“Certainly no ‘materialistic’ scientist would argue that life isn’t mysterious. However claiming that the mystery of life belongs in the world of the philosopher more than the scientist is ludicrous. Scientific study of life and life processes has given us more than he philosopher ever has.” Joseph H. Donahue, D. C. That’s like saying, the Hillerich & Bradsby Company which manufactures the Louisville slugger wooden bat has given more to the game of baseball than has Abner Doubleday the inventor of the game.
Joe,
You certainly have a BROAD perspective, (baseball aside 🙂 ).
It’s a pleasure looking outside the box and having been broadened by your expansive thinking.
So who tips the scale, the philosopher or the theoretical physicist or the theologian?
Is mystery, ignorance? And who is the fool?
Does the major premise imply a creator, or a purpose for mankind?
Does intelligence and it’s manifesting, as you have implied as the wish put into action and properties of matter, living and non-living, place man as the receiver of the wish of the major premise, or are we a mere recipient of it’s outcome.
You’re book ‘The Nature of Man’, has opened my eyes up to the simple premise, that we are here as the intent of the creator of the Major Premise (the beginning) . That IS a mystery and a blessing and a very illuminating perspective. And it’s as old as the Hebrews.
Glass half full, half empty?
Facts are always an attempt to have a bigger box.
Philosophy always attempts to step outside the box.
Where does realitys intent lie? Inside the box or outside?
David, facts don’t necessarily give us “a bigger box.” They just fill the box we already have with more “stuff”. That is neither good nor bad unless filling that box prevents us from “thinking outside the box”. Philosophy steps outside the science box and into a new box. The more boxes you have the greater your chance of making the right decisions/choices. Our reality and its intent lies within whichever box we are functioning in. The more boxes we have the greater our expanse of reality, unless of course some of those boxes include unreality.
Joe,
You are saying that the nature of human experience (sense based), usage of logic and/or reasoning, or information acquisition (facts), always sits within some container (box)(eg. Point of reference)? This is somewhat of the, I’ll say reasoning behind, NO Thought, meditative concepts. Reaching a truth(s), out of box, that thought and experience by their nature of mechanism (language, rhetoric,etc. ) cannot reach.
Like I’m telling you something that you didn’t know 😉
BUT you are implying that Making the right decisions/choices are or should be the criteria for Truth seeking.
What are the criteria for the reality of a Correct decision/choices?
Adaptation? Salvation? Survival? Ethical Living (a debate in itself)?
DOES A BOX ALWAYS EXIST?
Can we really say that the immaterial is a box outside of the material with regard to decisions and choices?
The fact that we cannot create life and we cannot avoid death, pretty much implies which box is outside. I’d assume you would agree?
But how does that affect the concept and reality of right or wrong decision/choices?
Not necessarily a question pertaining to the major premise, but somewhere in the perfection that we state of Universal Intelligence, exists a noble intent behind the creation of Man and as stated before, has entered my perview these days with regards to the immaterial, to the purpose of my and mans existence.
Intelligent design (universal intelligence-innate intelligence), at least to me has shifted MY thinking 180degrees at times.
Man as the recipient of the pinnacle of creations intent versus a victim of material experience.
Understand?
Comments?
Thank you for replying to wordy, searching, wonderful me (humbly speaking) 😉