Biologists like James Shapiro and Lynn Margulis for example bring a further dimension to light, namely, that biological processes inside the cell are far more complex than can be explained in terms of simple chemical or biochemical reactions. They find whole macro-molecular systems operating in very directed, non random, and goal oriented ways to accomplish the functioning and maintenance of the cell. Shapiro calls it natural genetic engineering (NGE) specifically to bring attention to the non-random, skillful nature of such engineering feats.
Whether these processes can be called evolutionary is open to question when we consider the deeper implications involved in such sentient cells. Shapiro has very nicely explained this in his own words, [...] I consider these statements to be thoroughly honest assessments of the current situation in our scientific knowledge of organic life. What we know from empirical observation is limited to what we can actually measure and see with our instruments, but there is a background life to all of that which such knowledge has not yet grasped. We may claim that life is simply the play of those processes, but the causes and purpose driven goals exhibited thereby are not explained by that simply identification. And most importantly, without understanding that background life or living milieu, we cannot simply say that life is capable of 'evolving' or if there are other principles that are involved in making it whatever it is. It is at this point that the belief of the scientist or simple faith of the religious person comes in, as soon as one takes a stand without any further knowledge of that unknown domain.
From that perspective the creationist has as much right to claim scientific evidence as supporting her position as any evolutionist. In that case, the only honest objective stance should be one in which both should be considered as equally inconclusive and open to further investigation and study as reason and evidence may lead us.
Your serious and respectful participation in this group is greatly appreciated.
Humble and sincere regards,
B Madhava Puri
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAEKJmQ1cCbeJQ_DSeh80pvLndJ3RtuZF7mhs%2BT48amuTa__1zw%40mail.gmail.com
On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 9:53 AM 'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Scientific Basis of Consciousness
Hi Alfredo, Chris, and all,
It seems that, in the past, all religious leaders faced the same problem related to God in reducing suffering as we are facing in our discussion. People go to religious places (temples, churches, etc) to pray by assuming God will take care of their problems. They might have confronted the difficulty as we are encountering in our discussion.
If we delete God (as science suggests) then who will take care of problems? If we consider God in us, then people will be confused because of 8 billion Gods. If we consider one single God, then also many problems arise because of science.
It seems true that if we assume God, and pray then we feel peace and our mindBrain system generate enough energy to take care of problems; there is help available from other people if we pray together because a feeling of friendship and cooperativity arise. This happens in a better way if we are superstitious or blind believers or somehow give logic to convince people-at-large that God really exists, who loves us and help us. This is how superstitions were created by leaders to organize and help society.
Evolution does not care what is correct or incorrect; it only needs if the hypothesis fits well (fittest survive). Religions fit best so it is not selected out; it is not only surviving, but it is also thriving, even if there is no God.
What should we do? Should we continue 'as it is' or try to find the solution of suffering to avoid superstitions?
Buddha tried his best to reducing superstition and suffering to some extent by proposing an atheist framework without soul, but he has to introduce another superstition of principle of Karmas across births, so he used rebirth theory even if it is incorrect; this reduces our mundane suffering to some extent thru his 8 Noble paths, but has superstition of rebirth. Mundane suffering is still present ‘as it is’.
The scientific fact seems that the principle of Karma is true for this life as there is no life-after-death. We need to discuss rigorously on how to reduce suffering in our mundane lives without any superstition that God, soul, and/or rebirths exist. This is a scientific challenge for all of us. So far, we agreed (at least three of us) that Monism is better than Dualism; for monism, consciousness was in potential form in the beginning; manifestation occurred later (presumably billions of years after Big Bang) in us in the monistic framework.
Cheers!
Kind regards,
Rām
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
There is only name and form
by Amod Lele
One can turn around the first sentence here: Buddhaghosa describes the elements not only by characteristic and manifestation, but also by function. (The term for function is rasa; Heim, in her excellent first book on Buddhaghosa, points out that Pali commentary uses this term in a sense very different from the more familiar Sanskrit aesthetic one, with Buddhaghosa defining it in terms of duty or function, kicca, or attainment, sampatti.) And when Buddhaghosa specifies the element's function, he specifies it in terms of what the element does in physical space – spreading, acting as a foundation – with no reference made to subjective feel. Unless we are seeking to superimpose our own purely phenomenological view onto the texts, I do not see any reason to view this function or attainment as something merely phenomenological – a way the element appears to function – and exclude ontology, the way the element actually does function. To do so seems to do exactly what Heim and Ram-Prasad have warned us against, and treat Buddhaghosa's descriptions as one side of a subjective-objective divide – in this case the subjective.
When Buddhaghosa illustrates the key term rūpa, he does so with an analogy that goes beyond subjective feel and even manifestation. He quotes a passage from the Majjhima Nikāya which says (in the Ñāṇamoli translation): “Just as when a space is enclosed with timber and creepers and grass and clay, there comes to be the term ‘house,’ so too, when a space is enclosed with bones and sinews and flesh and skin, there comes to be the term rūpa.” (Vism XVIII.26) Here he is saying that rupa includes those inner elements that we would not normally perceive or feel subjectively, the things that are typically invisible to us: the bones in the body, the timbers of a house.
