Shanta,Thanks for your careful reading of what I wrote and thoughtful response. I am still at a loss though of what his higher intelligence and what is lower intelligence. You have simply shown how humans are different from other animals in the activities they perform. I also do not understand what is higher knowledge and what is lower knowledge. I do not agree with your interpretation of Socrates. It is not humility but honesty. Socrates was not a specialist in anything so he did not have knowledge in anything. There were specialists who claimed to have knowledge in their specializations but upon being interviewed by Socrates they were exposed to not have the knowledge that they claimed to have. This does not mean that Socrates knew more about their specialization than they did. The lesson is one should never be over confident nor dogmatic. At the time there was a sense, as there is perhaps today as well, that certain people like poets, statesmen, academicians and intellectuals had more knowledge than craftspersons. Socrates is also challenging this view as he interviews famous people not ordinary craftspersons. Plato in his dialogues also uses a lot of examples from crafts to make his points showing his great respect of craftspersons and knowledge by experience and hard work. There are multiple domains of knowledge and I just do not see why and how the knowledge of a carpenter is a lower knowledge than the knowledge of a laboratory scientist. Feels good to say this on May Day.Priyedarshi--On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Dr. Bhakti Niskama Shanta <b...@scsiscs.org> wrote:--Dear Priyedarshi Jetli jiNamaskar.Every living entity is endowed with certain degree of intelligence and it is not a presumption but is a scientifically confirmed fact (you may read the paper “Bacteria are small but not stupid”). Hence, it is oblivious that bees are also intelligent. As far as comparing the intelligence of nonhuman creatures with human being is concerted, please note that intelligence is a subjective quality of the living entity and there are no standard units (like meter or kilogram) to measure and compare the same. We can only compare it with respect to different point of views. It is an observable fact that as compared to human beings different nonhuman living entities are very expert in fulfilling the immediate biological needs: eating (a pig can eat anything and everything), sleeping (a python can happily sleep for long long time), mating and defending. They do not need any special education and scientific research to perform these tasks and yet our modern education and scientific research works are mostly focused towards fulfilling these immediate biological needs only. Hence, you are correct in that sense that many of nonhuman creatures are more intelligent than human beings. But in another sense we human beings also systematically pursue philosophy, science, religion and so on, which we do not find in nonhuman creatures. So the judgment of the intelligence of different living entities depends on the angle of vision.You have told “As for needing help from those who have higher knowledge, I do not like the authoritative tint you give it.” and in contrast to what you have claimed in this sentence you have quoted some authorities (Buddha, Socrates, Confucius, Christ and many others) to try to justify your view points. Your statement “In the case of Socrates he can only help others gain knowledge because he himself does not have knowledge.” is completely misleading because Socrates could readily embrace the humility that “I know that I know nothing”. So, Socrates does have some higher knowledge because he has already realized the limits of egocentric knowledge gaining and that is the reason that he could teach to those who are ignorant (because they fancy that they know something) about this important humility that is very much essential for any genuine enlightenment. Regarding the question that how we can know who has higher knowledge and who has not, we have to realize that real knowledge does not originate from us (it is much beyond the reach of egocentric self) and hence we can never know by our own abilities alone what real knowledge is and who has that. Only we can sincerely hanker for that and we can only hope that some help will descend from the higher plane.Thanking you.Sincerely,
Bhakti Niskama Shanta, Ph.D. Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute +91-(9748906907) #8, Gopalakrishnan Mansion, Konappana Agrahara, Electronic City, Bangalore, Karnataka, India On Sunday, 30 April 2017 9:27 PM, priyedarshi jetli <pje...@gmail.com> wrote:
Shanta,Quite loaded with standard presumptions. What or who is an "intelligent being". Are bees not intelligent? They are more intelligent than humans in some aspects. To first place humans above other animals and then call them intelligent and then say that they come from an even more intelligent being is not a very convincing argument I am afraid.As for needing help from those who have higher knowledge, I do not like the authoritative tint you give it. The pedagogical message of Buddha, Scocrates, Confucious, Christ and many others is that knowledge is to be sought by the knower, who can be guided by a wise person but the wise person cannot impart knowledge to the knower. In the case of Socrates he can only help others gain knowledge because he himself does not have knowledge. It is a completely anti-authoritarian account of knowledge. If you say some have higher knowledge than others you will get caught in an authoritarian vicious circle. Who will decide that X has higher knowledge than I do. There will be some Y who has higher knowledge than X and I who can decide that. Then there will have to be a Z who has higher knowledge than Y to decide on the authority of Y to make the decision he does. And so on.....Priyedarshi--On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Dr. Bhakti Niskama Shanta <b...