Pope proclaims all redeemed, even atheists. "The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of... http://t.co/v3noB6170d
The mixing of religious and non-religious beliefs in an individual.
OSR: Does Science Necessarily Engender Argument?
One of the presented thoughts on Open Source Religion is to reflect upon scientific discoveries and then relate them to spiritual ideas. That is, what might they mean in relationship to our humanity and the humanities, our destiny, and our relationship to the micro and the macro.
Too often, I see in the discussions a sliding into ineffectual debate and argument. Sadly, the point which was originally raised is often missed entirely.
“Suppose you and I argue.
“If you win and I lose, are you indeed right and I wrong? If I win and you lose, am I right and you wrong? Are we both partly right and partly wrong? Are we both all right or both all wrong? If you and I cannot see the truth, other people will find it even harder.
“ Then whom shall I ask to be the judge? Shall I ask someone who agrees with you? If she already agrees with you, how can she be a fair judge? Shall I ask someone who agrees with me? If she already agrees with me, how can she be a fair judge? Shall I ask someone who agrees with both of us? If she already agrees with both of us, how can she be a fair judge? Then if you and I and others cannot decide, shall we wait for still another?
“Waiting for changing opinions is like waiting for nothing.
“Seeing everything in relation to the heavenly cosmos and leaving differing opinions as they are, we may be able to live out our years.
“What do I mean by seeing things in relation to the heavenly cosmos? Consider right and wrong, being and non-being. If right is indeed right, there need be no argument about how it is different from wrong. If being is really being, there need be no argument on how it is different from non-being.
“Forget time; forget distinction. Enjoy the infinite; rest in it.”
—Zhuangzi (cf. Feng & English, 1974)
This object exists in space independent of man. It was "discovered" by Charles Messier. Named M101. M42, aka the Andromeda galaxy, was first documented by an Arab astrologer in 936 CE. Our knowledge and description of it has changed over the years as new information became available. Quite recently, scientist discovered M42 was 5 times larger than originally thought. Fives times!!! I do not argue about Andromeda, I am filled with philo and encouraged to seek after sophia.
We make discoveries and develop theories according to the scientific model. This is a largely intellectual endeavor; the intellect being the "safe" realm of the masculine. But does not this image evoke a feeling of awe and wonder. Feeling is the realm of the feminine. Please allow me to use these terms loosely. Yin and Yang are not absolute; there is no pure yin or pure yang. What may present as yin in one situation, can easily present as yang in another. The ancient Chinese understood the relativity of all things in the Universe.
Does the scientific method necessarily exclude or negate the feminine?
Does science necessarily engender argument?
Is it possible for Open Source Religion to integrate science and spirituality with equal parts feeling and intellect?
Can we share our own experiences as additional evidence without the desperate need for ego to be "right"?
•
•
Too often, I see in the discussions a sliding into ineffectual debate and argument. Sadly, the point which was originally raised is often missed entirely.
“Suppose you and I argue.
“If you win and I lose, are you indeed right and I wrong? If I win and you lose, am I right and you wrong? Are we both partly right and partly wrong? Are we both all right or both all wrong? If you and I cannot see the truth, other people will find it even harder.
“ Then whom shall I ask to be the judge? Shall I ask someone who agrees with you? If she already agrees with you, how can she be a fair judge? Shall I ask someone who agrees with me? If she already agrees with me, how can she be a fair judge? Shall I ask someone who agrees with both of us? If she already agrees with both of us, how can she be a fair judge? Then if you and I and others cannot decide, shall we wait for still another?
“Waiting for changing opinions is like waiting for nothing.
“Seeing everything in relation to the heavenly cosmos and leaving differing opinions as they are, we may be able to live out our years.
“What do I mean by seeing things in relation to the heavenly cosmos? Consider right and wrong, being and non-being. If right is indeed right, there need be no argument about how it is different from wrong. If being is really being, there need be no argument on how it is different from non-being.
“Forget time; forget distinction. Enjoy the infinite; rest in it.”
—Zhuangzi (cf. Feng & English, 1974)
This object exists in space independent of man. It was "discovered" by Charles Messier. Named M101. M42, aka the Andromeda galaxy, was first documented by an Arab astrologer in 936 CE. Our knowledge and description of it has changed over the years as new information became available. Quite recently, scientist discovered M42 was 5 times larger than originally thought. Fives times!!! I do not argue about Andromeda, I am filled with philo and encouraged to seek after sophia.
We make discoveries and develop theories according to the scientific model. This is a largely intellectual endeavor; the intellect being the "safe" realm of the masculine. But does not this image evoke a feeling of awe and wonder. Feeling is the realm of the feminine. Please allow me to use these terms loosely. Yin and Yang are not absolute; there is no pure yin or pure yang. What may present as yin in one situation, can easily present as yang in another. The ancient Chinese understood the relativity of all things in the Universe.
