From: Scott Roberts (jse885@localnet.com)
Date: Fri Feb 18 2005 - 17:44:42 GMT
Ron,
Scott said:
I disagree. We know a lot about subatomic activity. What we cannot do is
visualize it. But the mathematics does allow us to make predictions. Of
course the theory may be overthrown and replaced by another, but the
predictive ability we have will not go away, same with relativity
replacing Newton. NASA still uses Newtonian physics to direct its
spacecraft.
Ron said:The thing is, we can't predict the movements of electrons. It is
more a
shell game we are playing with the subatomic particles and waves.
Scott:
We can't fully predict how a human behaves, but we still know a lot about
human beings. The uncertainty principle just tells us that we cannot think
of the universe as absolutely deterministic, but no one really can think
that anyway -- or at least there is no point in so thinking. The thing is,
the subatomic world is very far from being random or chaotic.
Ron said:
Let's just say that Quantum Physics leads us to think a bit closer
toward Eastern philosophy, or what can be termed as spirituality.
Scott said:I agree, but there are many books out there which disagree, so
this
statement can be questioned. Is it a case, for example, that we have
read spiritual meanings into QM only because we are inclined to do so
because of prior leanings toward the spiritual? (Also, there is plenty
of spirituality in Western philosophy as well.)
Ron said:
I don't see religion and spirituality meaning the same thing.
Scott:
?? Who mentioned religion?
Ron said:
The difference between enlightenment and the Christian Mystical
Experience is that you know prior to the experience what you are going
to experience when you are looking for the Virgin Mary. An Enlightened
Mystical Experience is something that comes to you from what I would
call 'Within.'
Scott said:
I would say that saying "Enlightened Mystical Experience is something
that comes to you from what I would call 'Within.'" is just as
misleading as saying it comes from 'without'. In both cases there is a
SOM presupposition: that something gets experienced, for example,
knowledge of "how the world is".
Ron said:
This knowledge simply does not depend on anyone or anything besides
yourself.
Scott:
But the self is a bundle of static patterns of value, according to the MOQ
(I disagree, but that is beside the point at the moment). If one has
actually reached a stage where nothing is going to shape a mystical event,
then one is, I suppose, already a Buddha.
Scott continues;
I also question your characterization of "Christian Mystical Experience"
as if it were all visions. Eckhart, the author of the Cloud of
Unknowing, and the contemporary mystic Bernadette Roberts are all
counter-examples. And of course, visions occur in all other traditions
as well.
Ron:
Bernadette Roberts does not stick to the 'Christian' mystical
experience. If you are speaking in terms of Christianity evolving, I do
believe it will, but hasn't yet to accept this idea of 'No-Self'.
Would you not agree?
Scott:
Yes. But the point I am making is that Christian mysticism, from the point
of view of the Church, is more about the unio mystica than having visions.
By the way, it also looks to me that she also goes past the mysticism of the
MOQ. But that is a matter of interpretation. Recall that her second
"movement" as she calls it, surprised her in that she had thought that her
first was final, and that the first could be described as "experiencing pure
DQ" (though she of course described it as an unio mystica).
- Scott
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 18 2005 - 18:14:21 GMT