@scsiscs.org> wrote:Dear Dr. Ádám KunNamaskar. Thank you for your reply.You have told “Richard Lenski's study of E.coli evolution is not a study of macroevulution. Long-term evolution does not equate to macroevolution... So it does prove that novelty can arise in evolutionary experiments.”We repeat that there is no empirical evidence that can support the idea that macroevolution is nothing but the repeated rounds of microevolution added up. The notion that in future microevolution will produce macroevolution is a mere dogmatic faith and there is no valid reason for believing that studies founded on such mere belief system have some scientific standing.Your have stated “Please have this argument with those well-versed in the philosophy of science. I admit my limitations. To be honest we do not know if the Sun will rise in the east and set in the west.” If you feel that rising of Sun example belongs to the domain of some sophisticated philosophy of science then let us consider another pure and simple empirical example. We smell by our nose and taste by our tongue. Like evolutionists someone can dogmatically argue that in future it will be reversed: we will smell by our tongue and taste by our nose. When someone challenges that irrational argument then he/she may dogmatically challenge that opposition with the argument similar to yours (Can you prove that macroevolution cannot happen?) “can you prove that in future we cannot smell by our tongue and taste by our nose?” Such naive arguments prove that the supporters of evolution are deviating from the core principles of science and in the process embracing a mere dogmatic attitude to support evolution. Please clarify whether you accept this plain fact or not, because apart from such unscientific arguments you have also repeatedly asserted without any empirical/scientific evidence: “all our knowledge about evolution and the history fo Earth tells us that species came from other species.” (you should remember here that the concept of species is controversial in science and what we are arguing here is about the macroevolution and not about a mere reproductive isolation).You have further argued “Developmental process can explain some morphological changes. But if that would be the sole difference and it would always be responding to the environment then (1) A chimp raised in a human family would become a human (2) all living organism would share the same genome. None of it is true. Development alone cannot explain the diversification of life.”Embryological development from zygote to the adult organism empirically proves that it is a miraculous process that can produce not only varieties of cells but also varieties of organs that can perform different function in the body as a whole. After the developmental process is finished, except some special cells, the same cells of an organ produce the same cells to meet different requirements of the body. Similarly the first life (God) can miraculously produce varieties of things that are inconceivable for ordinary processes. Your argument that “A chimp raised in a human family would become a human” is irrelevant because a mere environmental pressure will not force the heart organ to transform into an eye organ. The next argument of yours “all living organism would share the same genome” simply emphasizes the uniformitarian mindset that is commonly practiced in physical sciences but there is no scientific reason to believe that life/nature is enslaved to follow that dictum. You may read about chimera (genetics) to sense the complex nature of life on our Earth. Thus all empirical evidence confirms that the miraculous developmental process alone can explain the diversification of life. Science must accept miracles because it is empirically observed fact (embryological development) and our scientific methods cannot imitate the same (all the science and all the scientists in the world together cannot make a single blade of grass).You have told ““If changes occur in the network as a whole, then the various nodes (species) change accordingly, to maintain the harmony of the network of life." And that is one way to describe evolution. I'm glad that you are on board :)” If you think that evolution and developmental process are one and same then we have no problem to agree with such a concept of evolution.About the views of scientists under www.thethirdwayofevolution.com you have told “Did they ever question the basics of evolution...?” Please elaborate what are those basics of evolution.By citing the transient nature of material world (everything has a beginning and an end) you have strangely concluded that “The ape ancestor is our beginning, and an evolved human being is what will come after us. We cannot come from nothing.” What is the scientific basis for this radical conclusion? Moreover, a frog in a well cannot understand the phenomenon of gigantic ocean and thus our tiny brains cannot conceive the realty that is much beyond our observational limits. The transient material world is only a perverted reflection of eternal spiritual world. The word temporary has no meaning if there is nothing permanent.You have also told “Survival of the fittest. This is a catchy phrase. It does not equate the "only one one can remain" (as in the Highlander movie). So we also need food, and our being fit includes the survival of other species too. Exploitation has an evil connotation. We are heterotrophs, thus we eat other beings (or parts of other beings). I do not think that it makes us evil.”On