Lee Somlin in the "Life of the Cosmos" tries to understand why his students do
not like studying basic physics says...."Newtonian physics is useful, even if
it is not true, as an approximation that helps us to understad many different
phenomena. But it is completely discredited as an answer to any fundamental
question about what the world is."
....
"I believe that the answer is that there is no place for life in the Newtonian
universe. On the basis of the phusics that was known in the nineteenth
century, it is impossible to perceive a connection between oruselves as living
things and the rest of the universe."
Now, I have not finished the book. But this sort of fits into things I have
made up on my own for my own understanding. Religion seems to reflect our view
of ourself in the context of our knowledge at the time. For that reason, the
concept of God the mechanic made sense in a Newtonian understanding but no
longer does.
I only exist because I have some kind of integrity. I grant myself that 'box'
I live in and religion is only one way of describing the perimeter, my skin is
another.... etc.
No one can exclude themselves from this process unless they are dead that is.
The myths are there to explore. They do not have to 'capture' one. They are
no more powerful than any other myth there is.
Life may be nothing but a list of choices... I don't know. But I hope that
there is more than that. If not, then I will be happy that I traveled there.
For the destination is much less significant than the journey.
Eric Boyd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Marie Foster <mfos@ieway.com> wrote:
> > I suppose I was affected early in my life by a book called
> > "The Zen of Motorcycle Maintenance".
>
> Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Very good book. It's even on
> the virion recommended reading list! To a certain extent, I too was
> affected by that book. I did read it three times. I *still* think that
> it makes more sense to say that Quality is an emergent property of
> matter/energy than vice versa... but then I'm an engineer.
>
> Of course, I still find myself agreeing with things like the quotation
> below:
>
> The idea that Art should only ever be a mirror to reality has always
> seemed ass-backwards to me, given that Art is always and everwhere
> well-groomed and impecably turned out, whereas Reality wears a pair of
> two-year-old Adidas trainers and a Toy Story T-shirt. As far as I'm
> concernied, it's rather the job of reality to try and reflect Art.
> ***The purpose of Art is not to mirror reality, but to shape it by the
> imprints and aspirations that it leaves in the human mind.***
> -- Alan Moore
>
> (as a last word, don't bother to read Pirsig's next book, where he further
> develops the Quality metaphysics -- total waste of time)
>
> > We remain stuck with a Newtonian view of the world yet.
>
> Yes, we do. And that's becuase a Newtonian view *works*. Newtons laws
> still get aircraft and spacecraft off the ground, and I suspect that they
> will continue to do so -- regardless of the world-view of the people in
> charge!
>
> > What amuses me is that each age of man has
> > felt himself at 'some kind of pinacle' of knowledge.
> > And it is exactly that arrogance that has mostly led
> > to our downfall.
>
> I certainly don't think we are at a pinacle now -- although in some
> subjects, we clearly have a fairly through understanding, there are others
> where we are still mostly ignorant. Consider biology. I read somewhere a
> while back that our knowledge of biology is still *doubling* every five
> years! And things like psychology, or artifical intelligence, even digital
> computing -- these are all fields where we have much to learn.
>
> ERiC
-- MarieWho in real life exists as
The Great Lady Casey, Citizen of Oasis, Sonoma Shard, Britannia