Reality… how real is it?

[Bro Dave]

While this subject has been implicitly and explicitly debated ad nausium, may I have yet one more stab at it?

We seem to accept that all our arguments end up in relativistic conclusions. We seem to approach reality for two directions; The Atheists from the material, and the Theists from the spiritual. “reality” is for each of us only definable by how we are “wired”, i.e. our thought processes, and by our experiences. So, lets examine each side, and where they are coming from.

Atheists feel smug. They are material/science based. Well, exactly what does that mean? Our current best understanding using String Theory and Quantum Mechanics, seems to bring reality down to energy, vibrating at high frequencies, and in certain patterns. We already have figured out that matter is 99%+ “empty space, and yet, the illusion of solid objects is seen as a reality. Is it? Or, is it just energy, wearing different disguises? And what about my favorite Atheists insistance that because auto replication and auto evolvement exist, there is no need to look further?

Theists feel smug. They have absolute answers, because their answers come,(in some cases) from direct spiritual interactions. And while this absolute proof goes “poof” when they try to offer it to anyone who has not shared such an experience, for them it is absolute. And so, Theists believe in an Absolute Source of energy, providing the drive mechanism for all that is, including a mechanism to produce an evolutionary process, which can be guided to acheive desired results.

(or, is it as the Buddhists say, an illusion? )

The Atheists are left with energy, arranging itself in evolving patterns, and the Theists are left with a source of energy, with a plan to evolve that energy into certain patterns.

It just doesn’t seem like that wide of a gap!

Bro Dave

[Bugmaster]

Yes, I am sure of what I believe. Claiming to have exclusive access to truth, shows a lack of understanding of the nature of truth in its largest sense. God is Absolute Truth. All else is merely noble attempt at achieving God.

In this case, your statement is self-refuting. You've just told me that everybody is wrong when they claim access to abslute truth, and you immediately said that this is an absolute truth. So, you can't possibly be right (at least, not while remaining sane).

What I’m saying,(and apparently not all that well) is that we have reached a level of discovery,(quantum mechanically speaking) where our machines will have the capacity to engulf virtually all we know at any moment...

I'm sorry, how do you figure that ? As I've pointed out (actually, as someone I linked to has pointed out for me), the quantum computer is still executing a particular program; it's just not doing it in a conventional way. Quantum computers are not omniscient. They have the potential (so far, unrealized) to be more powerful than regular computers, which already aggregate more data than any one human being could understand... But that doesn't automaticaly imply that they'd have god-like powers, and it doesn't imply that they will automatically solve all the problems for us just by the virtue of existing.

Yeah, well its all relative. If you were living 1000 years from now, that might seem a trivial accomplishment.

Maybe, but what's your point ?

Personally, I think that measuring the radius of the Earth armed with nothing more than a stick and some rulers is pretty damn impressive, but maybe that's just me.

It seems unscientific to preclude even the possibility that those who report extra physical experiences and connections are to be dismissed.

"Possibility", no. Probability, yes. Anything is possible -- for example, it's possible that computers are really powered by invisible pink goblins -- but it's just not very likely.

And, it “possible” that you and your “invisible pink goblins”, (or pink unicorns) may just be throwing up flack in place of serious arguments. But then, I know you would not do such a thing! ;)

No, I was being serious. I don't doubt that "extra physical connections" -- i.e., souls and spirits and such -- are possible, but I don't see any reason for believing in them. Once I see some conclusive evidence for them, I'll change my mind.

[Bro Dave]

Yes, I am sure of what I believe. Claiming to have exclusive access to truth, shows a lack of understanding of the nature of truth in its largest sense. God is Absolute Truth. All else is merely noble attempt at achieving God.

In this case, your statement is self-refuting. You've just told me that everybody is wrong when they claim access to absolute truth, and you immediately said that this is an absolute truth. So, you can't possibly be right (at least, not while remaining sane).

I said that anyone claiming to possess Absolute Truth, or have exclusive access was “lying”. We all “access” God, who is Absolute Truth, but none of us can ever know that Absolute Truth in its totality.

