+- Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory (http://generational-theory.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Fourth Turning Forums (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Religion, Spirituality and Astrology (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-19.html)
+--- Thread: New paradigms in science and knowledge (/thread-813.html)
New paradigms in science and knowledge - Eric the Green - 06-07-2017
I thought of something to add to the discussion about quantum theory I was having with Bob, because I mentioned he might still be in the Saturn/brown stage in planetary dynamics in regard to his Newtonian views (the Saturn era being the last stage of the agricultural age, the age of kings and early western science). He claims Many Worlds is an interpretation of quantum theory that takes us beyond the Newtonian paradigm, and that emotion is a factor in the outcome of probabilities.
Plato and Heidegger as philosophers don't agree on a whole lot, but they both said that "care" is a determinative factor in human reality, at least. Care is an emotion, in a sense, and it could also be called love. Consciousness, which is recognized as a factor in updated Copenhagen versions of quantum theory, entered quantum theory as "the observer" which affects experiments. Care is a conscious emotion, and more than this, it is intentional. It conveys interest, or purposive behavior.
June distinguished "emotion" from "feeling." The latter includes love and caring, which are identified with F-feeling on many test questions of MBTI. People with strong F are those who care about relationships and people. Emotion, Jung said, was more reactive; an automatic physical expression. But IF emotion is taken to mean something like care or love, then Bob's physics enters territory compatible with existential and essentialist philosophy and with mystical awareness, in which the universe may be uncertain and spontaneous, but not "random," because there is intention within it.
RE: New paradigms in science and knowledge - Eric the Green - 07-13-2019
New discussion of quantum entanglement, plus some symbolic speculations:
http://generational-theory.com/forum/thread-5597-post-44782.html#pid44782
plus see the next post too.
RE: New paradigms in science and knowledge - Bill the Piper - 07-13-2019
(06-07-2017, 07:45 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: June distinguished "emotion" from "feeling." The latter includes love and caring, which are identified with F-feeling on many test questions of MBTI. People with strong F are those who care about relationships and people. Emotion, Jung said, was more reactive; an automatic physical expression. But IF emotion is taken to mean something like care or love, then Bob's physics enters territory compatible with existential and essentialist philosophy and with mystical awareness, in which the universe may be uncertain and spontaneous, but not "random," because there is intention within it.
Feeling is something more than emotion. There are only a few basic emotions, according to Paul Ekman who studied facial expression of people from around the globe there are seven: happiness, sadness, surprise, fear, anger, disgust, and contempt. They are the same in everybody and we share them with other mammals, like dogs.
But feeling is infinite. One can have a "childhood nostalgia" feeling, when something reminds one of the way one experienced the world as a child. I had such a feeling yesterday when reading William Blake's poems. Winter is a monster that usually sleeps in the caves of Iceland but sometimes visits Britain and dusk happens because God draws back the blue curtains of day. I thought, I would believe these explanations when I was 5 year old. Don't get me wrong. I don't bash Blake at all, I think it requires a lot of skill to evoke this way of seeing in a man in his 30s. And I can have a feeling of "2005 nostalgia", or nostalgia for the period before the negative changes of my 20s. It's a different feeling from the childhood nostalgia one.
Or take fear. CS Lewis distinguished between ordinary fear of (say) a tiger, and more spiritual fear he called dread. You are afraid of a tiger because he can eat you, but a demon is scary because he's a demon, not because of something he can do. If instead of demon I said psychopath, there would be a different shade of dread. Horror movies wouldn't exist if we felt only primal animal fear, always the same.