Posts Tagged materialism

Can Science and Religion be Integrated?

Can science and religion be integrated? What comes to mind immediately is that religions themselves cannot agree with one another whereas science is basically monolithic. How can there even be trade between the two, let alone integration?

Currently, the overall perception of science is that it is materialist. The belief is that science cannot be done without the dogma of material monism: all things of our experience have a material origin.

Cosmos

On the other hand, there is common ground for all religions in three respects:
1) all religions agree that there is God …
2) All religions also posit the existence of non-material “subtle” bodies connected with our internal experiences–feeling, meaning, and values–in addition to the material body.
3) All religions posit the importance of certain values as the goal of life; values such as, love, truth, beauty, justice, good.

The Dogma of Material Monism
Currently, the overall perception of science is that it is materialist. The belief is that science cannot be done without the dogma of material monism: all things of our experience have a material origin.

It is only logical that the practitioners of materialist science should have something to object and negate about the three religious contentions about reality enunciated above.

Materialists also posit that God, consciousness, mind, feelings, values, all things internal besides what we experience externally, matter, are explainable in material terms.

In quantum physics, objects are not determined things of Newtonian vintage. Instead, they are waves of possibility. When we observe, these waves “collapse” into actual events in our experience. Instead of spread-out waves what we observe is a localized particle. This is the famous observer effect.

The resolution of the paradox is to turn the materialist view of consciousness upside down. Let consciousness be the base of the world and let matter consist of waves of possibilities of consciousness. Consciousness chooses from the possibility waves of matter within it to collapse the actual events that we observe.

For the materialist model of individual consciousness associated with each brain, the solution is called solipsism. Only your consciousness is real; everybody else is a fragment of your imagination.

The good news is that not one, but three separate experiments are now showing that quantum consciousness, the author of downward causation is nonlocal, is unitive, is God.

Source: Can Science and Religion be Integrated? – Amit Goswami

See also:
- Biocentrism – A Theory of Everything that makes sense
- Quantum Zeno Effect and the Burning Bush

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Till Death Do You Part – A World in Decomposition

Skull

“Decomposition is the continual process of gradual decay and disorganization of organic tissues and structures after death.”

Source: Decomposition: World of Forensic Science

The Mainstream of science, politics, economics, arts and social relations is now in the phase of decomposition. It is evident in the way of thinking and acting of the leaders of this world and of the billions of their proponents.

Atomic Age and the Sexual Revolution
1950s started the Atomic Age, using the nuclear power for killing humans, producing fear and electric energy. 1960s heralded a new culture of “free love”, the so called Sexual Revolution. Both has one think in common: separation!

A feeling of nuclear optimism emerged in the 1950s in which it was believed that all power generators in the future would be atomic in nature. But what is left of this optimism today?
Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Materialism has gradually hardened into a kind of anti-Christian faith

Rupert Sheldrake, who has long called for this development, spells out this need forcibly in his new book. He shows how materialism has gradually hardened into a kind of anti-Christian faith, an ideology rather than a scientific principle, claiming authority to dictate theories and to veto inquiries on topics that don’t suit it, such as unorthodox medicine, let alone religion. He shows how completely alien this static materialism is to modern physics, where matter is dynamic. And, to mark the strange dilemmas that this perverse fashion poses for us, he ends each chapter with some very intriguing “Questions for Materialists“, questions such as “Have you been programmed to believe in materialism?“, “If there are no purposes in nature, how can you have purposes yourself?“, “How do you explain the placebo response?” and so on.

In short, he shows just how unworkable the assumptions behind today’s fashionable habits have become. The “science delusion” of his title is the current popular confidence in certain fixed assumptions – the exaltation of today’s science, not as the busy, constantly changing workshop that it actually is but as a final, infallible oracle preaching a crude kind of materialism.

Source: The Science Delusion by Rupert Sheldrake – review, by Mary Midgley

Further readings:
- Scientism
- Flynn Effect and Morphic Resonance
- Rupert Sheldrake’s Alternative Science
- Physicalism
- Morphic Fields and Morphic Resonance

Tags: , , , ,

Rupert Sheldrake’s Alternative Science

Richard Dawkins will barely give him the time of day and many other scientists hint darkly that he has gone mad. Since 1981, when a leader in the journal Nature accused him of “pseudoscience” and “finding a place for magic within scientific discussion”, Rupert Sheldrake has been outlawed by the science establishment.

But, before he went rogue, he was accepted as a very distinguished biochemist indeed so he cannot easily be dismissed as an ill-informed fantasist. The origin of his heresy lay in his conviction that biochemistry alone could not solve the problem of how organisms assumed their final form, the process of morphogenesis. He alighted on the idea of morphic resonance. We are all surrounded by as yet undetected fields, which carry information from the past that forms new organisms. Not only that, they carry our memories and store skills. So, thanks to morphic resonance, the first person who learns to ride a bike makes it easier for the second person and so on.

This points to a perennial failing of the institution of science (and, in fairness, of most institutions) — dogmatic vanity.

