Holistic As Apposed To Reductionist Science

[boagie]

"There is an old Hasidic story about The Devil and his imp friend who were walking down the street one day when they spotted a man who had bent down to pick up a piece of the truth.

The imp was horrified and said that now that the man had found this we will be discovered and it will lead to the end of our reign.

The Devil just smiled at his young friends naivety and told him not to worry. The man may have found a piece of the truth but we will help him organize it.

This is why I'm wary of "revisions." Once they begin being organized, without sufficient understanding to begin with, we just psychologically descend deeper into Plato's cave. Unfortunately there are many without any understanding who will want to be in charge of "revisions."

It is like members of the Jesus Seminar trying to understand Jesus from a secular perspective and offering revisions. Not a clue.[/quote]

Nick_A

I may be misreading you here, if I am please forgive. It has been my experience with persoanal friends whom are believers that it is not just evolutionary biology that they find threatening but any new knowledge whatsoever. You have given no indidication that you understand the concepts involved nor their potentially revolutionary effects upon the problems facing our trouble world and yet you sound poised to reject already what you do not understand. Again If I misread you please forgive, but if you wish to issue warnings of the possiable dangers involved in understanding the above imformation you would perhaps have more crediability if you give some indication that you understood it first.

[boagie]

"The whole is greater than the sum of its parts."

Sometimes, depending...
Sometimes the complete whole = the sum of it's parts,
ie; "the complete Universe being the sum-total of all Conscious Perspectives".

nameless,

Yes the example you give would be a good one if we knew for certain that the universe is itself a closed system. I do not believe that has been stated by science. If it is indeed a closed system then so to is your statement is true.

[Nick_A]

"There is an old Hasidic story about The Devil and his imp friend who were walking down the street one day when they spotted a man who had bent down to pick up a piece of the truth.

The imp was horrified and said that now that the man had found this we will be discovered and it will lead to the end of our reign.

The Devil just smiled at his young friends naivety and told him not to worry. The man may have found a piece of the truth but we will help him organize it.

This is why I'm wary of "revisions." Once they begin being organized, without sufficient understanding to begin with, we just psychologically descend deeper into Plato's cave. Unfortunately there are many without any understanding who will want to be in charge of "revisions."

It is like members of the Jesus Seminar trying to understand Jesus from a secular perspective and offering revisions. Not a clue.

Nick_A

I may be misreading you here, if I am please forgive. It has been my experience with persoanal friends whom are believers that it is not just evolutionary biology that they find threatening but any new knowledge whatsoever. You have given no indidication that you understand the concepts involved nor their potentially revolutionary effects upon the problems facing our trouble world and yet you sound poised to reject already what you do not understand. Again If I misread you please forgive, but if you wish to issue warnings of the possiable dangers involved in understanding the above imformation you would perhaps have more crediability if you give some indication that you understood it first.

You are misreading me. My path includes the natural unification of science and religion from a holistic perspective. I've learned that it is initially attractive but the human psych is such that it needs to pervert it.

The reason is that the holistic truth exists at what is called the conscious transcendent level of existence. Life in Plato's cave exists at what is called the exoteric level of existence that is reactive. They are connected by the esoteric level which begins when a person at the exoteric level inwardly experiences that there is something real beyond the exoteric.

There is nothing new in what you've presented but just differing degrees of quality as expressed by different people. I'm just more familiar with their ideas mostly from the sources from which they got their ideas. All legitimate sources will include the human tendency to try and pull the transcendent down into the exoteric while the person taking such ideas seriously knows that he must sacrifice his exoteric self importance to acquire what is being offered. He must get out of his own way. A lot of revisionists though just create ingenious ways for you to get in your own way.

In the Bible they are referred to as false prophets.

I've referred to scientists becoming aware of the Law of the Included Middle that makes quantum mechanics understandable by adding an additional dimension to the classic Law of the Excluded Middle. These two laws which appear contradictory refer to two different directions. The Law of the Excluded middle refers to one plane of existence while the Law of the Included Middle refers to how levels of existence are connected in the quality of a moment itself.

If in the links you provided I find someone that writes on evolutionary biology as half of a cycle that includes involutionary biology, that will be meaningful for me since the two complimentary halves create the whole process.

I'm not putting evolution down but rather suggest that it is an acquired human tendency to degrade "meaning" for the sake of feeling self importance. That is why the Devil in the story knew discovering a piece of the truth wouldn't be a problem. The Imp was just too young to realize and feel secure in how capable we are of self deception.

I'm one of the minority that really appreciated this classic movie "Mindwalk" based on ideas of Fritjof Capra.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... ovie&hl=en

It's over an hour long so it isn't your typical Internet empty quickie. But for those interested in what Capra was talking about, it will be intriguing.

