[johnsonjunior]

You are criticizing a hammer for being a really bad set of pliers.

[kavaTeexy]

The Scientific Revolution happened two centuries earlier, and is the source of the scientific method beginning to replace myth and speculative metaphysics. The rest of your conclusions in this section do not follow, as they are based on this false premise.

The Industrial Revolution (or perhaps more accurately greed) was a significant spur to science.
The point here is to recognise the cultural/scientific bubble we live in and to attempt to see past the walls of this bubble.
As Carlos Castanados,(sp?) wrote what we see on the wall of the bubble we live in is our own reflection.
Maybe what l am seeking is merely to enlarge the bubble,be more accepting of other realities. Not to think that my reality is the be all and end all
Sorry to say but Sobeh hasn't added anything to the thread.

[Drugmachine]

I'll spare you telling you how irrelevant quantum physics are. This time.

No please don't l'd like to read how you manage to split Q.P. from the real world.

[brorwargy]

The point I was trying to make is that it was unnecessary to get rid of all things with having to do with spirituality because of the Church's abuse of spiritual ideas.

Beyond what Sobeh has said so well, this is a straw man, on a couple of levels. We are not talking about the dismissal of "all things having to do with spirituality" (whatever that is supposed to mean, though I suspect you mean superstition and myth, but along with "all" things "spiritual", which could include meditation and other things that are not being challenged), we are talking about dismissal of superstition and myth.

Investigating the Buddha's liberative teachings is certainly "spiritual" in a non-myth-based sort of way, and the fact of "the Church's abuses" is certainly a valid reason to reject "the Church" and investigate the Buddha's liberative teachings. It is one of a multitude of good reasons to reject "the Church" and investigate the Buddha's liberative teachings.

[DianaDrk]

Human Sacrifice | I reject this without having lived the reality. I expect you would, as well... or no?

Human sacrifice,you mean like going to war?
Of course if l lived in a time,place and society where human sacrifice was required,l would most probable accept it.

[Kneedycrype]

stuka #24:

I'll spare you telling you how irrelevant quantum physics are. This time.

No please don't l'd like to read how you manage to split Q.P. from the real world.

QP is irrelevant to this discussion.

Sorry to say but Sobeh hasn't added anything to the thread.

I disagree completely. Science will never die out as long as humans are around. It is not a "belief system", but a method of investigating the world around us. There is no "bubble"; it is here to stay because it works, and very well.

Oh, and the irrelevant quantum physics you keep trying to drag into this discussion, frank...? It's science.

[leflyCode]

Sobeh #17:
Human Sacrifice | I reject this without having lived the reality. I expect you would, as well... or no?

Human sacrifice,you mean like going to war?
Of course if l lived in a time,place and society where human sacrifice was required,l would most probable accept it.

Doesn't make that acceptance any less ignorant. But that is not the point that Sobeh was making:

frank #15:
l do think that to throw out those beliefs without having lived that reality is a little presumptuous.

Human Sacrifice | I reject this without having lived the reality. I expect you would, as well... or no?

Sobeh is saying that Sobeh would reject that practice now, having not lived that reality, not if Sobeh were living in a time and place when it was practiced. You have said that to throw out beliefs (now is implied) without having lived that reality was presumptuous. You are quibbling.

[SHaEFU0i]

Science isn't a belief structure, it's a process for eliminating subjectivity from human observations of the natural world.

Many scientific advances start from a 'gut feeling'.
The idea in maths that an approach must be beautiful would be an example. What is that if not 'superstition',ok of a different order but still somebody having the courage of their convictions.
This is real science,not merely being a technician.

[ENGINESSQ]

Sobeh is saying that Sobeh would reject that practice now, having not lived that reality, not if Sobeh were living in a time and place when it was practiced.

We can not 'judge' an action outside of it's cultural/social environment.

[Adimos]

It is even presumptuous of me to do so?

Yes, please leave others to their commitments. As a point of fact Jains in India believe the world is flat.

[ticskebasse]

LOL!!! This thread has gotten really funny. Thanks guys. I love your responses Frank. Think I'm going to have to dip out of this one at this point.

[avarberickibe]

You are quibbling.

Certainly not a quibble.
At it's core this is a discussion about the right of an individual to practise as and what s/he feels is right.
I am attempting to take a stand against those who think that their way is the only way.
Those who for whatever reason wish to make our world 'scientific'.
What happened to chitta? (A non-existent organ being a mix of heart/mind)? Irrelevant l suppose.

[karaburatoreror]

There is no "bubble"

Maybe you mis-understood me,we all live in a bubble it's what keeps the real world out.

[dushappeaps]

please leave others to their commitments.

I think this is a wise advice for our practice. Do what you have to do and do not hold on what others do.

[O25YtQnn]

The idea in maths that an approach must be beautiful would be an example. What is that if not 'superstition'

You are speaking of "elegance"..? It's an idea, not a superstition.

stuka #31:
Sobeh is saying that Sobeh would reject that practice now, having not lived that reality, not if Sobeh were living in a time and place when it was practiced.

We can not 'judge' an action outside of it's cultural/social environment.

Sure we can.