what basis you justify the practice of exploitation attitude! Do you think that there is a way to overcome it? Obviously the concept of evolution does not have any foundation to help us overcome the spirit of exploitation. But the concept of an organic whole does teach us that there is a way by which we can overcome the exploitative spirit. But we leave that to you to understand it by yourself.You have asked us “We cannot explain how we became intelligent. We generally cannot, so it is not the problem of evolution or any other branch of knowing, it is our lack of knowledge. Do you know how we become "knowing"?”At least we know from empirical observation that every intelligent being comes from a preexisting intelligent being and an intelligent being does not appear from the mechanical or chemical aggregation of dull matter. Thus, an intelligent sentient life is primitive and reproductive of itself – omne vivum ex vivo – life comes from life. Moreover, in the miraculous developmental process a heart organ is endowed with the intelligence to perform the function of heart, an eye organ is endowed with the intelligence to perform the function of eye and so on. So the varieties of intelligent cells and organs appear from the developmental process and not by evolution. Similarly, different living organisms are part of an organic whole and are endowed with the appropriate intelligence to serve the purpose of that whole. Therefore, it is not the lack of knowledge but the practice of stubborn support for evolution that forces us to embrace the ignorance by simply denying the evidence.You have also not provided any scientific basis for your final conclusion “Evolutionary psychology has a scientific basis. As it involves humans, it is not very easy to do experiments. If any kind of study of the human mind is unscientific, then what is this mailing list about? If inquiry about the mind is a valid scientific pursuit then evolutionary psychology is fine.” Study of human mind is not unscientific but, to dogmatically insist that it came from nonhuman mind is unscientific. One cannot simply inquire and know things, otherwise why we have schooling system. To have proper knowledge one also needs some significant practical help from someone who has the higher knowledge.Thanking you.Sincerely,
Bhakti Niskama Shanta, Ph.D. Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute +91-(9748906907) #8, Gopalakrishnan Mansion, Konappana Agrahara, Electronic City, Bangalore, Karnataka, India On Saturday, 29 April 2017 12:23 AM, Kun Ádám <kun...@ludens.elte.hu> wrote:
Dear Dr. Bhakti Niskama Shanta,Thank you very much for your reply.(1) Richard Lenski's study of E.coli evolution is not a study ofmacroevulution. Long-term evolution does not equate to macroevolution.Those bacteria are grown on a minimal media with sugar being their main,an in some sense only food source. E.coli can live under suchenvironment. The evolutionary experiment show that they can actuallybecome very good at it. Mostly this is stabilizing selection. On theother hand, they have also found that there is evolutionary novelty: insome lines the bacteria evolved to be able to take up and utilizecitrate. So it does prove that novelty can arise in evolutionaryexperiments.> The stereotype unscientific arguments (like, “/Can you prove that> macroevolution cannot happen? Please bear in mind that absence of> evidence is not evidence for absence./”) will not make a scientific> case in the support of macroevolution. Do you think that modern> science is founded on this type of naive arguments? Anyone can make a> statement that after 1000 years Sun will rise in the west and then can> argue (similar to your argument) with opponents that /can you prove> that/ “/Sun cannot rise in the west/”. Any layman can construct> several such arguments and do you expect that science should accept> all of them? To defend evolution we should not deviate from the core> scientific process that modern science follows and we should always> remember that science is not a practice of dogma.(2) Please have this argument with those well-versed in the philosophyof science. I admit my limitations. To be honest we do not know if theSun will rise in the east and set in the west. As far as we know it doesit, and all our models of how the Earth revolve around the Sun predictthat it will be so tomorrow. Can you be sure? In similar veins all ourknowledge about evolution and the history fo Earth tells us that speciescame from other species.> You have told “/Evolution at least can explain the origin and> diversification life./” Why do you think that people should believe> this? What is the scientific basis?> You have asked “/What would be your alternative?/” The first message> on this thread> explains the alternative (developmental process and not evolution that> causes the appearance of biodiversity) and we had further clarified> the same in our reply to Vinod Sehgal>>Developmental process can explain some morphological changes. But ifthat would be the sole difference and it would always be responding tothe environment then (1) A chimp raised in a human family would become ahuman (2) all living organism would share the same genome. None of it istrue. Development alone cannot explain the diversification of life.