Does the scientific method necessarily exclude or negate the feminine?
Does science necessarily engender argument?
Is it possible for Open Source Religion to integrate science and spirituality with equal parts feeling and intellect?
Can we share our own experiences as additional evidence without the desperate need for ego to be "right"?
•
•
Tags: OSR, argument, art, beauty, co-creation, community, debate, discussion, science
Views: 0
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Zijan on -
Taggers and graffiti artists have a term for a piece used to cover a rival artist's work called a "burn". Some of these artists are incredibly talented. The more enlightened and mature move on to throw up art on "commissioned" walls, or walls where their work will be respected and appreciated by all, often moving to galleries as well.
Is not RG a place for such art? Can Open Source Religion be a gallery of frescos and murals, inspiring all to awe?
-
Permalink Reply by James S Saint on -
"Does the scientific method necessarily exclude or negate the feminine?
Does science necessarily engender argument?
Is it possible for Open Source Religion to integrate science and spirituality with equal parts feeling and intellect?"
I think we would have to get into the Science of JOY for that. But as sloppy as Science is these days, I couldn't trust them to not make misery of it. :)
-
Permalink Reply by James S Saint on
-
The SCIENCE is not the joyful rhetoric or the soothing flows perceived in sight and sound. The Science is the cold calculation of the mathematical formula that brought about the artistic flow and color, the coldly defined words that brought about the language from which the poetry emerges, and the calculated construction of the harmony of single frequencies into a symphony.
The masculine is the cold hard necessity of logic, firmness of structure, and cruel rationale. The feminine is the necessity for perceived hope even in the irrational, unstructured, and illogic of delight.
Without one you cannot have the other for long. Every atom has the light, loose, and airy electron smothering the dark, heavy, and solid proton. Together, yet separate. In harmony yet opposed. And from which a diverse universe of beauty emerges.
Neither the male nor the female conquered the jungle, but the family of the twain and the community of the group. The teaming up of the diverse is what brings power, not the uniformity of the gray in their melding.
So as to make equal, man attempts the make the lion into a deer and the deer into a lion, yet ends up with a weak and scared creature with neither of their great talents.
Homogeny makes all things equal. The harmony of diversity makes all things great.
Force the hard to be soft and inspire the soft to be hard, and what do you get but the gray clay ready to be molded by others who kept their strengths in separate urns and their wisdom out of sight.
In the cold of logic, joy is but the "perception of progress". All joy is but that one thing and nothing else. That is the cold truth of the masculine seeking the construct with which to cause joy where there had been none. From there, he can create the DNA of the beautifully colored flower, charm of the young kitten, and the delight in the heart of every woman.
-
Permalink Reply by Sidian M.S. Jones on -
Good words James. I'm in Washington at the moment without much time to respond to this great post but I believe you may have nailed it especially in regards to the "cold definitions" giving rise to poetry metaphor.
At Redefine God we can use cold science to inspire emotionally epic theories.
-
Permalink Reply by James S Saint on
-
Thks Sid.
I'm tempted to blog on the matter, but there is SOOoo much to say.. dunno.
Top Content This Week
Latest Activity
Roman Kozlowski left a comment for Sidian M.S. Jones"Dear Sid, love your site. Please keep it alive.
I've noticed since the name change, many…"
Roman Kozlowski replied to Kernel John's discussion Open Source Religion Tool Kit"Infants laughing or crying is not becuase of memories of past lives."
Roman Kozlowski left a comment for Kernel John"Dear Kernel, I think I might have removed you accidentally along with rest of my emails the…"
Roman Kozlowski replied to rob stone's discussion Predestined for Glorification"Are you restricting yourself only to the God of the bible in your searh for universal truth?"
Roman Kozlowski replied to Kernel John's discussion Are Your Religious Beliefs Plausible Facts of Probable Fiction?""Plausible facts of probable fiction?" - I know what you mean.
The danger is that fiction…"
sriv_anu via TwitterRT @guunjanjha: 2. @scotchism with all types of men and malicious intents. And it is natural for such a "free" open-source religion. What @HinduIDF
guunjanjha via Twitter2. @scotchism with all types of men and malicious intents. And it is natural for such a "free" open-source religion. What @HinduIDF
rob stone posted a discussionPredestined for Glorification
We cannot earn salvation, and we can never lose salvation, because salvation is based not upon what…See More
Roman Kozlowski replied to Roman Kozlowski's discussion What is God? And why the idea of God?"I agree kernel. Our ideas and beliefs are to a greater extent what define us and make us who we…"
© 2013 Created by Sidian M.S. Jones.
