T
tonyrey
Guest
I like your sensational opening sentence!
- Status
T
tonyrey
Guest
S
Solmyr
Guest
A smart child will say: “because may parents had a fun night”.
But I have a question. Your fingertips spell out your posts… What other part of your anatomy plays a part in this process? Is it not your brain?
A
Aloysium
Guest
You are describing a worldly child who has lost the sense of mystery that is inherent in existence having seen his parents seduced by superficial transient pleasures and other mundane desires.
A smart child will know that whys have to do with purpose. He’s there for the chocolate.
No one is denying we require a brain. We also need a mind which includes these ideas and these sensory impressions within ourselves as persons existing in relation to the external psychosocialspiritualmaterial world.
S
Solmyr
Guest
Ok, good start. Now what is the interaction between the brain and the mind?
A
Aloysium
Guest
No interaction, just different ways of describing a person.
It’s sort of like listening to something and seeing it.
One thing, different perspectives.
It’s sort of like listening to something and seeing it.
One thing, different perspectives.
T
tonyrey
Guest
Sooner or later analysis has to give way to synthesis. The whole is more than its parts! Modern medicine treats a person not just a collection of physical organs…
T
tonyrey
Guest
A more intelligent child will say “Because my parents love each other”…
T
tonyrey
Guest
Your question begs the question! It presupposes that we consist of nothing more than physical organs.
I
inocente
Guest
The girl who believes that, will believe she won’t get pregnant so long as she’s not in love. In sex education at least, her physical essence can’t be cancelled out by poetic thoughts.
T
tonyrey
Guest
An intelligent girl understands that love is not primarily sexual because she knows she loves her parents and her parents love her without having a sexual relationship.
I
inocente
Guest
Agreed, that was exactly why I questioned your claim that an intelligent child would say she is here “Because my parents love each other”.
T
tonyrey
Guest
Then you misinterpreted my statement!
T
tonyrey
Guest
The fatal flaw of atomism is that it exalts analysis at the expense of synthesis but there is no evidence that the sum of the parts is sheerly mathematical!Then you misinterpreted my statement!
A
Aloysium
Guest
And, those parts themselves are more than the sum of their parts, which are more than the sum of their parts, in turn being more than the sum of their parts, and so forth down to where the parts seem to behave very strangely. Do the shopping, have a bad day at work, make love with your spouse, watch your kid fall of a bike, it is pretty clear what reality is about.
T
tonyrey
Guest
There is no doubt at all that materialism is a hopelessly inadequate explanation of reality which doesn’t correspond to the way anyone thinks or behaves! By their fruits you shall know them…
A
Aloysium
Guest
Between you the reader and me, this is my take on how things work, rephrasing what’s been said, but in terms of the relationality of things.
Whether we are considering the grand scheme of things material, where we have Relativity, or chopping them up and ending up with Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, we see that everything is related to something other, to everything else. That is not only how events are able to happen, but also what makes it possible for us to know what goes on.
We ourselves, think, using images and words in different languages to express those thoughts not only to others but within ourselves. Who we are and the relationships we are capable of building with what is other is more complex than the relationships that exist between the more basic components of physical creation. Being material, we also participate in those basic interactions. Having also a spiritual nature, while these words on the monitor evoke electrochemical reactions on a material level, their perception and understanding involve a knower who is whole and can choose how to react. We relate perceptually, cognitively, and emotionally giving ourselves to the world, thereby commune with its deepest aspects.
At any level when things relate, there exists a triad of the two entities and the relationship between them, which is defined by what they are. The point of this thread is that that this triad may constitute a new whole, which is a totally different being, with a different way of relating to everything else. That is how the universe is more than a totally mind-blowingly large soup of bosons, and why we exist separate and able to contemplate all that is.
The OP concerns atoms having specific properties. It is assumed that they do exist. Their being being seems different and more than than their constituent particles. Atoms combine to form molecules and molecules combine to form cells, which combine to form organs, which in turn work together as the body. What may be reduced to complex interactions of subatomic particles is the actual experience of reading this post. While there is no denying that what is happening here is occuring within the material universe, that universe contains persons. Person’s relate differently to the world than the atoms which constitute their physical nature.
Between the smallest levels and us here, we have bacteria, plants and animals, with simpler relational naturse than ours, but nonetheless “transcending” the bosons and atoms of which their physical being is formed. The whole of any particular being is formed not only by its constituent parts and their relationships, but by primarily nature of its own being, its particular way of relating to all else that is.
