reality
July 2007 
Science & Religion
Posted on May 24th, 2007
by 
Zencopyright
Zencopyright
Science & Religion
The two fields of knowledge... again ...
Which of these two has (what we all want in this information age...) the freshest knowledge?
In my humble opinion, should a set of beliefs (or for that matter a complete belief system, science or ortherwise) not be capable of corrections from experience and new leaning and to compound matters not be able to withstand the test of repeatability, then it's totally useless.
I've read some (mumbo-jumbo from) psychics who take themselves quite seriously, they'd like to think that science should simply acknowledge some of the "truths" (for me truth is like everything else... it changes...) from mystics of old.
Wouldn't it be smarter (and probably safer too) if these same "mystics" would take up the same tests that science has to put forward to earn its place in our reality ?
All this going round in circles with reasoning that hold itself up (mostly because failure and contempt of others somewhere seem to be "proof " of "spiritual" worth!) until put to the test of reality (scientifically reproducatble tests) this "reasoning" just simply fails outright. Sorry.
<- see what George Carlin has to say on the subject...
I like that... Some simple common sense!
OK - I'll stop watching George Carlin now.
Joe Pesci is outside and he wants to come in...
What's he's doing with a baseball bat ?
Love and consciousness to all !!!
The two fields of knowledge... again ...
Which of these two has (what we all want in this information age...) the freshest knowledge?
In my humble opinion, should a set of beliefs (or for that matter a complete belief system, science or ortherwise) not be capable of corrections from experience and new leaning and to compound matters not be able to withstand the test of repeatability, then it's totally useless.
I've read some (mumbo-jumbo from) psychics who take themselves quite seriously, they'd like to think that science should simply acknowledge some of the "truths" (for me truth is like everything else... it changes...) from mystics of old.
Wouldn't it be smarter (and probably safer too) if these same "mystics" would take up the same tests that science has to put forward to earn its place in our reality ?
All this going round in circles with reasoning that hold itself up (mostly because failure and contempt of others somewhere seem to be "proof " of "spiritual" worth!) until put to the test of reality (scientifically reproducatble tests) this "reasoning" just simply fails outright. Sorry.
<- see what George Carlin has to say on the subject...I like that... Some simple common sense!
OK - I'll stop watching George Carlin now.
Joe Pesci is outside and he wants to come in...
What's he's doing with a baseball bat ?
Love and consciousness to all !!!
Access: Public
I just read meself… sounds scarry…
Good thing I put a reference to George Carlin in there for some comic relief.
I think this post is either too far from home or it is a very touchy subject.
In any case “Mysticism” without scientific proof (and I'm not Saint Thomas…) seems to be in this day and age a joke or a prank.
And I mean this earnestly (As I've felt It and seen with my own “eyes” what It can do…) :
May the Force be with you! : )
Peace & Love to All.
Yes, but….
It's true, the side effects of opening your mind and becoming more flexible can be that you become to gullible.
However, demanding of the test that proofs that light is a wave to also proof that light is a particle doesn't make sense, does it?
It seems to me that the tests that proof spiritual assumptions have to be extremely different than the tests that proof material assumptions. So extremely different, that they're actually the opposite, sort of (whatever that'll mean.)