06-12-2017, 06:11 AM
(06-10-2017, 08:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I still don't see either of us as being fundamentalists. I really reserve that label for groups with a detailed interpretation of a holy book that do not accept any interpretation other than their own. JPT was a fundamentalist. the two of us are off the beaten track wackos.
I will admit to being fond of Newton's Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, and the leading paragraphs of Jefferson's Declaration of Independence. To a lesser degree, I respect parts of the Bible, but that's a historical document written over many centuries reflecting many conflicting cultures and world views. I find myself having to be selective there.
I do sort of expect a rigid arbitrary defense of Planetary Dynamics. Your thought patterns can be as rigid and inflexible as a fundamentalist's. Still, one person rigidly defending said person's viewpoint doesn't feel to me like fundamentalism. Fundamentalism to me involves a big group pounding on a holy book while breathing fire and brimstone.
But if Fundamentalism just means believing firmly in one's world view, one might say there are lots of fundamentalists visiting the forum. Lots of us are committed firmly to our beliefs, our ways of looking at things.
That's right.
Myself, I am still growing in my awareness that at bottom, I am pure consciousness. To me, it's no longer a matter of debate. Debating cannot get you to awareness of pure consciousness. It's a matter of perception, in the widest sense, or not.
I see you as dedicated to the evidence provided by our senses, and its tools. As I see it, pure consciousness is prior to, and is the basis for, all sense perception. That does not make sense perception wrong or un-valuable, however. Since pure consciousness is the basis for all consciousness, it transcends and includes sense perception. While we need to see how limited sense perception is, in my world view, once one has transcended those limits, it is redeemed and becomes useful again. I see empirical investigation and evidence as very necessary to some kinds of knowledge. Some may be fanatical and reject it, but that's not me. I also use it. And I value the delights of the senses, as well as the feelings, which are also problematic if one is stuck in them, but very valuable if not stuck in them. And the same goes for our more purely-intellectual functions.