Well then, if we follow your logic nothing exists as facts until experienced by yourself... Nice one. That is for me just plainly stupid. Can you see the implications of following that logic? "Nah, Hitlers existence is not a fact because I didn't experience him."

Examples of the definition of a "fact":

"Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed: Genetic engineering is now a fact. That Chaucer was a real person is an undisputed fact."

"A truth verifiable from experience or observation"

"An event or thing known to have happened or existed"

Ya - looks unfortunately that i was the one that hit a nerve. You clearly havent considered my points fully. I have elaborated, made concessions and even arrived at a defintion i thought would be acceptable for all.

And i a met with sarcasm, which we all know is the last refuge of... But youre better than that ya.. But youre clearly taking this personally so ill take my ball and go home.

Too bad. I respect you and your beliefs even if you dont respect mine enough not to resort to sarcasm.And how are you different fron burnt, exactly, ya?

And dont lump me in with burnt. I always give consideration to everyones point of view an never resort to insults or the basest sarcasm.

Thought this was a discussion, a healthy debate...

Bye

JBArk the exasperated

Isn't this the same trap?



No, I rely on many others to tell me they exist. Just as the buddist monks tell us Nirvana exists. I haven't been there either.

Hey, went to bed last night with no new discussion on this topic, to wake up this morning to find two whole new pages...had to catch up!

I am refering to thought experiments such as the transient nature of our own existence, impermanance (ie life cycle/reincarnation). Where a rigid set of steps (methodology) are taken in order to provide the framework for contemplation, and having the results of these experiments/experiences repeated by skillful meditators over thousands of years. A carefully constructed experiment repeatable by anyone who has attained the skill through learning and practice.

A practice that takes as much time and experience to cultivate as it takes a physicist to learn and understand mathmatics so that they can repeat and verify the work of those who came before.

I didn't say it could be verified by repeatable objective means. They can be verified subjectively, by using methodoligoes that have been refined objectively.

Godspark- if you honestly cant ditinguish between your examples then there really is no point in continuing the discussionn with you.I respectfully agree to disagree with you.

JBArk

But I just started!

Then I am agreeing with you. They are not asking the same questions. There are certain questions science cannot answer, so they shouldn't try to answer them...as in what are values, morals, etc.

Same with religion, there are certain questions that they cannot answer and shouldn't try to...as in why does a volcano erupt? What is the process of plate techtonics, etc.

We need both, as they each seek to answer different and incompatible questions about the nature of existence. It is not science or religion, it is science and religion. Though I would personally use the word spirituality rather than religion, as religions often try to answer questions outside their purvue.

To Ya:

There is a difference between believing things based on faith and believing things based on evidence. I believe in things based on evidence and sometimes that thing called 'common sense' which can be wrong of course. There is also something humbling about being able to question your own experiences and learn from them in a rational manner.

To Saidin:

The reason I get annoyed about things like: alternative medicine and physics being misused to promote pseudoscience is that its a major problem going on between the public and science community these days. Scientific illiteracy is rampant and its a shame. I don't expect people to spend their whole day thinking about science or understand everything scientists spew out.

What I try to encourage is a critical attitude to some of the prevailing myths dominating not just the psychedelic drug culture but modern society in general. Its because science is my career and my passion and I wish people would pay more attention to the good science and stop supporting the BS which is expanding exponentially due to the internet. Scientists need to help restore the public trust in science and the public needs to pay more attention to what scientists are really trying to convey. This distrust directly affects me and I've have encounters with members of the pseudoscience field and they were worse then I thought. They are creating serious problems in my field of study. I am not going to get into details its too personal.

I really just want to help people think and learn. That's why I get pissed off. But to be honest I've learned a lot from you all and that's why I keep coming back even after I storm off because of conscious rocks or whatever. Understand for me this isn't just some internet debate its part of the debate I have to face often in my profession. I am totally to blame when I freak out and I admit sometimes I take out my frustrations here and its immature but I am trying to stop doing that.

Did you read the rest of the thread? I thought i had addressed these points ad nauseum. if i have done so ineffectually i humbly submit my apologies for communicating them badly. But i am too exhausted/exasperated to revisit and rephrase them!

cheers,

JBArk

Yes and I actually agree with most of your logic. However, my point in quoting your two contrasting examples was to highlight your example against empirical buddist belief based on third party opinion as being the same as as you having concluded from simplicities' sake that other peoples opinions based off of their rigorous proof testing as 'fact' seperates the CNS subjectivity.

I have never been to Africa so if a professor shows me a picture of it, how will I know that that really is Africa? His and his colleagues credentials? I sound ignorant don't I? If a buddist monk told me he has been enlightened and has seen Nirvana, and tells me his ancestors of thousands of years have seen it aswell, how can I trust that he is telling me the truth any more than the professor? This all comes down to picking and choosing who to believe more. Question everything, however we should be careful not to discredit that which we do not know.

Thank you. I now have a far better understanding of where you are coming from, and agree with your reasoning. Obviously this is your passion, and you are following it with your whole being...who in life can ask for more than that? I have always said I value your contributions to discussions very much, even though we often do not agree. You help me understand things from a perspective and an educational/experiential knowledge base I do not have. This in turn help me learn and grow. I have never had issue with your ideas, it is more the way they are presented.

One question I have though. Is it psuedoscience (or paradigms that are not commonly accepted by the mainstream, as some of their theories are based on solid scientific evidence) that is to blame, or is it the educational system?

And if it is the educational system, who and/or what is trying to keep our youth in a state of confusion or ignorance? Hint: the answer is not religion...accept in Texas, but we've known they've been fucked up forever!

Saidin, I agree education is where it's at, both in terms of problems and in terms of solutions. What I dont agree though (if thats what you're implying) that there is a centralized control over education made to keep us dumb. I think there might be some of that but there is also just plain inertia, misinformed good intentions with bad consequences, lack of funding, vices and reflection of the established system, etc. Also it varies a lot in different countries....

Actually I think Im gonna start a thread on education


oh and burnt: nice honest self-aware post! We all have our issues, but its important you self-reflect Your contributions to the forum are very much welcome and when you bring scientific knowledge it greatly helps those on the path that dont have the possibilities and can learn from that and use it productively. I know im certainly learning in this forum all the time

Its partially education, its partially mass media, and its partially the scientists themselves.

Education is the most important issue. Science education is continually getting worse all across the board. I don't know how much is the teachers, student or school boards fault I am sure each case is slightly different.

Mass media is just insane. Just watch national geographic channel half of their programs are pure pseudoscience these days. It was not always that way. Science journalism is more sensationalist then accurate and honest.

The scientists often hide in their "ivory tower" and don't care that the public is confused until it bites them in the ass. This also needs to change and I think slowly it is.

I didn't mean to imply there was a conspiracy...am I even allowed to say that word even in denying that is what is going on? Tough in my opinion, only governments that have something to hide from the common populace would engage in something so self destructive in the long term, intentional or not. And we all know that the government (at least in the US) is not what controls the agenda, but rather the corporations...and that can lead down all sorts of rabbit holes.

My main point was that religion wasn't the problem...

We all rely on our children, and their children to move us forward as a society. I am appaled that educaton is the first thing that government cuts when there is a lack of money. I am of the opinion that education should be the number one funding priority of any nation or culture, as they are the future of that society. An uneducated populace only spells stagnation and decay. I mean, the US has spent 1 trillion dollars on Irag and Afganistan in the last few years (Thank you for all those who have made the choice to serve in the military!)..money which instead could have been spent to send every single solitary child to four years of university for the next 50 years, at least. It is a matter of priorities.

There are a multitude of factors that go into it. I at one time was a teacher (of Engligh literature) and to see how the funding is misappropiated, and cut, and the burecracy that goes into school systems saddened me. Even pay to play(learn) colleges and universities have their own forms of control in the "publish or perish" system. You have to publish to teach, but you can only publish that which is comfortable by mainstrem ideas, therefore there is even a lack of diversity in that which is taught in universities.

I agree. The media is insane. I in fact got rid of my televison a couple weeks ago, I just could not stand it anymore the nonsense and programming used to distract and sell worthless crap. You can find anything you want on the internet anyway nowadays...at first there were withdrawls, but not I'm feeling pretty good!

In universities I would contend it is the publish requirement. Monies coming from government or private corporations who have their own agendas which may or may not coincide with good sound education. If an energy company is providing the majority of sourcing for a university, they are not going to be interested in any inventions which will make thier business obsolete. And that gets filtered into the educational system. If it is not deliberate, it is implied and trickles down...

Things are happening so fast it is hard to keep up...our technology is progressing faster than our ability to understand just what we are creating...and with lack of knowledge comes danger.

No. It is not the same.

In fact they are nothing alike. I suggest you read the thread and/or do some research as to the true meaning of 2012 which is a metaphor, not an actual date. It has nothing do to with main stream media/end of the world nonsense.

Verifiable and repeatable SUBJECTIVELY. So not the same as "as an equal number scientists coming to the same conclusion about an experiement"(sic). science strives for objectivity insofar is that is possible. No one can show another an objective result of a thought experiment - or "enlightenment" for that matter. In short, the method is verifiable and repeatable, but unfortunately, the most important part, the result, clearly is not.



Ginseng proof. Not real proof. Millions upon millions of things and experiences and beliefs are attested to by "tens of thousands of not far far more individuals over thousands of years" (sic). Does not make any of them true or valid. Is jesus the son of god? By your logic the proof that he is is simply that people believe he is and wrote books about it.

This is neither proof (you must agree), nor good enough for me.

JBArk

science is slow to admit errors !!!???

you measure time in years and decades. Relgious time is thousands of years, with NO change whatsoever. In the grand scheme of things, going from believing the earth was the centre of the universe to having probes on mars, from Newtonian classical physics to relativity to quantum mechanics to string theory in a matter of a few hundred years is EXTRAORDINARILY fast, no?

Science is humble. scientists may not be, but they don't last long. And their theories are ALWAYS built upon or discarded. The same cannot be said of any religion I am aware of. they are by nature vehicles of faith, and thus do not admit of change. Not slowly. Not ever. it goes against its very nature. Which is arrogant - to suppose that one doctrine provides all the answers to everything and is irrefutable and inflexible is the very essence of arrogance, no?

Whereas the scientific method has this safeguard built into it. In our lifetimes, science may seem stubborn, but what's a lifetime? a speck of time.

JBArk

BTW all - i am a very spiritual person. But probably not in the way a lot of you are. And i believe a lot of crazy things outside the scope of science. But I would never say i am certain about them, nor assert that they are provable. A belief is a belief, "the sky is blue" is an objective consensus, and thus a fact.

Wouldn't want y'all to think I was "pure and applied"

JBArk

just ask the mushrooms. Forget the rest.