Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Spirituality & Beliefs > Science & Spirituality

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 21-02-2014, 04:43 PM
cydonia1978 cydonia1978 is offline
Pathfinder
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 78
  cydonia1978's Avatar
Sammy - lol! I did word things a little funny, didn't I? I think I was overtired last night. :)

livingkarma - You are very right about how we personally evolve. I should probably read some of those philosophers and such, I'm sure it's fascinating to see how they changed over the years. :)
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 21-02-2014, 05:14 PM
Sammy Sammy is offline
Ascender
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 744
  Sammy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by cydonia1978
Sammy - lol! I did word things a little funny, didn't I? I think I was overtired last night. :)

livingkarma - You are very right about how we personally evolve. I should probably read some of those philosophers and such, I'm sure it's fascinating to see how they changed over the years. :)

No worries HAHA! I found the phrasing amusing.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 21-02-2014, 06:22 PM
livingkarma
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cydonia1978
livingkarma - You are very right about how we personally evolve. I should probably read some of those philosophers and such, I'm sure it's fascinating to see how they changed over the years. :)

You'll get a kick out of it!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 22-02-2014, 11:16 PM
no1wakesup no1wakesup is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 298
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cydonia1978
Hi everyone :)

I'm excited to poke through this particular section of this forum to see what everyone has been discussing on this topic! I've been in a kind of spiritual hibernation for the past while and during that time I allowed my "logical" mind to get involved more in the science-based world. I love science and technology.. I also love proof. It was hard for me when I was in my 20's as I felt like I was being split between my spiritual mind - which wanted to just believe, trust, and be - and my logical mind - which wanted proof, facts, evidence.

Now that I'm coming out of my hibernation I find so many people either give up on science or they give up on spirituality. I think there must be a balance! I trust peer-reviewed scientific articles but I also trust in the unseen, spiritual world.

I'm not sure I have a question specifically here, I just wanted to say it's really great to see this topic in this forum and to see other spiritual people exploring the scientific side too. It's very refreshing.

We attempt to measure the ground of being when there are no “parts” to it. This spirit or consciousness is a quality which includes the observation process when science attempts to quantify this or that. So the source keeps pointing to itself and that which is measuring ffails to see that it is the ground of being, that it is the universe. It is this ground of reality, this spirit if you will, which is primary within and by which all manifest. Yet a mind only interested in absolutes will only miss the mark. Its a tangible posture assuming to find a measurable target to establish a time bounded event. As such, this expression of “physicist” or “scientist” etc.. identified as individual in his or her conditioned experience will only find like results to substantiate its own view and conditioning of the world. Quantum physics and the un manifested/manifested world of atoms, quarks and bosons can only attempt to define it and so we go about it like a wave seeking out the ocean it unfolds from. It is not a separate event. Yet it is that pull to seek which comes from the notion that you already are. Whether through science or any other means conceptually, from that notion, one formulates and filters the belief that there is something to find. You can add to that view for ever and different “results” will come of course.

Now of course science has reached a precipice defined as being stumped, which will not allow further reason or measurements. Its a funny stalemate of sorts which refuses any further negotiating in the continuity, in any degree, relating to a measurable and therefore pliable determination

To understand it is to lose all understanding. To gain it is to realize it was never there to harness. And to see truly would be to see without someone there believing it as a me in a subjective event.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 24-02-2014, 11:51 AM
Ummon
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cydonia1978
"What the Bleep Do We Know"