> You have told “/We find different diversity in different historical> layers in the fossil record./” All living entities are related to each> other like a net, with the different species representing the nodes of> that network. Vedic chronology talks about different /Yuga/ cycles and> thus time and again our world has witnessed a drastic change, which> has led to a significant change in the network of life on our Earth at> different periods of life. If changes occur in the network as a whole,> then the various nodes (species) change accordingly, to maintain the> harmony of the network of life. Fossil record only gives a hint of> those changes. You have also told “/Getting from a time with less> species to a time with more necessitates a mechanism to get new> species. Evolution is such a mechanism./” At present stage this is a> pure speculation because we do not have any scientific method that can> accurately predict the chronology from the fossil record. We have> discussed that in a book chapter “The Chronology of Geological Column:> An Incomplete Tool to Search Georesources>You say: "If changes occur in the network as a whole, then the variousnodes (species) change accordingly, to maintain the harmony of thenetwork of life." And that is one way to describe evolution. I'm gladthat you are on board :)> The scientists under thethirdwayofevolution> <http://www. thethirdwayofevolution.com/> have already supplied> significant scientific evidence against the concept of evolution that> is commonly taught in different universities and colleges across the> world. That itself is enough to demand a change in the syllabus to> meet the revolutionary realization of 21st century biology. However,> at preset even that much humility is not shown by the majority of> scientific community and hence Joseph A. Kuhn, MD> <http://www.wlsdocs.com/about- us/dr-joseph-kuhn.php> states in his> paper ‘Dissecting Darwinism> In essence, current biology students, aspiring medical students, and> future scientists are not being taught the whole story. Rather,> evidence suggests that they continue to receive incorrect and> incomplete material that exaggerates the effect of random mutation and> natural selection to account for DNA, the cell, or the transition from> species to species.Did they ever question the basics of evolution and not some particularpart of biology? Please read their work! They are evolutionary biologistof the XXI.c. And indeed some advances of the last decades have notdribbled down to all branches of education. The broad strokes one learnsin elementary and secondary school are solid enough, biology studentsshould learn the most up to date form of evolution.> You have told “/Questioning something is scientific. Stating that it> is untrue because you wish it to be so is not./” We are questioning> those presumptions (speculations: human beings came from apes) that> are against the observable empirical evidence (empirically verifiable:> human comes from human and apes comes from apes). What is the> scientific basis for your assertion?I think there is a fundamental difference between our thinking. Iobserve that there are beginning and ends. The sun come up, and thus ourday begins. And then it settles and thus the day concludes. The desk I'msitting in front of has a finite dimension, I can touch its perimeter.My life had a beginning, and evidence about other humans tell me that itwill have an end (hopefully not in the near future). If everything Iobserve has a beginning and and end, then humanity as a species shouldhave a beginning and and end too. The ape ancestor is our beginning, andan evolved human being is what will come after us. We cannot come fromnothing.> You have told “/Evolution does not in any sense teaches materialistic> world view more than any other branch of the natural sciences. And> that materialistic world view is by no means a common knowledge. If> people would take evolutionary theory to their hearth, which by the> way includes all biology ecology included, they would know that> destroying species and our environment is bad for us. The urge for> //selfishness as centerpiece in evolution was propagated by> politicians and not by scientist./” If you think that selfishness is> not the centerpiece in evolution then why it propagates the concept of> survival of fittest. Without any foundation how the concept of> (objective) evolution or materialistic world view can teach the> concept: ‘destroying species and our environment is bad for us.’ Every> organism is dependent on other organisms for food and survival.> Without exploiting other living entities and environment how the> evolution that is taught in colleges and universities across the world> can justify the survival? Evolution also does not explain: by what> mechanism ‘a piece of matter’/’the fist life (first cell)’/’the> successive living entities’ developed the /knowing ability/ that> helped them /realize /that ‘destroying species and our environment is> bad for us.’Survival of the fittest. This is a catchy phrase. It does not equate the"only one one can remain" (as in the Highlander movie). So we also needfood, and our being fit includes the survival of other species too.Exploitation has an evil connotation. We are heterotrophs, thus we eatother beings (or parts of other beings). I do not think that it makes usevil.We cannot explain how we became intelligent. We generally cannot, so itis not the problem of evolution or any other branch of knowing, it isour lack of knowledge. Do you know how we become "knowing"?> You have also told “/Evolutionary theory of the present (and not that> of the '80) tries to understand why we are moral and does not argue> against our highly cooperative nature./” You should know that> evolutionary psychology (EP) cannot unify the social and natural> sciences because except pure mental speculations it does not have any> real scientific foundation (it cannot satisfy the rigorous demands of> experimental evolutionary biology)Evolutionary psychology has a scientific basis. As it involves humans,it is not very easy to do experiments. If any kind of study of the humanmind is unscientific, then what is this mailing list about? If inquiryabout the mind is a valid scientific pursuit then evolutionarypsychology is fine.best wishes,ÁdámOn Sunday, April 23, 2017 at 9:56:09 PM UTC+5:30, kunadam wrote:>> Dear Dr. Bhakti Niskama Shanta,>>> > It is a common practice in modern science where based on> evidence many> > presumed concepts are replaced by new concepts. If we are following> > the same process that modern science follows then there is a valid> > scientific reason behind the evidence based refutation of evolution> > theory.