In a series of books, Sheldrake has explored the evidence for and the implications of this idea. This involves ordinary phenomena such as dogs who know when their owner is coming home and the way people seem to know they are being stared at, as well as critiques of the whole edifice of materialist science.

Continue to read here …

Further reading:
- Morphic Fields and Morphic Resonance
- Consciousness involves a different kind of causation

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Avoiding the Infinite

Tonight is the thriller night, a night full of horror. Materialistic scientist from all over the world are going to watch a movie at the local cinema outside the town, near the dark wood. The title of the movie is so mysterious like the invitation which was teleported right on top of their desks:”The Infinite

You should know something about materialistic scientists, they fear the infinite like a little girl fears the darkness in the attic. They avoid this thematic and when they are confronted with it they start immediately to whistle, changing the topic, crying loud out for mommy, or just running away. Cowards! Indeed they fear to have reached the edge of their worldview and recognize finally that they lived in a illusion. Materialists are loosing territory with every single scientific discovery. Indeed the best they could do is to hide into theoretical classical physics and playing with their Big Bang simulation until mommy is going to get them to home.

People do think that if they avoid the truth, it might change to something better before they have to hear it.
(Marsha Norman)

The Big Bang and the Imaginary Time
Imaginary time was introduced by Stephen Hawking (materialist scientist) to avoid singularities, or points at which the spacetime curvature becomes infinite, that occur in ordinary time. Imaginary time too would be curved by matter in the universe and therefore would meet the three spatial dimensions to form a closed surface like that of Earth. This curved surface would not have a beginning or end, or indeed any boundaries or edges. This idea helps to avoid the fundamental question of what happened before the Big Bang.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Physicalism

Physicalism is a philosophical position holding that everything which exists is no more extensive than its physical properties; that is, that there are no kinds of things other than physical things. The term was coined by Otto Neurath in a series of early twentieth century essays on the subject, in which he wrote:

According to physicalism, the language of physics is the universal language of science and, consequently, any knowledge can be brought back to the statements on the physical objects.

In contemporary philosophy, physicalism is most frequently associated with the mind-body problem in philosophy of mind, regarding which physicalism holds that all that has been ascribed to “mind” is more correctly ascribed to “brain” or the activity of the brain. Physicalism is also called “materialism“, but the term “physicalism” is preferable because it has evolved with the physical sciences to incorporate far more sophisticated notions of physicality than matter, for example wave/particle relationships and non-material forces produced by particles. The related position of methodological naturalism says that philosophy and science should at least operate under the assumptions of natural sciences (and thus physicalism).

The ontology of physicalism ultimately includes whatever is described by physics — not just matter but energy, space, time, physical forces, structure, physical processes, information, state, etc. Because it claims that only physical things exist, physicalism is generally a form of ontological monism.

Tags: , , , ,

Do you really believe in Homeopathy?

Skeptic Person:”You believe in Homeopathy?”

Me:”No. Homeopathy is not a religion, it’s science, a therapy method based on a universal principle.”

Skeptic Person:”But you take homeopathic remedies.”

Me:”Well, yes. It works even if you don’t believe that it works.”

Skeptic Person:”In my opinion it is just a placebo. Unconsciously you believe that it works, therefore it works.”

Mmmh, I got really no time and delight in convincing him in something that is so obvious for me and million other people who knows for experience that homeopathy indeed works.

Me:”It works for animals, bacteria, … do they believe?”

Skeptic Person:”No … but there is no scientific proof that water has a memory …”

Oh here we are again: The legend of “No scientific proof”

Me:”Sure, scientific proofs exist, thousands of scientific proofs, done in laboratory, under strict conditions, double-blind, double-double-triple-blind, …”

Skeptic Person:”So if (IF … THEN … ELSE) … if science proved that it works, why is it not recognized in mainstream medicine?”

Oh dear, … no but he is right. It’s a good question!

Me:”Let me ask you first a question. Then maybe you will understand on your own the reason why it is not accepted in mainstream. What is the difference between a person who believes in a meaning of life and a person who don’t?”

Skeptic Person:”Most people who believe that life has a meaning believe also in God, a creator, or at least in some force. In contrast people who don’t believe that life has an meaning are in some kind lost, without hope.”

Me:”What do you think, whom of this people is more adhere to the golden rule*?”

* Golden Rule: One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.

Skeptic Person:”Who believes that life has a meaning, right?!”

Me:”And why should people who don’t believe in a meaning of life not take the golden rule into account?”

Skeptic Person:”Because a person who has hope has the natural desire to share his hope. Therefore who has no hope will not consider the golden rule.”

Me:”Ok, now just another question and you will see how the big picture looks like. Is homeopathy a materialistic science?”

In philosophy, the theory of materialism holds that the only thing that exists is matter or energy; that all things are composed of material and all phenomena (including consciousness) are the result of material interactions. In other words, matter is the only substance, and reality is identical with the actually occurring states of energy and matter.

Scientific ‘Materialism’ is often synonymous with, and has so far been described, as being a reductive materialism. In recent years, Paul and Patricia Churchland have advocated a radically contrasting position (at least, in regards to certain hypotheses); eliminativist materialism holds that some mental phenomena simply do not exist at all, and that talk of those mental phenomena reflects a totally spurious “folk psychology” and Introspection illusion.