What I’m saying,(and apparently not all that well) is that we have reached a level of discovery,(quantum mechanically speaking) where our machines will have the capacity to engulf virtually all we know at any moment...

I'm sorry, how do you figure that ? As I've pointed out (actually, as someone I linked to has pointed out for me), the quantum computer is still executing a particular program; it's just not doing it in a conventional way. Quantum computers are not omniscient.

Nor am I implying that they would be. All I’m saying, is that by virtue of having a total overview of knowledge to “crunch”, many knowable things will more quickly be known. This process of accelerated understanding should provide exponential breakthroughs in every field, including computers and how they compute information. They will begin self improvements at an astonishing rate, IMHO.

They have the potential (so far, unrealized) to be more powerful than regular computers, which already aggregate more data than any one human being could understand... But that doesn't automaticaly imply that they'd have god-like powers, and it doesn't imply that they will automatically solve all the problems for us just by the virtue of existing.

Not “all” problems, just disease, hunger, material breakthrough, new kinds of medical approaches to healing, robots that remove humans from boring menial tasks and on and on…

Yeah, well its all relative. If you were living 1000 years from now, that might seem a trivial accomplishment.

Maybe, but what's your point ?

My point is, we judge by what we know, by what has become familiar. In 1000 years, what will be “normal”, would today for us be truly miraculous.

Personally, I think that measuring the radius of the Earth armed with nothing more than a stick and some rulers is pretty damn impressive, but maybe that's just me.

I’m impressed, I’m impressed!

It seems unscientific to preclude even the possibility that those who report extra physical experiences and connections are to be dismissed.

"Possibility", no. Probability, yes. Anything is possible -- for example, it's possible that computers are really powered by invisible pink goblins -- but it's just not very likely.

And, it “possible” that you and your “invisible pink goblins”, (or pink unicorns) may just be throwing up flack in place of serious arguments. But then, I know you would not do such a thing!

No, I was being serious. I don't doubt that "extra physical connections" -- i.e., souls and spirits and such -- are possible, but I don't see any reason for believing in them. Once I see some conclusive evidence for them, I'll change my mind.

What we are about to experience in our lives, is going to change all of our minds…

Bro Dave

[Bugmaster]

I said that anyone claiming to possess Absolute Truth, or have exclusive access was “lying”. We all “access” God, who is Absolute Truth, but none of us can ever know that Absolute Truth in its totality.

In that case, you've rendered your own statement meaningless, because, what you've said is, essentially, "everything I say is most likely false".

This process of accelerated understanding should provide exponential breakthroughs in every field, including computers and how they compute information. They will begin self improvements at an astonishing rate, IMHO... Not “all” problems, just disease, hunger, material breakthrough, new kinds of medical approaches to healing, robots that remove humans from boring menial tasks and on and on…

Ah, you sound like a Singularity adherent to me ! I'll make a separate post about it.

My point is, we judge by what we know, by what has become familiar. In 1000 years, what will be “normal”, would today for us be truly miraculous.

If our civilization survives at all, then yes, that is quite possible. So what ?

What we are about to experience in our lives, is going to change all of our minds… :shock:

Yeah, but that's not much of a revelation. Everything we experience ultimately changes our minds -- unless it kills us in the process, of course.

[Bugmaster]

Singularity !

[Bro Dave]

I said that anyone claiming to possess Absolute Truth, or have exclusive access was “lying”. We all “access” God, who is Absolute Truth, but none of us can ever know that Absolute Truth in its totality.

In that case, you've rendered your own statement meaningless, because, what you've said is, essentially, "everything I say is most likely false".

Truth in its ABSOLUTE form is simply unavailable to finite minds. But, the truth we are capable of grasping IS available within each of our minds. You simply need to get quiet enough and disciplined enough, to learn to listen openly, without preconceived notions or judgements.

My point is, we judge by what we know, by what has become familiar. In 1000 years, what will be “normal”, would today for us be truly miraculous.

If our civilization survives at all, then yes, that is quite possible. So what ?

