Why Interdependent Reality is more Optimal than Independent Reality

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Why Interdependent Reality is more Optimal than Independent Reality

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Tue Nov 27, 2018 7:07 am

This topic is discussed within the perspective of religion.

All living things including human beings have been programmed via evolution to perceive reality and the external world as something that is absolutely independent of the human conditions.

The Advent of an Independent Reality:
This is critical to facilitate survival since the emergence of living things to human beings. The focus is generally toward what is outside the self to whatever resources humans can take from the external to ensure survival and to be aware of threats externally.

The above is the primal basis of Philosophical Realism;
In metaphysics, [Philosophical] Realism about a given object is the view that this object exists in reality independently of our conceptual scheme. In philosophical terms, these objects are ontologically independent of someone's conceptual scheme, perceptions, linguistic practices, beliefs, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism
Thus the idea of an absolutely independent external world programmed by evolution for survival is actually a very primitive way of thinking in the ultimate sense.

It is this primitive thinking that led human beings to postulate [via a leap of faith] the idea of a God that exists externally and independent of the human conditions, to ensure their survival [eternal life] after physical death within the so-claimed independent external world, i.e. an external heaven.

The problem is this idea of an independent God [illusory] for salvation lead to all sort of psychological pains*, terrible evil and violent acts that effect the individual[s] and the collective.
* the desperate anxieties and Angst of what will happen after physical death.

The Emergence of the Concept of Interdependent Reality.
The facts of the terrible evil and violent acts from the concept of an independent external reality and theism led thinkers to look inward into the self's entanglement with reality. Note Socrates' Know Thyself!

The fact that Reality is Interdependent with the human conditions cannot be doubted as I had proven in this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=25568

On a personal basis when one can override one's primitive thinking from an independent reality to a concept of an interdependent reality meant one can have freedom.
This is freedom from the burden of clinging to an independent external world and external God since there is no such thing.

When one realizes [need to be developed and cultivated] that reality is interdependent with the human conditions, one understand there no more interdependent reality after death or any need for salvation.

If there is no more interdependent reality after physical death, then rationally one will wean oneself from the terrible psychological pains of grasping an illusory independent reality for salvation and eternal life.

As such there is no clinging to an illusory soul nor God to survive in a so-claimed external world that exists after one's death.

When there is no more clinging to an illusory soul and God, there will be more personal sufferings chasing an illusion and no more terrible evil and violent acts committed in the name of a God.

Conclusion:
Achieving a state of the concept of an Interdependent Reality is more optimal than the primitive basis of an absolute independent external reality which lead to terrible evil and violence.

The above is very pragmatic since Buddhism and the likes had already put the above [interdependent reality] into practice [black box basis] since thousands of years ago.

Views?

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Why Interdependent Reality is more Optimal than Independent Reality

Post by TimeSeeker » Tue Nov 27, 2018 7:56 am

You are making your way to the "systems" way of thinking. The whole is greater than the sum of its part.

To treat reality independent from the observer is an error.

This is the premise behind Black Box testing (modeling). It is the most basic inter-dependence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_box
Image

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Why Interdependent Reality is more Optimal than Independent Reality

Post by TimeSeeker » Tue Nov 27, 2018 8:12 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Nov 27, 2018 7:07 am
Thus the idea of an absolutely independent external world programmed by evolution for survival is actually a very primitive way of thinking in the ultimate sense.

It is this primitive thinking that led human beings to postulate [via a leap of faith] the idea of a God that exists externally and independent of the human conditions, to ensure their survival [eternal life] after physical death within the so-claimed independent external world, i.e. an external heaven.
This, I don't agree with. To say that it is a "primitive" way of thinking is to imply that there is a "better" way of thinking. By what criteria for "better" or "worse" ?

Suppose Physics discovered its Theory of Everything, solved the Arrow of Time problem, settled on an interpretation of QM.
Suppose Cosmology solved the problem of time and the Origin question.
Suppose Mathematics solved the Riemann hypothesis
Suppose Computer science solved P vs NP problem.

Suppose that human knowledge was complete. We understood the Universe and had no questions left.

Then what happens?

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Why Interdependent Reality is more Optimal than Independent Reality

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Tue Nov 27, 2018 8:37 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Tue Nov 27, 2018 8:12 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Nov 27, 2018 7:07 am
Thus the idea of an absolutely independent external world programmed by evolution for survival is actually a very primitive way of thinking in the ultimate sense.

It is this primitive thinking that led human beings to postulate [via a leap of faith] the idea of a God that exists externally and independent of the human conditions, to ensure their survival [eternal life] after physical death within the so-claimed independent external world, i.e. an external heaven.
This, I don't agree with. To say that it is a "primitive" way of thinking is to imply that there is a "better" way of thinking. By what criteria for "better" or "worse" ?