> Sure.> > If microevolution constitutes most of the evolution theory then> there> > should not be a problem for any scientist to accept the same. As> you> > have accepted that it is not easy to do experiments on> macroevolution> > (although we can find experimental studies on bacteria which> disprove> > macroevolution) and hence we should not propagate a purely faith> based> > opinion (macroevolution is nothing but the repeated rounds of> > microevolution added up) on the name of science. Fossil record also> > does not prove this concept that macroevolution is nothing but the> > repeated rounds of microevolution added up.> Which study on bacteria did disprove macroevolution?> Can you prove that macroevolution cannot happen? Please bear in mind> that absence of evidence is not evidence for absence. I.e. the> fact that> we cannot do macroevolutionary experiment because of time constraints> does not disprove the theory. Indirect evidence in the fossil record> proves that macroevolution works. Why do you think that it does not?> > What is the scientific justification for the rigid stand to presume> > evolution as the cause of origin of life and biodiversity? We> cannot> > accept certain presumption as scientific just because there are> many> > scientists who believe that presumption. Scientific conclusions are> > not accepted on the basis of majority voting. Accepting truth on> the> > basis of consensus is not science.> Evolution at least can explain the origin and diversification> life. What> would be your alternative? Saying the life and the diversity of it> always existed does not solve the question. As for diversity we> know it> dwindles and rises through history. We find different diversity in> different historical layers in the fossil record. Getting from a time> with less species to a time with more necessitates a mechanism to get> new species. Evolution is such a mechanism.> > Scientists under the banner of thethirdwayofevolution> <http://www. thethirdwayofevolution.com/>> have realized the> > unscientific nature of evolution theory that is commonly taught in> > different universities and colleges across the world. This> realization> > is purely based on scientific evidence. Presuming that evolution is> > the only process by which biodiversity has manifested on our Earth,> > the scientists under the banner of thethirdwayofevolution> <http://www. thethirdwayofevolution.com/>> are trying to explore what> > are the other possible ways that evolution might have happened.> These> > scientists have also not provided any credible evidence that> > demonstrates the mechanism for macroevolution. One can believe> > different things but just a mere belief is not science. In> science we> > have to support our presumptions with the valid scientific> evidence.> Those people questioned some part of the theory. There is progress in> evolutionary theory, it is not a stale branch of science. They do not> question the foundation of evolutionary theory. So please do not> quote> them as opposing evolution. They do not.> > We agree with you that learning is a process [of overcoming the> > ignorance] and scientifically questioning “evolution theory” is> also a> > part of that process. We have not told that we should abandon> science> > and scientifically questioning evolution theory is not equal to the> > process of abandonment of science because science does not mean> > “evolution theory”.> Questioning something is scientific. Stating that it is untrue> because> you wish it to be so is not.> > You have written “/I kept on asking what is your problem with> > evolution, and you keep on not answering that question. How does> > evolution interfere with your /> > /faith? How does it interfere with your study of consciousnesses?/”> > Teaching of evolution theory is actually a great disservice to the> > human civilization. Evolution theory tries to cultivate a> > materialistic attitude in society, where individuals try to find> > themselves in a position of superiority, which would allow them to> > exploit and oppress nature. If someone feels the urge to exploit or> > oppress other human beings then evolution theory justifies that> urge.> > Accordingly to evolution theory the mood of exploitation and> > oppression is the natural instinct of every individual which is> > established by millions of years of evolution. If that is true then> > why there is a judiciary system in our society to discipline> these bad> > urges. Evolution theory propagates many such delusions that are> > utterly against our true spiritual nature (consciousness) and> thus is> > an extremely harmful unscientific concept. We have explained many> > times on this forum that a genuine scientist follows the evidence> > wherever it may lead. One of the works of our institute is to> > inculcate this type of genuine scientific attitude in our> society for> > the betterment of humanity.