5. gunnerwitharubber 6.) cmsirola@yahoo.com 7.) http://thetruf@blogspot.com 8.) no 9.) no 10.) place all postings
11.) randall has comprised an equation in the rs 1 model for proof of the 5 dimensional geo plane, but her real reason for theoretically venturing into the realm of the unknown goes with her gut; she feels the only way to accurately describe the reason for weak gravitational pulls and such is due to the matter that there must be alternate realities to the one we are currently in; it would explain many mathematical improbabilities and would make it the "holy sanctuary" of physics.
12.) pythagorus, much more of a renaissance man than a philosopher, held steadfast to many of his philosophical views (most of which are surprisingly buddhist, if not all) and comprise many extraordinary ideas that were practically revolutionary in his time. pythagoras (or as us philosophical gangsters like to call him, p. thagg) is renowned for the triangle, and his philosophical beliefs mimic his mathematical ones. purely in search of inteligent scientific knowledge to backup his mystical and somewhat spiritual reasonings, his ideas go all over - from music to arts, to religion to science, to philosophy. the most important however are his beliefs in a.) reincarnation and b.) balance- both of which are the fundamental laws of buddhism, science, and philosophy- something that was alien to the greeks of the time. indeed even socrates seems more like an arrogant fool while p thagg was more of the humble student of life- seeing patterns , mystical signs and beauty in everyday life.
12.) can religion and science coexist?
religion and science has been put together for thousands of years, without fail, and recent technological advances have only strengthened the bond between the two. I am, of course, speaking of Buddhism. It is the only religion, to my knowledge (excluding more recent new age and rastafari and scientology stuff) that has consistently held steadfast to whatever is TRUE- because that is the goal of buddhism, to uncover the truth. many people feel that religion and science are gladiators duking it out in the global arena, but that is because these "people" tend to be of western decent, and so tend to have a very narrow-minded thought stream. few people realize what the religion of buddhism is about- even though many people practice and understand its fundamental concepts on a daily basis. recently, eastern and western ideas have come together, permeating the old ways and changing the way we think.
recently arthur versluis, in a new book american transcendentalism and Asian Religions (1993) pieced five or six major historical views on this subject, and presented this by way of conclusion:
However much people today realize it, the encounter of Oriental and Occidental religious and philosophical traditions, of Buddhist and Christian and Hindu and Islamic perspectives, must be regarded as one of the most extraordinary meetings of our age. . . . Arnold Toynbee once wrote that of all the historical changes in the West, the most important—and the one whose effects have been least understood—is the meeting of Buddhism in the Occident. . . . And when and if our era is considered in light of larger societal patterns and movements, there can be no doubt that the meeting of East and West, the mingling of the most ancient traditions in the modern world, will form a much larger part of history than we today with our political-economic emphases, may think.
ssssss
Strangely enough, people still revert to the old monotheistic religions as an overbearing, overgeneralization of religion- giving the whole aspect of spiritual growth a very bad name. Since missionaries of Buddhism brought their newfound religion to the west, they proclaimed the basic ideals of their "religion" , speaking of it in a way that those tired of the old judeo-christian religions were:
1) Buddhism did not assert or depend upon the existence of a God
2) Buddhism was a superstition-free moral ideal; it conformed to the scientific view of an ordered universe ruled by law (Dharma)—a system both moral and physical where everything seemed to work itself out inexorably over vast periods of time without divine intervention (karma)
3) Buddhism posited no belief in gods who could alter the workings of this natural law
4) Buddhism was a religion of self-help with all depending on the individual working out his/her own salvation
5) "Original" Buddhism was seen as the "Protestantism of Asia," and Buddha as another Luther who swept away the superstitions and rituals of an older, corrupted form and took religion back to its pure and simple origins
6) Buddhism presented an attractive personal founder who led life of great self-sacrifice; parallels were drawn between Jesus and Buddha as the inspiration of a personal figure exerted strong appeal to seekers who had given up on theology and metaphysics.
Thus, Buddhism was packaged and presented in its most favorable light viz a viz the current spiritual crisis in the West; and, not surprisingly, Buddhism seemed immensely reasonable and appealing to Americans. Darwinism might be undermining Biblical Christianity, but it only enhanced Buddhism's standing.
-http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/Buddhism/VerhoevenBuddhismScience.htmWith the advent of darwinism, everything seemed to be undergoing the process of change- evolution, as one would call it; things either get better, or they die off. and this is the fundamental belief in buddhism, as well- either we advance ourselves spiritually and become better people because of it- or we fall through the ranks of reincarnation, realizing that at the bottom levels of life we have failed to do the simple most job we were put here to do: alieviate the suffering so profound in this world. Buddhism brings together the holy with the moly, it is the bridge between what is real and what is known to be real; it is the link between the truth and "the truf"- if you can feel me. If you can't, know this: religion and science can coexist: it just depends on who's doing the coexisting.
14.) Socrates was charged for impurifying pure minds (havent we heard that before) and for his complete disconnection with athens in its time of need (the reign of the thirty tyrants). He was accused mostly, however, for his political views; nothing to do with his brainy philosophical quotes and his eccentric ideas; it was his politics that did him in. Socrates defended his position with a three hour tirade that left no stinging sense of apology or plead- nothing to soften the heart of the jury that convicted him (as was the common policy at the time). Socrates may have induced his own death- commiting suicide when he could have easily spoke sugar and spice, winning an audience over to his favor. Socrates chose death apparently as a way to convey his last and final message; a true martyr for free speech, in the tradition of jesus christ and the like.
No comments:
Post a Comment