How to find spirituality or a sense of deeper meaning as an atheist / agnostic

C4Cat

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
9,150
Logic, physics and biology?

Just starting at the 5 senses:
Sight : We can only detect a small portion of the light spectrum

This is translated into signals that are transported to the occipital lobe for translation into "you speak" for what you are seeing.


(Just one example)
The bar in the middle is exactly the same color all the way through, but your brain has certain shortcuts it uses that makes you believe you see a gradient shade of grey that contrasts the background.

Furthermore, it takes information from your eyeball approximately 100ms to reach the occipital lobe and be processed. That's a lot of time for an object that is flying through the air to get closer to you, but with practise we get really good at catching things when we don't "actually" see them flying through the air.
Your brain is really good a predicting things.
https://www.livescience.com/29417-how-brain-tracks-moving-objects.html

From just that one sense, we can logically conclude that you don't see the world/universe for what it really is. Instead your brain is compensating constantly to bring you into the present from approximately 100ms behind...
The only thing I don't understand is this: everything you describe above is based on observation and if you're conclusion is correct then, as you say, we're not actually observing things as they are, so what you're describing above is not a description of things as they are, but a description of a biological simulation created by the brain. Bit of a catch22 there...
 

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,280
Dude. He literally claims they took mind altering drugs and saw dna and made the drawings. I have watched some of the other videos, that was just a nice summary.
And the Ica stones? you didn't talk about those either.

Why is Jordan Peterson so important to you? Do you realise how you sound? There is no single person on this planet that is above criticism, and the fact that you almost seem to worship this guy is a bit concerning TBH.
The primary problem with what you're doing is what I find a lot of people do. You're dismissing an entirety of a persons viewpoint / work based on some failings or viewpoints you don't agree with.
He has some valuable stuff to say and overall, the message is a good one. When you look at his talks, he genuinely wants people to be better overall and thats good enough for me.

I don't expect everything he says to be true.

I don't agree with a lot of his stuff, but I can see how he got there.
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
16,766
The primary problem with what you're doing is what I find a lot of people do. You're dismissing an entirety of a persons viewpoint / work based on some failings or viewpoints you don't agree with.
He has some valuable stuff to say and overall, the message is a good one. When you look at his talks, he genuinely wants people to be better overall and thats good enough for me.

I don't expect everything he says to be true.

I don't agree with a lot of his stuff, but I can see how he got there.
This.
 

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,280
The only thing I don't understand is this: everything you describe above is based on observation and if you're conclusion is correct then, as you say, we're not actually observing things as they are, so what you're describing above is not a description of things as they are, but a description of a biological simulation created by the brain. Bit of a catch22 there...
Observation backed up by solid science that independently proves these things exist.
 

C4Cat

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
9,150
Observation backed up by solid science that independently proves these things exist.
Solid science is also based on observation and measurement of a reality that is a simulation of the brain though...
(if your conclusion is correct)
 

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,280
Solid science is also based on observation and measurement of a reality that is a simulation of the brain though...
(if your conclusion is correct)
No not really. Science is a bunch of measurements created to measure things about reality. So yes we created science to make sense of real things, but the real things are still there to be measured.
Just because a ruler has a made up measurement of 30cm, doesn't mean that it isn't 30cm. The universe and therefore reality don't have a measurement called centimeters.
It's still 30 centimeters though and holds true every time you measure it.

Science is human language for "universe". The language may be subjective, as is our observation. Doesn't mean the universe isn't.

We're getting really off track here though.
 

Mars

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 4, 2006
Messages
10,320
The primary problem with what you're doing is what I find a lot of people do. You're dismissing an entirety of a persons viewpoint / work based on some failings or viewpoints you don't agree with.
He has some valuable stuff to say and overall, the message is a good one. When you look at his talks, he genuinely wants people to be better overall and thats good enough for me.

I don't expect everything he says to be true.

I don't agree with a lot of his stuff, but I can see how he got there.
........

He has some good methods for living, some utter crap methods.

...................
Really? :rolleyes:
 

C4Cat

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
9,150
No not really. Science is a bunch of measurements created to measure things about the simulation created by our brain which we call reality. So yes we created science to make sense of real things, but the real things are still there to be measured.
How do you know this?