> This is a misconception. Evolution does not in any sense teaches> materialistic world view more than any other branch of the natural> sciences. And that materialistic world view is by no means a common> knowledge. If people would take evolutionary theory to their hearth,> which by the way includes all biology ecology included, they would> know> that destroying species and our environment is bad for us. The> urge for> selfishness as centerpiece in evolution was propagated by politicians> and not by scientist. I strongly recommend to read Frans de Waal's> "The> bonobo and the atheist". He labels this thinking of bad urges and> a good> jurisdictional system the veneer theory. Evolutionary theory of the> present (and not that of the '80) tries to understand why we are> moral> and does not argue against our highly cooperative nature.> If as you wish evolution would be scraped from the curricula of> education, what would happen? I hasten yo say we are speaking about a> handful of lectures (so a few hours at most) in high school and then> some courses in biology BSc/MSc. And most people have no idea what> evolution is, maybe except that dinos are now extinct, which is more> paleontology than evolution. So what would happen? People will leave> their car so to produce less CO2? They will not eat beef and would> revert to pork just to use less water? They will magically become> more> friendly, even thought politicians are constantly urging them to heat> someone?> I wish people would know much more about evolution! Because then they> would understand that humans are not the pinnacle of creation but one> species among the many. Then they would understand - as Serge> Patlavskiy> said - that there no duller and brighter animals. They can cope with> their environment, and they are much better at coping with their> environment than we would be in coping with theirs despite our larger> brains. We are the best at being humans. That is our niche.> If people would know more evolutionary theory then they would also> know> that there are more cooperative / mutualistic interaction among> species> that competitive. Competition is bad, takes energy, and thus organism> evolve to lessen competition. This is niche segregation.>> So it is not evolutionary theory that does disservice to humanity but> the misunderstanding of it, and employing scientific terms to> validates> one's evil. I think you should be fighting against bad attitudes> in our> society and not against a scientific field that very few people> understand or care about. And if you do care about evolutionary> theory,> then I bet you will find more synergy with what you try to achieve> than> opposition.>> best wishes,> Ádám>>>>>> On Sunday, 23 April 2017 3:53 PM, Dr. Bhakti Niskama Shanta> <b...@scsiscs.org> wrote:>>------------------------------Fifth International ConferenceScience and Scientist - 2017August 18—19, 2017Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, NepalBHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report ArchivesSponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donateReply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizerBhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & SciencePrinceton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.orgSri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.orgDarwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/DarwinSadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsangaContact: http://scsiscs.org/contact---You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 9ed96ea5-2a36-2a35-1015- b506b18ecbdb%40ludens.elte.hu.To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 456083847.711158. 1493538240093%40mail.yahoo.com .--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfDhQ3dPGFuD31c5HhkGfcvaW7bUEPcoNQxJsGbtDwfGPg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/892019016.1294715.1493611978720%40mail.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfBcmXqowQSDdUzzHDMJnppCfw5CYBXTXrgZ2hNTtG_PJw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
...
[Message clipped]
I would humbly submit that scientific skeptics of concepts such as the "soul" or "mind", although sincere in their own way, are erring by being "too careful" in pushing the scientific proof paradigm beyond its legitimate scope.
Such skeptics should ponder about what would constitute a proof of the soul or mind. There are two levels of difficulty here:
- It would difficult to provide "evidence" beyond reasonable doubt for such concepts: for example, if a shadowy figure resembling the dying person was photographed and adduced as evidence of postmortem continuity consciousness, this might be "explained" as a remnant electromagnetic discharge or whatever. Hope you get the drift!
- We are intimately aware of our own "I" consciousness, Yet each of us is unable to prove to another that we are conscious beings.
- The best we can do is pass the Turing test resoundingly, but even we would admit that this would be inconclusive.
So, this dilemma should be the point of the departure towards spiritual inquiry, that interested scientific skeptics may want to use. They may wish to accept that certain subjective realities, which while they are intimately and immediately true, are manifestly unprovable and hence have to be accepted by analogy to one's own subjective reality, rather than by the traditional scientific method of objective experimentation.
Extrapolating this line of thought, the opinions of spiritual luminaries like Shri Ramakrishna or Shri Ramana Maharshi, who evidently had very clear "subjective channels", are worthy of serious consideration.
On a lighter vein: here, the type of researcher we need is meditators with a PhD !!
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAKTqw4fPXsz_E4FEHo9eZ1OTq95JxEuWYB_8HU3sRzsYH6xqaQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Dear Srikanth,
Thanks!!Srik
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAKTqw4fPXsz_E4FEHo9eZ1OTq95JxEuWYB_8HU3sRzsYH6xqaQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/690A27A8-0A42-4E3A-BBB1-17AFE25678EA%40ulb.ac.be.
Dear All,Science deals with physical objects and light/radiation
whereas soul is the immaterial/incorporeal entity as such science cannot make any inquiry about soul.
The proof of existence of soul is the existence of Ego
'the I in the human beings', the innate knowledge of existence of God in every human being and the book of innate moral law in every human being which are embedded in human consciousness..
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAHYwPz0z4wKM_FP4gB6KSnhWq8eorzMWmruBaf7NuQrYhcKvXQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Dear Srikanth,
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/690A27A8-0A42-4E3A-BBB1-17AFE25678EA%40ulb.ac.be.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAHYwPz0z4wKM_FP4gB6KSnhWq8eorzMWmruBaf7NuQrYhcKvXQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Dear Shafiq,
Dear Srikanth,
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/690A27A8-0A42-4E3A-BBB1-17AFE25678EA%40ulb.ac.be.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAHYwPz0z4wKM_FP4gB6KSnhWq8eorzMWmruBaf7NuQrYhcKvXQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/3A03B54C-39D7-43DF-A174-2274A70DD1F7%40ulb.ac.be.
...
[Message clipped]
Dear Shafiq,Namaste. Rationally it seems quite correct to infer the "the innate knowledge of existence of God in every human being." As Hegel argued, even an atheist has to have a concept of God in order to deny or refute it. St Anselm explained that the concept of God as 'that than which nothing greater can be thought' is intrinsic to human reason.As far as the existence of such a concept, Descartes and other philosophers refer to God as that whose concept and being are congruent, which is the definition of Truth.Thank you for your contribution to this list,SIncerely,B Madhava Puri, Ph.D.
Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2017 6:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Scientific skepticism can use some reflection
Dear All,Science deals with physical objects and light/radiation whereas soul is the immaterial/incorporeal entity as such science cannot make any inquiry about soul. The proof of existence of soul is the existence of Ego 'the I in the human beings', the innate knowledge of existence of God in every human being and the book of innate moral law in every human being which are embedded in human consciousness..With Best RegardsMohammad Shafiq Khan
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/867681149.2014720.1493836617633%40mail.yahoo.com.
Dear Shafiq,Namaste. Rationally it seems quite correct to infer the "the innate knowledge of existence of God in every human being." As Hegel argued, even an atheist has to have a concept of God in order to deny or refute it. St Anselm explained that the concept of God as 'that than which nothing greater can be thought' is intrinsic to human reason.As far as the existence of such a concept, Descartes and other philosophers refer to God as that whose concept and being are congruent, which is the definition of Truth.Thank you for your contribution to this list,SIncerely,B Madhava Puri, Ph.D.
Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2017 6:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Scientific skepticism can use some reflection
Dear All,Science deals with physical objects and light/radiation whereas soul is the immaterial/incorporeal entity as such science cannot make any inquiry about soul. The proof of existence of soul is the existence of Ego 'the I in the human beings', the innate knowledge of existence of God in every human being and the book of innate moral law in every human being which are embedded in human consciousness..With Best RegardsMohammad Shafiq Khan
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/867681149.2014720.1493836617633%40mail.yahoo.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/20170503190729.GA1973%40black.transpect.com.
Dear Whit, Priyadarshi, and allNamaste. It is true that most people do not have a specific or determinate conception of God, but all must have at least a comparative idea of greater and lesser concepts. For instance, we can recognize "all" is greater than "some," a whole is greater than its parts, and so on. Scientists do not yet have a clear idea of the universe, but everyone accepts it is greater than any of the regions or galaxies within it.This is not a European notion. The Sanskrit root of Brahman is brih which means "to be great" or to expand or grow. The suffix -man means absence of limitation. The idea is that everything comes from Brahman, therefore whatever appears has its origin, ground or true being in Brahman. Because there is nothing in existence that is as great as Brahman, it is called nirguna Brahman or non-existent, or sunya, or sunyata, or nothing. This does not mean that Brahman which is the source of all existence is Nothing, but that it is the nothing of the existences that have derived from itself.Even to say "I do not have a concept of God" means that you are referring to something you have some general idea about. This generality or immediate universality may not yet be mediated or determinately thought in any particular or individual way, but this is true of all universals. For example, if you were to look for fruit in the market, you would not be able to find it. All you could find would be cherries, grapes, plums, and so on. Fruit as such does not exist, but that does not mean it is not the essence of those instances of fruit that do exist in the marketplace.In a similar way God does not exist among those things which are created or expand from God. At the same time God is the essence of all appearances, being the source and ground of them. In this way, with thoughtful consideration, the concept God can gradually become clear to anyone - but not that it has to be implanted, as it were, in you or anyone. Rather by thoughtful reasoning its inherent concept can be recognized within oneself. Thus it is not a matter of converting anyone from an atheist to a theist using philosophy. Each person already has within themselves the idea that merely has to be clarified. Conversing with philosophers or others that have explored that area certainly helps. After all, that is the meaning of sadhu-sanga.Sincerely,B Madhava Puri, Ph.D.
