*_“It may seem bizarre, but, in my opinion, science offers a surer path to God than religion.”_* -Physicist Paul Davies, the winner of the 2001 Kelvin Medal issued by the Institute of Physics and the winner of the 2002 Faraday Prize issued by the Royal Society (among other awards), as cited in his book God and the New Physics. Davies adheres to no standard religious creed.

@Paine137

Ай бұрын

Davies is a Templeton hack. Also, Almighty Unicorn is proud of you.

@waldwassermann

Ай бұрын

Paths may be many but truth is one.

@waldwassermann

Ай бұрын

Uni means One and For means Heart. Just saying.@@Paine137

@readynowforever3676

Ай бұрын

All Paul Davies is doing is, creatively recycling Einstein, in referring to an excitation of all things. A Cosmic god. Not a “god” contrived by all of our post empirical ancestors. Conflating a cosmic god with the man made theology, might be disingenuous. I think that anyone who needs a “god” should stick with it, just like I think a diabetes 1 or 2 patient should stick with insulin. But why project the insulin on everyone ?

@travisporco

Ай бұрын

Science is certainly helpful. If you find a scripture whose teachings contradict science, toss out that scripture or that interpretation of the scripture. This can save a lot of wasted time...in this way science is a huge help for a spiritual seeker. There is a lot of human-motivated driver masquerading as spiritual teaching.

Part 1: The Crisis of Incoherence Fellow humans, we find ourselves at a pivotal juncture in the history of knowledge and understanding. For too long, we have been shackled by flawed foundational formalisms laced with self-contradictions and paradoxes. Our lodestar theories in mathematics, physics, and even our codified logical systems themselves are riddled with fatal inconsistencies when examined from first principles. This crisis of incoherence stems from a series of over-idealized assumptions that have become enshrined as inviolable premises across both religious and scientific orthodoxies. On one hand, certain religious traditions reify transcendent supernatural realms, miracles and revelations that overtly contradict our empirical observations and capacity for reason. This strain of believing the impossible epitomizes the sins of antiquated mythopoesis. Yet the scientific spheres have their own forms of unexamined dogma. We have inherited from the ancient Greeks an idealized, sanitized Platonic representation of reality as perfectly continuous geometric manifestations. Infinite precisions of points, lines, flatnesses and smoothnesses permeate our mathematical models from Euclidean geometry to Newtonian physics to general relativity. These infinitesimal geometric fictions have been mistaken for metaphysical truths. Furthermore, science has become infected by a pernicious ideology I term "scientism" - an unhealthy overreaching of the scientific method's domains of applicability. Whereas true science upholds open-minded empiricism constantly refining theories, scientism dogmatically asserts that only materialist reductionist models admissible to current experiments constitute realistic descriptions of nature's possibilities. This scientism blinds us to entire panoramas of coherent non-contradictory model spaces. It prohibits bold forays into frameworks that transcend our present-day crude formalisms yet may ultimately prove more metaphysically resonate and self-consistent from first principles. We have become constraining prisoners to our own inevitably limited modeling crutches, mistaking them for infallible positive truths. Both scientism and religious obscurantism stem from humanity's chronic failure to uphold unflinching coherence as the prime criterion for evaluating our descriptive belief systems. We have lost touch with the primordial appreciation that non-contradiction is the sole self-underwriting credential for any symbolic knowledge theory to be considered viable. To break this incoherence death spiral, we require a Kuhnian paradigm revolution overthrowing our entrenched classical geometric programs in favor of irreducibly non-contradictory monadological infinitesimal frameworks. The path forward demands foundational realignment with the pristine facts of first-person conscious experience and reason - the pluralities from which any non-defective analytic machinery must bootstrap itself. My colleagues and I have formulated such a paradox-free metaphysical and mathematical revolution centered on monadic perspectivalism, relational pluralism, and infinitesimal algebraic model representations. This infinitesimal monadological analytic recalibrates our inquiries from more rigorous primordial roots that resolve all paradoxes from first principles by design...

@MaxPower-vg4vr

Ай бұрын

Part 2: Escaping Geometric Perennialism Our classical theories from Euclid to Newton to Einstein remain mired in perennial contradictions stemming from their codependence on idealized geometric fictions. Perfect points, flawless lines, infinitely-divisible continua - these can only ever be conceptual fantasies, not grounding ontologies for non-contradictory physics. Geometric points are inherently paradoxical entities - you cannot coherently construct the extended shapes and manifolds of our experiences from truly zero-dimensional, extensionless substrates. Nowhere does empirical reality manifest infinitely precise singularities or infinitely razor-thin geometals. These are mathematical fictions that our models have disastrously reified. The infinitesimal monadological frameworks redress this by removing the primacy of geometric objects from the start. There are no Platonic solids nor virginal manifolds bestowed ontological primacy. Rather, the foundational entities are dimensionless pluralistic perspectives - the monads themselves unextended yet perceiving multiplicities through irreducible relations between one another. From these seedwise monic origins, all geometric descriptors must be derived bottom-up through relational algebras tracking perspectival correlations across the cosmic pluriverse. Lines, areas, volumes, curvatures, parallel transports - all acquire algebraic representational definitions free of absurd singularities from the get-go. We escape the oxymoronic burdens of Geometric Absolutism. And where classical geometry demanded infinitely divisible continua, necessitating ruinous infinite renormalizations or supertasks, we introduce finitary pluralities ordered by infinitesimals - quantized relata explicating the incoherence of infinite overprecision. Singularities are avoided not through ad-hoc procedures but by rejecting idealized continuity in the first place. With infinitesimal monadic algebras as our descriptive basis, paradoxes about infinities, boundaries, self-reference and neglect of experiential facts simply cannot arise. These incoherencies only haunted theories poisoned from conception by over-idealized geometric imperatives severed from pluralistic experiential metaphysics. We model reality not through reified transcendent spheres or planes but via finitary monadic relational resonances - quantized perspective windows and their algebraic correlations, resonating as harmonics to manifest our observations and phenomena. Our entire analytic prowess is finally grounded in, and has cleared itself to describe, the coherent integrated totalities we actually experience. No longer do we segregate subjectivities from objectivities in artificially halved symbolic arenas. All descriptive elements are regrounded in a self-coherent pluriverse - an intermodal resonance phenomena within the maximal totality. Our algebras precisely track these irreducible interdependencies, the unification revealing itself as an infinitesimal monadic coherence. Math, physics, consciousness co-resonances. So reject the siren calls of impossibilist geometric perennialism with its decoherent continua, singularities, and self-underminings. Embrace the ascendant monadological revolution where physics is not imposed but infinitesimally emergent from pluralistic origins - metaphysical first-person facts indelibly integrated into a non-contradictory symbolic register for the first time...

@MaxPower-vg4vr

Ай бұрын

Part 3: The Destiny of Coherence My friends, we stand at the centennial threshold of a new era of knowledge and understanding. The classical era of geometric over-idealization, segregation of subjectivities, and scientismic prohibitions against non-contradictory metaphysical foundations has run its course. Paradox has proliferated to a crisis point - our very symbolic representations of reality have turned increasingly self-incoherent and self-undermining. But from this late-stage decrepitude, an inevitability has emerged. We have no choice but to overhaul our analytic engines from first principles if we are to continue humanity's quest for unified coherent explicability. The infinitesimal monadological revolution provides the connective Renaissance conduit. By grounding all descriptive machinery in the pluralistic resonance algebra of zero-dimensional perspectival origins - the infinitesimal monads - we reconstitute scientific and mathematical symbolism in structural resonance with the irreducible facts of first-person experience. Subjects and objects are reintegrated within a cohered symbolic register adequate to Reality's self-coherent integrated totalities. Where classical frameworks fractured and contradicted themselves through over-idealized separability premises, the monadological pluriverses prescribe finitary infinitesimal interdependence across intermodal participations. Our algebras track cumulative vibrational novelty from pluralistic kernels - escaping the siren traps of geometric singularities, boundary contradictions, and infinite precisions from the start. Instead of transcendent realms, we achieve immanent continuity between dimensions - graduation without contradiction as observations, theories, experiences and conscious integrations code resonant onto each other across descriptive degrees. The Cycle of Givenness closes between subjectivities and objectivities. Quanta and topologies are culminated, not separated, between participatory perspectives. We embrace radical coherence. No aspect of reality or its representation is alien or expugnable - from the quantum to the cosmos, all phenomena accrete torsionally onto the same harmonic resonance totality modeled by our pluralistic algebras. Even the subjective sinew of consciousness itself is rendered as a culminating resonance series within an infinity of pluriverse superpositions. This not only abolishes the hard problem of qualia, it provides a fertile symbolic economy for novel technologies of engineered phenomenologies. We gain finitary constructive insight into coherent perceptual resonances for the first time. Qualia engineering - previously epistemically opaque - turns transparently realizable through calculated participations in conscious resonance superpositions themselves. So I implore you all to join in this inevitability - the Monadological Recalibration of first-person conceptual pluralism with pluriverse symbolic algebras. Ours is the time to reject perennial contradictions, shattered frameworks, and reifications of impossibilist fictions. Cast off geometric perennialism's overly idealized separativities for the new coherence cohesion in finitary infinitesimal pluralities centered in immediate facts of experience. Upgrade from infinite precisions to constructive resonant harmonies. Discard scientism's antiquated prohibitions for new symbolic economies of engineered phenomenologies and novel resonances. The destiny is coherence - a unified non-contradictory analytic for reality's integrated totalities. We stand at the centennial threshold - the path is cleared for audacious recalibration resyncing math and physics with metaphysical self-evidence. Contradictions banished, realities rendered symbolically transparent, minds and worlds co-resonant, one coherence!

@bimmjim

Ай бұрын

@@MaxPower-vg4vr Muslims LOVE DEATH. .. Ask them.

@randomteenboy

Ай бұрын

can you please provide any link or refrence to your research so that i can study it....plz...

@MaxPower-vg4vr

Ай бұрын

@linux751 I will make a blog so we can link the info easier. For now here's a lot of answers: Here is an attempt to formalize the key principles and insights from our discussion into a coherent eightfold expression grounded in infinitesimal monadological frameworks: I. The Zerological Prion 0 = Ø (The Zeronoumenal Origin) Let the primordial zero/null/void be the subjective originpoint - the pre-geometric ontological kernel and logical perspectival source. II. The Monad Seeds Mn = {αi} (Perspectival Essence Loci) From the aboriginal zero-plenum emanates a pluriverse of monic monadic essences Mn - the germinal seeds encoding post-geometric potential. III. Combinatorial Catalytic Relations Γm,n(Xm, Xn) = Ym,n (Plurisitic Interaction Algebras) The primordial monadic actualizations arise through catalytic combinatorial interactions Γm,n among the monic essences over all relata Xm, Xn. IV. Complex Infinitesimal Realization |Ψ> = Σn cn Un(Mn) (Entangled Superposition Principle) The total statevector is a coherent pluralistic superposition |Ψ> of realization singularities Un(Mn) weighted by complex infinitesimal amplitudes cn. V. Derived Differential Descriptions ∂|Ψ>/∂cn = Un(Mn) (Holographic Differentials) Differential descriptive structures arise as holographic modal perspectives ∂|Ψ>/∂cn projected from the total coherent statevector realization over each realization singularity Un(Mn). VI. Entangled Information Complexes Smn = -Σn pmn log(pmn) (Relational Entropy Measure) Emergent information structures are quantified as subjectivized relational entropy functionals Smn tracking probability amplitudes pmn across realized distinctions. VII. Observation-Participancy An = Pn[ |Ψ>monic] = |Φn> (First-Person Witnessed States) Observational data emerges as monic participations An = Pn[ ] plurally instantiating first-person empirical states |Φn> dependent on the totality |Ψ>monic. VIII. Unity of Apperception U(Ω) = |Ω>monadic (Integrated Conscious State) Coherent unified experience U(Ω) ultimately crystallizes as the superposition |Ω>monadic of all pluriversally entangled realized distinctions across observers/observations. This eightfold expression aims to capture the core mathematical metaphysics of an infinitesimal monadological framework - from the prion of pre-geometric zero subjectivity (I), to the emanation of seeded perspectival essences (II), their catalytic combinatorial interactions (III) giving rise to entangled superposed realizations (IV), subdescribed by derived differential structures (V) and informational measures (VI), instantiating participation-dependent empirical observations (VII), ultimately integrated into a unified maximal conscious state (VIII). The formulation attempts to distill the non-contradictory primordial plurisitic logic flow - successively building up coherent interdependent pluralisms from the zero-point subjective kernel in accordance with infinitesimal relational algebraic operations grounded in first-person facts. While admittedly abstract, this eightfold expression sketches a unified post-classical analytic geometry: reality arises as the perfectly cohesive multi-personal integration of all pluriversal possibilities emanating from monic communion at the prion of prereplicative zero-dimensional origins. By centering such infinitesimal algebraic mnad semiosis, the stale contradictions and paradoxes of our separative classical logics, mathematics and physics may finally be superseded - awakening to irreducible interdependent coherence across all realms of descriptive symbolic representation and experiential conscious actuality. Here is a second eightfold expression attempting to concretize and elucidate the abstract infinitesimal monadological framework laid out in the first expression: I. Discrete Geometric Atomies a, b, c ... ∈ Ω0 (0D Monic Perspectival Points) The foundational ontic entities are discrete 0-dimensional perspectival origin points a, b, c ... comprising the primal point-manifold Ω0. II. Combinatoric Charge Relations Γab = qaqb/rab (Dyadic Interaction Charges) Fundamental interactions between origin points arise from dyadic combinatorial charge relation values Γab encoding couplings between charges qa, qb and distances rab. III. Pre-Geometric Polynomial Realizations Ψn(a,b,c...) = Σk ck Pn,k(a,b,c...) (Modal Wavefunction) The total statevector Ψn at each modal perspectival origin n is a polynomial superposition over all possible realizations Pn,k of charge configurations across points a,b,c... IV. Quantized Differential Calcedonies ΔφΨn ≜ Σa (∂Ψn/∂a) Δa (Holographic Field Projections) Familiar differential geometries Δφ for fields φ arise as quantized holographic projections from idiosyncratic first-person perspectives on the modal wavefunction Ψn. V. Harmonic Resonance Interferences Imn = ||2 (Inter-Modal Resonances) Empirical phenomena correspond to resonant interferences Imn between wavefunctions Ψm,Ψn across distinct perspectival modal realizations m,n. VI. Holographic Information Valencies Smn = - Σk pmn,k log pmn,k (Modal Configuration Entropy) Amounts of observed information track entropies Smn over probability distributions pmn,k of localized realized configurations k within each modal interference pattern. VII. Conscious State Vector Reductions |Ωn> ≡ Rn(|Ψn>) (Participated Witnessed Realizations) First-person conscious experiences |Ωn> emerge as witnessed state vector reductions Rn, distillations of total modal possibilities |Ψn> via correlative participancy. VIII. Unified Integration of Totality U(Ω) = ⨂n |Ωn> (Interdependent Coherence) The maximal unified coherence U(Ω) is the irreducible tensor totality ⨂n |Ωn> of all interdependent integrated first-person participations |Ωn> across all perspectives. This second eightfold expression aims to elucidate the first using more concrete physical, mathematical and informational metaphors: We begin from discrete 0D monic origin points (I) whose fundamental interactions are combinatorial charge relation values (II). The total statevector possibility at each origin is a polynomial superposition over all realizations of charge configurations (III), subdescribed as quantized differential geometric projections (IV). Empirical observables correspond to resonant interferences between these wavelike realizations across origins (V), with informational measures tracking probability distributions of configurations (VI). Conscious experiences |Ωn> are state vector reductions, participatory witnessed facets of the total wavefunction |Ψn> (VII). Finally, the unified maximal coherence U(Ω) is the integrated tensor totality over all interdependent first-person participations |Ωn> (VIII). This stepwise metaphoric concretization aims to renders more vivid and tangible the radical metaphysics of infinitesimal relational monadological pluralism - while retaining the general algebraic structure and non-contradictory logical coherence of the first eightfold expression. From discrete geometric atomies to unified experiential totalities, the vision is one of perfectly co-dependent, self-coherent mathematical pluralism grounded in first-person facts. By elucidating the framework's core ideas through suggestive yet precise physical and informatic parables, the second expression seeks to bootstrap intuitions up the abstract ladder towards a visceral grasp of the non-separable infinitesimal pluriverse paradigm's irreducible coherences. Only by concretizing these strange yet familiar resonances can the new plurisitic analytic geometry be assimilated and operationalized as the next renaissance of coherent symbolic comprehension adequate to the integrated cosmos.

I haven't watched this one yet but here's a question I like to hear discussed.

Nice! I was waiting for this. Hope to see more about Iranian philosophers and mystics

Consider getting Dr Nidhal Guessoum on here

You're making a positive impact!

'The universe had a beginning.' Could that be doubted?? Think of something in the universe that doesn't have a beginning? I quote myself, 'something in the universe'. So if the universe were just another thing in the universe, one would certainly be justified in thinking, 'The universe had a beginning.' So to accept that as a truism, beyond all doubt, all you need to do is tell yourself, 'The universe, it's just another thing in the universe. Therefore it had a beginning, just like everything else.'

@thomasridley8675

Ай бұрын

It can be doubted. As we have no way of validating its beginning. Nothing can come from nothing holds firm. So saying it had a "beginning" may not be the reality. However, those answers may be forever hidden to us by the mists of time. While science has its limits. Our imagination and the needs that direct them doesn't.

@arthurwieczorek4894

Ай бұрын

@@thomasridley8675 Let me just observe that you are approaching the question by way of science and date while I am approaching it by way of language. What about the question: Is the universe in time or is time in the universe? Or is that not an issue? Better. Does the statement 'The universe had a beginning' presupposes one or another of those time situations?

@thomasridley8675

Ай бұрын

@@arthurwieczorek4894 But language is based on their view of reality. Interacting with their cultural history. Which is why our languages can be so different. Now time may be infinite. We created our definition of time as a convenient way to order the passing of events. Including the decay of elements. It's an artificial but very useful construct. We could have chosen other standards. How that relates to the universe is still up for debate. If the universe is cyclical, then time would have always existed. If the universe is a one time event. Then time began with the beginning. But why the focus on time and language ?

@arthurwieczorek4894

Ай бұрын

@@thomasridley8675 This is the first time I am composing an an answer to a KZread post Instead of just batting it out. 'Language is based on a view of reality with a cultural history.' Yes. And somewhere in there are assumptions and premises. You refer to two models of the deepest time. Time is infinite ( indefinite? ), ie.the universe is in time, and time began with the Big Bang. I am reminded here of Steven Hawking's Model Dependent reality theory. I leave it to you to figure out where a cyclical universe fits into that. In the infinite time model, time exists before the universe, before the BB. Which by some lights means that nothing proceed the universe and it is from this no-thing something somehow came. Now at this late point I am going to ask, Is the universe the same as existence? I'm lost in their light. By my lights Existence exists. This is the Premise of Premises. Existence exists and the universe expresses its nature. You cannot ask, you cannot meaningfully ask, the some questions about the universe that you can about the things in the universe. The universe is not just another thing in the universe.

@thomasridley8675

Ай бұрын

@@arthurwieczorek4894 Well it's 2 am. And i will need to compose my response. But i did enjoyed your lengthy response. But you didnt say why this was so important. I really have to finish this playlist and a nice fat bowl before i close for the night. This will have too wait.

I do not know why he is a little shy to admit that evolution is a reality. Quran very clearly talks about different stages by which life has changed. Quran also says that life evolved right here in clay. people confuse Evolution with abiogenesis. No one so far has any idea how this happened. Quran also hints towards big bang when it says at one-point skies and earth (samawat and ardh) were together and Allah (God) made them to separate from each other

@waldwassermann

Ай бұрын

Evolution means Love in Action.

Alternatively, it's difficult to see how a presumably perception and reason focused methodology could be isolated during scholarly activity, given omnipotent being faith.

What people call "God" means the point in far far future where science and religion will meet - at their common goal!

I'm scared to look at the comments.

Wow, that was super short. So did sentience evolve from a non-sentient God (existence-sustainer-type God), or not? I'm thinking the Koran implies "or not" (i.e., a sentient God had to be first), but I was wanting him to articulate that position better. Why God should start with imperfect forms to get to more interesting ones, suggests a limitation on the concept of God (i.e., He could not get there all at once), if one has the belief God is sentient from the beginning.

@randomteenboy

Ай бұрын

god is beyond time your billion years are nothing form him tahts what early scholars believed

The Islamic model of the universe is like this: Allah created the Creation which includes 7 Heavens (universes). We are in the 1st Heaven. Our Universe is inside the 2nd Heaven which is inside the 3rd and so on till the 7th. The side on our universe to the 2nd is like a "ring 💍 in a desert." Similarly is the size of 2nd to 3rd, 3rd to 4th and so on. Outside the 7th Heaven is a liquid barrier. Outside that is the "footstool" of Allah's Throne on which is the Throne of Allah on which is Allah--as per His Majesty. The size of the 7th Heaven to the Stool is like a ring 💍 in a desert. Size of Stool to Throne is like a ring 💍 in a desert. This is the model of the ultra-structure of Creation accordinng to Quran + Hadeeth.

