Beyond Light Speed: A Tenet Nosce suggestion

[zenmaster]

There certainly have been many attempts to represent aspects or portions of consciousness mathematically.

Attempts that have been taken seriously by the scientific community? Can you give some examples so I can check them out?

What is the "scientific community"? There are various fields of research, as well as independent investigators.

Here's a few :

http://www.calresco.org/links.htm
http://sites.google.com/site/unifiedcomplexity/
http://indigo.ie/~peter/integral.html

Scientists also observe many in the scientific arena being just as dogmatic as some religious fundamentalists. Religious people do the same. Such viewpoints are just steps to learning about the self. And, yes, they also find it quite humorous and ironic. But if you look into both science and religion, there is nothing about the purpose of science which is dogmatic and nothing about the purpose of religion which is dogmatic (in the pathological or regressive sense). The scientific method is based on creating relationships from observation. The religious ceremony is about connecting to the creator.

The purpose of both appears to be to ascertain truth. Something about the process seems to lead many astray. It appears in both cases to lead to attachment to a particular conception of truth. Both processes seem to make it too easy for a seeker to become attached to certain ideas, or to feel that they have arrived at the "ultimate truth" of some kind.

It isn't made plain to seekers that one truth will lead to a greater truth will lead to a greater truth, and so on.

You can't hand hold, or learn for someone, or hand them subjective experience on a plate without damaging infringement. There are stages and lines of development. Support groups exist for the initial stages, then the umbilical chord must be cut and one's life must be more self-determined. Rejecting what brought us to that point of recognition is inharmonious and wrong - it also tends to be necessary. We must magnify many things about our learning experience, after the fact, in order to eventually find out just what occurred - to fit those experiences more appropriately into our worldview and to take ownership of them.

For example, in every generation since the advent of the scientific method, some bozo out there declares that science has reached its limits and that "we know everything there is to know". In every generation since Jesus, some bozo out there has been declaring that Armageddon is upon us. And so on...

Of course. There will always be examples of this type to be found and help up as failures in light of something more encompassing or sufficient. People are 'at' different stages in development.

The scientific method is based upon a false idea of an objective observer.

Untrue. It is based upon observation, in general, and experiment. Replication of results is key. The notion of an 'objective-experience box', materialsm, reductionism, etc. is not inherent to the method. Wiber points this out in his system here as the 'right-hand' theorists.

Religious rituals have been manipulated in order to reinforce a feeling of disconnect to the creator. (For example, the doxology following the Lord's Prayer in the Christian liturgy changes the entire ceremony from an invocation to an evocation.)

Sure, this is because at certain levels, we are simply not capable of accepting a divine aspect of ourselves. It is only possible when put into specific terms. On the other hand, life here tends to start out with an undifferentiated connection with creator and creation - the 'participation mystique'. So tend to have three stages of development as one individuates: pre-personal, personal, and transpersonal.

The "purpose" of science and religion seems to have become lost in the "process" of science and religion. Seekers in both camps have a tendency to place undue "faith" in the process and selectively ignore the countless examples of where the process has failed.

Sure, because it is completely irrelevant to learning. It should be selectively ignored. When we are ready, the information becomes available. To treat the information as 'new' is ironic. It's merely the tired drama of Plato's Cave allegory.

What do you mean broad brush strokes in the manner of the security-blanketed, dogmatic science and religion?

It appeared to me that you were tossing me into the camp of others who claim that because a scientific discovery is "fitting for the times" that it should be accepted without reservation. I may have projected this on to you, however if so your words were not clear in this respect. I am an individual and belong to no camp. That is where the "broad brush stroke" comment comes in.

You are an individual, but absolutely do belong to a camp. Welcome to society - you are borrowing part of it to use for your mind until you are capable of actually learning on your own.

As for the "security blanket" piece- it is as I described before. Many scientists feel that the "scientific method" is so sacrosanct- so perfect- that any failure to arrive at the truth must have been a failure to apply the scientific method properly. I don't observe scientists turning the scientific method upon itself in order to arrive at an improved methodology.

The methodologies that scientists employ when conducting their research are at their discretion and prone to error. The scientific method is not the core of the problem. Rather, the limitations exist in society as lack of philosophical or epistemological foundations. I'm fairly certain we have a while to go before the general method is the limiting factor or something that is steering us away from discovery.

