IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
naimisharanya said:
Sorry about the English. I tend to not hold back.
"Are you saying that we have scientific reasons to consider that a creator made our universe? If so, I'll not look the other way. I'm not ignorant."
There certainly is no emperical evidence for a grand Creator. I was building a theology of the soul on the fact that we have no (really nothing) understanding of consciousness, and a good model for explaining it exists already.
You see, certain classes of learned men aren't so interested in emperic proof. I give you a striking example - mathematicians. They don't want to measure anything. Sure, the have something called a "formal proof", but overall they are obsessed with the self-consistency of a particular set of truths.
I aimed to show that there are theologies that are in-depth, advanced, ancient and have also been accepted by western intellectual giants as being thoroughly significant.
I can gather from your writing ethos that you're not arrogant or ignorant.
|
Well, generally I do demand empirical evidence when it comes to my beliefs. But if something seems logical only through a non-empirical perspective I neither can nor should blame anyone (including myself) for believing that it is true. And ignoring your actual beliefs (i.e. living in denial) is certainly not a good thing.
I'll have to look up more about these non-empirical explanations of the consciousness. Seems interesting indeed.
|
When one considers it properly, then it may dawn on one that consciousness is constitutionally a subjective experience. Therefore, these empirical methods which are per definition objective, become (at least to a certain extent) obsolete.
I could prescribe an analytical test for you (serious). It may involve some naturally grown fungus (which may be illegal), and an open mindset, but it will (medically speaking) be totally safe. I guarantee you a deeper insight into this problem from there.
