Could We Have Been Lied To? (genesis 1-3)

[Squeek]

Done.

 

[Rithrandil]

To be fair, Squeek, I often never have any idea what side of an argument you are supporting. Your language can be interpreted as extremely ambiguous sometimes, and your statements often seem somewhat opaque to an outside reader. Often times you are (apparently) serious when you appear to be joking or joking when you appear to be serious. It's why I usually have a hard time responding to you - maybe I just haven't learned the difference between you being funny and serious, yet? The joys of internet communication! No vocal or facial cues to examine.

 

[Squeek]

Fair enough, I suppose.

With the exception of Narpet and maybe a handful of others, I've probably been on the Internet longer than anyone else here, and I think it's fair to say that I've seen my share of arguments and am probably a little jaded by them. I demand less of people and get turned off easily when they demand more of me.

I can't tell you how many times I've sat across from somebody, trying my very hardest to understand what the hell they were talking about. Then the tables would turn, and I would then sit across from other folks, trying to explain the same stuff to them while they tried their hardest to understand what the hell I was talking about. More than anything else, I think that describes a career spent in high technology.

I don't mind making an effort to explain myself, but I prefer to do it when the person on the other end is receptive and making an effort to understand (and I don't mean anyone in particular). For whatever reason, conversations tend to go a little differently on the Internet.

You would think that I would have more patience for that, not less, after all this time. But I don't. It's a fault, I know.

 

[Benedict]

In short: science works, it actually makes measurable predictions, still it does not assume that it knows the absolute truth, but constantly tests current theories for exceptions and flaws and adjusts its models to fit new results, it also does not make any a priori assumptions and favors no particular theory when several are equal given the evidence at hand.

Read a nice quote in new scientist - "There is no truth, only progress".

Can't remember who said it but I quite liked it as a phrase.

 

[coyote]

New Scientist is a journal that likes to provoke, but the phrase is nice!

 

[aries100]

I'm abit confused about what the OP actually means? but let me say this:

Most Danes, both theologians and priests, think that the Bible, Genesis included, do not a history book make. And the whole thing about how old the Earh is not included in the Bible; Usher, an Anglican Bishop made the estimate that the Earth is
6,000 years old and was made on Sunday at 9.30 in the morning, I think, by God.
(The Church needed to know the true birth date and year of Jesus Christ....)

Scholars at Danish universities pretty much agree on that the Old Testament (OT) probably was assembled around the year 1200 B.C. (or before our time) when the Hebrews were in Babylon or in Egypt. Hence the many references to Sumerian mythology in Genesis 1. The elder Jews then wrote down the tales they've heard told. And thus they became a written testament to the plights of the Hebrews....

As for the Creation Myth, it is a Myth about how the world came to be, a story about how man and woman and animals came into being. This is not to be confused with the scientific explanation about how life came to be.

Still, a myth or legend can still be true, as they can tell some truths about ourselves, we otherwise won't be able to see or understand - from just looking at the scientific point of view.

 

[JemyM]

As far as I remember, since recent archaeological discoveries debunked some theories involving Solomon there are no longer a historical record of the 9nth century BCE around the Canaan region. That means that there's no trace of any great civilization around the era when people like David and Solomon were supposed to have lived. It also seems like the region was a part of Egypt 1200 BCE. The OT gets more and more historically accurate the closer you get to around 500 BCE.

 

[buckaroobonzai]

As far as humans evolving from a lower species, even a common ancestor would require by purely natural evolution that we have organized from primordial soup. And does anyone really with any ability to think freely and grasp the forest, not just the trees trully think man with his metaphysical consciousness and not to even mention a soul, could arise from purely primordial matter (and evolution requires matter alone) via natural selection?

There is absolutely no possible material explanation for a natural selection progression to a soul. Neither is there one for a non-physical consciousness. SO anyone who excepts everything transmitted and programmed at them without critical thinking, is it acceptable to you to believe that you are nothing more then organized matter, with no energistic consciousness nor soul, a walking autamata/robot flesh machine?

 

[Rithrandil]

You're assuming there is such a thing as a 'soul' or a 'non-physical consciousness'. I don't think there is scientific proof of either.

