Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Philosophy and Religion > Philosophy

Philosophy For discussion about general and fundamental problems connected with reality, existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language


Thanks Tree3Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 10th, 2018, 09:41 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,790
gibberish

I am labeling this gibberish because my thought doesn't make sense to me but maybe someone can make sense out of it?

Long ago a read a book about how cultures limit our consciousness and different cultures can have a very different perception of reality. The most obvious would be a culture that makes cannibalism taboo versus a culture that associates cannibalism with a religious/spirit rite. The point is I am always looking for what may lie outside of my cultural consciousness.

Math is abstract, right? We can think of reality being multidimensional but we should not use the word "God". However, the Hindu pantheism is pretty multi-dimensional. I think democracy requires a plurality such as a reality from the points of view of many gods, and that black or white, true or false thinking, makes democracy dysfunctional and limits our understanding of reality. This gibberish involves an understanding of math.

Quote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namagiri_Thayar
Namagiri and Srinivasa Ramanujan
Srinivasa Ramanujan credits his mathematical findings to the Goddess of Namagiri. According to Ramanujan, she appeared to him in visions, proposing mathematical formulae that he would then have to verify. One such event was described by him as follows:

While asleep, I had an unusual experience. There was a red screen formed by flowing blood, as it were. I was observing it. Suddenly a hand began to write on the screen. I became all attention. That hand wrote a number of elliptic integrals. They stuck to my mind. As soon as I woke up, I committed them to writing.[2]

Furthermore, Ramanujan's mother received permission from Namagiri Amman for Ramanujan to go to England in a dream.[3
Einstien expresses the same notion in another way..

Quote:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...ic-imagination
For Einstein, insight did not come from logic or mathematics. It came, as it does for artists, from intuition and inspiration. As he told one friend, "When I examine myself and my methods of thought, I come close to the conclusion that the gift of imagination has meant more to me than any talent for absorbing absolute knowledge." Elaborating, he added, "All great achievements of science must start from intuitive knowledge. I believe in intuition and inspiration.... At times I feel certain I am right while not knowing the reason." Thus, his famous statement that, for creative work in science, "Imagination is more important than knowledge" (Calaprice, 2000, 22, 287, 10).
Having many gods surely increases our imagination and perhaps this has something to do with the blooming of intelligence? Whereas one God can dimish our intelligence and no God could result in a mechanical society that would atrophy.
Thanks from Twisted Sister
Athena is offline  
Old April 10th, 2018, 02:36 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NM
Posts: 1,855
Linguistics was a long time ago

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis? It's still in play, as far as I know. It's available online, free, @ Sapir Whorf Hypothesis | Sean O'Neill - Academia.edu -- a PDF file.

Yah, networks are defined by their nodes - the more nodes, the more complexity (connectivity) is possible. & in humans, neural nets seem to have optimum windows of opportunity - thus, most children learn language best early on, even if their production of language is deficient @ first. But a child who is never exposed to language has a very difficult time - the brain is apparently primed for certain stages in a fairly deterministic way - if the first steps are delayed or never arrive, it's apparently very difficult to bootstrap the brain (the network) past that point to try to catch up to the normal developmental curve.
hoosier88 is offline  
Old April 12th, 2018, 08:44 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier88 View Post
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis? It's still in play, as far as I know. It's available online, free, @ Sapir Whorf Hypothesis | Sean O'Neill - Academia.edu -- a PDF file.

Yah, networks are defined by their nodes - the more nodes, the more complexity (connectivity) is possible. & in humans, neural nets seem to have optimum windows of opportunity - thus, most children learn language best early on, even if their production of language is deficient @ first. But a child who is never exposed to language has a very difficult time - the brain is apparently primed for certain stages in a fairly deterministic way - if the first steps are delayed or never arrive, it's apparently very difficult to bootstrap the brain (the network) past that point to try to catch up to the normal developmental curve.
Let me see if I can work with what you said. Can we consider each god or each branch of science a node? It is my understanding the specialization of the sciences has lead to separate but unconnected nodes, and this has put the brakes on new discoveries. That when the sciences work together this stimulates the growth of the knowledge.

Now when it comes to math and the notion of multiple dimensions, what is happening here? Science is based on observation but we do not observe more than three dimensions and neither do we experience/observe God. Both math and theology might have an element of superstition?

I hope you can reply again because this train of thought is moving into the unknown and can possibly make the unknown know? That is gibberish, thought without identifiable form. But when you speak of nodes and connections things start making sense.
Athena is offline  
Old April 12th, 2018, 10:27 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NM
Posts: 1,855
The map is not the territory

Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
Let me see if I can work with what you said. Can we consider each god or each branch of science a node? It is my understanding the specialization of the sciences has lead to separate but unconnected nodes, and this has put the brakes on new discoveries. That when the sciences work together this stimulates the growth of the knowledge.

Now when it comes to math and the notion of multiple dimensions, what is happening here? Science is based on observation but we do not observe more than three dimensions and neither do we experience/observe God. Both math and theology might have an element of superstition?

I hope you can reply again because this train of thought is moving into the unknown and can possibly make the unknown know? That is gibberish, thought without identifiable form. But when you speak of nodes and connections things start making sense.
Hindus might treat each god in their pantheon as a node of consciousness although Im not sure (as a non-Hindu) about that conclusion. Wed really have to consult a Hindu on the topic. With branches of science, Im on firmer ground. Yah, each branch can be considered a node but understand that they all tie back to rationality, & are self-consistent within a broad frame of logic. Yes, I think the US view of science/technology tends to fragment the field but thats a result of an emphasis on the pragmatic (stuff we can use right now to fix this problem) approach we typically take.

The classical Western Civilization education syllabus approach was much more organic, although it tended to consider theology as the greatest of the sciences. Weve rearranged the furniture somewhat on that post-Christendom & all. The leading edges of scientists & thinkers Einstein, Hawking, Oppenheimer could fall back on the organic structure of science & human scientific/technological history they didnt have to do everything themselves.

The question of dimensions beyond the usual three + time? I think thats an outgrowth of particle physics going back to the 1920s CE. The maths have gotten very subtle, to deal with an enormous span of size & energy. Just now, a lot of the math/physics innovation is coming out of CERN, the high-energy physics center in Europe. We could have built a counterpart in the US, but Congress pled budget issues, & the political timing was unfortunate. Theres a discussion of Superstring theory, which apparently calls for 11 dimensions, @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension - under Additional dimensions. Its a tough slog, though. Ive seen lots of discussion & inclusions of additional dimensions in SF but its still a hard read.

Thought without form? That echoes The Wasteland - & its very hard to do. A favorite quote: I don't speak, I operate a machine called language. It creaks and groans, but is mine own. ― Frank Herbert, Dune Messiah

Once you put a thought into language, thought has to submit to the vagaries of language. If we could somehow forget language, & go directly to thought What might we achieve?
Thanks from imaginethat
hoosier88 is offline  
Old April 12th, 2018, 02:25 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 60,061
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier88 View Post
~snip~

Once you put a thought into language, thought has to submit to the vagaries of language. If we could somehow forget language, & go directly to thought What might we achieve?
'Tis something to ponder.

"For truly I tell you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, Move from here to there, and it will move; and nothing will be impossible for you.
imaginethat is offline  
Old April 12th, 2018, 02:44 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Twisted Sister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Brown Township, Ohio
Posts: 11,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
I am labeling this gibberish because my thought doesn't make sense to me but maybe someone can make sense out of it?

Long ago a read a book about how cultures limit our consciousness and different cultures can have a very different perception of reality. The most obvious would be a culture that makes cannibalism taboo versus a culture that associates cannibalism with a religious/spirit rite. The point is I am always looking for what may lie outside of my cultural consciousness.

Math is abstract, right? We can think of reality being multidimensional but we should not use the word "God". However, the Hindu pantheism is pretty multi-dimensional. I think democracy requires a plurality such as a reality from the points of view of many gods, and that black or white, true or false thinking, makes democracy dysfunctional and limits our understanding of reality. This gibberish involves an understanding of math.



Einstien expresses the same notion in another way..