So, get ready to experience many “miracles” in your life! (not all physical either)

What we are about to experience in our lives, is going to change all of our minds…

Yeah, but that's not much of a revelation. Everything we experience ultimately changes our minds -- unless it kills us in the process, of course.

Remember this exchange in the next few years. The changes about to unfold will turn the heads of even the most skeptical.(Please don’t ask, you would not like my reply)

Bro Dave

[Bugmaster]

But, the truth we are capable of grasping IS available within each of our minds. You simply need to get quiet enough and disciplined enough, to learn to listen openly, without preconceived notions or judgements.

According to your own statement, though, this "truth" is virtually useless, because it's all relative, and there's no way of knowing whether your "truth" is actually true in any way. After all, if everyone is entitled to their own path, who are you to judge which path is true, right ?

My point is, we judge by what we know, by what has become familiar. In 1000 years, what will be “normal”, would today for us be truly miraculous.

If our civilization survives at all, then yes, that is quite possible. So what ?

So, get ready to experience many “miracles” in your life! (not all physical either)

Wow, I didn't know I'd live to see the next 1000 years...

Remember this exchange in the next few years. The changes about to unfold will turn the heads of even the most skeptical.(Please don’t ask, you would not like my reply) :blink:

Oooh ! Actually, I would love to see your reply. Can you make a tangible, easily verifiable prediction that will come true in the next few years ? I am talking about something simple yet extraordinary, such as the exact net worth (down to a cent) of Google, or the number of coins I'll have in my pocket on March 8th, 2008, or the exact date and GPS coordinates of the next big meteorite strike, the next 1000 random integers from random.org, or whatever. I'm looking for something useful here; vague statements such as "The Eagle will dance in the East" a la Nostradamus are inapplicable, and neither are blindingly obvious statements such as "The next American president will either be a man or a woman, most likely a man".

I don't care how you come by this prophetic knowledge -- the Urantia book, aliens, God, whatever. If you do manage to make an accurate, timely, and extraordinarily accurate prediction of an otherwise unpredictable event, I will instantly accept that my materialistic worldview is wrong. I can't speak for every atheist, but I think most will follow suit. Evidence like that would be nearly impossible to argue with.

[Bro Dave]

I was reading my UB on the Life of Jesus, where he was traveling with a father,(Gonod) and his son,(Ganid) for whom he was acting as a tutor. Jesus does a rather indepth discussion on reality, and I thought you might find it of interest:

DISCOURSE ON REALITY
p1433:6 130:4.1 The night before they left Alexandria Ganid and Jesus had a long visit with one of the government professors at the university who lectured on the teachings of Plato. Jesus interpreted for the learned Greek teacher but injected no teaching of his own in refutation of the Greek philosophy. Gonod was away on business that evening; so, after the professor had departed, the teacher and his pupil had a long and heart-to-heart talk about Plato's doctrines. While Jesus gave qualified approval of some of the Greek teachings which had to do with the theory that the material things of the world are shadowy reflections of invisible but more substantial spiritual realities, he sought to lay a more trustworthy foundation for the lad's thinking; so he began a long dissertation concerning the nature of reality in the universe. In substance and in modern phraseology Jesus said to Ganid:
p1434:1 130:4.2The source of universe reality is the Infinite. The material things of finite creation are the time-space repercussions of the Paradise Pattern and the Universal Mind of the eternal God. Causation in the physical world, self-consciousness in the intellectual world, and progressing selfhood in the spirit world—these realities, projected on a universal scale, combined in eternal relatedness, and experienced with perfection of quality and divinity of value—constitute the reality of the Supreme. But in an ever-changing universe the Original Personality of causation, intelligence, and spirit experience is changeless, absolute. All things, even in an eternal universe of limitless values and divine qualities, may, and oftentimes do, change except the Absolutes and that which has attained the physical status, intellectual embrace, or spiritual identity which is absolute.
p1434:2 130:4.3The highest level to which a finite creature can progress is the recognition of the Universal Father and the knowing of the Supreme. And even then such beings of finality destiny go on experiencing change in the motions of the physical world and in its material phenomena. Likewise do they remain aware of selfhood progression in their continuing ascension of the spiritual universe and of growing consciousness in their deepening appreciation of, and response to, the intellectual cosmos. Only in the perfection, harmony, and unanimity of will can the creature become as one with the Creator; and such a state of divinity is attained and maintained only by the creature's continuing to live in time and eternity by consistently conforming his finite personal will to the divine will of the Creator. Always must the desire to do the Father's will be supreme in the soul and dominant over the mind of an ascending son of God.
p1434:3 130:4.4A one-eyed person can never hope to visualize depth of perspective. Neither can single-eyed material scientists nor single-eyed spiritual mystics and allegorists correctly visualize and adequately comprehend the true depths of universe reality. All true values of creature experience are concealed in depth of recognition.
p1434:4 130:4.5Mindless causation cannot evolve the refined and complex from the crude and the simple, neither can spiritless experience evolve the divine characters of eternal survival from the material minds of the mortals of time. The one attribute of the universe which so exclusively characterizes the infinite Deity is this unending creative bestowal of personality which can survive in progressive Deity attainment.
p1434:5 130:4.6Personality is that cosmic endowment, that phase of universal reality, which can coexist with unlimited change and at the same time retain its identity in the very presence of all such changes, and forever afterward.
p1434:6 130:4.7Life is an adaptation of the original cosmic causation to the demands and possibilities of universe situations, and it comes into being by the action of the Universal Mind and the activation of the spirit spark of the God who is spirit. The meaning of life is its adaptability; the value of life is its progressability—even to the heights of God-consciousness.
p1434:7 130:4.8Misadaptation of self-conscious life to the universe results in cosmic disharmony. Final divergence of personality will from the trend of the universes terminates in intellectual isolation, personality segregation. Loss of the indwelling spirit pilot supervenes in spiritual cessation of existence. Intelligent and progressing life becomes then, in and of itself, an incontrovertible proof of the existence of a purposeful universe expressing the will of a divine Creator. And this life, in the aggregate, struggles toward higher values, having for its final goal the Universal Father.
p1435:1 130:4.9Only in degree does man possess mind above the animal level aside from the higher and quasi-spiritual ministrations of intellect. Therefore animals (not having worship and wisdom) cannot experience superconsciousness, consciousness of consciousness. The animal mind is only conscious of the objective universe.
p1435:2 130:4.10Knowledge is the sphere of the material or fact-discerning mind. Truth is the domain of the spiritually endowed intellect that is conscious of knowing God. Knowledge is demonstrable; truth is experienced. Knowledge is a possession of the mind; truth an experience of the soul, the progressing self. Knowledge is a function of the nonspiritual level; truth is a phase of the mind-spirit level of the universes. The eye of the material mind perceives a world of factual knowledge; the eye of the spiritualized intellect discerns a world of true values. These two views, synchronized and harmonized, reveal the world of reality, wherein wisdom interprets the phenomena of the universe in terms of progressive personal experience.
p1435:3 130:4.11Error (evil) is the penalty of imperfection. The qualities of imperfection or facts of misadaptation are disclosed on the material level by critical observation and by scientific analysis; on the moral level, by human experience. The presence of evil constitutes proof of the inaccuracies of mind and the immaturity of the evolving self. Evil is, therefore, also a measure of imperfection in universe interpretation. The possibility of making mistakes is inherent in the acquisition of wisdom, the scheme of progressing from the partial and temporal to the complete and eternal, from the relative and imperfect to the final and perfected. Error is the shadow of relative incompleteness which must of necessity fall across man's ascending universe path to Paradise perfection. Error (evil) is not an actual universe quality; it is simply the observation of a relativity in the relatedness of the imperfection of the incomplete finite to the ascending levels of the Supreme and Ultimate.
p1435:4 130:4.12Although Jesus told all this to the lad in language best suited to his comprehension, at the end of the discussion Ganid was heavy of eye and was soon lost in slumber. They rose early the next morning to go aboard the boat bound for Lasea on the island of Crete. But before they embarked, the lad had still further questions to ask about evil, to which Jesus replied:
p1435:5 130:4.13Evil is a relativity concept. It arises out of the observation of the imperfections which appear in the shadow cast by a finite universe of things and beings as such a cosmos obscures the living light of the universal expression of the eternal realities of the Infinite One.
p1435:6 130:4.14Potential evil is inherent in the necessary incompleteness of the revelation of God as a time-space-limited expression of infinity and eternity. The fact of the partial in the presence of the complete constitutes relativity of reality, creates necessity for intellectual choosing, and establishes value levels of spirit recognition and response. The incomplete and finite concept of the Infinite which is held by the temporal and limited creature mind is, in and of itself, potential evil. But the augmenting error of unjustified deficiency in reasonable spiritual rectification of these originally inherent intellectual disharmonies and spiritual insufficiencies, is equivalent to the realization of actual evil.
p1436:1 130:4.15All static, dead, concepts are potentially evil. The finite shadow of relative and living truth is continually moving. Static concepts invariably retard science, politics, society, and religion. Static concepts may represent a certain knowledge, but they are deficient in wisdom and devoid of truth. But do not permit the concept of relativity so to mislead you that you fail to recognize the co-ordination of the universe under the guidance of the cosmic mind, and its stabilized control by the energy and spirit of the Supreme.