Suppose Physics discovered its Theory of Everything, solved the Arrow of Time problem, settled on an interpretation of QM.
Suppose Cosmology solved the problem of time and the Origin question.
Suppose Mathematics solved the Riemann hypothesis
Suppose Computer science solved P vs NP problem.

Suppose that human knowledge was complete. We understood the Universe and had no questions left.

Then what happens?
It is 'primitive' in terms of its neural dominance.

The idea of the an independent reality is driven significantly by the mid and lower brain which are active within non-humans and lower animals.
Note classical Newtonian Physics which assume an independent reality. Newton was a theist who believe in an independent reality created by God.

The concept of the interdependent reality is dominated by the neo-cortex.
One need a lot of deep thinking and reflection to overcome the psychological forces of the primitive brain to understand the concept of an interdependent reality.
Note Einstenian and QM where the interaction of the observer is unavoidable and this is dominantly driven by the higher thinking faculties in the neo-cortex.

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Why Interdependent Reality is more Optimal than Independent Reality

Post by TimeSeeker » Tue Nov 27, 2018 8:49 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Nov 27, 2018 8:37 am
It is 'primitive' in terms of its neural dominance.
Can you juxtapose it to something you would deem as non-primitive?
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Nov 27, 2018 8:37 am
The idea of the an independent reality is driven significantly by the mid and lower brain which are active within non-humans and lower animals.
Note classical Newtonian Physics which assume an independent reality. Newton was a theist who believe in an independent reality created by God.
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Nov 27, 2018 8:37 am
The concept of the interdependent reality is dominated by the neo-cortex.
One need a lot of deep thinking and reflection to overcome the psychological forces of the primitive brain to understand the concept of an interdependent reality.
Note Einstenian and QM where the interaction of the observer is unavoidable and this is dominantly driven by the higher thinking faculties in the neo-cortex.
I don't know about that. Emergence/Holism/Systems thinking is a pattern of thought that has been observed throughout human history. Certainly long before we ever understood the "structure of the brain".

It goes as far back as ancient Greece and even the Babylonians. It can be found throughout all theistic holy books. Obviously - if one has not been inducted into the school of systems thinking wouldn't recognise it for what it is.

I think we all have the brain capacity - just not the opportunity/need to develop/practice the application of the skill. And in any case - it has only seen resurgence, mainstream attention and 'scientific formalisation' in the form of Systems Theory ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_theory ) in the last 70 years or so.

Every system has inputs and outputs and so you cannot blame the Greeks for having failed to come up with QM. They had neither technology nor the financial means, nor the shoulders of giants to stand on. They had other problems in their time. To be fair we have also had 3000 years extra to work on it. And a WHOLE lot more minds focusing on it.

You can't escape the economics of finite resources. Not to mention that conflict and societal collapse always wipes out knowledge and sets us back.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5569
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

the crux of it

Post by henry quirk » Tue Nov 27, 2018 4:19 pm

The point is the idea of an absolutely independently reality leads to bigotry and dogmatism.
The worst of it is the absolutely independent God that is claimed as real with delivers holy texts with evil elements that compels believers [SOME] to commit terrible evil and violent acts.

If we bring in the element of the fallible human being into the equation for reality [thus an interdependent reality], then there is no room for an independent God [illusory] and all the consequential evil and violent acts plus the existential pains to be endured by the vulnerable individual[s].


In other words: let's kill God by dissolving the barriers between us. Let's eliminate the 'need' for God by being 'one'.

In essence: the independence of the 'apple' is irrelevant cuz even if the 'apple' exists independent of me, I should pretend otherwise so as to defend my head from infection by nasty 'god' parasites.

tsk-tsk, Veritas.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: the crux of it

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Wed Nov 28, 2018 5:31 am

henry quirk wrote:
Tue Nov 27, 2018 4:19 pm
The point is the idea of an absolutely independently reality leads to bigotry and dogmatism.
The worst of it is the absolutely independent God that is claimed as real with delivers holy texts with evil elements that compels believers [SOME] to commit terrible evil and violent acts.

If we bring in the element of the fallible human being into the equation for reality [thus an interdependent reality], then there is no room for an independent God [illusory] and all the consequential evil and violent acts plus the existential pains to be endured by the vulnerable individual[s].
In other words: let's kill God by dissolving the barriers between us. Let's eliminate the 'need' for God by being 'one'.

In essence: the independence of the 'apple' is irrelevant cuz even if the 'apple' exists independent of me, I should pretend otherwise so as to defend my head from infection by nasty 'god' parasites.

tsk-tsk, Veritas.
Note:
At present, given the current state, I understand the idea of God is a critical necessity [psychologically] for the majority of people. However the idea of God as independent of the human conditions is illusory.

What I have proposed is, toward the future the majority must be weaned off their clinging to an the idea of God which is illusory and contribute to theistic-based evil and violent acts. To do so there is a need for serious discussions on the topic starting from now.

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: the crux of it

Post by TimeSeeker » Wed Nov 28, 2018 8:57 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 5:31 am
Note:
At present, given the current state, I understand the idea of God is a critical necessity [psychologically] for the majority of people. However the idea of God as independent of the human conditions is illusory.

What I have proposed is, toward the future the majority must be weaned off their clinging to an the idea of God which is illusory and contribute to theistic-based evil and violent acts. To do so there is a need for serious discussions on the topic starting from now.
You are missing a few levels of analysis here.

The particular idea of God may or may not be a problem, but it's a manifestation of a broader psychological/human issue. Dogmatism. And people can be dogmatic about VERY many things!

During my (brief) presence on this forum I am observing people being dogmatic about logic and adherence to the "law" of non-contradiction.
I have seen people being dogmatic about political ideology. Dogmatic about philosophical positions. Dogmatic about methodology (science, evidence etc.). And the one that scares me the most - dogmatic about Truth (with a capital 'T'. Like God).

If you care to follow this thread ( viewtopic.php?f=16&t=14919&start=285#p385176 ) you will observe a Mathematical dogmatist, who (despite being contradicted) undertakes on a mission of rationalisation and apologetics to preserve his beliefs rather than amend them.

You can't take away people's USEFUL things without offering a better alternative. And if dogmatism serves a purpose - you need to understand that purpose. Even if it is "anxiety management". Or just damn laziness.

Or, you can just let people keep their non-harmful dogmatism.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: the crux of it

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:53 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 8:57 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 5:31 am
Note:
At present, given the current state, I understand the idea of God is a critical necessity [psychologically] for the majority of people. However the idea of God as independent of the human conditions is illusory.

What I have proposed is, toward the future the majority must be weaned off their clinging to an the idea of God which is illusory and contribute to theistic-based evil and violent acts. To do so there is a need for serious discussions on the topic starting from now.
You are missing a few levels of analysis here.
:?:
The particular idea of God may or may not be a problem, but it's a manifestation of a broader psychological/human issue. Dogmatism. And people can be dogmatic about VERY many things!
Dogmatism is not the critical issue.
What is critical is that which a person is dogmatic about and the fundamental impulses that trigger the specific dogmatism.

If a person is dogmatic with the republican or democrat ideology, it is not a serious issue.
If a person is dogmatic with an evil ideology then the critical elements here is his tendency/inclination toward evil. So the question is why is the person embedded with evil tendencies.

The particular idea of God is a problem because it contribute to terrible evil and violent acts.
Even though the terrible evil is only confined to some [not all] theistic religions, the problem is we cannot get rid of the theistic related evil without getting rid of the idea of God [illusory] from humanity.
There is a problem from element of dogmatism within theism, but the critical problem is what trigger theism in the first place for dogmatism to take place.

You can't take away people's USEFUL things without offering a better alternative. And if dogmatism serves a purpose - you need to understand that purpose. Even if it is "anxiety management". Or just damn laziness.
I have stated many times, the weaning of theism will not be effective until we find fool proof alternatives to replace theism/religions in dealing with the inherent UNAVOIDABLE existential dilemma/crisis or DOOM.

Reflex
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 9:09 pm

Re: Why Interdependent Reality is more Optimal than Independent Reality

Post by Reflex » Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:07 am

What separation are you talking about?

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: the crux of it

Post by TimeSeeker » Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:08 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:53 am
Dogmatism is not the critical issue.
What is critical is that which a person is dogmatic about and the fundamental impulses that trigger the specific dogmatism.
Then you are necessarily saying some dogmatism is good and some dogmatism is bad.
Who decides which is which and by what criteria?
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:53 am
If a person is dogmatic with the republican or democrat ideology, it is not a serious issue.
If a person is dogmatic with an evil ideology then the critical elements here is his tendency/inclination toward evil. So the question is why is the person embedded with evil tendencies.
This is just post-hoc rationalization. You have invented the word 'evil' to get yourself out of the hole you have dug.
What is your criterion for 'evil' dogmatism and 'non-evil' dogmatism?

Nazism is an evil political ideology. Is it not?
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:53 am
The particular idea of God is a problem because it contribute to terrible evil and violent acts.
So if Truth-seekers began committing violent acts in the name of Truth then Truth would be an evil ideology?
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:53 am
I have stated many times, the weaning of theism will not be effective until we find fool proof alternatives to replace theism/religions in dealing with the inherent UNAVOIDABLE existential dilemma/crisis or DOOM.
Straman! I am asking you a straight-forward question. IF people ever began commit atrocities in the NAME of Truth - would you wean yourself off Truth?

Is Truth an ideology? Abso-fucking-lutely!

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5569
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Wed Nov 28, 2018 3:55 pm

"What I have proposed is, toward the future the majority must be weaned off their clinging to an the idea of God which is illusory and contribute to theistic-based evil and violent acts. To do so there is a need for serious discussions on the topic starting from now."

Yeah, whenever I hear 'there is a need for serious discussion' my B.S. translator kicks in. 'serious discussion' means 'shut up you retarded theists and think what I tell you to think'.

Good luck with the conversions.

And: you say 'God as independent of the human conditions is illusory' which is 'god is fiction'. Mebbe, mebbe not (I'm an apathetic agnostic so I don't know or much care one way or the other). Mebbe, before you go about the holy work of disabusin' the world of god parasites, you need to come up with sumthin' 'convincing' (at the least, you need better marketing, cuz right now you couldn't sell poop to a starvin' fly).

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: the crux of it

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Thu Nov 29, 2018 4:06 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:08 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:53 am
Dogmatism is not the critical issue.
What is critical is that which a person is dogmatic about and the fundamental impulses that trigger the specific dogmatism.
Then you are necessarily saying some dogmatism is good and some dogmatism is bad.
Who decides which is which and by what criteria?
Note dogmatism, originally from theistic doctrines and dogmas is preceded by the idea of God.
If your grandma is dogmatic to her traditional way of cooking, it is could be matter of habit thus not necessary a bad thing. What is critical to dogmatism is the context

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re:

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Thu Nov 29, 2018 4:28 am

henry quirk wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 3:55 pm
"What I have proposed is, toward the future the majority must be weaned off their clinging to an the idea of God which is illusory and contribute to theistic-based evil and violent acts. To do so there is a need for serious discussions on the topic starting from now."

Yeah, whenever I hear 'there is a need for serious discussion' my B.S. translator kicks in. 'serious discussion' means 'shut up you retarded theists and think what I tell you to think'.

Good luck with the conversions.
There is something wrong within your brain that triggered a B.S. translator which is actually a "shut up" mechanism. It mean what I want to discuss is bullshit, therefore no need to discuss - and discussion is shut up.

'there is a need for serious discussion'
means open continual discussion and permanent questioning.

Note I am doing Philosophy here, thus Russell's
Bertrand Russell wrote:Thus, to sum up our discussion of the value of philosophy; Philosophy is to be studied, not for the sake of any definite answers to its questions since no definite answers can, as a rule, be known to be true, but rather for the sake of the questions themselves;
My proposal "there is a need for serious discussion" mean non-stop questioning without arriving at any absolute answers while abstracting whatever is useful along the way.
And: you say 'God as independent of the human conditions is illusory' which is 'god is fiction'.
Mebbe, mebbe not (I'm an apathetic agnostic so I don't know or much care one way or the other). Mebbe, before you go about the holy work of disabusin' the world of god parasites, you need to come up with sumthin' 'convincing' (at the least, you need better marketing, cuz right now you couldn't sell poop to a starvin' fly).
At present we do not have sufficient knowledge of the human brain and what is exactly going on inside the brain to arrive at something convincing.
But humanity is on its way to have a greater understanding of the brain via the Human Connectome Project http://www.humanconnectomeproject.org/
and humanity has already mapped the human genome..
https://www.genome.gov/10001772/all-abo ... oject-hgp/

Given so much doubts, humanity must keep questioning the idea of God [illusory] instead of clinging to the irrational conclusion 'God exists' merely based on a leap of faith.

Note at present there are millions of theists who accept the immutable holy texts' 'God commanded me to kill non-believers' so I must carry out God's command as a divine duty. This is very real and evident, i.e. here is one stats among many others'
Image

It is irresponsible of you to turn a blind eye to what is really happening to the world at present. There is a very high chance you could be blown to pieces any time when you are in town. If you are a coward to question, at least do not condemn me or attempt to shut me up [implied in your sort of response].

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: the crux of it

Post by TimeSeeker » Thu Nov 29, 2018 5:04 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Thu Nov 29, 2018 4:06 am
Note dogmatism, originally from theistic doctrines and dogmas is preceded by the idea of God.
If your grandma is dogmatic to her traditional way of cooking, it is could be matter of habit thus not necessary a bad thing. What is critical to dogmatism is the context
dogma. noun. a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.
Occam's razor. Dogma.
Hickam's dictum. Dogma.
Principle of least effort. Dogma.
Logic/Mathematics. Dogma.
Law of non-contradiction. Dogma.
Truth-seeking. Dogma.

To say that context is critical to dogmatism is weasel words. You are giving yourself an exit strategy for any future contradiction.

The context is "being in the universe".

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests