Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Science vs. Spirituality.

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 11, 2012, 11:45:25 PM
My mistake, NHA.
I took you seriously for a while there.
If you can call me dishonest, it becomes clear that not only have you no equipment to help you recognize what spirituality is, but that you also have none to conceptualize what dishonesty is, either.
In my reality, people like you are insane.
But, naturally, you have every right to be.
I think it's just wonderful, vibrant and diverse.

NHA

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 11, 2012, 11:59:06 PM
I said your post was dishonest. And i think it was. You assumed my post before was attacking you when it wasn't and decided to devolve the conversation into an ego contest by creating sentiment/conflict that never existed.

You claim to want to help show people the benefits of spirituality but i don't see that. All i see you is mocking people for not being able to understand such lofty concepts (as apparently only the chosen few can understand) without making any clear attempt to communicate them.

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 12:30:39 AM
You are right.

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 01:48:25 AM
Science takes a thing, manipulates it, 'understands' it, and exploits it.
This process, far more often than not, results in the destruction of whatever science is applied to.
I agree with the first statement but not the second. How does it destroy whatever?

Quote
Science seeks always to 'understand'. And of what use is 'understanding'?
Once labeled, known, put in a box and organized, what is that thing, then?
You already answered this question. Understanding things allows us to exploit them.

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 01:58:01 AM
Science takes a thing, manipulates it, 'understands' it, and exploits it.
This process, far more often than not, results in the destruction of whatever science is applied to.
I agree with the first statement but not the second. How does it destroy whatever?

Quote
Science seeks always to 'understand'. And of what use is 'understanding'?
Once labeled, known, put in a box and organized, what is that thing, then?
You already answered this question. Understanding things allows us to exploit them.


Forget for a moment, all you think you know. (Asif:)
The destruction of what is applied to science, is destroyed by the science applied to it.
Its mystery is stripped from it. Therefore it ceases to be an unknown. Unworthy of respect or reverence.
A thing's mystery is its power.
A figure of speech, but a profound one.

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 02:03:11 AM
Forget for a moment, all you think you know.
Nah, that's cool.

Quote
The destruction of what is applied to science, is destroyed by the science applied to it.
Its mystery is stripped from it. Therefore it ceases to be an unknown. Unworthy of respect or reverence.
A thing's mystery is its power.
A figure of speech, but a profound one.
OK. I understand what you mean here, but I don't agree. Unraveling mystery and understanding a thing doesn't mean we cease revering or respecting it. At least, it shouldn't. Whether or not it empirically does seems to vary from person to person.

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 02:13:24 AM
Fair enough.
What you do with anything, determines the result.

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 04:40:02 AM
Spirituality is not a tool.
It is a baseline, reference-point, from which to live life.
Not having a baseline, one is able to say things like: "spirituality is simply a tool".

That's horseshit, son.  "Spirituality" is—in every particular—an invention of Man, intended to meet the needs and serve the desires of Man.  It is no more and no less than a conceptual hammer: useful to those with the wit to use it, useless to those who don't, and dangerous in the hands of still others. 

In fact, for the vast majority of those who practice it (or have practiced it historically), spirituality serves primarily to, A.) make sense of and impose order upon experience and B.) to provide a means for asserting control over the wider universe.  In other words, for most "spiritual" people, spirituality fills precisely the same functions that others seek from science.


Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 04:52:39 AM
Ah. Horseshit. I had wondered.
I'll be sure and abandon a lifetime of searching, finding, utilizing, appreciating, then.
Thank you so much.


Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 05:17:32 AM
Ah. Horseshit. I had wondered.
I'll be sure and abandon a lifetime of searching, finding, utilizing, appreciating, then.
Thank you so much.



You're making this either/or, black/white, 1/0 when it doesn't have to be.  As I said, spirituality is a tool: do you throw out your hammer just because some jobs call for screwdriver?

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 05:43:47 AM
You expect to read horseshit, so horseshit is what you see.
You might try reading back a bit.
You might try sleeping on it.
You might even try imagining I know what I'm talking about.
You might try imagining I am not an enemy.
You might even try not trying.

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 06:16:46 AM
I expect intelligent folks to be able to distinguish between the baby and the bathwater, and I grow weary of thinking without nuance.  When people spout horseshit, I call it likes I sees it. 

There's nothing inherently good about "spirituality" and nothing inherently bad about "science."  Like life, they are what you make of them.  I see no great value in creating a binary opposition where there need not be one.

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 06:21:12 AM
I expect intelligent folks to be able to distinguish between the baby and the bathwater, and I grow weary of thinking without nuance.  When people spout horseshit, I call it likes I sees it. 

There's nothing inherently good about "spirituality" and nothing inherently bad about "science."  Like life, they are what you make of them.  I see no great value in creating a binary opposition where there need not be one.

Sense; it had been so long since the word had been mentioned here. This statement contains tons of it.

Moderation, fellas.

Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 06:23:51 AM
Dylar:
If you grow weary of thinking without nuance, perhaps you should try introducing some, to your thought.
I see everyone being very good at pointing out the often-imaginary flaws in others.
While being oblivious to their own.
This is nothing new.
But it sure gets old.

BTW, I was 59 this very day.
If you're calling me "son", you must be really, really old.


Re: Science vs. Spirituality.
April 12, 2012, 06:26:45 AM
Dylar:
If you grow weary of thinking without nuance, perhaps you should try introducing some, to your thought.
I see everyone being very good at pointing out the often-imaginary flaws in others.
While being oblivious to their own.
This is nothing new.
But it sure gets old.

BTW, I was 59 this very day.
If you're calling me "son", you must be really, really old.



I feel older than dirt, and that's all that matters, right?