Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Each Of Those Four Subjects Is Hard To Understand.

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Paul R. Martin on May 20, 2004 16:40:34 UTC

Hi Mike,

"Does the prime directive of "spiritual guidance" actually censure sensuality or does it caution that, regardless of rhetoric, other minds are still rattling and careening out of control and hence we need all our wits about us to avoid collisions?"

IMHO, and my opinion is based on nothing but guesswork, I would say the latter. I think this is a good metaphor for what minds are about. I have also, as you well know, used the metaphor of mind as driver and organism as vehicle. And just as in the "real" driving of vehicles, the driver exerts a certain amount of control, but collisions happen anyway. On the whole, intentions are achieved and the vehicles get to where the mind wants them to go.

"If the latter, then all TRUE moralists should assess sensuality in terms of traffic etiquette, not as a blanket dichotomy about whether to "travel" in that region at all."

Exactly!!! In spite of your (only occasionally) obtuse rhetoric, Mike, I think you have deep insight.

"Similarly , my diatribe here should not be construed as a blanket rejection of any of the cautions, constraints or counsel of our ministers and sages. "

Not to worry. It is not so construed by me.

"Is one's own mind, or the ultimate mind, the ultimate cause of existence?"

Yes. (IMHO, of course)

"This should not have a simple answer but an elaborate one, in my view. It cannot be simpler than a three dimensional geometry plus time, I think. It could be more complex."

I think we agree. Although, you have to be careful and clear about how and when you judge simplicity. I think it is analogous to the physical cause of an individual human. It cannot be simpler than its body and its life history, I think. It could be more complex....However, if you are looking only at the ultimate cause, you might consider the zygote, or the egg-sperm combination as much simpler.

My guess is that the Mind started out very simple compared to what seems to exist now and that it developed, grew, learned, and evolved to become unimaginably complex.

"If the minds of others are seen in their true integrated complexity, there is no truth in the rush to categorize sensuality as being "unspiritual," "less holy," or even
"not one of the true purposes of our existence."

Most true.

"Science helps on topics like this by modeling
rigor, caution and exactness. Reference to neuroscience, proportionality and sequence can help. I don't know if all the sciences really have much to say about it though. Why would I consult algae about this topic?
Chlorophyll, "

More wonderfully deep insight! Seriously; I do not kid around when I make such attributions.

Warm regards,


Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins