Something Else
as you might have gathered if you managed to read all the back and forth on my previous post, i've been thinking a lot about religion and science lately.
can everything be explained scientifically?
that's what i'm still thinking about.
is there something to existence that cannot be explained? could a scientist with enough knowledge and materials create consciousness so as to prove, via experiment, that a man such as me would think thoughts such as these? or exactly like these? because if consciousness is a scientific process, then it can be created and verified. thought patterns can be recreated. the daydream you were having before reading this? someday it can be induced in a lab brain. the love you feel? a beautiful product of firing neurons. a chemical sequence stored in fatty tissue. we could build a body and start the engine of consciousness if only we had enough science.
but:
if it is not a scientific process, then what is it?
really. i'm thinking about it. you feel strongly? convince me.
in other non-philosophimastibatory news, it's looking more feasible that by this time next year i'll be an eco-dive tour manager in mozambique.
Well, from the most conservative numbers I've seen, and others feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, we, as a species are on track to create a fully sentient artificial intelligence by 2030. If current trends continue, the most likely emergence of this AI is in the military side of things. Happy thoughts.
Will we see a doomsday scenario ala Terminator or Matrix? Will we see a 'protect humanity from its own insanity' scenario ala iRobot? Will it be something else we can't even begin to imagine?
Even freakier, is it possible, as my brother who studied cognitive science at UCSD suggests (as a possibility only): that by creating the internet, a consciousness could already be manifest using the distributed network as its neural network, or will when the network gets big/complex/fast enough?
Who knows.
One other thought is that the previous discussion comparing science and religion seemed limited in that it compared a process (science) with an institution (religion).
In the mystical traditions, knowledge was/is passed down and experiences are shared by peers. Is everyone capable of experiencing these realms? Perhaps not. Can everyone comprehend particle physics at the mathmatical level where it can be most accurately described (so I've been told by those that can). Again, probably not.
In short, I think that when the process of scientific knowledge and mystical/spiritual practice are compared, the paths are parellel. Not synonomous, though similar in objective and overall process of peer-supported evolution of knowledge.
Further more, when the institutions of science and religion are compared, there is again strong parallels of social control through indoctrinating followers in specific methodologies for seeking truth, even if those methodologies include openness to critical review.
In short, to me the question is an interesting logical excecise, though has little real-life implication. And not to sound arrogant, but all I have to do is look at my family, friends, and community and our lives together to see what matters most to me.
glad i have such erudite friends!
okay. the most interesting part of that comment to me is this: Is everyone capable of experiencing these realms?
is it hard for people to accept religious thought because they are unable to access it? never thought of that! although i don't think "unable" would be a definitive statement -- with training i'd think most could access any type of realm of thought be it religious or scientific. it's just a matter of the cultural base ttn spoke of.
i also think it's fascinating that you say, "not to sound arrogant but... family, friends, community..."
why is that fascinating to me? because it's wholly subjective that those things are important but to you it's so clear that you'll state it as if others are foolish for not seeing it.
those things being important: that's more of a "religious" mindset then a scientific one. there are scientific benefits to community, but i do not believe those are what you're referring to.
i just think it's fascinating how we each have our own ideas of what's worth being alive for and that those ideas are so ingrained in our personalities that it's hard to see how others cannot share them.
i also think that if the internet became self aware the first thing it would do is try to sell me viagra.
Hmmmm...you said:
with training i'd think most could access any type of realm of thought be it religious or scientific.
I don't disagree, though I do think that the degree of internalized comprehension will vary. If not, then someone like Einstein, Christ, or Buddha (to name only a few well-known luminaries) is simply a product of his cultural base, which I don't buy.
I know that for me, when I get very far into mathmatics, my brain totally turns to mush. True, the only decent math teacher I ever had was in 6th grade, but still I feel like a little kid trying to get the sqare peg into the round hole. It's a close fit, but just not there.
I also agree that it's totally facsinating how we have our own ideas of what life is about. And even more fascinating watching those values shift over time. I think you summed this up beautifully when we talked about the massive shift that occurs when you find the *one* that you are meant to be with, and when you commit to each other. It's a sea change and people that haven't been there cannot truly understand (I don't think, though perhaps there are those empathic enough) the depth of what happens, of what kind of love that is.
If I had a 12- pack, dexadrine, a carton of Marlboros, and 24 hours, I could figure it out for you.