplastic wrote:

ZenDen wrote:

I'm suggesting NP is on an endless task because the argument he expresses can not be proved.

In such a discussion as ours your position in a debate is called your "argument."

In my examination of your argument and in my comment, the word "god" wasn't used or considered. Mine was merely a statistical examination (which I suppose some may attribute to a god). So my comment reads (without a "god" being present) to your question:

"So much more elegant and comprehensive than the answer I was able to sum up: "So why do you demand an explanation for something that doesn't even exist?"......

......"It's because life exists in such an obviously hostile (impossible for life to form?) environment that we ask the question at all. Statistically it's quite unlikely life would arise in only one place."

No mysticism involved. In fact I posit a belief system that stated intelligent creatures ONLY arose (or could have only arisen) on our planet would indeed involve mysticism.

Additionally I mentioned the difficulty of proving a negative statement (argument or position). When you make sweeping statements about (for example) the sterility of the universe you make unproveable statements, only conjectures. And since your statement can NOT be proved then the existence of life on our planet is the only sure evidence we have to "hang our hat on."

Sorry for the confusion.

NoahYates
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Mar 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 545
Location: Kentucky

28 Mar 2016, 3:29 pm

Dinosaw
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: 8 Mar 2011
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 255
Location: Raleigh, NC

28 Mar 2016, 3:33 pm

AspE wrote:

First of all, the opinion of scientists on God doesn't mean more than any other opinion.

Ya

Opinions.

Amen Brother.

Yep, like this thread.

Also like your contribution.

For whatever OPINION's worth.

I also like triangles. Geometric poetic.

_________________
"Alpha males are for monkeys"
"If you cannot say what you mean...you will never mean what you say"

Dinosaw
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: 8 Mar 2011
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 255
Location: Raleigh, NC

28 Mar 2016, 3:36 pm

NoahYates wrote:

Yep.

More poetic geometry.

_________________
"Alpha males are for monkeys"
"If you cannot say what you mean...you will never mean what you say"

GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

28 Mar 2016, 3:55 pm

Would people be so kind as to formulate some falsifiable predictions in order to test the following theories:

- Anthropic Principle
- Fine-Tuned Universe
- Multiverse

... please.

Thanks.

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,682
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

28 Mar 2016, 9:36 pm

Right now the later two are just theories people on one side of the 'great debate' pelt each other with. No present proof of multiverses, and it's challenging to make heads or tails of fine-tuning because we wouldn't be here to comment without it - or if the coolest planet universe was 1,000 degrees and we were based on a different chain of ingredients we'd call it the same way.

As for anthropic principle, that just sounds like the kind of ontological conundrum that Hopper was pointing out often a few months back - that our needs shape our orientation the environment and accordingly our construction of reality is filtered according to our priorities. I'd think any battery of personality tests seems to illustrate variances in selective attention and observation within our species and it would be enough to say that if we met an asexual semi-liquid rock eating race of equal intelligence that their technology probably would have increased to serve somewhat different patterns of needs.

_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.

Deltaville
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 941
Location: SystemShock Universe

29 Mar 2016, 3:53 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

We cannot compare another universe yes, but we know from particle physics that these fundamental forces must be properly balanced in order stabilize the atomic structure of any particle. It is important to recognize that the fine tuned constants are an independent force, with no scientific understanding of WHY they are set in the values that they are.

_________________
Sebastian

"Don't forget to floss." - Darkwing Duck

NoahYates
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Mar 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 545
Location: Kentucky

29 Mar 2016, 6:26 am

Page 9 of 12 [ 189 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 Next

Jump to:

Asperger's Syndrome and The Third Eye Post Reply New Topic

Asperger's Syndrome and The Third Eye