Human mind created many tools for understanding

[Jim_Baur]

Science was made by human reason.

Human reason made many other reasonable forms of knowledge.

There are many other forms of the ability to reason.

Chess is reasonable and logical, but it isn’t science.

Logic is reasonable and logical, but it isn’t science.

Math is reasonable and logical, but it isn’t science.

Carpentry is reasonable and logical, but most would not consider it a science.

Common sense and prudence are created by human reason, and they are not science.

Human reason and common sense can clearly see the human body, psyche, intellect and will are made by superior being(s).

Us religious people believe, hope and pray that it is One being. That It/He/She revealed Itself to Moses and Moses continued the revelation from Adam to Abraham et cetera.

A person of FAITH has to be accurate and acknowledge this.

A person without religion has to be accurate and say: Yes common sense does agree with that, and common sense is created by the same ability to reason and math and science.

Oh, by the way, math is immaterial. No one has ever seen four, pi or circle. They are immaterial objects that the physical sciences cannot weigh, measure, or count. But we all agree that they exist.

Just as our mind can see that four, pi, and circle exist. We can see the evidence that we were carefully made. We hope that that being reveals Himself to us here and now. We hope that that Being is still in existence. We hope that It lets us life on after this old body dies.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Common sense and prudence are created by human reason, and they are not science.

Be careful of things labeled as “Common Sense.” Sometimes it can be a yield to popular opinion.

Oh, by the way, math is immaterial. No one has ever seen four, pi or circle. They are immaterial objects that the physical sciences cannot weigh, measure, or count. But we all agree that they exist.

I think the term “conceptual” might fit here. Inference preserving metaphors and models isomorphic to reality can be incredibly useful tools. Math is one of the most widely used conceptual tools for this.

Pardon my mistakes. Sent from my mobile device.

 

[Jim_Baur]

ThinkingSapien

If your still online, in your judgment, are concept material or immaterial.

THANKS!

Thanks!

Many, thanks!

 

[Bill_7154]

A person without religion has to be accurate and say: Yes common sense does agree with that, and common sense is created by the same ability to reason and math and science.

Oh, by the way, math is immaterial. No one has ever seen four, pi or circle. They are immaterial objects that the physical sciences cannot weigh, measure, or count. But we all agree that they exist.

Just as our mind can see that four, pi, and circle exist. We can see the evidence that we were carefully made. We hope that that being reveals Himself to us here and now. We hope that that Being is still in existence. We hope that It lets us life on after this old body dies.

The most powerful and profound experience I have ever had of the existance of God was when I held my newborn baby along with my wife, in our arms. It was a divine experience. Divine perfection. A man and woman bound by marriage under God brining new life into this world. For those of you who are married with children you probably know what I mean. Divine perfection is the way I described it to my parents and the way I experienced it. My mother commented that we often forget how many mericles God actually performs, if you allow yourself to think of the gift of a child as a mericle. And despite how great I felt seeing my baby for the first time, and holding him in my arms without my wife being present (he was premature and needed to stay in an infant ICU for a while), holding our baby together was alltogether a totally different experience. That’s when I felt like it was a divine mericle.

I’m still a new daddy, my boy is 11 months old. But even looking at his face and seeing him smile at me reminds me daily of the power and grace of God.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Jim_Baur]

Bill 7154

I have seven children, and five are still with us.

I agree with you!

 

[ThinkingSapien]

ThinkingSapien

If your still online, in your judgment, are concept material or immaterial.

In general they would be thought of as immaterial. But their expressions are dependent on physical mediums. For example, the number “3” would be considered immaterial. But to express it I would need to write it down, type it, say it, gesture it, or represent it with some other set of objects. For these expressions one might need paper nd pen, a computer, fingers to make the gesture, so on. Even if I transmit information electronically the electromagnetic waves through which it travels are still physical.

If we could communicate via thought then we still haven’t removed the concept from being bound to something physical since there are going to be minds involved and those minds are embodied in brains (a substance dualist might not agree with me here).

Note, I differentiate between the concept of the number “3” and 3 occurrences of some classification of objects or events. The distinction may be difficult to understand.

Pardon my mistakes. Sent from my mobile device.

 

[Jim_Baur]

ThinkingSapien

Again, thanks for your ideas and time.

You did say that concepts, at lest some of them, are immaterial.

I found it ironic if physics and chemistry will not acknowledge things that they cannot touch, measure and so forth as outside the domain of science. And yet one of their most powerful tools is immaterial.