Skeptic Person:”It seems to be a kind of idealism.”

You should know that we have talked about the difference between materialism and idealism. So he knew the difference at the time we talked about homeopathy.

Me:”And on what kind of science is the mainstream medicine based?”

Skeptic Person:”Materialism … ah now I understand!”

Me:”We are living in a material world, right?”

Skeptic Person:”Ok I got the point. It’s the same thing as with the free energy research. …”

… we talked for another half hour and and we met again the next month. Surprisingly he was now convinced about homeopathy and he desired to know more about the memory of water. I was very curious and asked him what part exactly of our conversation changed his mind about homeopathy and he answered with a smile:”None of it. I made a self proving.”

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Dean Radin: Are You Nothing but a Pack of Neurons?

According to laboratory scientist Dean Radin, research suggests that our moral sense is deeply tied to our worldview. If you saw yourself as nothing but matter, how would that affect the way you live right now?

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Collective unconscious

Collective unconscious is a term of analytical psychology, coined by Carl Jung. It is proposed to be a part of the unconscious mind, expressed in humanity and all life forms with nervous systems, and describes how the structure of the psyche autonomously organizes experience. Jung distinguished the collective unconscious from the personal unconscious, in that the personal unconscious is a personal reservoir of experience unique to each individual, while the collective unconscious collects and organizes those personal experiences in a similar way with each member of a particular species.

Jung’s definitions

My thesis then, is as follows: in addition to our immediate consciousness, which is of a thoroughly personal nature and which we believe to be the only empirical psyche (even if we tack on the personal unconscious as an appendix), there exists a second psychic system of a collective, universal, and impersonal nature which is identical in all individuals. This collective unconscious does not develop individually but is inherited. It consists of pre-existent forms, the archetypes, which can only become conscious secondarily and which give definite form to certain psychic contents.

Jung linked the collective unconscious to ‘what Freud called “archaic remnants” – mental forms whose presence cannot be explained by anything in the individual’s own life and which seem to be aboriginal, innate, and inherited shapes of the human mind’.

Archetypes and collective representations
Jung considered that ‘the shadow‘ and the anima/animus differ from the other archetypes in the fact that their content is more directly related to the individual’s personal situation’, and less to the collective unconscious: by contrast, ‘the collective unconscious is personified as a Wise Old Man’.

Jung also made reference to contents of this category of the unconscious psyche as being similar to Levy-Bruhl’s use of collective representations or “représentations collectives,” Mythological “motifs,” Hubert and Mauss’s “categories of the imagination,” and Adolf Bastian’s “primordial thoughts.”

A iceberg is a good analogy for the difference between the individual unconscious and the collective unconscious. The "tip of the iceberg" above the surface of the water is the individual consciousness, which is full aware. The ice which is underwater is the individuals unconscious. But what really is interesting: All icebergs float in the same ocean. The ocean water is the collective unconscious.

Minimal/maximal interpretations
In a minimalist interpretation (or materialistic interpretation) of what would then appear as ‘Jung’s much misunderstood idea of the collective unconscious’, his idea was ‘simply that certain structures and predispositions of the unconscious are common to all of us…[on] an inherited, species-specific, genetic basis’. Thus ‘one could as easily speak of the “collective arm” – meaning the basic pattern of bones and muscles which all human arms share in common’.

Others point out however that ‘there does seem to be a basic ambiguity in Jung’s various descriptions of the Collective Unconscious. Sometimes he seems to regard the predisposition to experience certain images as understandable in terms of some genetic model’ – as with the collective arm. However, Jung was ‘also at pains to stress the numinous quality of these experiences, and there can be no doubt that he was attracted to the idea that the archetypes afford evidence of some communion with some divine or world mind‘ (idealistic interpretation), and perhaps ‘his popularity as a thinker derives precisely from this’ – the maximal interpretation.

Marie-Louise von Franz accepted that ‘it is naturally very tempting to identify the hypothesis of the collective unconscious historically and regressively with the ancient idea of an all-extensive world-soul’.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

What is Alternative Science?

Every 3 or 4 years I get the urgent need to delete all the posts of my blogs and start over again. Why? Because something changed inside me, I got a new paradigm, acquired a new worldview. When this happens I cannot continue to write my posts on the base of the old ones. Therefore I have deleted them all and I desire to write new articles with a more holistic approach than before.

Let me first clarify what “Alternative Science” means to me:
People do a lot of things for money and personal power. This whole system in which we live is based on materialism and this has a profound effect on the worldview. Scientists cannot express their ideas if they are not based on materialism, they cannot get money for research if they presents their scientific research proposal based on something else than materialism. So “Alternative Science” is that kind of science which is not based on materialism, but on idealism, on the idea that consciousness is the base of everything and not matter. This time I have enabled the comment function in this blog. Please feel free to register and write your comments. Naturally I will moderate all comments first, because some pseudoskeptics will react allergic on the “idealistic content”. Please pseudoskeptics, stay away, we don’t need you!

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,