How long before creation of the self and big bang - coming into existence

[Altair]

Originally Posted by TattieHowker

Psychology isn't a teaching it's a science, regardless of your opinion. Nor is it opinion-based, as all accepted science it's based on verifiable evidence and research.

Which brand of psychology? Neuropsychology is not the same as social psychology...

[inavalan]

As I use these terms, knowledge is acquired intuitively, and it is processed intellectually.

Science, atheism are predominantly intellectual. Religions, spirituality are predominantly intuitional. All distort the underlying reality, then each individual adds their own distortions according to their beliefs and ability to understand.

What we consider "facts" and "experience" is what we perceive only through our physical-senses. That is further filtered and distorted by our conscious and unconscious beliefs (assumptions, respectively truths), and by our intellectual and intuitive abilities that are dependent on our personalities' individual levels of evolvement.

I believe that those who decided to incarnate now, here, under these conditions, did it either from youthful ignorance or to learn humility. Both lead to painful experiences.

[TattieHowker]

Originally Posted by Altair

Which brand of psychology? Neuropsychology is not the same as social psychology...

Take your pick, none of it is based on opinion.

[TattieHowker]

Originally Posted by Altair

So I've noticed. But for me it does not change anything. Science is very different from religion. Believing the sun goes to sleep in the underworld is not the same as observing and measuring what's going on.

In Spirituality people can believe whatever they want to believe for their own agenda, it doesn't even have to make any sense. Even groundless opinions become truth and frankly, Spirituality is an entropic system. With science there's a validation process, essentially, where ideas become facts or are dropped by the wayside.

[Altair]

Originally Posted by TattieHowker

Take your pick, none of it is based on opinion.

But quite a bit is based on Richter scale variables. For example, measuring the degree to which people agree or disagree with X, Y or Z, such as in personality tests. This is largely based on your interpretation (and knowledge) of words, sentences and what memory comes up to you and what you emphasize when the question is asked. It has its uses, it can definitely give insights into one's self, but I'd be careful to call it science.

[TattieHowker]

Originally Posted by Altair

But quite a bit is based on Richter scale variables. For example, measuring the degree to which people agree or disagree with X, Y or Z, such as in personality tests. This is largely based on your interpretation of words, sentences and what memory comes up to you when the question is asked. It has its uses, it can definitely give insights into one's self, but I'd be careful to call it science.

The problem with personality tests is that personalities vary depending on a number of factors, so if you took a Myers-Briggs test right now it's likely that you'd have a different result after you'd won the lottery. Similarly with Richter scale variables, I know that the scale of my agreement or disagreement depends on who I'm talking to about what. I don't think either of those things are set in stone and often areas of science account for the variables too. I can take a Myers-Briggs when I feel grumpy, but after an afternoon with my camera it would give different results. There's still a process of validation regardless though, and it's not based on someone's opinion of themselves. It's what relative reality is all about, it's a response to the changing circumstances we find ourselves in often from moment-to-moment. Like a formula in a spreadsheet, punching in different numbers gives you different results but the formula is constant.

I'd call it science and for the time being, it's often the best we have but there is such a thing as evolution. Sadly, there same old behaviour patterns appear in Spirituality that have been around since a long time ago.

[Altair]

I wouldn't call it a science, because of Richter scale and context dependency (how you interpret, your mood at the time, choices in life, etc.). Questions such as ''do you prefer to be at home in the evening or go out?'' entirely depends with whom and where you go, so there's really not a meaningful way to answer it. I can imagine different scenarios and what springs to mind influences the outcome of the test.

[TattieHowker]

Originally Posted by Altair

I wouldn't call it a science, because of Richter scale and context dependency (how you interpret, your mood at the time, choices in life, etc.). Questions such as ''do you prefer to be at home in the evening or go out?'' entirely depends with whom and where you go, so there's really not a meaningful way to answer it. I can imagine different scenarios and what springs to mind influences the outcome of the test.

The law of gravity is science but it varies according to distance from the earth, so because it has a variable - distance - does that make it any the less of a science? Being on the moon is a different scenario to being on earth. So yes, an individual might give a different answer depending on mood or whatever else but bear in mind that the results will be analysed by large numbers. That means statistics and minor result anomalies due to mood or other factors will be insignificant and the people doing the analysing would be expecting that anyway. The methodology behind it is sound though and gives verifiable results, and if it didn't work people wouldn't use it. The truth is not what they're after, what they want to see are trends.

And is the Richter scale a psychology anyway? It's gathers information based on what answers people give at the time, it doesn't seek to analyse the reasons they give those answers.

[Native spirit]

Please keep the post polite or it will be closed


Namaste

[Miss Hepburn]

What is an entropic system?

''(in cosmology) relating to or characterized by entropy, a hypothetical tendency for the universe
to attain a state of maximum homogeneity:
As entropy grows, the system loses dynamism, to the point that a perfectly entropic universe would
be a smooth and inert field of matter.''