Just because a ruler (which you can only experience the simulation of) has a made up measurement of 30cm, doesn't mean that it isn't 30cm. The universe and therefore reality don't have a measurement called centimeters.
It's still 30 centimeters though and holds true every time you measure it. Provided your simulation remains consistant

Science is human language for "universe". The language may be subjective, as is our observation. Doesn't mean the universe isn't.

We're getting really off track here though.
Ok, well I won't continue this discussion beyond this if it's too off track for the thread (though I think understanding the nature of reality is essential to finding any deeper sense of meaning in the universe) Once you realise that 'reality' is not a noun, is not singular, is not 'out there' to be observed, it changes the whole nature of the question of spirituality and your relationship to the realities that we live in.
 

Techne

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
11,900
Logic, physics and biology?

Just starting at the 5 senses:
Sight : We can only detect a small portion of the light spectrum

This is translated into signals that are transported to the occipital lobe for translation into "you speak" for what you are seeing.


(Just one example)
The bar in the middle is exactly the same color all the way through, but your brain has certain shortcuts it uses that makes you believe you see a gradient shade of grey that contrasts the background.

Furthermore, it takes information from your eyeball approximately 100ms to reach the occipital lobe and be processed. That's a lot of time for an object that is flying through the air to get closer to you, but with practise we get really good at catching things when we don't "actually" see them flying through the air.
Your brain is really good a predicting things.
https://www.livescience.com/29417-how-brain-tracks-moving-objects.html

From just that one sense, we can logically conclude that you don't see the world/universe for what it really is. Instead your brain is compensating constantly to bring you into the present from approximately 100ms behind...
But, "We're not actually observing the universe as is, because we're not capable of observing it all.".
And logic, reason, biology, science etc.... all just subjective.
And, what you are saying now isn't true in any meaningful sense. It is just subjective waffling masturbation linked to survival.
 

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,280
But, "We're not actually observing the universe as is, because we're not capable of observing it all.".
And logic, reason, biology, science etc.... all just subjective.
And, what you are saying now isn't true in any meaningful sense. It is just subjective waffling masturbation linked to survival.
As C4Cat mentioned, understanding the nature of our reality is part of the key to understanding deeper and meaningful existence. It's but a sliver of the pie of a much greater understanding.
You can call it all the names you want, it means you've hit the limit of your understanding whether it is a real barrier or a subjective one.
 

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,280
How do you know this?


Ok, well I won't continue this discussion beyond this if it's too off track for the thread (though I think understanding the nature of reality is essential to finding any deeper sense of meaning in the universe) Once you realise that 'reality' is not a noun, is not singular, is not 'out there' to be observed, it changes the whole nature of the question of spirituality and your relationship to the realities that we live in.
We can probably take this to another thread perhaps? Beyond this comes certain acceptances, like WIFOM, where you avoid the slippery slope argument by accepting certain things based simply on acceptance, realising that to much questioning may never reveal and answer or a starting point with which to begin comprehension.
It is enough for Alice to realise that the hole is deep, without needing to know how deep until later.
We then also start stepping into the quantum sciences, where things are not quite as black and white as we would like. For example, how the past is deterministic, the future non-deterministic and in the present there is free-will (in my opinion/observation).
 

Techne

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
11,900
As C4Cat mentioned, understanding the nature of our reality is part of the key to understanding deeper and meaningful existence. It's but a sliver of the pie of a much greater understanding.
You can call it all the names you want, it means you've hit the limit of your understanding whether it is a real barrier or a subjective one.
Explain how you think we can understand the nature of our reality when you say we're not actually observing the universe as is, because we're not capable of observing it all. And, as you say, what we observe is manifest and directly linked to our ability to survive/live. It is utility, and subjective utility, nothing more.
 

saor

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
21,282
As C4Cat mentioned, understanding the nature of our reality is part of the key to understanding deeper and meaningful existence. It's but a sliver of the pie of a much greater understanding.
You can call it all the names you want, it means you've hit the limit of your understanding whether it is a real barrier or a subjective one.
I'm not sure how you're defining 'understanding reality'. If you had to pick one of these statements as a better fitting key to a meaningful existence, which would you choose:

1.) Do things that interest you, or
2.) Attempt to understand the nature of reality (whatever that means).

A particular kind of enquiry into reality would surely only bring about a meaningful existence if such enquiry is of interest to a person. In the way that someone who loves playing guitar finds meaning in that activity, but they wouldn't extrapolate out and make the statement: understanding music is the key to understanding deeper and meaningful existence. Because obviously, the next person might enjoy baking or philosophical enquiry more and derive a connection to reality from their unique interaction with it.

I'm curious, would you have made a similar statement when the Earth was flat and aether filled the universe?
 
Last edited:

Prawnapple

Expert Member
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
1,567
So is maths, your mom, science and everything else. All made up stuff, completely subjective, made up by your jelly meat ball on your neck. No objective truths. Lucky for you, when you finally figure out how utterly devoid of reason amd logic this view is, you can just blame your subjective meatball on your neck for tricking you.... subjectively that is.
Nope. My mom, maths and science is testable, verifiable and demonstrably logical with tons of evidence. Over and over again. That's what's so great about science. It doesn't care about the way you feel or how you think about something. My mom is real because I can see her. I can also see the words you're typing on this page, so I know your account exists and so does everyone else. Do you honestly think the universe is not an unbroken chain of cause and effect events stemming from the big bang or a point of origin then I don't see how you even have a world-view to begin with.

Libertarian. The only correct one that actually makes sense in our reality with the information we have.
@rietrot - The above is for you as well - True libertarianism asserts that you and I are free agents, able to make free thoughts, devoid of cause and effect. I don't understand how any human being anywhere on Earth, now or ever can hold this position. You feel as though you have free will but you know very well it's just an illusion.
 

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,280
Explain how you think we can understand the nature of our reality when you say we're not actually observing the universe as is, because we're not capable of observing it all. And, as you say, what we observe is manifest and directly linked to our ability to survive/live. It is utility, and subjective utility, nothing more.
Out of context/cherry picking.
Our senses developed to observe what we do, as directly linked to our survival.
That does not preclude the ability to understand that our observation is limited or to seek methods by which to better understand.

Intellect is not a sense, it is what has allowed us to discover what our sense have not.
 

eXisor

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
1,073
Nope. My mom, maths and science is testable, verifiable and demonstrably logical with tons of evidence. Over and over again. That's what's so great about science. It doesn't care about the way you feel or how you think about something. My mom is real because I can see her. I can also see the words you're typing on this page, so I know your account exists and so does everyone else. Do you honestly think the universe is not an unbroken chain of cause and effect events stemming from the big bang or a point of origin then I don't see how you even have a world-view to begin with.



@rietrot - The above is for you as well - True libertarianism asserts that you and I are free agents, able to make free thoughts, devoid of cause and effect. I don't understand how any human being anywhere on Earth, now or ever can hold this position. You feel as though you have free will but you know very well it's just an illusion.
I agree. Will can only be as free as your understanding of your available choices. And that is incomplete.
.
 

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,280
@rietrot - The above is for you as well - True libertarianism asserts that you and I are free agents, able to make free thoughts, devoid of cause and effect. I don't understand how any human being anywhere on Earth, now or ever can hold this position. You feel as though you have free will but you know very well it's just an illusion.
To me this is wrong though. Logically, the past is deterministic, the future is non-deterministic and the present is where freewill resides.
The deterministic/freewill matrix completely falls apart as a valid theory under the above circumstance and "True" libertarianism along with it.
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
16,766
@rietrot - The above is for you as well - True libertarianism asserts that you and I are free agents, able to make free thoughts, devoid of cause and effect.
Nope your understanding of that is incomplete. Our freedom is constrained by reality and the natural world and every other free agent and is most certainly subject to cause and effect. I'm a realistic libertarian. I cannot choose to flout off into space, but I can choose every single small action/decision that I make. We also have an auto pilot(you can act subconsciously) and can go through life with that on, it is very useful, for mundane repetitive task like breathing, but don't mistake that for determanism.
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
16,766
I can't even understand how Sam Harris or some other Internet atheist could have convinced so many people of determanism. It doesn't even fit with the rest of their world view. You 1stly need to be extremely fundamentally religions to believe in determanism and secondly you need to interpret that religion incorrectly along the lines of God has already determined everyones destiny. And not just big picture, every small detail is planned out if you are hard deterministic.
 

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,280
And alongside Determinism we have the only 3 states of matter, solid, liquid and gas :rolleyes:
 
Top