 

[JemyM]

He also seems to suggest life is meaningless without one. That's a value statement, and I disagree to it.

 

[Prime Junta]

As far as humans evolving from a lower species, even a common ancestor would require by purely natural evolution that we have organized from primordial soup. And does anyone really with any ability to think freely and grasp the forest, not just the trees trully think man with his metaphysical consciousness and not to even mention a soul, could arise from purely primordial matter (and evolution requires matter alone) via natural selection?

There is absolutely no possible material explanation for a natural selection progression to a soul. Neither is there one for a non-physical consciousness. SO anyone who excepts everything transmitted and programmed at them without critical thinking, is it acceptable to you to believe that you are nothing more then organized matter, with no energistic consciousness nor soul, a walking autamata/robot flesh machine?

Are you familiar with the concept of "emergent properties?"

What do you mean by "energistic consciousness," "non-physical consciousness," or "soul?"

 

[buckaroobonzai]

Wow this is some funny stuff. The concept is quite simple really. Science does not have the instrumentality to observe or measure anything besides physical matter and energy. Thats it, thats all that means. So, we are talking about people believing that what science can measure today is the only thing that exists. So if you believe in that line of thinking, then your beliefs will slowly grow over the course of your life. However, current scientific theory asserts the age of the universe at approx. 14 billion or so years old. So your belief in all that exists is only founded on, what 400 years of modern western science????

Do you trully believe believe that our 400 year old observations of a 14 billion old(according to the latest theories), maybe even older, observable universe are rock solid!?

Some of the latest astrophysic postulations concerning gravity, and even somewhat older ones like string theory suggest both particle spin and gravitic force may be influenced by other dimensional forces.

Lets take a look at consciousness. The mechanisms for for the "experiencing window" of conscious processing are unknown. There is no model of ongoing leading thought processing. Basically, there is no location of consiousness by cells, system or energy that can be measured. The understanding is the brain fires the I/O processing, yet the leading edge experiential thinking control center is an unkown device. Why? Its because the mind is not a physical object of the brain. Consiousness rides on the physical thoroughfares of the brain, and it connects at its core which can not be easily accessed to the soul. Thats why the soul cannot be measured, because it does not exist in a physical location. We at the most simplistic terms are talking about dimensional transposition. And you know what, string theory and latest gravitational theory postulates dimensional transposition as well.

In sacred texts many cultures going back thousands of years, consciousness is by means of meditative and hypnotic trance frequency attainment is known to achieve transcendant experience, non-physical observation such as out of body experiences.

Lets look at martial arts, yoga, etc. Consiousness states can control physical states, even physical properties of the body. I can expand on the incredible eastern achievements and how they connect with the concept of the soul.

Also, I am not familiar how it is possible for any 100% physical natural selection or emergent property theory to explain evolution to +4 dimensional connections/existence etc. I would like to see that though for a good chuckle.

 

[JemyM]

If you are honest about what you are writing, it's apparent that your insight in neuroscience is non-existent.

 

[coyote]

What JemyM said. You might believe that the around 100 billion neurons and around 100 trillion synapses in your brain are just for show, but they are not, bb.

And by the way, I do some martial arts, and I have yet to see some metaphysical aspect of it. Sure it's about concentration and understanding anatomy to a degree, but in the end these things are very compatible with Newtonian physics. And when you speak of out of body experiences, this is basically the mind thinking that it is somewhere else, but you can not actually see what is happening outside the range of your own two eyes or hear anything outside the range of your own two ears. The mind is not actually outside the body, and therefore can not get any sensory input other than what is available to the body, but it certainly can hallucinate any number of interesting things that you imagine happen around you.

 

[Corwin]

But, What is the Mind?

 

[Rithrandil]

Wow this is some funny stuff. The concept is quite simple really. Science does not have the instrumentality to observe or measure anything besides physical matter and energy.

And?

Thats it, thats all that means. So, we are talking about people believing that what science can measure today is the only thing that exists.

Only things proven to exist, yes.

So if you believe in that line of thinking, then your beliefs will slowly grow over the course of your life.