Having many gods surely increases our imagination and perhaps this has something to do with the blooming of intelligence? Whereas one God can dimish our intelligence and no God could result in a mechanical society that would atrophy.
Think outside the box as Einstein did. Thinking outside the box comes easy to me because I reject authority.
Twisted Sister is offline  
Old April 13th, 2018, 08:43 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier88 View Post
Hindus might treat each god in their pantheon as a node of consciousness – although I’m not sure (as a non-Hindu) about that conclusion. We’d really have to consult a Hindu on the topic. With branches of science, I’m on firmer ground. Yah, each branch can be considered a node – but understand that they all tie back to rationality, & are self-consistent within a broad frame of logic. Yes, I think the US view of science/technology tends to fragment the field – but that’s a result of an emphasis on the pragmatic (stuff we can use right now to fix this problem) approach we typically take.

The classical – Western Civilization education syllabus – approach was much more organic, although it tended to consider theology as the greatest of the sciences. We’ve rearranged the furniture somewhat on that – post-Christendom & all. The leading edges of scientists & thinkers – Einstein, Hawking, Oppenheimer – could fall back on the organic structure of science & human scientific/technological history – they didn’t have to do everything themselves.

The question of dimensions beyond the usual three + time? I think that’s an outgrowth of particle physics – going back to the 1920s CE. The maths have gotten very subtle, to deal with an enormous span of size & energy. Just now, a lot of the math/physics innovation is coming out of CERN, the high-energy physics center in Europe. We could have built a counterpart in the US, but Congress pled budget issues, & the political timing was unfortunate. There’s a discussion of Superstring theory, which apparently calls for 11 dimensions, @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension - under Additional dimensions. It’s a tough slog, though. I’ve seen lots of discussion & inclusions of additional dimensions in SF – but it’s still a hard read.

Thought without form? That echoes The Wasteland - & it’s very hard to do. A favorite quote: “I don't speak, I operate a machine called language. It creaks and groans, but is mine own.” ― Frank Herbert, Dune Messiah

Once you put a thought into language, thought has to submit to the vagaries of language. If we could somehow forget language, & go directly to thought – What might we achieve?
Hot damn! That is it! I am calling my thinking gibberish because so much of my thinking does not yet have form. I feel like I took a big risk posting the OP because I did so without words for what I was thinking, and hoping someone would give me the words. You are doing that.

When it comes to my theory of having multiple gods, I was thinking about why, in the past, some thought Athenians to be a race of geniuses. Civilizations at that time had pantheons and not all of them developed in the direction of science as the thinking of Athens did. However, Hinduism may have been better for developing in the field of math?

I believe there is an important east/ west difference with the west being more materialistic and pragmatic. Many books have said eastern philosophy goes with quantum physics better than western philosophy. Might this be do to language differences? Such as a language that favors thinking of life as action versus thinking of life in nouns?

Mayan concepts seeming to share more with Chinese thinking than western culture. Jose Arguelles' book "The Mayan Factor Path Beyond Technology" stretches our thinking beyond our cultural limits. While this book seems to indicate Athens may have had a more eastern take on life than the materialism that seems the stronger focus of Rome. Are we thinking of the power of three, the trinity, or the quantity of three? Religiously this really matters!


Quote:
https://www.harpercollins.com/978006...g-the-universe
The Universe May Be a Mystery,
But It's No Secret
Michael Schneider leads us on a spectacular, lavishly illustrated journey along the numbers one through ten to explore the mathematical principles made visible in flowers, shells, crystals, plants, and the human body, expressed in the symbolic language of folk sayings and fairy tales, myth and religion, art and architecture. This is a new view of mathematics, not the one we learned at school but a comprehensive guide to the patterns that recur through the universe and underlie human affairs. A Beginner's Guide to Constructing, the Universe shows you:

Why cans, pizza, and manhole covers are round.
Why one and two weren't considered numbers by the ancient Greeks.
Why squares show up so often in goddess art and board games.
What property makes the spiral the most widespread shape in nature, from embryos and hair curls to hurricanes and galaxies.
How the human body shares the design of a bean plant and the solar system.
How a snowflake is like Stonehenge, and a beehive like a calendar.
How our ten fingers hold the secrets of both a lobster and a cathedral.

Last edited by Athena; April 13th, 2018 at 08:49 AM.
Athena is offline  
Old April 13th, 2018, 09:00 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twisted Sister View Post
Think outside the box as Einstein did. Thinking outside the box comes easy to me because I reject authority.
Okay, but perhaps my thinking will test your willingness to think outside of the box. I have read books most people don't touch. My understanding is too board and not the level of comprehension I wish I had. I love it when someone like Hoosier comes up and explains what I am trying to understand. I hate it when someone insults my curiosity in things like trying to understanding the ancient concepts of life and Mayan concepts or Taoism.

