10-30-2018, 10:03 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-30-2018, 10:13 PM by Eric the Green.)
(10-30-2018, 08:42 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: But the scientists no longer use alchemy (which is the predecessor of highly-useful chemistry that relies upon sophisticated machinery and measuring devices) or astrology. I concede that however useless I find astrology, it at least allowed the development of some sophisticated mathematics. Religion? Little can more effectively comfort people in hopeless situations.
My point though was just that interest in and knowledge of astrology and alchemy, as well as religion, did not impair the scientists who founded today's science. Metaphysical knowledge like astrology and alchemy adds to our knowledge, rather than conflicts with it, although it does conflict with materialist dogmas which many scientists and science fans cling to.
And of course I have shown any open mind here enough evidence that astrology has a degree of truth through the research I have done and shared here, and its obvious links to the saeculum and generations. It is a challenge to the dominant paradigm, and shows instead that we are all an intimate part of the cosmos, and connected to the Earth and the sky and their cycles, not separate entities living in our own worlds.
Astrology cannot be seen as true from the point of view of mechanical causation, but that is what most people think astrology is saying, because that's what people are used to thinking. Astrology does not say that the planets and signs are entities that cause things in our lives. It is saying that through synchronicity, resonance, and perhaps quantum non-local connections and entanglements, the inherent vibration and spirit of the planets are archetypes reflected in our own being as microcosms of the macrocosm. As above, so below. It is just an idea most people today are not used to, but was common before the 18th century. And it was common because it actually works. And it remains the most venerable (and maybe the best) system of psychological typing, on which all others are based including the Strauss and Howe system.
Quote:Ironically it is objective science that establishes the danger of climate change and can predict consequences upon nature, ecosystems, and wildlife. Anyone who wants to protect Nature might as well know some mathematics, chemistry, physics, and biology. For dealing with the economics of it all, one might want to study some accounting, economics, and business management. Big Business is highly adept at convincing people that those ivory-tower activists who rhapsodize about the glory of Nature threaten livelihoods. So long as the intellectual hired guns of Big Business can convince people that greater pollution means that people get to keep their jobs, the polluters will win.
Indeed
Quote:Trying to understand Life looks like one of the supreme challenges of the intellect.
Which it cannot meet.
Quote:Quote:7. diminishing returns from materialist medicine; inability to recognize the value of alternative therapies, especially for lifestyle diseases, and tendency to repress these alternatives
Quit smoking, don't drink to excess, control weight, don't participate in reckless sexuality, get some exercise... Some people have a "death style".
Yes indeed. And methods that mainstream scientists do not always recognize, but may also have scientifically-proven benefits, can be helpful, such as chinese medicine, meditation and prayer, herbs etc.
Quote:The fault with materialism is that one can never reduce all knowledge to the actions of subatomic particles, which materialism must do to allow a perfect prediction of events.
Indeed.
Quote:Quote:A science guy who does the videos called It's OK to be Smart ends his shows with "stay curious." Good advice!
Obvious agreement. Smugness is not a good attitude for scientific inquiry.
Curiosity also leads some people like me to look beyond science sometimes for answers, as well as to science for the knowledge it can provide.