Of course.

However, current scientific theory asserts the age of the universe at approx. 14 billion or so years old. So your belief in all that exists is only founded on, what 400 years of modern western science????

Yes.

Do you trully believe believe that our 400 year old observations of a 14 billion old(according to the latest theories), maybe even older, observable universe are rock solid!?

No, but Science has proven to be the best tool we have in analyzing the universe around us. As new things are discovered, old theories are updated or thrown out to match the new data. No other human 'belief system' comes close to Science.

Some of the latest astrophysic postulations concerning gravity, and even somewhat older ones like string theory suggest both particle spin and gravitic force may be influenced by other dimensional forces.

And?

Lets take a look at consciousness. The mechanisms for for the "experiencing window" of conscious processing are unknown. There is no model of ongoing leading thought processing. Basically, there is no location of consiousness by cells, system or energy that can be measured. The understanding is the brain fires the I/O processing, yet the leading edge experiential thinking control center is an unkown device. Why? Its because the mind is not a physical object of the brain.

Really? So if I bash part of your brain in with a bat you're going to keep operating at the same level of consciousness?

Consiousness rides on the physical thoroughfares of the brain, and it connects at its core which can not be easily accessed to the soul. Thats why the soul cannot be measured, because it does not exist in a physical location.

Oh, really? So it can't be measured yet you know it exists? Well hey, I think my mind resides in a mystical passageway to my gleebelgloble, but you can't detect it with science. How amusing your "scientific theories" are! They can't even detect a gleeblegloble, yet you still blindly follow them!

We at the most simplistic terms are talking about dimensional transposition. And you know what, string theory and latest gravitational theory postulates dimensional transposition as well.

k

In sacred texts many cultures going back thousands of years, consciousness is by means of meditative and hypnotic trance frequency attainment is known to achieve transcendant experience, non-physical observation such as out of body experiences.

Oh, really? This is known? Where is the lab testing that shows us? You do realize there are million dollar prizes readily offered to anyone who can prove any sort of ESP-like abilities, yes? Where are the peer review studies for your claims, UFO Weekly?

I just wrote a number on a piece of paper on my desk. It is seven digits long. Tell me what it is with your out of body powers.

Lets look at martial arts, yoga, etc. Consiousness states can control physical states, even physical properties of the body.

Wow, people can calm themselves down and slow their heart rate! That HAS to prove that your mind doesn't have a physical location!

I can expand on the incredible eastern achievements and how they connect with the concept of the soul.

I'm sure you can, and I can expand on how my gleeblegloble allows me to see into the Third Realm of Kazmodiar.

Also, I am not familiar how it is possible for any 100% physical natural selection or emergent property theory to explain evolution to +4 dimensional connections/existence etc. I would like to see that though for a good chuckle.

K

 

[Prime Junta]

And by the way, I do some martial arts, and I have yet to see some metaphysical aspect of it. Sure it's about concentration and understanding anatomy to a degree, but in the end these things are very compatible with Newtonian physics.

I used to do some aikido (ki no kenkyukai school) many years ago. That particular school approaches the martial art through ki; i.e., all the techniques are taught and practiced through the concept of ki. I mean sure, we learned the motions, but the main point was "where the ki goes."

The interesting thing was that it worked. I could do stuff by "extending ki" that I could not do any other way. Some of the masters I trained with could even do some pretty amazing stuff, such as preventing two much bigger guys from lifting him off the ground, or throwing an uke without any physical contact. (I even learned to do the latter myself, under some very specific conditions.) It also became quite easy to tell in sparring or training if the other guy was extending ki or not.

However, I did not see nor experience anything that would require supernatural explanations either. No levitation, no smashing bricks at a distance, no X-ray vision.

I also attended some "mixed school" camps as well, which had practitioners of the aikikai school as well. Aikikai practices aikido the same way most martial arts are taught -- through repetition and continuous refinement of technique, combined with sparring. The interesting thing there was that the lower-ranked aikikai practitioners were, generally speaking, *not* extending ki -- their technique *looked* good (better than ours, in fact), but there was no "power" behind it. However, the *higher-ranked* aikikai folks were extending ki exactly the same way as the higher-ranked ki no kenkyukai folks. IOW, the end result was the same in both cases -- practice ten years, and you'll get pretty good at it.