This is what Genesis is getting at, that the creation of the universe happened in step-wise fashion in time, with the new being brought into existence from the old. There was light, separated from darkness, the earth and stars, plants and animals, and ultimately we ourselves, brought forth from the earth. Gravity, electromagnetic, and intranuclear forces make up the relationships that produce the various forms of matter, space and time. Biological entities go beyond this, transforming matter into themselves, maintaining themselves growing, reproducing, and behaving. For us the nature of the relationship we have with the world is the spirit of God. We can know and love, act in the best interests of and give ourselves one each other. We require a free will to do so, and as a consequence can also do evil. It is that spirit that permits us to enter into relation with God, pure and perfect Relationally - Love, who has left His stamp on even the most basic of the world’s constituents.
Whether we are considering the grand scheme of things material, where we have Relativity, or chopping them up and ending up with Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, we see that everything is related to something other, to everything else. That is not only how events are able to happen, but also what makes it possible for us to know what goes on.
We ourselves, think, using images and words in different languages to express those thoughts not only to others but within ourselves. Who we are and the relationships we are capable of building with what is other is more complex than the relationships that exist between the more basic components of physical creation. Being material, we also participate in those basic interactions. Having also a spiritual nature, while these words on the monitor evoke electrochemical reactions on a material level, their perception and understanding involve a knower who is whole and can choose how to react. We relate perceptually, cognitively, and emotionally giving ourselves to the world, thereby commune with its deepest aspects.
At any level when things relate, there exists a triad of the two entities and the relationship between them, which is defined by what they are. The point of this thread is that that this triad may constitute a new whole, which is a totally different being, with a different way of relating to everything else. That is how the universe is more than a totally mind-blowingly large soup of bosons, and why we exist separate and able to contemplate all that is.
The OP concerns atoms having specific properties. It is assumed that they do exist. Their being being seems different and more than than their constituent particles. Atoms combine to form molecules and molecules combine to form cells, which combine to form organs, which in turn work together as the body. What may be reduced to complex interactions of subatomic particles is the actual experience of reading this post. While there is no denying that what is happening here is occuring within the material universe, that universe contains persons. Person’s relate differently to the world than the atoms which constitute their physical nature.
Between the smallest levels and us here, we have bacteria, plants and animals, with simpler relational naturse than ours, but nonetheless “transcending” the bosons and atoms of which their physical being is formed. The whole of any particular being is formed not only by its constituent parts and their relationships, but by primarily nature of its own being, its particular way of relating to all else that is.
This is what Genesis is getting at, that the creation of the universe happened in step-wise fashion in time, with the new being brought into existence from the old. There was light, separated from darkness, the earth and stars, plants and animals, and ultimately we ourselves, brought forth from the earth. Gravity, electromagnetic, and intranuclear forces make up the relationships that produce the various forms of matter, space and time. Biological entities go beyond this, transforming matter into themselves, maintaining themselves growing, reproducing, and behaving. For us the nature of the relationship we have with the world is the spirit of God. We can know and love, act in the best interests of and give ourselves one each other. We require a free will to do so, and as a consequence can also do evil. It is that spirit that permits us to enter into relation with God, pure and perfect Relationally - Love, who has left His stamp on even the most basic of the world’s constituents.
T
tonyrey
Guest
:clapping: A superb analysis, Aloysium, which reduces materialism to a surreal fantasy!
A
Aloysium
Guest
Interestingly, what is most real - existence, is ignored and discarded as being transient, spectral even imaginary, and what is truly ephemeral, with its ever changing forms and ambiguous foundations - matter, is supposed to be rock solid. In the end, following this course we are left with a contorted, gap-fillied, Ptolemaic-like explanation about what it means to be a person, whose obvious reality is that of a spirit-body unity.
T
tonyrey
Guest
Alas, it doesn’t seem obvious to those who are led to believe science will give us the ultimate explanation:
imdb.com/title/tt2980516/quotes
I admire Hawking’s courage but not his logic! Pascal was more perceptive:
Pensées
Hawking makes the elementary mistake of equating size with significance - which is understandable because he is a scientist not a philosopher. He assumes belonging to “an advanced breed of primates” implies that man exists for no reason whatsoever even though progressive development is a sign that reality is rational rather than absurd. In fact science is based on belief in the validity of reason and the intelligibility of the universe.
- Status