In the religion department, we can use as an example the "security blanket" of those who "just pray to Jesus" over and over again despite their prayers not being answered. They have absolute "faith" in Jesus- ascribing powers to him that do not exist.

Jesus is the transcendent principle. The idea is a constellating force for impressing the idea of 'love' and salvation on our consciousness. It is an aspect of spirituality and a lesson to those who wish to learn about it in the manner provided. Consider that when they ascribe powers that do not exist, they are learning about the principles of those powers through the imagination. Still we continue to progress and eventually that which was projected outward and no longer needed for support will be discarded.

In both cases there is the security blanket of false "faith" which, ironically, reinforces the belief in a faulty process every time it fails. Instead of taking the failure as an opportunity to improve the process, the seeker takes it as an opportunity to "renew their faith".

It's a lesson where faith is renewed in slightly different ways until entropy casts 'faith' in a new light, and it is rediscovered as yet another, higher principle.

Does this address your question, or did I misunderstand it?

Seems fine to me.

Its actually just yet another way to explain the condition that is currently happening. The "unbridled" term I got from Ra, as I felt it was an apt depiction of hyper-intuitive behavior where blanks in cognition are allowed to be filled by unconscious desires i.e. in the manner here or here.
The "masking" term was used because any meme which we inflate as "truth" is necessarily temporary.

I see. That makes more sense. If I may make an observation, sometimes your posts leave many blanks for the mind to fill in with projections. It might improve communications with others to provide the kind of details you offered above- especially when using words that can be taken in several different contexts.

Possibly, but I think the posts would then become too wordy, cumbersome and lacking adequate space for questions for clarification. There tend to be two sides to a dialog and my limited responses often reflect a restraint based on what I myself have been able to understand as what actually has been intended or claimed.

The so-called open minded person who is the would-be purveyor of truth (for example, some conspiracy) and therefore some kind of "liberator", is often just parroting what they are compelled to do based on valuing-meme identification. They do not see the hole which they have dug from the attachment to their borrowed ideology. For them it is entirely appropriate or fitting to what they perceive to be the actual situation and righteous.

And so, am I to assume that this above paragraph is your depiction of myself? If so, this seems to be a recurring distortion in our communications.

No. It is one stereotypical depiction of a meme that is rampant among fanatical seekers wishing to enlighten but who are absorbed in their own projections.

This thread was intended by Conifer16 and myself to be a discussion of this new observation- not as an exposition of truth by self-appointed "liberators" of humanity.

Indeed, and then there were tangential questions related to dogma, scientific method, limitations, etc. There is a general direction, one well studied, with regards to the opposition to that which seems to imprison or restrain the evolution of consciousness be that aspect spiritual, emotional, social, mental, etc. These are projections which serve as learning experiences for the person doing the projection. So you have the irony of this embedded projection system that Ra calls 'the dance'.

The "grasping" necessarily follows from the attachment, for one can not fully see any brand new condition of being which they are drawn to for some reason. "grasping" is an apt word because it does describe this new condition of learning. We tend to move in stages from apprehension (grasping), to comprehension to understanding.

Well this makes more sense. I took "grasping" to mean as in "grasping at straws" in the sense of desperately holding on to a perception despite clear evidence to the contrary. It appears you are using "grasping" as a necessary stage to comprehension and understanding.

The apprehending stage is one where the information is not integrated, but treated as if it were so. A concept is often overextended due to its perceived potential power to serve as an explanation. 'Knowledge is power'. This over-extension is a meme and there is a bandwagon effect as people resonate with the particular themes. There is immense dishonesty involved. There is an immoral consequentialist mentality involved. There is a stifling affect on polarization involved, as Ra pointed out.

Yes, all of us - hence the broad-generalization brush strokes.

OK. Well again, it might improve communication if you were to more readily point out where your own mind might be "filling in the blanks" in addition to pointing out when this occurs in others. Your fixation on identifying bias appears to be your own bias.

Yes it is my own bias at this time due to the perception that identifying bias, in various forms, is key to promoting balance and consciousness.

---

Off topic somewhat, but fascinating due the notion of that there must be limited analogs of all 'logoic' principles (such as 'free will', space/time, 'mind', etc) existing in lower densities with respect to their more complex or further developed instantiations in higher densities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will_theorem
It also fits into the philosophy of panexperientialism.