Well, I guess we didn't know, but maybe we did. After all, if we are all parts of the same thing, then we are all one together with that thing, so we all knew that one part of us will watch the show and other parts are going to discuss something related. I like that phrase from the Rasta philosophy - they say "I and I" instead of "we". So, I and I and I knew .
I agree that it doesn't have to explained, and it probably never will be, at least not without the great uncertainty. That "relatedness" and "being open" you wrote about actually fits in my other post here, the one about the pebble. Being more open would mean being closer to actually perceiving totality of yourself, and perceiving "relatedness" comes easily with that.
I guess the main thing is that you find contentment with it, just as I do with my world view, and that we can respect indeed welcome and enjoy diversity. Given the lack of conclusive proof for any particular view set, I have to keep an open mind even as I adopt these views, which I believe I chose to do with free will, hehe :-)
When I choose to believe in God and eternal salvation I know full well that this may be due to a psychological yearning for the idealised parent who will look after everything forever, there there democrates, eat your schnitzels and rest your noggin on your cloud pillow. But it feels good and I'm not harming anyone, so I'm happy to wear that technicolor raincoat.
Same thing with believing in the multiverse, a concept eastern philosophy has long espoused but now has some backers from the fields of string theory and supergravity as they exercise their brains with branes and matrix theory. 9, 10, 11, 12 dimensions, take your pick. The big bang was caused by the collision of two branes? Cool! Trillions of other universes with who knows what laws of physics? Awesome! I don't care! So long as no-one tells me the size of reality in cubic parsecs I shouldn't feel trapped and suffer a dose of claustrophobia. Maybe there's another psychological basis indicated for that view, that darn cot with it's bars...
Off course, diversity is welcome. Some time ago I would probably argue against the existence of God, but now I know it makes no sense to argue over something that is neither provable or disprovable, so I won't argue over something I cannot be sure in myself .
I read somewhere a thought by someone who said that the best world view one can have is the world view that benefits him most, because ultimately no world view can be proved true or false, so practically they are all equally true. While this is a pretty pragmatic point of view, it suggests the connection you mentioned, between someone's psychology and his choice of world view. After all, people tend to choose the world view that they feel is right, some of them feel so strong that it's right that they firmly believe they know it's right. It could all be firmly rooted in their psychology.
Although I find beauty and content in the world view I described, I wouldn't necessarily call it my world view, as I don't completely believe in it. But then again, do you have to completely believe in something for it to be your world view, or does having a world view include a healthy dose of doubt? I guess that without doubt one would be a true believer, or a closed minded person.
This view brings one problem with it - a lack of true free will and choice. But I don't see free will or choice as fundamentally necessary, so it doesn't bother me much. After all, we don't need free will because we are simply fixed four dimensional objects inside the pebble. Free will has no meaning in the totality of the pebble, it is an illusion of living consciously through time. In this picture, it is a nice little effect.
I could ask: if there's no such thing as free will, then isn't Free Software ultimately pointless? What sense would there be in talking about rights and freedoms if there's no such thing as free will in the first place?
But instead, I'll say this: I assume free will exists. I can't help it if my assumption's incorrect; but if it is correct, then I have chosen, of my own, free will, to make the correct assumption.
I read somewhere a thought by someone who said that the best world view one can have is the world view that benefits him most, because ultimately no world view can be proved true or false, so practically they are all equally true.
You know, I bet some christians would jump on that and say "yeah you just believe in what suits you at the moment, you are a lost soul my child".
To be honest, something does slightly smell about that philosophy, because it leads to the conclusion that selfishness is base to all world views and that all struggles between humans are based on selfishness alone. But that doesn't appear to be true, although even those who selflessly work towards a better world (as they see it) do so because of at least one selfish motive: it is a better world for them too. So I suppose these things intermingle. What a surprise!
Anyway, I'd say the whole story about world views probably comes down to being described as a process. The best way to think about world views is probably not as some sort of fixed unchanging concepts, but rather as an ongoing process of discovery, questioning, adoption and then all over again.
That again makes me conclude that life is just a journey, an ongoing process in the memory of cosmos, not a fixed file on a hard disk called Earth.
Lol, this disk is special technology, it is round... but 3D round.
Hehe, a spherical disk; I wonder how that would look when drawn
(If it's a hard disk the schematics for a spherical version would be very interesting.)
Imagine a sphere with some sort of a motor at its center which moves the reading "head" over the interior surface of the sphere, reading and writing data.
Well it'd probably not be very efficient, but hey.. that's how I imagine it.
Well, I guess we didn't know, but maybe we did. After all, if we are all parts of the same thing, then we are all one together with that thing, so we all knew that one part of us will watch the show and other parts are going to discuss something related. I like that phrase from the Rasta philosophy - they say "I and I" instead of "we". So, I and I and I knew
.