The experience I got from that is that ki is a label for a very complex psycho-physical phenomenon. It describes a way of consciously getting the mind and body pulling in the same direction that can normally be achieved only through such intense practice that the techniques become automatic. You can see it in sports, if you look for it -- for example, an intermediate-and-up tennis player serving, a golfer hitting a drive, a footballer feinting past an opponent or shooting, and so on.

However, I have no idea what ki "is," or whether it can be reduced to anything further. I believe it's yet another of the emergent properties that make us such interesting beings. I certainly can't think of ways to quantify or measure it; however, it is a useful concept. I think "mind" and "consciousness" are similar, but more complex ones.

And as for "soul..." that, I'll leave to the poets and theologians.

 

[Thoth]

I've read some pretty cool stuff on out of body experiences, including a few of folks that have drawn pictures of hidden in envelopes in other rooms. Ingo Swan, is the name of one such person, I believe. Does it prove we have a soul? Who knows, but it is interesting.

 

[Prime Junta]

That has never been accomplished under even minimally controlled conditions -- and not for want of trying. Whenever those stories are looked into, they seem to evaporate. If it did pan out, it would totally revolutionize the way we think of consciousness.

 

[Pladio]

I used to do some aikido (ki no kenkyukai school) many years ago. That particular school approaches the martial art through ki; i.e., all the techniques are taught and practiced through the concept of ki. I mean sure, we learned the motions, but the main point was "where the ki goes."

The interesting thing was that it worked. I could do stuff by "extending ki" that I could not do any other way. Some of the masters I trained with could even do some pretty amazing stuff, such as preventing two much bigger guys from lifting him off the ground, or throwing an uke without any physical contact. (I even learned to do the latter myself, under some very specific conditions.) It also became quite easy to tell in sparring or training if the other guy was extending ki or not.

However, I did not see nor experience anything that would require supernatural explanations either. No levitation, no smashing bricks at a distance, no X-ray vision.

I also attended some "mixed school" camps as well, which had practitioners of the aikikai school as well. Aikikai practices aikido the same way most martial arts are taught -- through repetition and continuous refinement of technique, combined with sparring. The interesting thing there was that the lower-ranked aikikai practitioners were, generally speaking, *not* extending ki -- their technique *looked* good (better than ours, in fact), but there was no "power" behind it. However, the *higher-ranked* aikikai folks were extending ki exactly the same way as the higher-ranked ki no kenkyukai folks. IOW, the end result was the same in both cases -- practice ten years, and you'll get pretty good at it.

The experience I got from that is that ki is a label for a very complex psycho-physical phenomenon. It describes a way of consciously getting the mind and body pulling in the same direction that can normally be achieved only through such intense practice that the techniques become automatic. You can see it in sports, if you look for it -- for example, an intermediate-and-up tennis player serving, a golfer hitting a drive, a footballer feinting past an opponent or shooting, and so on.

However, I have no idea what ki "is," or whether it can be reduced to anything further. I believe it's yet another of the emergent properties that make us such interesting beings. I certainly can't think of ways to quantify or measure it; however, it is a useful concept. I think "mind" and "consciousness" are similar, but more complex ones.

And as for "soul..." that, I'll leave to the poets and theologians.

Actually, I practised Aikido for a year too. The concept was quite special for me too at first. However, I couldn't find the same kind of Aikido school here in uni, so I started Budo Taijustu.

Without calling it ki, they still perform closely the same things and the fat 15th Dan master can probably throw me to the moon (that's an exaggeration , btw), but it's not because of 'ki' like you said.

I don't think it has anything to do with supernatural events or whatever, it's quite simply anatomy, physiology and physics at work here.

While my Aikido masters were teaching everything in a more 'spiritual'/'ki' fashion, my Budo Taijutsu masters were teaching technique, technique, technique.

It all boils down to the same thing though. Just keep practising and you'll get better.

I bolded the part that's actually important.