Martial Arts & Religion

[RenDaHai]

They'd start with you, FYI...

Great, it would be a chance to learn stuff.....

I do not agree with this post. Science and Spirituality are not really on the same plain of mind or reality at all.

Rethinking perhaps actually it is the concept of what constitutes spirituality that we differ on...

I suppose I think of the use of Logic to analyse Sensation as science and to the use of Abstraction to analyse Intuition as spirituality.

Tangible Vs Intangible, Conscious Vs Unconscious, Logos Vs Eros, Logic Vs Abstraction, Sensation Vs Intuition, Anima Vs Animus.

I tend to have Yin/Yang approach to everything.

[David Jamieson]

Yin Yang can be interpreted as a symbol for cause and effect.
I can get behind that.

[Syn7]

I prefer to look at it from a physics perspective. I love Shroedingers Cat. Great thought experiment. The Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum Mechanics implies that the cat is both alive and dead (called eigenstates) until observation breaks down the wavefunction and only one possibility remains to be seen. A so called single classical state from a linear mixture of states in equal portion.

The question he asked was when does a quantum system stop existing as superposition and become one thing or another. Anyone asking the whole tree falls in the forest question should take the time and learn about the experiment. Einstein took it even further with the "kittens" scenario and I suggest yall read that too. They aren't particularly complicated. A highschool graduate shouldn't have any issue fully comprehending these experiments.

[Scott R. Brown]

A critical thinking classroom in college would rip this thread into a million pieces. And then do it again.

Nagarjuna already did that nearly 2,000 years ago, so I would not get all excited about a critical thinking class. Even critical thinking depends upon assumptions that cannot be demonstrated to be true. They must use the If/Then process. If the "IF" is demonstrated to not exist the "THEN" cannot follow!
___________________

The common denominator of all knowledge/knowing is the mind. Mind is what determines/measures all things. Nothing can be proven to exist if there were no mind(s) to perceive them.

When arguments are made such as Schrodinger's Cat. it always presumes the existence of minds to do the perceiving. If it is not your mind it is my mind, but if you consider the absence of ALL mind(s), then nothing exists.

Creation perceives itself through the perceiving faculty, which is mind, it is irrelevant whether that mind is a Universal mind broken down into zillions of individual minds or not. Without a mind to create, organized, perceive, interpret phenomena, nothing can be proven to exist.

All phenomena that exists, exists because of mind, therefore it cannot be separate from mind, it is mind substance creatively expressed.

[Drake]

Nagarjuna already did that nearly 2,000 years ago, so I would not get all excited about a critical thinking class. Even critical thinking depends upon assumptions that cannot be demonstrated to be true. They must use the If/Then process. If the "IF" is demonstrated to not exist the "THEN" cannot follow!
___________________

The common denominator of all knowledge/knowing is the mind. Mind is what determines/measures all things. Nothing can be proven to exist if there were no mind(s) to perceive them.

When arguments are made such as Schrodinger's Cat. it always presumes the existence of minds to do the perceiving. If it is not your mind it is my mind, but if you consider the absence of ALL mind(s), then nothing exists.

Creation perceives itself through the perceiving faculty, which is mind, it is irrelevant whether that mind is a Universal mind broken down into zillions of individual minds or not. Without a mind to create, organized, perceive, interpret phenomena, nothing can be proven to exist.

All phenomena that exists, exists because of mind, therefore it cannot be separate from mind, it is mind substance creatively expressed.

It sounds like the class you went to sucked.

[rett]

A critical thinking classroom in college would rip this thread into a million pieces. And then do it again.

More interested in seeing if you can do it.

[Scott R. Brown]

It sounds like the class you went to sucked.

It more looks like you don't have a clear understanding of the limits, and flaws, of critical thinking.

All logic is founded upon unprovable assumptions. This was the true genius of Socrates, that is not realized by many, even logic/critical thinking is supported by a foundation of sand.

[RenDaHai]

I prefer to look at it from a physics perspective. I love Shroedingers Cat. Great thought experiment. The Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum Mechanics implies that the cat is both alive and dead (called eigenstates) until observation breaks down the wavefunction and only one possibility remains to be seen.

Good stuff.

And for those who want proof the double slit single electron experiment is worth having a look at.


When we interpret Quantum Mechanics it is common to hold the Copenhagen View or the Many Worlds view (personally I like the former).

The Copenhagen as you observed above considers the object existing as a Probability Wave until this wave is forced to collapse by measurement. Once it collapses the other probabilities cease to exist and the object takes a definite position.