[QED]

I wonder what everyone else gets out of reading Dave's quote from the UB? I get the distinct impression that we're hearing the thoughts of someone roughly contemporary with Einstein and his relativity theorems, contemplating the cosmos and placing himself in Jesus's sandals for the benefit of a bit of vicarious authority. Ever since developing the capacity for imagination isn't it inevitable that man would come to extrapolate the extremes of everything and through all this arrive at all these hunches about the nature of the cosmos? The trouble with convincing the rest of his fellow men might be that these extrapolations exist only in thought and as a consequence require some additional device to support them against criticism. This device seems to be the concoction of an alter-ego for material reality, an idea made concrete simply by naming it "spirit".

Nobody can challenge this "spirit" not just because we already identify it with other sorts of thought process, but also because it is, by definition, incorporeal. So now we can be accused as having the wrong perspective on the cosmos if we don't see it through a spiritual eye as well as a material eye. Well this evidently suits those who want to stick to their hunches but I don't think it sheds any real light on what, if anything, is actually going on. If someone can demonstrate that spirit is something that exists outside and independently of the mind then it might be that all this odd sounding stuff is justified.

[Bugmaster]

I wonder what everyone else gets out of reading Dave's quote from the UB? I get the distinct impression that we're hearing the thoughts of someone roughly contemporary with Einstein and his relativity theorems, contemplating the cosmos and placing himself in Jesus's sandals for the benefit of a bit of vicarious authority.

Meh, I kinda skimmed the quote. I stopped paying close attention at the point where it implies that science and religion are two methods of discovering the same truth. I've heard that before (from some Bahai recruiters, oddly enough), and it never made sense to me. The methods used by science and religion are complete opposites, and the conclusions they arrive at are often opposites, as well. And, of course, spirits are completely undetectable, so there's no way to scientifically detect them, by definition. There's not much room for joyful unity in that department.

[QED]

Meh, I kinda skimmed the quote. I stopped paying close attention at the point where it implies that science and religion are two methods of discovering the same truth. I've heard that before (from some Bahai recruiters, oddly enough), and it never made sense to me. The methods used by science and religion are complete opposites, and the conclusions they arrive at are often opposites, as well. And, of course, spirits are completely undetectable, so there's no way to scientifically detect them, by definition. There's not much room for joyful unity in that department.

Which is why I prefer instead to examine the context of this sort of material. Very often when watching an old movie that is supposed to represent some historical event, we actually gain more of an insight into the period in which the movie was made (verbal and body language, haircuts etc.). In other words people can't help but leave their fingerprints on everything they touch. Also, in courts of law, motive is frequently a component of the evidence. If we are presented with something that we are asked to take on trust, we do well to examine the motives behind the act.