Meaning and Conviction

Interesting comparison between the atomic world and our world. I've looked at the atomic theory with some confusion before, simply because it seems (and is!) so completely alien to all we can plainly see. How can a solid concrete wall actually be more than 90% empty space? An entirely different world indeed.

However, the same is true when we look at a large scale- look at the solar system. The world, despite all that we can see, is actually round. How strange! And, despite me clearly seeing the sun set and rise, it is actually the Earth that moves?

Think about this though- we have never seen an atom. No microscope can go that low. So how do we know that protons do not look like glowing energy balls? How do we know that the nucleus actually looks something like, oh, say, the sun? Think about how much empty space is in between the planets, that oddly look much like the electrons in their orbits, just like the empty space in the electron cloud- and think of how much empty space is bewteen solar systems. And oddly enough, despite space being mostly emptiness, if we stand back and look at a galaxy, it looks like it is made mostly of stars, not emptiness. It almost looks solid- much like the objects that are made of the billions of atoms that so resemble the solar systems. Suddenly, the world actually looks very similar on several levels, and things start to make sense. Or maybe I'm crazy?

But I digress from the question at hand. You claim we need philosophical speculation to guide us? How ironic that this is little more than philosophical speculation, and can be so easily ignored as such, proving you both wrong and right at the same time.

You are completely correct in saying that, though. Without philosophical speculation, we will never evolve in our understanding of the universe. Look at the religions of today- mainly Christianity. I see nothing terribly wrong with it, but I do see that it has changed very little over the past two thousand years. Is it ironic that Jesus was a free thinker? He led people into complete dogma to him and what he said, whether he meant to or not! I am not going to speculate on whether Jesus was The Son of God or not, but I will say that he was clearly a free thinking, intelligent person- who brought philosophical speculation to the Jewish church. And he led people to healthy pacifism- though it is clear that some Christians still support killing their enemies if their enemies threaten them, and differ in thought and mind of what Jesus wants them to do.

But do they ever change? There has not been any philosophical speculation on Christianity since Martin Luther. If we don't have any philosophical speculation we will 1. Never convert from a wrong way, and 2. If our way is right, we'll never see why others would think wrongly.

What are the limits and possibilities for human life? Obviously the limits are only as great as they are on the most brilliant and strong humans. All it takes is one genius to enlighten us about something, and it becomes completely mainstream and common knowledge- you can see this in the fact that thanks to Newton, Einstein, Hawking, and plenty of others, that now our fifth graders probably understand the universe better than the ancient Greek philosophers!

Of course, also, we have the negative effects of simply accepting a new theory or speculation as truth, as it could lead us in the opposite direction- but over all, the human race seems to be becoming so intelligent that even the fools among us understand the world like a philosopher and teacher from the ancient world- probably much more so!

Therefore, there are no limits on humanity. If we think in the right direction, we will become brilliant and live forever. And if we do not, we could die off in two hundred years, thanks to our self-destructive nuclear bombs and global warming.

Foley

There are boundaries to human achievement. Humans have lost through evolution a good bit of our former animal instincts and thus we have removed ourself from the standard biological natural selection process. We have the capacity of reason to replace those lost instincts and it is this faculty that we must rely upon for our ability to adapt to the constantly changing world, a world we are primarily responsible for creating. If this new generation coming of age now does not create the intellectual capacity to restructure society quickly I suspect there may not be an opportunuty for future generations to get a shot at it.

You are right in seeing the boundaries, but as I said, the boundaries only exist because we created them. If we limit ourselves through our lack of foresight, then we do indeed have to overcome them, but only because we made a mistake before. And ultimately, if we do overcome it, society will change for the better, as it always does. It is completely our choice as to which direction humanity heads, and for how long. Thus, we truly have no natural boundaries.

Foley

The sciences of psychology, sociology, and psychiatry have carefully mapped human nature and if is from this base that we can determine the capacity of human adaptation and change.

On the other hand, heavy metals in the brain can mess up our psychology completely.

Also, think about this: A man who has an IQ of 160 from ancient Greece would still look like a moron today. Why? Because he alone, no matter how smart he is, cannot come up with all of the ideas that many people have built on top of each others. A man with an IQ 160 today would be vastly superior to one from ancient Greece because he doesn't have to figure out the complex ideas that Plato, Socrates, Euclid, Einstein, Newton, and Hawking did, because he was born into a world where they are public knowledge, so he can start his thinking from the most complex of Hawking's ideas.

And he may come up with the idea of how to make fusion work as an energy source, thus solving our energy problem!

However, in his life, he spent so much time trying to figure that out, that he never made it to the next step- but a man from the next generation does! He figures out how to perpetuate it so that we never need to worry about energy again!

Do you see what I am saying? We can measure our psychological capabilities, but because all of our knowledge stacks, we gradually become better and better! The only limit is how fast people can think up the ideas.

But for mankind as a whole, there is no limit.

Are you speaking for yourself here? Seems to me that this statement only has value on a subjective level. I see myself as a part of "us", but I do not recognize myself in this paragraph. And I know many people who this does not apply to also.

And once again, the "sciences" of psychology, sociology and psychiatry have not mapped anything at all. In fact, the debate on wether or not these branches of human activity deserve to be called science at all is still going strong.

Also, I advise you to check out eastern philosophy. Then you'll find that there are many approaches to understanding and qountering blind habits. The ideas you put forth as new in our western societise are in fact ancient and have existed for thusands of years before the philosophers and scientists you mention.

Are you speaking for yourself here? Seems to me that this statement only has value on a subjective level. I see myself as a part of "us", but I do not recognize myself in this paragraph. And I know many people who this does not apply to also.

And once again, the "sciences" of psychology, sociology and psychiatry have not mapped anything at all. In fact, the debate on wether or not these branches of human activity deserve to be called science at all is still going strong.

Also, I advise you to check out eastern philosophy. Then you'll find that there are many approaches to understanding and qountering blind habits. The ideas you put forth as new in our western societies are in fact ancient and have existed for thusands of years before the philosophers and scientists you mention.

Foley

I think you miss the essential point. The amount of information in the world is useful in determining some matters--it is certainly useful in determining the boundaries of human nature. However, it is the puzzles that we construct that determine our capacity to be all we can be. We must have a place to place the knowledge within a context before that knowledge is of any value. It is value and meaning that we seek not just large human data banks.

Socrates was the first creature, that we know of, to truly grasp that we are meaning and value seeking creatures and that we have the need to create through imagination, intellection, and emotion the world that is in accord wiyth our nature. We have created a society that alienates a significant part of our nature and it is the restructuring of this society that must be our goal lest we send our species into oblivian.

Cyracuz

Eastern philosophy will no doubt have much of value to teach me but alas I have limited time and Western ideas are more than I can handle.

Becker tells me that you are mistaken. Becker tells me that our sciences have provided us with the essential knowledge that I speak of. Becker speaks from great knowledge and experience and I do not know enough to dispute his claims.

We all must make our own judgments and evidently you have made yours and I have made mine and we shall have to agree to disagree.

Hang on there cob.



This statement is just not true. What do you have to say to that?



You got that right.

So what you are saying is, you cannot handle the vast amount of cultural and philosophical ideas from around the world, and yet you claim that humanity's abilities are limited. Perhaps it is just your perceptions.

As I said, individual people are limited, but society as a whole has potential beyond [your] comprehension.