The March Philosophy Book of the Month is Final Notice by Van Fleisher. Discuss Final Notice now.

The April Philosophy Book of the Month is The Unbound Soul by Richard L. Haight. Discuss The Unbound Soul Now

The May Philosophy Book of the Month is Misreading Judas by Robert Wahler.

Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
Locked
creation
Posts: 423
Joined: November 22nd, 2019, 10:39 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by creation » January 13th, 2020, 12:24 am

The_architect wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:12 pm
I talked to a man who was run over by a car. At the emergency room he flat lined 3 or 4 times for several seconds, up to a minute or so each time. He said he remembered what it felt like during those moments of death because he had them so frequently. He described it as feeling like "nothing". He said it was the most awesome feeling. He couldn't describe it any other way. He said it was the most peaceful feeling, that his mind didn't think, it was turned off, but he had an awareness of "nothing".

I wasn't the least surprised. My theory on life is that it is fundamentally a creature of polarity. Where there is life, there is death: where there is everything, there is nothing. Light, dark. Good, evil. Prey, predator. Time, no time. The Big Bang is not a problem because the Nothing is still there. It is out of our reach, however. Everything and Nothing co-exist. They are two parallel states. Then there is the 1s and 0s of life that I suggest as so:
The TOE or GUT will come down to more or less Everything has an opposite, on a continuum, with equilibrium.

And, to experience what that awesome feeling that person talked about when flat lining, then just stop thinking. I have been doing it for about 20 years now, and with lots of practice have achieved about the astounding record of about four or five seconds. But the Bliss I feel in that time is about the best way I can describe it.

For the body to just breathe or to do absolutely anything, like sit up or anything else, there has to be some sort of thought processing going on in the brain to tell the body to keep moving the muscles that cause breathing and to keep doing whatever else it is that causes what the body is doing at every minute parts of each second. So, to stop thinking absolutely and completely brings with it an overwhelming calming sense of 'nothing'. 'Bliss' is the closest feeling word I can use to describe this 'nothing'.
The_architect wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:12 pm
1 DNA evolve 0 AND love 1 DNA evolve 0 AND love ...

Note that "love" are the first 4 letter of evolve spelled backwards, as DNA and AND mirror each other. We don't evolve by one lifetime; that doesn't make sense. To evolve as a species with singular DNA within that species, meaning we are actually individual subspecies, you need to regenerate. One lifetime does not regenerate. It is only logical that our individual DNA must regenerate to evolve; hence, more than one liftetime. And, I believe what is evolving is our capacity for love, not the capability of our minds. It is not necessarily a religious thing; it is a survival thing. If we plan to remain a fixture on this planet we will need to grow our capacity for love of humanity to prevent war and annihilation and the cooperative global effort to maintain a healthy environment on Earth.

The magic of science is the incredulity it defines in our universe. It certainly seems to be discovering and defining the divine. In any case, the numbers and facts are so astronomical they are out of our brain's league. That is unquestionable. We have the knowledge but we don't comprehend them so much. We've only been here for two seconds, after all. If God existed since the beginning of time or infinitely, He only created us 2 seconds ago in the age of the universe. Why did He wait so long? Did it take Earth that long to become inhabitable? Why was He dependent on a growth line in the first place? Trial and error?
Firstly God is NOT a "he".

God, just like the Universe exist eternally HERE-NOW.

God did not, in a sense, create 'us', human beings. Humans beings like everything else is created, from at least two pre-existing things coming together, and then evolves, like everything else does.

creation
Posts: 423
Joined: November 22nd, 2019, 10:39 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by creation » January 13th, 2020, 12:26 am

Sculptor1 wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:22 pm
Consul wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 12:01 pm


No.



There's no possible (ontological) emergence out of nothing, because it's part of the very concept of emergence that emergent entities are founded on, grounded or rooted in other entities. Emergent attributes are ontologically irreducible but not ontologically independent.
Since we have only one example of the "big bang", there is no empirical precedent to comment on the possibility or impossibility of this event.
But we do have, that is; If anyone wants to look at it.

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 1079
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Sculptor1 » January 13th, 2020, 5:31 am

Consul wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:35 pm
Sculptor1 wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:22 pm
Since we have only one example of the "big bang", there is no empirical precedent to comment on the possibility or impossibility of this event.
My point is that if the Big Bang is the absolute beginning of the matter-energy-space-time system, then it's not a case of emergence, since emergence from nothing is non-emergence.
You are mistaking a definition for a cause.

