'We are like fish in water, athirst" - I dont remember the author but it relates to the idea that humans are questioning creatures and meaning making machines... it also reminds me of an osho saying about a man who used his lantern to find fuel to cook his rice - had he known what he was looking for, he would have eaten his rice sooner
It's pretty curious that a pure materialist would speak in terms of what we "should" do because it's the "truth." Is truth material, and can the material possess a should?
Fine points on the differences in philosophical discourse in the public and academic domains. Lots of articles have cropped up on the chasm between these domains and the increasing irrelevance of academic philosophy for having no scope of impact, so I think your remarks collectively serve as a helpful reminder to those of us trying to engage in public philosophy.
Is there time or not. Most of science is dependent on time (I think), not so for spirituality. Are humans and other sentient creatures one entity, encapsulated in the gene range expression, manifested to us in "time"...or the manifesting is the time. The speed of light is another sort of time, or is it? Frozen in the moment, the sun does not shine. The superposition must feel eternal. Does God act, and bring in time, or not...and if not, is time in the universe, separate from God. Is God potential or does God act. Language is based on being and moving and is inherently biased. Doing might be only moving, not being...thinking is movement also. Relations and time might be lower down than movement, with movement as potential expressed as being, and for sentient creatures, time emerging swiftly on the heels of this. Our bias, time, so familiar and comforting!
IMO what we call time is the experience of process or change. We then reify the term and imagine it to be a thing in itself. I think that is an error. There is only process & change.
@@david8157 Yes, I think I'm with you on that one. Continuous change in processes (or a process) that form loose affiliations, forming in patterns, breaking apart then reforming. By inventing a clock we give time identity and as you say, imagine it to be a thing in itself, more stable or fixed than it actually is. A useful tool, like seeing the wind by the movement of the trees. Graham Harman speaks of objects and warns of overmining and undermining, that is, simplifying something to relations or using reductionism. If the grand process has objects that move thru periodic and aperiodic patterns, then time could be change, both the space between objects and the "oil" that allows things to happen...kind of a machine analogy (my own, not Harman's). Harman's criticism of seeing reality as all relations, is that there's no change possible, but I think I need to read his books to understand this.
@@projectmalus I dont know the work of Harman so off the top of my head - there is always a disconnect between perception & reality. A solid object such as a rock may appear not to change over time; but closer inspection would reveal changes; eg to the surface due to environmental effects etc; and we know there is constant dynamic activity at the molecular and subatomic levels. Perception and intellect (eg science) give us access to different kinds of reality; and I think it is important to properly estimate and value each. I dont think they can always be reconciled; and this needs to be ok.
![[UNCUT] ที่นี่ที่แรก ปู - หาญส์ พูดถึงมหากาพย์หนี้สิ้น I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ I 10 ก.ค.67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KDNA9DZ0p4U/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you for introducing Pannikkar to myself and whoever else, audio quality notwithstanding.
Gosh sorry about the audio quality. I will use a USB mic from now on!
Looking forward to your dialogue with David Long.
'We are like fish in water, athirst" - I dont remember the author but it relates to the idea that humans are questioning creatures and meaning making machines... it also reminds me of an osho saying about a man who used his lantern to find fuel to cook his rice - had he known what he was looking for, he would have eaten his rice sooner
It's pretty curious that a pure materialist would speak in terms of what we "should" do because it's the "truth." Is truth material, and can the material possess a should?
gnshapiro who you mean is a pure materialist?
Fine points on the differences in philosophical discourse in the public and academic domains. Lots of articles have cropped up on the chasm between these domains and the increasing irrelevance of academic philosophy for having no scope of impact, so I think your remarks collectively serve as a helpful reminder to those of us trying to engage in public philosophy.
you talk up to us (happy daze =) .. he talks down to us .. pontificating NOT exploring .. guess why find this INFURIATING ?
Is there time or not. Most of science is dependent on time (I think), not so for spirituality. Are humans and other sentient creatures one entity, encapsulated in the gene range expression, manifested to us in "time"...or the manifesting is the time. The speed of light is another sort of time, or is it? Frozen in the moment, the sun does not shine. The superposition must feel eternal. Does God act, and bring in time, or not...and if not, is time in the universe, separate from God. Is God potential or does God act. Language is based on being and moving and is inherently biased. Doing might be only moving, not being...thinking is movement also. Relations and time might be lower down than movement, with movement as potential expressed as being, and for sentient creatures, time emerging swiftly on the heels of this. Our bias, time, so familiar and comforting!
Things happen. Time is science's akashic record
IMO what we call time is the experience of process or change. We then reify the term and imagine it to be a thing in itself. I think that is an error. There is only process & change.
@@david8157 Yes, I think I'm with you on that one. Continuous change in processes (or a process) that form loose affiliations, forming in patterns, breaking apart then reforming. By inventing a clock we give time identity and as you say, imagine it to be a thing in itself, more stable or fixed than it actually is. A useful tool, like seeing the wind by the movement of the trees.
Graham Harman speaks of objects and warns of overmining and undermining, that is, simplifying something to relations or using reductionism. If the grand process has objects that move thru periodic and aperiodic patterns, then time could be change, both the space between objects and the "oil" that allows things to happen...kind of a machine analogy (my own, not Harman's). Harman's criticism of seeing reality as all relations, is that there's no change possible, but I think I need to read his books to understand this.
@@projectmalus
I dont know the work of Harman so off the top of my head - there is always a disconnect between perception & reality. A solid object such as a rock may appear not to change over time; but closer inspection would reveal changes; eg to the surface due to environmental effects etc; and we know there is constant dynamic activity at the molecular and subatomic levels. Perception and intellect (eg science) give us access to different kinds of reality; and I think it is important to properly estimate and value each. I dont think they can always be reconciled; and this needs to be ok.
@@david8157 A good answer, thanks.