Comments on: Universe navel-gazing http://the-sacred-path.com/2007/11/26/universe-navel-gazing/ journeys through the mist Mon, 26 Mar 2012 20:22:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: MusEditions http://the-sacred-path.com/2007/11/26/universe-navel-gazing/comment-page-1/#comment-213 MusEditions Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:06:56 +0000 http://the-sacred-path.com/2007/11/26/universe-navel-gazing/#comment-213 After recovereing from Frank's {diseased} response [side splitting--totally agree! 8) ] I can now take a breath and thank you for posting this, Richard. Those of us among the spiritually minded often wonder how scientists get away with believing that the universe consists *only* of that which can be observed with humanoid eyeballs! And even some scientists say that human observation is not a particularly reliable source of information. I appreciate what you say about our current focus in reality as being an experiment by the totality of existence. I often look at "life experience" as a vast playing field. Today I may want to play accountant, or physicist, or blogger...and when I am no longer learning from or having fun with my role, I'll come on in, hit the showers, and put on a different uniform. After recovereing from Frank’s {diseased} response [side splitting--totally agree! 8) ] I can now take a breath and thank you for posting this, Richard. Those of us among the spiritually minded often wonder how scientists get away with believing that the universe consists *only* of that which can be observed with humanoid eyeballs! And even some scientists say that human observation is not a particularly reliable source of information.
I appreciate what you say about our current focus in reality as being an experiment by the totality of existence. I often look at “life experience” as a vast playing field. Today I may want to play accountant, or physicist, or blogger…and when I am no longer learning from or having fun with my role, I’ll come on in, hit the showers, and put on a different uniform.

]]> By: Richard http://the-sacred-path.com/2007/11/26/universe-navel-gazing/comment-page-1/#comment-212 Richard Tue, 27 Nov 2007 07:03:58 +0000 http://the-sacred-path.com/2007/11/26/universe-navel-gazing/#comment-212 Why don't you tell us what you really think, Frank? ;) (for those who do not know, Frank and I have been friends for a long time) Perhaps we need to get all the scientists in a circle and have them "observe" each other. We can all take a few minutes to ponder what will happen. Why don’t you tell us what you really think, Frank? ;) (for those who do not know, Frank and I have been friends for a long time)

Perhaps we need to get all the scientists in a circle and have them “observe” each other. We can all take a few minutes to ponder what will happen.

]]> By: Frank http://the-sacred-path.com/2007/11/26/universe-navel-gazing/comment-page-1/#comment-211 Frank Tue, 27 Nov 2007 00:39:30 +0000 http://the-sacred-path.com/2007/11/26/universe-navel-gazing/#comment-211 This article is a great example of a diseased metaphysics asking diseased questions. (For a great discussion of that, see E. F. Schumacher's A Guide for the Perplexed, probably out of print but available used.) Medievals used to ask how many angels could dance on the point of a needle; modern physicists ask if observing dark matter might shorten the life of the universe. Same process, same nonsensical results no matter how the question is answered. Those physicists are assuming the primacy of matter rather than the primacy of a non-material reality; they are assuming that it makes sense to judge reality as it looks from within time and space rather than envisioning how it looks from outside time and space; they probably think that contact with unembodied intelligence is impossible and is a superstition of the feeble-minded; they recognize nothing that cannot be measured unless it is one of their epicycle like the square root of minus one. So some such diseased question as that posed in the article is only to be expected. Not that i mean to be judgmental, you understand. :) This article is a great example of a diseased metaphysics asking diseased questions. (For a great discussion of that, see E. F. Schumacher’s A Guide for the Perplexed, probably out of print but available used.) Medievals used to ask how many angels could dance on the point of a needle; modern physicists ask if observing dark matter might shorten the life of the universe. Same process, same nonsensical results no matter how the question is answered. Those physicists are assuming the primacy of matter rather than the primacy of a non-material reality; they are assuming that it makes sense to judge reality as it looks from within time and space rather than envisioning how it looks from outside time and space; they probably think that contact with unembodied intelligence is impossible and is a superstition of the feeble-minded; they recognize nothing that cannot be measured unless it is one of their epicycle like the square root of minus one. So some such diseased question as that posed in the article is only to be expected.

Not that i mean to be judgmental, you understand. :)

]]>