This point brings us to nāmarūpa, that compound at the heart of their article's concernes. I agree with what I took to be their most basic point about nāmarūpa. That is: Nāmarūpa is most commonly translated, somewhat opaquely, as "name and form". Some translators have tried to render it in a more English idiom as "mind and matter" or "mentality and materiality". I think Heim and Ram-Prasad are quite right to resist that latter interpretation, pointing out that rūpa includes mental elements of subjective feel. I am in agreement with the "more careful scholars" they name, like Steven Collins and Sue Hamilton, who keep the "name and form" translation within "a metaphysical account of the human being where the disaggregative project of analyses for dismantling selfhood produces an account of smaller constituent parts, which are then affirmed as reals."
https://wp.me/pxfBj-1a5
What are the implications of it? Does this mean that Leftism is dead? No, I don't think so. Leftism, as a concept, precedes Marxism by several centuries. But it is a good thing if the Marxism is finished because this Abrahamic concept had obtained a hold on the minds of Hindus.
https://twitter.com/maidros78/status/1122700256473280512?s=19
But Leftism - as a concept - is not going to die because it is a reflection of several issues. What we need is a Dharmic Left - a Left that is rooted in Dharmic ethos, so that, if tomorrow BJP is voted out [no party can rule forever], the opposition will also be a Dharmic party.
No, it won't happen. The `elite Left' is already migrating to the BJP from the Congress [CPI and especially CPM were never the bastions of the elite Left, which didn't have the resources to indulge their expensive and degenerate tastes]. The elite Left which parasitically destroyed the Congress from within is going to start moving the BJP to its tastes. This is why you have so many `activists' moving to the BJP.
Savitri Era: Savitri Era Religion respects all faiths and traditions https://t.co/ryhTUCP26E @NathTusar #SriAurobindo
Nothing at present indicates that Savitri Era Party can be a success (it's already twelve years), but having seen some dramatic changes happening quite unexpectedly, I'm hopeful that such a change can come. Instead of a miracle, it should be perceived as logical outcome of events
A relevant thread to what we have been stressing on but without being soft on the other side of the political spectrum. Each ideology has contributed and served the Evolutionary purpose even like the evil in a story but the future belongs to Sri Aurobindo. https://t.co/QXVSWtHzYV
https://twitter.com/NathTusar/status/1122872517922709504?s=19
[PDF] Portrayal of Women in Indian Fiction
I Pundir, A Singh
… The rights of women were intensely restricted in this era; they were ceased from the possession of their payments earned from the work, all of … Whether it is Savitri in “The Dark Room” (1938), Rosie in “The Guide” (1958) or Bala …
The Position of the OIC on Abortion: Not Too Bad, Ugly, or Just Confusing?
I Cismas - The Organization of Islamic Cooperation and Human …, 2019
Page 174. CHAPTER 7 The Position of the OIC on Abortion: Not Too Bad, Ugly, or Just Confusing? Ioana Cismas Introduction In the wake of the sociopolitical upheavals that have engulfed several states in the Middle East and …
The Doctor and the Saint: The Ambedkar-Gandhi Debate: Caste, Race and Annihilation of Caste
A Roy - 2019
NUMBER NINE
J Mowitt
… crossing traced in “Revolution 9.” Less unclear is that the sonic encounter between pop and the avant- garde was decisively mediated by two spiritual figures from India: in the case of the Beatles, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi; in the …
Plasim Radar
Do not violate established physics in an attempt to understand consciousness - “Shakespeare reads morally. He’s always attuned to moral issues. He is always interested in ethics and the complexity of decisions. Measure for Measure i...
Photographs of the Mother’s Darshan of 24 April 1963 and 1966 - Dear Friends, The Mother came to Pondicherry for the first time and met Sri Aurobindo on 29 March 1914. In February 1915 She went back to France and after ...
al talween wa al tamkeen - Dr. Pepper having ibn bin seen dissolving saudade in this Bacardi neat Wine is not bitter at its, perennially parting, Red Sea's defeat Nor can my *al talwe...
Two Required Conditions for Effecting the Spiritual Transformation of Human Society - Individual spiritual development takes place constantly. Individuals experience life-transforming revelations, undertake spiritual quests, take up yoga, m...
Demise of the Clockwork - A large component of the post-modern condition and the end of the Grand Narrative is the winding down of the Clockwork Universe. This is also connected wit...
Savitri Satsang 090 pp. 158-160 - A weekly sharing on Savitri by Dr Alok Pandey (an audio recording in English). The post Savitri Satsang 090 pp. 158-160 appeared first on AuroMaa.
The importance of reading Buddhaghosa closely - A while ago, Chakravarthi Ram-Prasad made a thoughtful reply to the last of my post series on Buddhaghosa. I thank Ram-Prasad for that reply; I appreciate ...
The importance of reading Buddhaghosa closely - A while ago, Chakravarthi Ram-Prasad made a thoughtful reply to the last of my post series on Buddhaghosa. I thank … Continue reading →
Thinking from the verge: The dynamic of secularism and its others - In this forum prompted by Emily Ogden’s *Credulity*, Susan Lepselter’s *The Resonance of Unseen Things*, Pamela Klassen’s *The Story of Radio Mind*, and ...
- In the Johannesburg Mail and Guardian, the answer to fundamentalist violence. In his books *Being and Time* and What Is Metaphysics?, he maintains that h...
A Theology of Failure: Žižek Against Christian Innocence - My first book, A Theology of Failure: Žižek Against Christian Innocence is out on 7 May. A 30% discount is available if you buy the book via http://www.com...
World Book and Copyright Day 2019 - World Book and Copyright Day * which refers more to * * World BOO...
Challenging the Ashram Trust’s Stand on Relics - [*The Notice below has been issued in the name of Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust in the January 2017 issue of the Oriya monthly magazine “Navaprakash”, publis...
No comments:
Post a Comment