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 1079
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Sculptor1 » January 13th, 2020, 5:32 am

creation wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 12:26 am
Sculptor1 wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:22 pm


Since we have only one example of the "big bang", there is no empirical precedent to comment on the possibility or impossibility of this event.
But we do have, that is; If anyone wants to look at it.
"But we do have"???? DO have what , exactly.
It is still speculative that the BB happened. So we have less that one example.
We have a appearance saving theory.

creation
Posts: 423
Joined: November 22nd, 2019, 10:39 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by creation » January 13th, 2020, 11:29 am

Sculptor1 wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 5:32 am
creation wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 12:26 am


But we do have, that is; If anyone wants to look at it.
"But we do have"???? DO have what , exactly.
We have an empirical precedent to comment on the possibility or impossibility of this event. That is what I say we do have.
Sculptor1 wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 5:32 am
It is still speculative that the BB happened. So we have less that one example.
We have a appearance saving theory.
You can look at theories if you like. But I much prefer to just look at what IS actually true, right, and/or correct instead.

User avatar
Consul
Posts: 2747
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Consul » January 13th, 2020, 3:38 pm

Sculptor1 wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 5:31 am
Consul wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:35 pm
My point is that if the Big Bang is the absolute beginning of the matter-energy-space-time system, then it's not a case of emergence, since emergence from nothing is non-emergence.
You are mistaking a definition for a cause.
:?:
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 1079
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Sculptor1 » January 13th, 2020, 4:22 pm

creation wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 11:29 am
Sculptor1 wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 5:32 am


"But we do have"???? DO have what , exactly.
We have an empirical precedent to comment on the possibility or impossibility of this event. That is what I say we do have.
Sculptor1 wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 5:32 am
It is still speculative that the BB happened. So we have less that one example.
We have a appearance saving theory.
You can look at theories if you like. But I much prefer to just look at what IS actually true, right, and/or correct instead.
There is no empirical evidence as you claim.
Stop time-wasting.

creation
Posts: 423
Joined: November 22nd, 2019, 10:39 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by creation » January 15th, 2020, 6:03 am

Sculptor1 wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 4:22 pm
creation wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 11:29 am


We have an empirical precedent to comment on the possibility or impossibility of this event. That is what I say we do have.



You can look at theories if you like. But I much prefer to just look at what IS actually true, right, and/or correct instead.
There is no empirical evidence as you claim.
Stop time-wasting.
Why do some people exist who actually BELIEVE that they KNOW absolutely ALL knowledge.

Do you KNOW every piece of empirical evidence that has existed, exists now, and will exist in the future?

If yes, then great.

But, if no, then WHY do you say, "There is no empirical evidence as you claim"?

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 1079
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Sculptor1 » January 15th, 2020, 6:33 am

creation wrote:
January 15th, 2020, 6:03 am
Sculptor1 wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 4:22 pm


There is no empirical evidence as you claim.
Stop time-wasting.
Why do some people exist who actually BELIEVE that they KNOW absolutely ALL knowledge.
Look in the mirror.
Do you KNOW every piece of empirical evidence that has existed, exists now, and will exist in the future?

If yes, then great.

But, if no, then WHY do you say, "There is no empirical evidence as you claim"?

creation
Posts: 423
Joined: November 22nd, 2019, 10:39 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by creation » January 15th, 2020, 12:04 pm

Sculptor1 wrote:
January 15th, 2020, 6:33 am
creation wrote:
January 15th, 2020, 6:03 am


Why do some people exist who actually BELIEVE that they KNOW absolutely ALL knowledge.
Look in the mirror.
Do you KNOW every piece of empirical evidence that has existed, exists now, and will exist in the future?

If yes, then great.

But, if no, then WHY do you say, "There is no empirical evidence as you claim"?
You are so PREDICTABLE.

ONCE AGAIN, I do NOT believe anything.

And the power of BELIEF, and the very reason WHY it is best to neither believe nor disbelieve absolutely anything, will very soon be SHOWN and REVEALED.

Besides the FACT that you MISSED THE MARK on that point, you also MISSED THE MARK on the other point.

User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 969
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by h_k_s » January 15th, 2020, 1:46 pm

creation wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 12:24 am
The_architect wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:12 pm
I talked to a man who was run over by a car. At the emergency room he flat lined 3 or 4 times for several seconds, up to a minute or so each time. He said he remembered what it felt like during those moments of death because he had them so frequently. He described it as feeling like "nothing". He said it was the most awesome feeling. He couldn't describe it any other way. He said it was the most peaceful feeling, that his mind didn't think, it was turned off, but he had an awareness of "nothing".

I wasn't the least surprised. My theory on life is that it is fundamentally a creature of polarity. Where there is life, there is death: where there is everything, there is nothing. Light, dark. Good, evil. Prey, predator. Time, no time. The Big Bang is not a problem because the Nothing is still there. It is out of our reach, however. Everything and Nothing co-exist. They are two parallel states. Then there is the 1s and 0s of life that I suggest as so:
The TOE or GUT will come down to more or less Everything has an opposite, on a continuum, with equilibrium.

And, to experience what that awesome feeling that person talked about when flat lining, then just stop thinking. I have been doing it for about 20 years now, and with lots of practice have achieved about the astounding record of about four or five seconds. But the Bliss I feel in that time is about the best way I can describe it.

For the body to just breathe or to do absolutely anything, like sit up or anything else, there has to be some sort of thought processing going on in the brain to tell the body to keep moving the muscles that cause breathing and to keep doing whatever else it is that causes what the body is doing at every minute parts of each second. So, to stop thinking absolutely and completely brings with it an overwhelming calming sense of 'nothing'. 'Bliss' is the closest feeling word I can use to describe this 'nothing'.
The_architect wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:12 pm
1 DNA evolve 0 AND love 1 DNA evolve 0 AND love ...

Note that "love" are the first 4 letter of evolve spelled backwards, as DNA and AND mirror each other. We don't evolve by one lifetime; that doesn't make sense. To evolve as a species with singular DNA within that species, meaning we are actually individual subspecies, you need to regenerate. One lifetime does not regenerate. It is only logical that our individual DNA must regenerate to evolve; hence, more than one liftetime. And, I believe what is evolving is our capacity for love, not the capability of our minds. It is not necessarily a religious thing; it is a survival thing. If we plan to remain a fixture on this planet we will need to grow our capacity for love of humanity to prevent war and annihilation and the cooperative global effort to maintain a healthy environment on Earth.

The magic of science is the incredulity it defines in our universe. It certainly seems to be discovering and defining the divine. In any case, the numbers and facts are so astronomical they are out of our brain's league. That is unquestionable. We have the knowledge but we don't comprehend them so much. We've only been here for two seconds, after all. If God existed since the beginning of time or infinitely, He only created us 2 seconds ago in the age of the universe. Why did He wait so long? Did it take Earth that long to become inhabitable? Why was He dependent on a growth line in the first place? Trial and error?
Firstly God is NOT a "he".

God, just like the Universe exist eternally HERE-NOW.

God did not, in a sense, create 'us', human beings. Humans beings like everything else is created, from at least two pre-existing things coming together, and then evolves, like everything else does.
In Philosophy, the God-Concept is imbued with creating, since It exists because of the dilemma of need for a First Cause, at least according to the philosopher and cleric Aquinas.

In the case of Aristotle, it is the need for a Prime Mover that justifies the need for a God-Concept.

According to Descartes, it is because of the Greatest-Good concept, which is known today as the ontological argument. It goes like this: "If I am good there must be someone more good. And more so, on and on, until you arrive at the Most Good, which is God."

There is also the Artistic Artificer, and also the Changeless Changer, etc.

There are several arguments and "proofs" of the God-Concept in Philosophy.

Atla
Posts: 411
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Atla » January 15th, 2020, 5:54 pm

Consul wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 12:01 pm
Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 4:10 pm
Then aren't you talking about weak emergence?
No.
Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 4:10 pm
For example the Big Bang emerging out of 'nothing': what structural properties or relation between its elements or whatever does 'nothing' possess?
There's no possible (ontological) emergence out of nothing, because it's part of the very concept of emergence that emergent entities are founded on, grounded or rooted in other entities. Emergent attributes are ontologically irreducible but not ontologically independent.
Your ontological emergence is indeed emergence out of nothing then, you slip in magical thinking and deny it.

So we don't fully consider all the 'elements', and when new behaviour appears at higher 'organization', we think it emerged out of the elements. That's magic.

Atla
Posts: 411
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Atla » January 15th, 2020, 5:58 pm

Consul wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:35 pm
Sculptor1 wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:22 pm
Since we have only one example of the "big bang", there is no empirical precedent to comment on the possibility or impossibility of this event.
My point is that if the Big Bang is the absolute beginning of the matter-energy-space-time system, then it's not a case of emergence, since emergence from nothing is non-emergence.
Lol

Atla
Posts: 411
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Atla » January 15th, 2020, 6:04 pm

We tend to run into problems when we try to apply reductionism to a universe that doesn't actually have parts.

User avatar
Consul
Posts: 2747
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Consul » January 15th, 2020, 8:05 pm

Atla wrote:
January 15th, 2020, 5:58 pm
Consul wrote:
January 12th, 2020, 1:35 pm
My point is that if the Big Bang is the absolute beginning of the matter-energy-space-time system, then it's not a case of emergence, since emergence from nothing is non-emergence.
Lol
What's so funny?
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars

Locked