Cosmology between Philosophy and Science
About | Information | History | Online | Facts | Discovery
riffing on my dissertation...
Comments
-
I've got that book next in my list & recently I read some by Samuel Alexander & Iike his ideas on religion, (the deity lectures at Glasgow). Also Arthur Eddington has a good reading to consider about cosmology and metaphysics. I'll follow some more of your videos. You've got a beautiful mind, mate.
-
I wonder if any of these words mean anything.. Does sound fascinating though!
-
Great discussion! I think you and I have really similar PhD topics! I think I'm a little more clunky and analytic than you, though. My PhD topic is on the natural sciences and human value, human normativity. Do you know John McDowell and Wilfird Sellars? I'm drawing on them. I'm arguing that human values are natural - not in a reductive natural scientific sense, but in the sense that the space of reasons is coextensive with nature.
I think at base level I'm an insane Hegelian, Spirit is the truth of Nature and all that, even though Nature is Spirit's presupposition. -
you have read steiners thoughts on art and science?
-
philosophers >> aristotle >> science >>
eco spreading systems of less scariness
( mesopotamia vs egyptian beginnings) -
Sounds brilliant man. What is the book called by Whitehead? And have you ever read Sartre? I think his ideas of freedom may be of interest to you.
-
Have you ever looked into the Samkhya philosophy of India. There is its classical form in the Samkhya Karika by Ishvara Krishna, which is dualistic (pluristic) and contains no thiesm, and there is the non-dual thieistic forms of the Hindu Puranas, particularly of interest is the form given in the Bhagavata Purana.
-
Humanity has a spiritual and historical form of amnesia. Amnesia rooted in events that took place in our ancient past. And although Truth is within our grasp, humanity, in the aggregate chooses not to know Truth - out of Fear. Fear leads to ignorance. Choosing not to know, while acting on blind 'beliefs', creates the suffering we experience. If we don't understand our True past, the single event that lies at the ROOT of our current hellish condition, then we will never regain the authenticity and worth of our true selves. It's very sad that a handful of world "leaders" no doubt know very well the "what and why" of this planet. And because of the fallen state of these psychopathic individuals, the majority of us will continue to learn Truth the hard way, while people like Josef Ratzinger laugh mentally at the ignorant. At this point, it ridiculous that we even have to promote verbally eloquent rants tainted with the slightest kiss of superficiality, instead of being straightforward and simply finding Truth. The ego is almost as bad as fear. But only the ego can be used as a tool within yourself.
-
"Cosmo-poiesis"? Then your project engages in a mythic (not a mythological) undertaking. In other words: Your project can only be subject to science (maybe psychology/sociology of religion or cultural studies) and by no means science itself. I am very sad to see you are wasting time and money here---all the more I hope it's not the money of others.
-
The “20th century mind” with the best grasp of natural science and cosmology may have been Tesla. I think the reason Tesla didn't try to educate academia about his discoveries was because they were slowing him down. Tesla’s peers were not in a position to understand his paradigms, and arguing with people who cannot understand and accept new discoveries is time consuming. Tesla chose to demonstrate his understanding of what was possible to the scientific community rather than argue with inferior minds about things he knew better about. I would recommend that you try to heed this principle.
So rather than constructing a “new order” that is essentially a pacificatory cosmo-fiction, your work would be of better service if it apprehends the details of the best-fit order and describes the implications. This may mean less reading and more “experimenting”. Ergo ERIE perhaps, but that makes publishing your findings a difficult and potentially dangerous task.
Another issue I’d like to raise with you is that while you are aware of many challenges moving from Newtonian Mechanics to Whitehead’s “modern science”, another major paradigm shift is already on the table. And beware! There is also a nest of lies and disinformation on the table from the dying Newtonian holdouts who deny what was actually discovered when men traveled more than 400 miles above the Earth- Newton’s physical matter starts to break down along with his “laws”.
As far as choosing a good teacher, you're definitely not wasting your time with Whitehead. But “orbit” withstanding, there have been many critical scientific discoveries since Whitehead’s time. And don’t make the mistake of getting invested because understandings of the universe as multi-dimensional in nature rather than 3D is the domain of the new Whiteheads. You might call this “current science” rather than “modern science”. I realize this is really pushy and demanding, but you have such a great mind Matt, I can’t resist challenging you.
Irony's finest: http://deoxy.org/branes.htm
I'm really curious, by the way, of how you arrived at your characterization of Einstein's cosmo-theological position. That was quite an articulation! It sounds really good, and I’d like to believe it, but the skeptic in me… It would be fascinating you hear you elaborate on it with thoughtful referential support.
Thanks for sharing your work., Matt. -
Wow. This crap is going to be in a dissertation. This guy is going to have a PhD.
-
The sheer vastness of the universe is a stumbling block to faith for many people. But because the human mind is so powerful the universe must be vast, in order to accomodate the human mind. If our minds were bigger than the universe then we would be able to see God, which is forbidden to us in this present dispensation.
I incline to the kabbalistic doctrine of zimzun, contraction, first promulgated I think by Isaac Luria. God WITHDREW in order to create space for His creation. The creation exists in the space left by His withdrawal. Yet the Abrahamic tradition also stresses the immanence of God, so zimzun cannot be a comprehensive explanation.
But I resolutely believe that the distinction between God and His creation must be maintained. The one is not the other. All forms of pantheism should be rejected. This I believe to be the secret strength of Islam, a religion that I generally abhor. The Muslims absolutely and unconditionally uphold both the unity and the separateness of God. -
heard a woman say philosphy was more about why we shouldnt be here:) was a reply to someone had said she must know all about universe etc:)
-
Sounds like the freedom element is a piece of WTHead Theology in the make up of the organic, changing, defining by and while unifying, cosmos stasis of just an implication. If an just an implication a heavy one. Almost personifying yes?
12m 8sLenght
39Rating