Scientists who have reviewed What the Bleep Do We Know!? have described distinct assertions made in the film as pseudoscience.[12][13] Lisa Randall refers to the film as "the bane of scientists".[14] Amongst the assertions in the film that have been challenged are that water molecules can be influenced by thought (as popularized by Masaru Emoto), that meditation can reduce violent crime rates,[15] and that quantum physics implies that "consciousness is the ground of all being." The film was also discussed in a letter published in Physics Today that challenges how physics is taught, saying teaching fails to "expose the mysteries physics has encountered [and] reveal the limits of our understanding". In the letter, the authors write: "the movie illustrates the uncertainty principle with a bouncing basketball being in several places at once. There's nothing wrong with that. It's recognized as pedagogical exaggeration. But the movie gradually moves to quantum 'insights' that lead a woman to toss away her antidepressant medication, to the quantum channeling of Ramtha, the 35,000-year-old Lemurian warrior, and on to even greater nonsense." It went on to say that "Most laypeople cannot tell where the quantum physics ends and the quantum nonsense begins, and many are susceptible to being misguided," and that "a physics student may be unable to convincingly confront unjustified extrapolations of quantum mechanics," a shortcoming which the authors attribute to the current teaching of quantum mechanics, in which "we tacitly deny the mysteries physics has encountered".[12]
Richard Dawkins stated that "the authors seem undecided whether their theme is quantum theory or consciousness. Both are indeed mysterious, and their genuine mystery needs none of the hype with which this film relentlessly and noisily belabours us", concluding that the film is "tosh". Professor Clive Greated wrote that "thinking on neurology and addiction are covered in some detail but, unfortunately, early references in the film to quantum physics are not followed through, leading to a confused message". Despite his caveats, he recommends that people see the movie, stating: "I hope it develops into a cult movie in the UK as it has in the US. Science and engineering are important for our future, and anything that engages the public can only be a good thing." Simon Singh called it pseudoscience and said the suggestion "that if observing water changes its molecular structure, and if we are 90% water, then by observing ourselves we can change at a fundamental level via the laws of quantum physics" was "ridiculous balderdash". According to João Magueijo, professor in theoretical physics at Imperial College, the film deliberately misquotes science.[13] The American Chemical Society's review criticizes the film as a "pseudoscientific docudrama", saying "Among the more outlandish assertions are that people can travel backward in time, and that matter is actually thought."[15]
Bernie Hobbs, a science writer with ABC Science Online, explains why the movie is wrong about quantum physics and reality: "The observer effect of quantum physics isn't about people or reality. It comes from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, and it's about the limitations of trying to measure the position and momentum of subatomic particles... this only applies to sub-atomic particles—a rock doesn't need you to bump into it to exist. It's there. The sub-atomic particles that make up the atoms that make up the rock are there too." Hobbs also discusses Hagelin's experiment with Transcendental Meditation and the Washington DC rate of violent crime, saying that "the number of murders actually went up". Hobbs also disputed the film's use of the ten percent myth.[16]
David Albert, a philosopher of physics who appears in the film, has accused the filmmakers of selectively editing his interview to make it appear that he endorses the film's thesis that quantum mechanics is linked with consciousness. He says he is "profoundly unsympathetic to attempts at linking quantum mechanics with consciousness".[17] These issues relate to the so-called Quantum mind-body problem.
In the film, during a discussion of the influence of experience on perception, Candace Pert notes a story, which she says she believes is true, of Native Americans being unable to see Columbus's ships because they were outside their experience. According to an article in Fortean Times by David Hambling, the origins of this story likely involved the voyages of Captain James Cook, not Columbus, and an account related by Robert Hughes which said Cook's ships were "...complex and unfamiliar as to defy the natives' understanding". Hambling says it is likely that both the Hughes account and the story told by Pert were exaggerations of the records left by Captain Cook and the botanist Joseph Banks. Historians believe the Native Americans likely saw the ships but ignored them as posing no immediate danger.[18]
Skeptic James Randi described the film as "a fantasy docudrama" and "[a] rampant example of abuse by charlatans and cults".[19] Eric Scerri in a review for Committee for Skeptical Inquiry dismisses it as "a hodgepodge of all kinds of crackpot nonsense," where "science [is] distorted and sensationalized".[20] A BBC reviewer described it as "a documentary aimed at the totally gullible".[21]
According to Margaret Wertheim, "History abounds with religious enthusiasts who have read spiritual portent into the arrangement of the planets, the vacuum of space, electromagnetic waves and the big bang. But no scientific discovery has proved so ripe for spiritual projection as the theories of quantum physics, replete with their quixotic qualities of uncertainty, simultaneity and parallelism." Wertheim continues that the movie "abandons itself entirely to the ecstasies of quantum mysticism, finding in this aleatory description of nature the key to spiritual transformation. As one of the film’s characters gushes early in the proceedings, 'The moment we acknowledge the quantum self, we say that somebody has become enlightened'. A moment in which 'the mathematical formalisms of quantum mechanics [...] are stripped of all empirical content and reduced to a set of syrupy nostrums'."[22]
Journalist John Gorenfeld, writing in Salon, notes that the film's three directors are students of Ramtha's School of Enlightenment, which he says has been described as a cult.[17]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_th...demic_reaction
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 24-02-2014, 01:13 PM
Miss Hepburn Miss Hepburn is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Southwest, USA
Posts: 24,948
  Miss Hepburn's Avatar
I love science, too.
But, what I love MORE is direct experience in stillness within me sitting
for hours in meditation.
Instinct, blind faith? No.
Direct, personal experience is what is for me...it will take a while for science to
catch up...why, they don't even know scientifically why acupunture works!
Or how my fingernails grow while I sleep or what is "it" that leaves my body,
turning it cold?
They just can't get small enuff to see the unseen with instruments...
Our best instrument is the receiver in our own heads to pick up spiritual vibrations or
frequencies and to glimpse and visit the Other Side with our own inner vision.