I agree that it doesn't have to explained, and it probably never will be, at least not without the great uncertainty. That "relatedness" and "being open" you wrote about actually fits in my other post here, the one about the pebble. Being more open would mean being closer to actually perceiving totality of yourself, and perceiving "relatedness" comes easily with that.
Indeed.
Well I've got nothing more to say without reiterating the same thing.
Awesome thoughts are being spilled in this thread.
That sounds a lot like metaphysical naturalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical_naturalism
I guess the main thing is that you find contentment with it, just as I do with my world view, and that we can respect indeed welcome and enjoy diversity. Given the lack of conclusive proof for any particular view set, I have to keep an open mind even as I adopt these views, which I believe I chose to do with free will, hehe :-)
When I choose to believe in God and eternal salvation I know full well that this may be due to a psychological yearning for the idealised parent who will look after everything forever, there there democrates, eat your schnitzels and rest your noggin on your cloud pillow. But it feels good and I'm not harming anyone, so I'm happy to wear that technicolor raincoat.
Same thing with believing in the multiverse, a concept eastern philosophy has long espoused but now has some backers from the fields of string theory and supergravity as they exercise their brains with branes and matrix theory. 9, 10, 11, 12 dimensions, take your pick. The big bang was caused by the collision of two branes? Cool! Trillions of other universes with who knows what laws of physics? Awesome! I don't care! So long as no-one tells me the size of reality in cubic parsecs I shouldn't feel trapped and suffer a dose of claustrophobia. Maybe there's another psychological basis indicated for that view, that darn cot with it's bars...
Off course, diversity is welcome. Some time ago I would probably argue against the existence of God, but now I know it makes no sense to argue over something that is neither provable or disprovable, so I won't argue over something I cannot be sure in myself
.
I read somewhere a thought by someone who said that the best world view one can have is the world view that benefits him most, because ultimately no world view can be proved true or false, so practically they are all equally true. While this is a pretty pragmatic point of view, it suggests the connection you mentioned, between someone's psychology and his choice of world view. After all, people tend to choose the world view that they feel is right, some of them feel so strong that it's right that they firmly believe they know it's right. It could all be firmly rooted in their psychology.
Although I find beauty and content in the world view I described, I wouldn't necessarily call it my world view, as I don't completely believe in it. But then again, do you have to completely believe in something for it to be your world view, or does having a world view include a healthy dose of doubt? I guess that without doubt one would be a true believer, or a closed minded person.
This view brings one problem with it - a lack of true free will and choice. But I don't see free will or choice as fundamentally necessary, so it doesn't bother me much. After all, we don't need free will because we are simply fixed four dimensional objects inside the pebble. Free will has no meaning in the totality of the pebble, it is an illusion of living consciously through time. In this picture, it is a nice little effect.
I could ask: if there's no such thing as free will, then isn't Free Software ultimately pointless? What sense would there be in talking about rights and freedoms if there's no such thing as free will in the first place?
But instead, I'll say this: I assume free will exists. I can't help it if my assumption's incorrect; but if it is correct, then I have chosen, of my own, free will, to make the correct assumption.
:-)
Live Free Or Die
I read somewhere a thought by someone who said that the best world view one can have is the world view that benefits him most, because ultimately no world view can be proved true or false, so practically they are all equally true.
You know, I bet some christians would jump on that and say "yeah you just believe in what suits you at the moment, you are a lost soul my child".
To be honest, something does slightly smell about that philosophy, because it leads to the conclusion that selfishness is base to all world views and that all struggles between humans are based on selfishness alone. But that doesn't appear to be true, although even those who selflessly work towards a better world (as they see it) do so because of at least one selfish motive: it is a better world for them too. So I suppose these things intermingle. What a surprise!
Anyway, I'd say the whole story about world views probably comes down to being described as a process. The best way to think about world views is probably not as some sort of fixed unchanging concepts, but rather as an ongoing process of discovery, questioning, adoption and then all over again.
That again makes me conclude that life is just a journey, an ongoing process in the memory of cosmos, not a fixed file on a hard disk called Earth.
... a fixed file on a hard disk called Earth.
It's a disk????
Lol, this disk is special technology, it is round... but 3D round.
Lol, this disk is special technology, it is round... but 3D round.
Hehe, a spherical disk; I wonder how that would look when drawn
(If it's a hard disk the schematics for a spherical version would be very interesting.)
Imagine a sphere with some sort of a motor at its center which moves the reading "head" over the interior surface of the sphere, reading and writing data.
Well it'd probably not be very efficient, but hey.. that's how I imagine it.