Questioning authority is being iconoclastic. I love it.

Last edited by Athena; April 13th, 2018 at 09:03 AM.
Athena is offline  
Old April 13th, 2018, 09:30 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NM
Posts: 1,855
One, some, many, infinity?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
...

When it comes to my theory of having multiple gods, I was thinking about why, in the past, some thought Athenians to be a race of geniuses. Civilizations at that time had pantheons and not all of them developed in the direction of science as the thinking of Athens did. However, Hinduism may have been better for developing in the field of math?

I believe there is an important east/ west difference with the west being more materialistic and pragmatic. Many books have said eastern philosophy goes with quantum physics better than western philosophy. Might this be do to language differences? Such as a language that favors thinking of life as action versus thinking of life in nouns?

...
Yah, I still have to look @ Greece & Athens & Sparta. I picked up one book, but it's massively comprehensive. Next up is something a little less ambitious in terms of ancient Greece.

Which reminds me - the thinking on Greece & Rome for a long time was that the Greeks were explorers & scientists, philosophers & writers. The Romans, in this view, were administrators & back-office guys - not innovators. There is some justification for that take - wealthy Romans in the Republic & Empire typically had Greek clerks (to write, keep records, do calculations, P&L, etc.) & also Greek advisors on the arts, philosophy, esthetics in general. & as architects, I suppose.

Yah, Asian & India & Native American languages all seem to have a higher tolerance for ambiguity than English as spoken these days. It's a worthwhile topic to look into.
Thanks from Athena
hoosier88 is offline  
Old April 22nd, 2018, 11:08 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier88 View Post
Yah, I still have to look @ Greece & Athens & Sparta. I picked up one book, but it's massively comprehensive. Next up is something a little less ambitious in terms of ancient Greece.

Which reminds me - the thinking on Greece & Rome for a long time was that the Greeks were explorers & scientists, philosophers & writers. The Romans, in this view, were administrators & back-office guys - not innovators. There is some justification for that take - wealthy Romans in the Republic & Empire typically had Greek clerks (to write, keep records, do calculations, P&L, etc.) & also Greek advisors on the arts, philosophy, esthetics in general. & as architects, I suppose.

Yah, Asian & India & Native American languages all seem to have a higher tolerance for ambiguity than English as spoken these days. It's a worthwhile topic to look into.
You are the kind of person who makes the Internet and forums a wonderful thing. How much do I not know and how closed is my mind, because I know only one language and think only with my own brain. I have long known the importance of learning about language, but your last statement has deepened my awareness of how I might improve my understanding of past consciousness by learning a different language. I understand this as an important spiritual matter.

Without tolerance for ambiguity, we must be less tolerant people in general, right? Look at how we argue about what is true and what is false, as though the all things can be divided between true or false. My exposure to Eastern philosophy has given me a degree of immunity to this intolerance of others and what they think. And at the moment I am thinking a wonderful way to spend my day may be to take my book on Eastern philosophy to the gym and enjoy reading it while soaking in the hot tub and lookings specifically for words of wisdom that might help me deal with ambiguity.

I think this is the miracle of democracy. It is the greater intelligence coming out of sharing our thoughts. This is the trinity of you, me and a greater knowledge, greater than either one of us could have if we did not stimulate the thoughts of each other. The ameba can only reproduce itself. Sex is required for reproducing variety and cannot keep things in balance.

Monad
You cannot conceive of the many without the one... The study or the unit is among those that lead the mind on and turn it to the vision of reality". Plato

Dyad (two)
"Everything that originated from the tree of knowledge carries in it duality."
Zohar (mystical Jewish text)

Trinity
"The triad has a special beauty and fairness beyond all numbers, primarily because it is the very first to make actual the potentialities of the Monad."

Iamblichus (c. 250-c. 330, Greek Neoplatonic philosopher.

Rule by one god, one king, one political party will atrophy because they can not reproduce the variety of life, nor keep things in balance.
Athena is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Philosophy and Religion > Philosophy

Tags
gibberish



Thread Tools
Display Modes



Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.