Modern Mysticism In Mendham [episode 0.5]

Some thoughts about inmendham, the modernmystic, atheism, cosmology, science, attitudes, and perspectives.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• science
• religion
• spirituality
• atheism
• cosmology
• mythology

[MellumFellum]

The danger we must avoid is that we must not allow "science is storytelling" to ever, ever be interpreted as "science is no more plausible (or useful) than religion".

I think the problem is that "story," like "myth," has a connotation of falsehood, of being based solely in imagination rather than fact. This view may be misleading, especially for how anthropologists use the terms, but it's still very common, such that it is very unwise to agree with someone who says, e.g., "evolution is a myth!"

[redliterocket4]

I'd say my point in the video is that "facts" are not enough for "meaning." Science gives us plenty of facts, which are abstract truths derived from careful measurement. But these facts do not of themselves cohere into a plausible story. We must add "myth" before we can understand what our many facts mean. That is, we must participate in the unfolding of those facts, we must recognize the context within which we and they arise. For "evolution" to have meaning, we must become it.

[jtr3030]

seriously, why do you bother with inmendham?

[HaleyMary]

I agree that people need to grow up as far as letting go of their beliefs. Hanging on to something in life that isn't true isn't necessarily going to help people understand the universe as it is in reality. I think society may be on the verge of a paradigm shift at some point in the future.

[ligerman30]

@redliterocket4 What do you define truth as? If you don't have an answer, by what other standard can you say a truth can be abstract? If you do have a definition, is it practical? If it is practical, how?

[YourFuture2012]

Religion, myth or all non prove thinking structures creates a collective matrix of consciousness where new creative designs of the universe manifest.

These architectal structures will evaluate in time by people till eventaully it changes.

I think believing and science are cycles. And one day we will believe again because we can't

[YourFuture2012]

I have thought about my own made up theory called loverelated manifestation..

The truth is simple and why not simply look at what love could manifest in endless forms of reality.

I think god is equal to us, and every1 experience a status in time.

And in cyclus we are all that is will always be and allways become.

[SBRslacker00]

There is no need to make religion into science or science into religion. They are two different things which need not intersect.

Granted, science demonstrates Bible literalism to be invalid. All of creation couldn't have been done in 7 days, etc.

So, science does make us question the Bible, but I don't have a problem with this. The scripture didn't survive for 1,000's of years for no good reason. There's something to it. I prefer to focus on the morality rather than the creationism.

[TaR0uk]

technocracy, technological determinism, logical positivism, whig history you wanna look at this and then you will understand why half the pseudo intellectual on youtube act the way they do.... It isn't your problem or false dichotomy to worry about it is merely your problem if you wish to communicate your proposition.... One must be a cunning linguist to say the very foundation of your suppositions is not something I am inclined to agree with in of itself....

[learntodiscover]

How do you know I have not researched evolution? I have been taught it in school and have researched myself.....and it just does nothing but reafirm that there is a God. It has made me more self assured about my religion. And you have researched my religion right?

Your statement is a little contradictory, if science is not based on 'proof' then does it not become just a another religion?

[MellumFellum]

Based on this post, it sounds like evolution is 'irrational to you' because you haven't researched it much. In contrast, religion is 'irrational to me' because I HAVE spent so much time researching it; the more one learns about world religions, the harder it is to adhere to any one of them.

In this case, your mistake is to speak of 'proof.' Science, unlike math or logic, is not based on strict 'proof'; the only proof in science is empirical, which is to say, contingent and subject to revision.

[cheerstar1128]

who the fuck are you?

your giving mendham an even worse rep

shut the fuck up.. you're not socrates

[Plutoincapricorn]

check out byron katie's work

[learntodiscover]

but we must remember at the root of it, science has not been able to completely disprove religion. Has evolution been completely proved....how many remains of a part human part ape being been found? What was the cause of the big bang....and if it were from some random gases, where did they come from?

For this reason I don't think it fair to call religion a "myth" or a "story". Just as religion seems irrational to you, evolution is totaly irrational to me.