To: "'BMP' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com>
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/152842116.2222209.1493848808552%40mail.yahoo.com.
Dear Mr. Bruno,Mathematics is abstract science and as such cannot deal with entities like soul.
Science cannot believe in something which has no physical identity.
Every wave-motion (light/radiation is a wave-motion) requires a medium to propagate in but science has rejected existence of aether filling the space because science has failed to physically identify the aether but I have shown that aether exists on the same premises on which it was rejected. This is to show that non-physical entities do exist.
We cannot know whether animals possess the Ego and we cannot know whether animals have the innate knowledge of existence of God.
But the book of innate moral law separates the animals & humans and that is the evidence that animals do not possess souls.
The very purpose of human life is to know the book of innate moral law, inscribed on every human soul, and to adopt this book of innate moral law in life.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAHYwPz3MMT03_pZxYi574_paz2hw21PdZktwZsHqD2rtH3difA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Dear All,Some members deny the existence of innate knowledge of existence of God in humans. It is only through self introspection & meditation they will know that there is the innate knowledge of existence of God. My trying to convince them with whatever argumentation will be in vain because the only way is 'self introspection'. They may also reread the 'Meditations' by Rene Descartes & my book titled 'Natural World Order & The Islamic Thought' which is available free at https://www.slideshare.net/mohammadshafiqkhan1/natural-world-order-the-islamic-thought.With Best RegardsMohammad Shafiq Khan
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAHYwPz0x-GqkHQbB7PT-7EjBAku%2B3b8U2SBo0eqgb7Xx3A%3DWsw%40mail.gmail.com.
Dear All:Who is an atheist? Is it the one who believes in a God that does not exist or the one who believes in the ultimate universal reality that does exist?
Since the ultimate universal reality can only be ONE and non-dual, the genuine scientific reality and spiritual reality must converge into ONE.
While the mainstream science has been lost into the material-only reality, the mainstream religion is blinded by dogma and belief in a personal God that may or may not exist.
The challenge for humanity is to merge the knowledge of science and the wisdom of spirituality to reveal the ultimate universal reality to transcend beyond the materialism and dogmatism.
Fortunately this can be done via developing a wholesome integrated scientific model of matter, mind, and consciousness that not only predicts the observed material universe but also vindicates the wisdom of spiritual masters and scriptures.
Proving either Einstein (E=mC**2) wrong or spiritual masters (God) wrong is a loose loose exercise, merging the two is a win win for humanity, science and spirituality.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/15bd1291ad7-6f90-11dd8%40webprd-m105.mail.aol.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Whit
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/20170504140832.GB18158%40black.transpect.com.
Dear Avtar,
To: "'BMP' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/15bd1291ad7-6f90-11dd8%40webprd-m105.mail.aol.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/A80CC3A6-E89D-471F-B029-25D2168C4E70%40ulb.ac.be.
Bruno,Responding to your continuous use of incompleteness as a necessary feature of mechanism, I find it very interesting.
You have mentioned the Turing test.
What about the halting problem? Is it something like incompleteness.
A machine can go on at least for a long time, if not infinitely, with the process in the halting problem, by constructing other machines to carry on the task, by producing another machine and so on recursively. In this regard what about the human mind, can it pass on the task to future after its end because of its mortality? Or is it the mortality a constraint that makes the human mind incapable of grasping incompleteness.
I know I am all over the place. I had written some vague paper on this. I will dig it out and send it to you. You can comment if you get time.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfCH05_VH%3DPggc-y9x%3DK9SJzEHAcHFf2NcRWRss6Z9yJJw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/20170505020820.GA30769%40black.transpect.com.
Priyedarshi,
Priyedarshi
Dear Avtar,
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfCH05_VH%3DPggc-y9x%3DK9SJzEHAcHFf2NcRWRss6Z9yJJw%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/83F1205B-6D16-4297-9FB9-16210E846076%40ulb.ac.be.