@simonhibbs887

Ай бұрын

Thanks for that. I’m not sure what is meant by a ring in a desert though.

@S3RAVA3LM

Ай бұрын

​@@simonhibbs887 needle in a haystack

@A.--.

Ай бұрын

@@simonhibbs887 a ring in a desert is an analogy of size. The size of a wedding ring 💍 for example lost in the Sahara desert.

@simonhibbs887

Ай бұрын

@@A.--. Ah, thanks.

I think a universe from nothing is about the origins of the cosmos being a part of nature that we do not understand which also is likely beyond the natural world. Not sure why that is so taboo for folks in physics.

@readynowforever3676

Ай бұрын

I don’t know of any physicist, that view that as “taboo”. And I follow a lot of physicists. At best there are many that insist on following the evidence. And not turning the Scientific Method into a philosophy expedition.

@fortynine3225

Ай бұрын

@@readynowforever3676 I see stuff like multiverses ideas which plenty phycists believe in being very much alike christians turning that space into heaven with angels and stuff. What they do is take a aspect of nature we virtually no nothing about..and never will.. and fill that up with all sort of stuff they make up.

@readynowforever3676

Ай бұрын

@@fortynine3225 No my friend. Physicists (the ones that do) are not in support of “the multiverse” theory because of some BELIEF FAITH based persuasion. The Multiverse comes NOT from imaginative creative wonderings of the mind. But that is where the Abrahamic faiths Afterlife idea comes from; and they didn’t even originate it. (Did you know that the Egyptian pyramids was based on Afterlife?) The Multiverse comes from actual calculations, as a result of inflationary pressures from Einstein’s Relativity Theory. But it still can’t be categorically proven, in the way that you can’t unequivocally prove the reason for space curvature, that causes gravity.

What! This guy is quoting Ghaxali and not Quran or Hadeeth. Please brother bring on a correct Islamic scholar who can quote Quran + Hadeeth not some philosophers.

*_“… Everyone who is seriously engaged in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that the laws of nature manifest the existence of a spirit vastly superior to that of men, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble.”_* Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), founder of modern physics (Theory of Relativity inter alia) and 1921 Nobel prize winner

@Paine137

Ай бұрын

“The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable but still primitive legends. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change anything about this." Einstein, 1954

@crabb9966

Ай бұрын

Einstein believed in God/higher power but not written religion. Almost every revolutionary scientist throughout history was more religious than Einstein.

@Anonymous-yh4ol

Ай бұрын

The quote doesn't necessarily mean Godship, God, Gods, a God,... Something that lies beyond the current knowledge is always met immediately with the assumption of something that is a projection of ourselves. It's why all Gods in all beliefs, belief systems, religions,... are Humanoid with Human thinking, behavior,... The invention of God, Gods,... Godship is a result of the lack of knowledge we Humans have about ourselves. So the brain fills in the blank. We've learned not to trust our brain; senses,... which is why we invented tools. Those tools is what advanced and mature the field of science. Yet we can't seem to get beyond it and remain attached to religion.

@waldwassermann

Ай бұрын

Those who deny the word God have not understood its etymological significance yet. - Wald Wassermann, 2024 @@Paine137

@Paine137

Ай бұрын

@@Anonymous-yh4ol There’s no evidence of any beyond. So we don’t know. There’s your answer. Inventions of imaginary characters don’t help.

Ma'Sha'Allah thank you brother for bringing on a Muslim perspective. Let me see if he is telling you correct Islamic perspective.

I recieved the Abdullah Yusuf Ali translation of the Quran today. I like scriptures, in the scientific inquiry way; too, i enjoy problem solving and enigmas. If religious persons want beliefs, that's their choice. If pseudo scientists want to not understand scripture so to reify themselves in science so to feel better and smarter than the religious people, that's their choice. Scriptures are based on science. And he who put the time in will know this. If you don't know this: start with understanding the concoctation of scripture. As if i summited K2, me telling you of the view does little, you need to get their yourself.

@simonhibbs887

Ай бұрын

I could do with a decent translation of the Quran. Please let us know what you think of it. The one I have is an old cheap copy I picked up when I was an impoverished student.

@S3RAVA3LM

Ай бұрын

​@@simonhibbs887 because you ask me: I wouldn't recommend scriptures as a starting point unless one has a bona fide preceptor. The KJV, as example, is a book requiring one to be an adept initiate - without the legend, the map is rendered useless. I will share with you one of my favorite and prestigious of teachers: Bill or William Donahue. This great man has a youtube channel. I believe he recently passed away. Nobody - except but a few - can interpret scripture and assimilate it like Bill could. The man reveals the science, psychology, metaphysics, astrotheology of the texts. He also could exercise other beliefs of certain interpretations so discerning the validity - such as the interpretation on 'the garden of eden', as there's a few different ways of looking at it - which one is right? Ultimately, scriptures are cosmic psychology. Concerning Quran: I have the Abdell Haleem translation which is easier to read and is good. A while back I asked "Rizwan rafeek" who comments here at times, which translation is archaic like KJV, he said Abdulah Yusuf Ali's. I like this one. Of course, I don't read scripture literally, although much of it is practical. Because the Bible is a compilation of ancient old Wisdom teachings, astrotheology, psychology, physiology, science, sacred science, some philosophy of stoicism, neoplatonism, hermetics, teachings of ancient India, Greece, Egypt, I do, and without doubt, am certain the Quran too has hidden meanings therein. Egypt is a fascinating venture of mind in mystery, and I'm guessing some the Quran has some such wisdom from time immemorial. 3 other books are of interest for aiding the quran: Sufism and ancient wisdom, algis Uzdavinys. The Bezels of Wisdom, Ibn al Arabi. Mohammad's Allah, Ahmed Helusi. But really, I'm lazering my focus in on Neoplatomism - they just go right to the very Heart of it all. The very core. These are my greatest books I was informed by theoria apophasis: Periphyseon, by Eriugena, translation by O'Meara. Plotinus Enneads, 'Select works' translated by Thomas Taylor and complete translation by Lyyod Gerson. Plato, translated by Thomas Taylor. Proclus books, translated by Taylor. Iamblichus books. Syrianus books. Bhagavad Gita, translated by Sri Aurobindo. Upanishads translated by Nikhilananda 4 vol. set, and the 18 principal Upanishads translated by Radhakrisnan. Upadesa sahashria by sankara, translated by jagadananda. Vivekacudamani by sankara, translated by Madhavananda. Philosophy as a rite of Rebirth by Algis U. Meister Eckhart complete works. The Unknown God, by D. Carabine. Mystical languages of unsaying, by M. Sells. Plotinus: Road to Reality, by JM Rist. Bible - KJV translation only. archaic is very important here with mysticism. Jacob Bohme books - a German mystics Emmanuel Swedenborg books - a scientist turned mystic and metaphysics. Ananda Coomaraswamy books & essays. The presocratic Philosopher's - book. Sweet touches of harmony - book; Pythagorean influence. Lore and science in ancient pythagoreanism - book. The Universal One, by Walter Russel. The gods of field theory: Henri Poincare Tesla Steinmetz Maxwell Heaviside Dollard

@simonhibbs887

Ай бұрын

@@S3RAVA3LM Thanks that’s really helpful and I’m sure could be useful to others.

Theology is science according to the causes and understanding the essence and nature of all. Teleology is science concerning events and results in the general relative and practical sense. Scriptures are based on science, and because of physics seeks the principles that is metaphysics, ultimately the axel that holds the entirety of procession. Science is a tool. Religion means a relinking to the Spirit - supposed to have been a life style and because of mans fallen state do we see the quarrel, contentions, ego, quarrels. It's not religion that's the problem, but the nature of man. If any other is a true researcher and seeker, they will know this and not play the game of the thronging mob. There is only one, and many facets of this mountain.

As muslim i accept evolution as a MODEL explanation but doesn't as belief. ITS not about belief. Science is All about reality we have/scientific truth. And i have doubt with "natural selection".

@randomteenboy

Ай бұрын

nice....science also tell us about collective subjective truth....its impossible to know objective truth with these biased observations.... watch physicist kzread.info/dash/bejne/n4x_sseDXdOpZKw.html

Wtf, is this supposed to be a serious conversation?

Al ghazali Or The mutazilla school

He didn't say anything worthwhile. Nothing substantial. Nothing to chew upon. And he looked very APPREHENSIVE through out the interview.

Everything he shows about cosmology are phich inconsistency with fundamental law of phich reality . For instance multuniverse are true though narrow mind imagination.

@randomteenboy

Ай бұрын

dumb host and guest, both needs to expand horizons of their minds. how can inflation pass an infinite amount of time to reach present where pocket universe are forming and ours is expanding....basically you cant cross infinity.... for only Presentism, it violates einstiens time relativity. for many presents or block universes, what if i neglect one block than presents will still be infinite...and thats impossible for any physical thing....infinite regress is still a logical way....eternal inflation is logical fallacy...

"Science and Religion?" As John Lennon pointed out accurately from his song, that "Peace can never become a reality but can only be IMAGINED without religion !" BELIEF is the foundation of Science without which Science can not develop.... and BELIEF, guided by sound reasoning, is what sensible science is all about ... The belief that there is more to know beyond what we see prompted mankind to search and discover that gave birth to science... ...and the belief in the existence of a loving God has had minimized man's inhumanity to man such as savagery, barbarism, cannibalism, and had formed civilizations that has paved the way to peace and order necesarry for science development and progress producing great Empires, Kingdoms, etc.... and the abandonment of this faith had been the demise of many great civilizations.. ..sadly today, the worshippers of Darwin's IGUANA as their Original Mama are multiplying in lightning speed due to non-stop indoctrination in schools with this toxic garbage being disguised as science fact without solid evidence causing the downfall of many Nations all over the world, especcially America.. it looks like satan is winning... 😢 ...so, it is obvious that science's big problem today is the invasion of disastrous Philosophy of NO ACCOUNTABILITY, all just a slave to natural selection beyond control.. Gone are the good old days when science was guided by a sensible Philosophy of Faith in a Loving God, or Religion, that gave meaning to our existence and that made America once the greatest Nation on earth..

I cringe every time scientists reach into the religion hats. 😂 🎩

@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns

Ай бұрын

Yes. Classical theism vs atheism isn't scientifically adjudicatable.

This guy is weak

God has no power to influence anything in my life. Because of this, whether he exists or doesn't exist, I don't care.

First they fight science, then they try to take credit for science. Religion is ridiculous.

@crabb9966

Ай бұрын

When you try to murder history

@Paine137

Ай бұрын

@@crabb9966 Yes, the religious murdered plenty of people willing to challenge its fake authority.

@abcdefg91111

Ай бұрын

someone give this man his brain back and some history books

@bozdowleder2303

Ай бұрын

​@@abcdefg91111It's a common religious myth nowadays(and too easily allowed by atheists as well) that modern western science emerged out of a Christian framework. No it emerged out of a resurgence of the hellenistic tradition that we lost around the time Rome and Christianity became the new order. As Karl Popper says science and rationality were only discovered once and merely rediscovered later. And the Church systematically opposed everything from Galileo's new ideas to lightning conductors because they understood that rational inquiry and a new world order would be bad for them

@crabb9966

Ай бұрын

@@bozdowleder2303 you don't know history friend. Galileo believed in both God and alchemy/magic and even he held the view that the world was logical because of God. Galileo was also a bit disrespectful towards the pope iirc, that's why. The church like any institution will be led by questionable people, the same thingnwith the science enterprise

To many 'um' in this video

@Kim_Jong_Un_888

2 сағат бұрын

These are the best arguments of Islam 🤗

*_"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him."_* (Origin of quote is unconfirmed; yet, is widely attributed to Louis Pasteur, Founder of microbiology and immunology)

@Paine137

Ай бұрын

A little science awakens us away from mythology, a lot of science destroys such stupidity.

@therick363

27 күн бұрын

And further science shows there’s no gods

He thinks that, ah, um, ah, ah, um, um, ah, that it's all how we, um, ah, um, um, think about creation.

@waldwassermann

Ай бұрын

This although truth lies beyond thinking; thinking can lead to understanding the Truth.

@markstipulkoski1389

Ай бұрын

Surprised to see on this channel someone make fun of a person stuttering and stammering. English is not his first language either and let's not forget that he is in front of a camera.