[boagie]

Nick_A

My apology Nick_A, perhaps you would consider leading the way here in introducing this systems understanding of our world. Thanks for the link I most assuredly will make use of it! I shall have to read over your post and digest, as I am not familar with some of the difficulties that you have been talking about. Your input is most appreciated! By the way, your work at possiable unification, yes, I almost instinctively felt that this is spiritually significant. I must admit though if you are coming from a Christian perspective, I find that suspect in itself.

[Nick_A]

Hi Boagie

Would you consider that maybe you've never experienced Christianity but rather only sects of Christendom Kierkegaard refers to that are normally assumed to be Christianity. The Christianity I know and respect is something few are aware of.

It is impossible to explain levels of reality that exist both within cosmoses and what connects cosmoses themselves. For example we can see how matter develops into what we see as forms like a tree for example. Trees also exist within forests: a higher whole. Forests exist within land masses: higher wholes. Land masses exist within the planet: a higher whole and a cosmos. Now the planet earth exists within a higher level of reality called our solar system which in turn exists within our milky way as a higher whole which in turn exists within the infinity of galaxies.

Everything is connected in this way including the very small and infinitely large. This is what is meant by the triune universe or one level of reality within another. Science is normally concerned with the universe at one level. It is changing now through research at the quantum level. I learned of the Law of the Included Middle from Dr. Basarab Nicolescu, a highly regarded particle physicist. This law which allows us to understand the triune universe or the connection of "middles" allows us to unite science with religion since science deals with the gap between before and after and the essence of religion deals with the objective quality of the moment or the vertical line that connects involution or the movement of forces into creation and evolution which is the movement of forces back to the source.

As you can see this is hard to explain. If you read how Buddha and Einstein were referring to the same thing, it is much food for thought. I link this from Thomas McFarlane's site Integral Science. It has been useful to me:

http://www.integralscience.org/

Read how he compares statements by Buddha and Einstein:

http://www.integralscience.org/einsteinbuddha/

Scroll down and read the sample parallels from the book.

If you are willing, the first chapter of Jacob Needleman's classic book "A Sense of the Cosmos is posted on this site:

http://www.rawpaint.com/

Click on Library on top far right. Then scroll down and find

Jacob Needleman's Chapter One: The Universe
The Universe as A Teaching
Pragmatism and Desire
A Conscious Universe
What Is Consciousness?
Microcosmic Man
The "Parable" of Geocentrism
The Face of Reality
Against the Literal Mind
Heliocentrism
Where Bateson studies Mind as a scientist from the outside, Jacob Needleman observes it as a philosopher and metaphysician, from within. This first chapter from his book, A Sense of the Cosmos; The Encounter of Modern Science and Ancient Truth (Doubleday), presents us with the possibility that the Universe is a living teaching. Don't mistake this for another "New Age" criticism of science. Needleman has the greatest respect for science and for the search for truth that is the heart and soul of science. Be sure to read section 4, What Is Consciousness? Needleman's challenging reflections imply that there are states, levels or qualities of consciousness that can be developed within us. What is more, the implication is that this development is the purpose of both the Cosmos and Great Teachings.

Professor Needleman does an excellent job in opening the mind to ideas we are not used to like levels of reality and the systems of universal structure as well as our resistance to opening to them. If it interests you and you are open to this quality of thought, we could discuss it.

[boagie]

I suggest if your spirituality is not generic in dealing with and understanding this material then your intellectual intigrity is corrupt. If you had stated that a new mythology could take wing here, one that might inspire an entirely new worldview this would have been something. No this is not the case is it, you are welcome to contribute to the topic at hand but please do not try to usurp it to your preexisting mindset, this is not intended, repeat, not intended to be about Christianity.

The intent here also is to present if possiable an introduction to the topic, as it is far from being a household word. A basic understanding of this new science will indeed not occur unless it is presented in such a way that the novice might follow easily.

[Nick_A]

I suggest if your spirituality is not generic in dealing with and understanding this material then your intellectual intigrity is corrupt. If you had stated that a new mythology could take wing here, one that might inspire an entirely new worldview this would have been something. No this is not the case is it, you are welcome to contribute to the topic at hand but please do not try to usurp it to your preexisting mindset, this is not intended, repeat, not intended to be about Christianity.

The intent here also is to present if possiable an introduction to the topic, as it is far from being a household word. A basic understanding of this new science will indeed not occur unless it is presented in such a way that the novice might follow easily.

You have a negative reaction to a word without knowing what it means. Christianity is about human conscious evolution. It is easy to understand in the context of levels of reality.

We both accept the truth of mechanical evolution on earth. Man is dual natured having both an animal and spiritual part. I believe that Man is unique on earth in its potential for the transition between mechanical evolution and conscious evolution towards a higher level of reality or the origin of the spiritual part of Man. That is what Christianity is about. You've been turned off by much of what you've experienced with Christendom.

My interest is in understanding the meaning and purpose of life on earth including Man's unique purpose. I'm convinced it is impossible without first perceiving the cosmological structure of the universe. This is the link between science and religion and what Prof. Needleman describes in "A Sense of the Cosmos." I cannot allow myself to have bad connotations of words get in the way.

Our tendency is most often to devolve higher understanding by our defense mechanisms and foolish pride. If you want to go that route it is your choice but I won't do it.

[boagie]

Nick_A,

Ok, thank you for respecting the autonomy of the topic at hand.

[Nick_A]

Nick_A,

Ok, thank you for respecting the autonomy of the topic at hand.

Simone Weil was one of those rare ones that understood the holistic connection between science and the ancient teachings. I cannot see our emotions as a whole becoming capable of opening to such ideas in less then 50 years when it would be common knowledge. It helps my hope to know this influence is out there regardless of the condemnation:

I believe that one identical thought is to be found--expressed very precisely and with only slight differences of modality-- in. . .Pythagoras, Plato, and the Greek Stoics. . .in the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita; in the Chinese Taoist writings and. . .Buddhism. . .in the dogmas of the Christian faith and in the writings of the greatest Christian mystics. . .I believe that this thought is the truth, and that it today requires a modern and Western form of expression. That is to say, it should be expressed through the only approximately good thing we can call our own, namely science. This is all the less difficult because it is itself the origin of science. Simone Weil....Simone Pétrement, Simone Weil: A Life, Random House, 1976, p. 488

[boagie]

This concept of oneness is not new, but has been accepted in the east for a very long time. Schopenhauer wrote a long time ago that it would be the east that comes to greatly influence the west in philosophy not the other way around.

This holistic thinking, this general systems theory is simplier to something I used in my own thinking before hearing about this established process, and that was to realize that context defines. Seeing as everything is an open system, it is difficult to enclose for the purpose of examination any particular object or area of concern, but for practical purposes one must quite literally throw a ring around the object of concern, and consider that that outside of the ring to be of less direct affect on object in question.

I am begining to realize that to affectively present this new way of approach this new science it is likely going to have to be by presenting some sort of modeled situtation. I do not entirely feel up to the task, so if there is anyone out there that wishes to give context to these ideas well and good I would appreciate the help. In the meantime, I shall spend some time pondering just how to go about presenting this, as something almost visually workable.

[wanabe]

Perhaps a challenge is the most practical way to approach this, though it may be viewed as a fallacy by some.

Prove that there is something that is a closed system... That if you take 'a' thing apart and separate it, it can be fully understood as a whole.

[Belinda]

Boagie #25 I am trying to explain monism in the Phil of Religion lists.I like your description of 'throwing a ring around' arbitrarily for practical purposes.

[NameRemoved]

well I am running late for this train of thought but here goes..

We have all been raised with the old structure of science, that is, reductionist science, this is not to be discarded but the new science opens new possiablities and the two are said to be complimentary. The old science we are told has structured our thinking, not just for the scientist but the whole population. It is said that our thinking is modeled upon the reductionist approach, thus it is fragmented thinking.

I think I can see where the holistic approach does have some outstanding insights that reductionism would not be able to deal with. If this is so, I mean if at present our thinking is fragmented what will it mean to be reprogramed by this new science. Will we come closer to whole brain functionality and what will it mean to the extensions of this thinking into the world, culture, industry, interpersonal relationships and indeed the approach to healthcare. Your thinking cannot stay the same perhaps my associates here have a slant or two to help us out in predicting the coming changes.


Edit: Ok, no one is biting on this one, perhaps if it is made clear that this holistic thinking and general systems theory are really one and the same thing. I believe cybernetics is inclusive now in the defination of general systems theory. I am very much the novice myself, so there is no need to feel intimadated.

"The whole is greater than the sum of its parts."

I would agree with most of your points except to correct you on your old science term. the old science was not reductionist, it was entirely holistic. depends how far you are going back ie which era made you think old science was reductionist?

[boagie]

"would agree with most of your points except to correct you on your old science term. the old science was not reductionist, it was entirely holistic. depends how far you are going back ie which era made you think old science was reductionist?"


"Izzy"

Actually I appreciate that in the past the ideal of wholism was embraced in the west but with the introduction of the scientific method and the age of reason it seems to have been lost in the west. This is not I believe as foreign a concept in the east today as it is experienced in the west. Our whole psychological framework in the west seems to be based upon this fragmentation, this reductionism which if you listen to the likes of David Bohm, it is fundamental to the level of strife in our modern world.

As Einstein said the problems that face us cannot be solved by the same thinking that created them--parphrased I believe.

[NameRemoved]

Hi I think strife has always existed, its not a matter of just the western worlds psychology, but reductionism is limiting to what is on offer and holistic therapies have shown to have great benefits in China and here, [though you are right not enough here] Medicine in China is practiced much more holistically, than in the West.