The many Worlds interpretation considers that every possibility along the wave becomes manifest in a separate universe. Personally I don't like this one for several physical reasons, but more importantly (for me) from intuition.

The lesser Known 'Many Minds' interpretation may be of interest here as part of this topic. This proposes that the many worlds are split inside the mind of the observer as opposed to being physical universes.

This is the part of Physics that I feel starts to occupy a similar space with spirituality.

The Probability wave itself, when it collapses does it choose a place on the wave by some kind of quantum of free will, or is it genuinely random? Is anything genuinely random? Developments of Quantum Theory will change the way we view the world, physically, philosophically and spiritually.

[David Jamieson]

@Ren - I am not sure that spirituality and belief cannot be separated. they are semantically entwined in the intangible. IE: one must believe they have a spirit, one doesn't actually know they have one or not.

We know we have a body by the obviousness of it's functions, we know we have a brain by the peculiarity of the internal dialogue, we know the function of the body and it's parts and are learning the mysteries of the brain more and more each day.

If you cannot define the road you want to set in front of yourself, it will not be laid down and you will continue to wander aimlessly.

What we don't know, we are perfectly free to wonder at, be in awe of and attempt to understand through whatever means we may have at our disposal at the time, but the bottom line is that at this time, a spirit is only mind, it's an idea, it is not something that can be readily understood such as the length of your arm is.

Build up those things that are accessible and understandable. Build up the knowledge you have, build up the body you live in, build up the traits of your character in a fashion that is optimum to your life and relationships. I think you'll find that if you build these up, you will feel just fine in "spirit". Those are the things that nourish the idea anyway.

[sanjuro_ronin]

A critical thinking classroom in college would rip this thread into a million pieces. And then do it again.

I can't tell you how many times I have seen "critical thinkers" ripped to pieces in in a basic philosophy class, much less a theology one.
Critical thinkers are great, except that they tend to NOT apply that very thinking to their own views.

[Drake]

[Scott R. Brown]

The lesser Known 'Many Minds' interpretation may be of interest here as part of this topic. This proposes that the many worlds are split inside the mind of the observer as opposed to being physical universes.

This is the part of Physics that I feel starts to occupy a similar space with spirituality.

The Probability wave itself, when it collapses does it choose a place on the wave by some kind of quantum of free will, or is it genuinely random? Is anything genuinely random? Developments of Quantum Theory will change the way we view the world, physically, philosophically and spiritually.

Once one understands that nothing exists without mind, we realize that the physical universe depends upon mind for its existence.

Mind and experience of life (phenomena) are not really separate entities. They are like two sides of the same coin, one cannot exist without the other and ultimately there is no separation between the two. Mind and experience are the same thing.

[Scott R. Brown]

I can't tell you how many times I have seen "critical thinkers" ripped to pieces in in a basic philosophy class, much less a theology one.
Critical thinkers are great, except that they tend to NOT apply that very thinking to their own views.

Or apply critical thinking to critical thinking. Except that critical thinking is, again, nothing more than a construct of mind. It cannot exist without a mind to create it and utilize it. It follows strict rules that are created and founded upon assumptions that themselves cannot be demonstrated to exist, but must be assumed to exist.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Or apply critical thinking to critical thinking. Except that critical thinking is, again, nothing more than a construct of mind. It cannot exist without a mind to create it and utilize it. It follows strict rules that are created and founded upon assumptions that themselves cannot be demonstrated to exist, but must be assumed to exist.

LOL !
Were you in that philosophy class too when "critical thinking" got kaiboshed like that?

[RenDaHai]

@Ren - I am not sure that spirituality and belief cannot be separated. they are semantically entwined in the intangible. IE: one must believe they have a spirit, one doesn't actually know they have one or not.

Well, Ok, I can accept this. However the Spirit itself is a self defined quality. So depending how I define it, it is perfectly reasonable for me to believe in it. I can define it scientifically if I like. 'The seat of emotions and character' in the last dictionary I looked at. Which itself is parts of the mind intangible to current science yet fully explorable by self contemplation and intuition.

Thus my search for the truth can be both scientific and spiritual. The truth of my own mind and self through contemplation and the truth of the observable world through science. Eventually when science is powerful enough the two shall meet.

If I believed in God, I would still say that God himself must conform to scientific principles. These may be beyond our power of comprehension but must exist none the less. However through the spiritual it is possible to 'know' that which is beyond our science. We may not understand it but we can intuitively know it to be true. If we understood why we know it it would cease to be intuition and would become logical science.

Intuition is true knowledge without reason. That is more spiritual than science. At least, in my mind.