Science is wonderful, but limited.
__________________

.
*I'll text in Navy Blue when I'm speaking as a Mod. :)


Prepare yourself for the coming astral journey of death by daily riding in the balloon of God-perception.
Through delusion you are perceiving yourself as a bundle of flesh and bones, which at best is a nest of troubles.
Meditate unceasingly, that you may quickly behold yourself as the Infinite Essence, free from every form of misery. ~Paramahansa's Guru's Guru
.


Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 24-02-2014, 02:08 PM
cydonia1978 cydonia1978 is offline
Pathfinder
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 78
  cydonia1978's Avatar
There's a distinction in my mind that the 3D, linear-type stuff of the world that can be measured and tested by science is one thing.. and the unseen-world of spirit that can only be understood through us personally is another. Sometimes it sounds like one may be trying to understand the other, but in my mind they are separate for good reasons.

While I'd love science to prove my guide is with me by "measuring" energy somehow or whatever, that's not what science is meant for and I can "prove" it to myself well enough. But if I come across something that is more related to the physical world - ie: determining which ingredients work together to produce better versions of Advil.. then I'll leave that to science, as that's what their tools are designed for.

I'm curious to see if scientific exploration of quantum mechanics will start to provide answers that blur the lines, but who knows. :)

Ummon - That is quite the write up on that movie!! Thanks. I never really thought about that movie so literally before.. I guess I viewed it more as an intriguing journey, not exactly reality. But sad to see so much of it is so readily written off either way. There were some interesting paths in it, though I definitely wouldn't condone anyone giving up on medicine they needed to be well just because they spiritually feel they can deal with it. The two ways of dealing with illness need to work in harmony, not separately. And while I thought the water-energy thing was remarkable, and I thought that one was proven (oops), it's too close to homeopathy for my tastes anyway.. and from what I've read about the process of homeopathy, it's pretty laughable (water having "memory" of medicine? Yeah, I guess water being affected by emotion is just as silly).
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 24-02-2014, 03:51 PM
Kpastelle
Posts: n/a
 
spirituality without science is ignorant

Science without spirituality is blind

Balance the two and you get harmony
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 24-02-2014, 05:44 PM
cydonia1978 cydonia1978 is offline
Pathfinder
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 78
  cydonia1978's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kpastelle
spirituality without science is ignorant

Science without spirituality is blind

Balance the two and you get harmony

I'm too used to Facebook.. I keep wanting to "Like" posts. lol! I like this, it's short and sweet.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 26-02-2014, 03:43 PM
MuadDib MuadDib is offline
Knower
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: CZ, Europe
Posts: 104
  MuadDib's Avatar
Thumbs up Agreement, vote 50:50 so

Hi Cydonia, good to hear you... I started in opposite way a little, amazed by science/technology in previous century and continued with more spiritual point of view in recent years. I can admit, there is missing regular "interdisciplinary" science in this area, so attempt to keep both aspects in harmony and exploring of every finding from both sides can be hard...

I can see glitches on both sides so after initial enthusiasm about mysticism comeback, I'll vote 50:50 for both. Many believers aren't aware of science even, but more scientists learned from alchemists greatly. I noticed raising number of premature scientific revealing in recent years (with the only purpose to be first and ensure grant), and e.g. raising number of "2012 like" predictions too, what both look very optimistic but confusing a little.

Wondering if I'm allowed to show a couple of positive examples to dispel fog from recent threads here as - supervolcano related findings look rather very optimistic in recent years (commenting Extinction thread), ORMUS shouldn't be taken as Holy Grail (in world full of nanotechnologies), and in turn, quantum mind enthusiasm (of Mr.Penrose) should be cooled a little, because paranormal things still can't be explained this easy way.

And what about MerKaBa and fractals (software)? Both sacred geometry...
Apologizing for more possibly controversial points here...
...but details can follow. Peace.

Nice day for all
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums