|
Author
|
Topic: truth - absolute or real
|
katatonic
Knowflake Posts: 501
From: ca, usa
Registered: Jan 2008
|
posted November 02, 2008 12:51 PM
 
this topic threatened to derail another thread so thought i'd carry it on here -one of the questions we were discussing was whether astrology is an absolute reality or a human construct. personally i think by definition it is our creation, not something that is there already....because astrology MEANS "STUDY of the stars" not "actions of the stars". what does anyone else think?? another debate was about the absoluteness of the colour red... IP: Logged |
blue moon
Moderator Posts: 4700
From: U.K
Registered: Dec 2007
|
posted November 02, 2008 01:15 PM
It's symbolic.IP: Logged |
Libralove09
Knowflake Posts: 560
From:
Registered: Sep 2008
|
posted November 02, 2008 01:19 PM
explain the "debate of the absoluteness of the color red" lol what does that mean?are you guys arguing weather red is another color? or red is actually another colour but only red to our vision? IP: Logged |
Unmoved
Knowflake Posts: 2160
From: Born in S.Africa
Registered: Jun 2007
|
posted November 02, 2008 01:25 PM
On which thread did this debate begin, katatonic?IP: Logged |
Libralove09
Knowflake Posts: 560
From:
Registered: Sep 2008
|
posted November 02, 2008 01:28 PM
Unmoved, it "ended here" but if u go back about 1 page, it started in this topic:
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/019699-3.html pls continue it here though IP: Logged |
Unmoved
Knowflake Posts: 2160
From: Born in S.Africa
Registered: Jun 2007
|
posted November 02, 2008 01:40 PM
Thank you. I'll go and read.  IP: Logged |
Deliverance
Knowflake Posts: 440
From: Bolloxville, Nutbush
Registered: Mar 2005
|
posted November 02, 2008 01:48 PM
IMO, there are no absolutes in humanity - everything is relative.
The universe (including the stars) was created by an absolute being, but it (the universe)is not absolute because it is ever changing. The study & symbolism of the stars - by man, is relative. IP: Logged |
Sei no Senshi
Knowflake Posts: 88
From: Hot Springs, AR, USA
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted November 02, 2008 01:54 PM
quote:
one of the questions we were discussing was whether astrology is an absolute reality or a human construct. personally i think by definition it is our creation, not something that is there already....because astrology MEANS "STUDY of the stars" not "actions of the stars"
If so, then all "-ology"s are contrived as they are the "study of" something. Biology is the study of life. So then "life" must be something we created? I don't think so. Life has always been there, the scientific study of it is relatively new, certainly, but the existence of its subject of study is not. I'm not sure why astrology has to be any different. Coming up with a way to study a natural phenomena would usually be an argument for the pre-existance of this phenomena, as people don't usually study things that don't exist yet. Understand? quote:
are you guys arguing weather red is another color? or red is actually another colour but only red to our vision?
Actually, that whole argument was silly. Regardless of what color we perceive things, they still exist. We see Mars as red, so the ancients equated it to other things that are red: fire and heated iron. The idea was that we'd have a different idea of Mars if we saw it a different color (green was mentioned). This is silly, because if we saw Mars as green then we'd see everything else that we once saw as red, it would now be green. So fire and heated iron would be green to us now, so there would have been no difference based on perception of colors, as all of these things mysteriously would still reflect the same range of the spectrum of light, regardless of what colors we would perceive it as. IP: Logged |
Libralove09
Knowflake Posts: 560
From:
Registered: Sep 2008
|
posted November 02, 2008 02:11 PM
lol iv never seen an argument so pointless about colours! why can't you all just learn to agree to disagree, and just respect eachothers opinions. it doesn't really matter whos wrong and whos right, you'll probably never find out. astrology is what it is, you either believe in it or don't i guess? IP: Logged |
Sei no Senshi
Knowflake Posts: 88
From: Hot Springs, AR, USA
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted November 02, 2008 02:21 PM
I agree about the futility of arguing color, but the argument spun off of how astrology developed. Either they named things and derived signification off of the names or they observed it and the names came later. History shows that the names came later, but the modern way is to name things first, such as the case with the Outer planets (which we agree that naming something and coming up with significations based on that name is ridiculous) and whatnot.That was the basis of it all...then it just kind of...you know...spiraled out of control a bit. IP: Logged |
Unmoved
Knowflake Posts: 2160
From: Born in S.Africa
Registered: Jun 2007
|
posted November 02, 2008 02:37 PM
You guys. This debate will be probably be won by the person with better "debating skills", more patience or most persistence than the person who is correct because I'm seeing both sides of the same coin being discussed here. "Which came first, the chicken or the egg"? type of scenario and/or the choice between "I think therefore I am" or "I am therefore I think" where noone should win since winning this debate would say that there is right and wrong and nothing can just BE. It's a Divine Dichotomy. Both arguments are valid in my eyes. And what's interesting here in particular is how 23 and Sei no Senshi could be in agreement if they chose to see it as an agreement instead of a debate, if they think their views are opposing. If I didn't know this was a "debate" I wouldn't have thought it intrinsically was one. oh. I've got nothing to say about the debate itself.  IP: Logged |
23
Knowflake Posts: 4497
From: Outside, to watch the nightfall in the rain
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted November 02, 2008 02:56 PM
I couldn't be bothered reading all this at the moment and am not in some serious thinking mood but I will say that I think that those that think that the Red debate is stupid needs to develop themselves a bit more as thinkers. In the context of the post that it was found in, it may have appeared a bit ridiculous. In reality, this is what the discipline of Philosophy. There's nothing wrong with challenging and thinking about the fundamentals of existence. In fact, if you can't do it, then I pity you for being so narrow minded. IP: Logged |
Azalaksh
Moderator Posts: 7410
From: New Brighton, MN, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted November 02, 2008 02:59 PM
Sei ~ quote:
the planet is still there and would, presumably, still be emitting an influence that would be felt in some way.
Do luminaries, planets and asteroids ***EMIT*** an "influence" that humans feel???IP: Logged |
23
Knowflake Posts: 4497
From: Outside, to watch the nightfall in the rain
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted November 02, 2008 03:09 PM
quote:
Do luminaries, planets and asteroids ***EMIT*** an "influence" that humans feel???
Well according to the laws of physics there is --> the law of gravitational force says that each body will exert a force upon the other dependent on the mass of each body and the distance from each other. Force is something we feel, it is that emission of influence that we feel. quote:
If so, then all "-ology"s are contrived as they are the "study of" something. Biology is the study of life. So then "life" must be something we created? I don't think so. Life has always been there, the scientific study of it is relatively new, certainly, but the existence of its subject of study is not. I'm not sure why astrology has to be any different. Coming up with a way to study a natural phenomena would usually be an argument for the pre-existance of this phenomena, as people don't usually study things that don't exist yet. Understand?
Q is: is any of this real? Are we real? As Deliverance said, is it relative? Or is it absolute? In my younger days, I used to say that things were real. To my senses they are, I can see things, tough things etc. But my mind says, is this just my perception, is this my relativity? What is real? As human beings our perceptions based on my conversations with others seem to be aligned but really, what is the truth? Are we all Neos like in the Matrix? Is my perception just a coping mechanism for what is really out there, that the truth is so big that I just don't understand it or can't conceive it or is there no truth? Unmoved - I'm not quite sure where I stand with Sei, I haven't really thought of her/him as an absolute opposite to me. I just argue on point. IP: Logged |
blue moon
Moderator Posts: 4700
From: U.K
Registered: Dec 2007
|
posted November 02, 2008 03:18 PM
I've got a degree in philosophy.As you can tell by my deeply profound two word reply above. I don't normally admit this in public. Especially where I live, lol. Quite often people struggle with the concept of symbolism, probably because we are raised in a world that believes in "scientific fact". But anyway. I'd recommend Plato's Republic for anyone interested in this topic ~ it's not as bad as it sounds, it not that bad to read. It's not light reading, but it's readable. As far as I recall he regarded mathematics as the only absolute truth. I might have got that wrong, I'm quite happy to be put straight, and if I'm quite honest my major interests at the time were beer and boys. A bit about it here ~ Plato and the Cave, that is... http://members.cox.net/xocxoc/philosophy/plato.htm
IP: Logged |
23
Knowflake Posts: 4497
From: Outside, to watch the nightfall in the rain
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted November 02, 2008 03:20 PM
Yes I should read it. In fact, I should study some philosophy maybe, I have no philosophical training. Don't know what I'd do with it in the REAL world though EDIT - maybe what I am saying with my theories that its all symbolism. I got think about this. Symbols represent perception maybe and my perception as to what is or is not happening out there. I abbreviate or symbolise to try and understand. Not sure if anyone gets that. IP: Logged |
blue moon
Moderator Posts: 4700
From: U.K
Registered: Dec 2007
|
posted November 02, 2008 03:24 PM
According to a Physics Phd I was chatting to, high level Physics and Philosophy walk hand-in-hand. Unfortunately, this comment comes from a drunken night 20 years ago so I can't illuminate the topic much more than to impart that. I felt like I knew less than when I got there ~ I mean at the seat of learning, not at the party where I got chatting to nerdy men (again). Then I married an Aqua Nerd. IP: Logged |
Unmoved
Knowflake Posts: 2160
From: Born in S.Africa
Registered: Jun 2007
|
posted November 02, 2008 03:25 PM
23- yeah. I totally thought of that when I read Zala's question. Maybe the word "influence" could be substituted with the word "energy" because influence has connotations of some coersion when influence could just mean a natural interaction of energies from different sources. And the Neo ref made me giggle. In highschool I was called The One because of some speech I did which had Matrix refs. Memories. IP: Logged |
blue moon
Moderator Posts: 4700
From: U.K
Registered: Dec 2007
|
posted November 02, 2008 03:27 PM
quote:
Don't know what I'd do with it in the REAL world though
Win arguments. IP: Logged |
Azalaksh
Moderator Posts: 7410
From: New Brighton, MN, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted November 02, 2008 03:30 PM
23 ~ quote:
Well according to the laws of physics there is --> the law of gravitational force says that each body will exert a force upon the other dependent on the mass of each body and the distance from each other. Force is something we feel, it is that emission of influence that we feel.
So, to take this a step further, astrological planetary "influences" = gravitational forces "felt" when one is at or near a mathematical angle (aspect)??Another wrinkle: “Superstring theory and other esoteric advances in physics….are revealing that our reality is embedded in a much more expansive, higher-dimensional realm of pure energy – or pure spirit….
The discovery of quantum nonlocality – the ability of particles to exert subtle influences on each other instantaneously across vast distances – is confirming the ancient mystical teaching that all things are profoundly interconnected. Quantum nonlocality might also explain extrasensory perception…. As well as the miraculous healing that results from prayer and other spiritual practices.” ~ From Rational Mysticism by John Horgan Luminaries/planets/asteroids are Symbols. Can a Symbol possess an energy that affects humans?? IP: Logged |
23
Knowflake Posts: 4497
From: Outside, to watch the nightfall in the rain
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted November 02, 2008 03:30 PM
BM - the more you learn, the less you know I find. And from what I do know about Physics (the tiny bit), it is very much like Philosophy at the hard end of Particle Physics. In fact, Physics' arcane name is "Natural Philosophy".Unmoved - well there's actually a theory that there's these sub-atomic particles called "gluons" that actually provide for force (or gravity) between two bodies, well so the physicists think, so even there it's mundane. It's all very complex, I'm not a trained physicist. I've just picked up bits here and there. IP: Logged |
23
Knowflake Posts: 4497
From: Outside, to watch the nightfall in the rain
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted November 02, 2008 03:34 PM
I was about to say something on String Theory in my post to Unmoved but decided to leave it out I heard that String Theory believes in the existence of 11 dimensions. We live in four. I definitely agree there's a lot more out there that we are privy to. quote:
Luminaries/planets/asteroids are Symbols. Can a Symbol possess an energy that affects humans??
In my reality and perception, symbols (or planets, luminaries etc) do possess energy, based on what I have been taught and seen. In my mind, do we actually exist? Is the mundane real? quote:
So, to take this a step further, astrological planetary "influences" = gravitational forces "felt" when one is at or near a mathematical angle (aspect)??
Well an angle is the relation of two bodies (two points) to a third point, in the case of astrology, the third body is Earth. From earth we see the angle between the two bodies. We make the assumption that we are Earth because we are so close to it. In the world of physics, whether things are felt is in relation to two bodies without that third point. The law of Force between two bodies says its the mass of the two bodies and the distance between them. Now, what it is saying is the mass can be infinitely small approaching zero and the distance can be infinitely large, ie two points on either side of the universe approaching infinity and STILL there will be feeling between the two. However, for the sake of simplicity we choose to ignore the existence of those two forces because it is so small in relation to other forces between bodies in this universe. Likewise, this can be extrapolated to angles. Earth is also affected as we are (it feels and we feel) by planets, luminaries, asteroids, ourselves or even bubblegum wrappers and invisible micro-organisms. We are creating a relation between us and those two other bodies in astrology but we take for granted our relationship between us/Earth and the bodies (what I'm saying is that we take it as a given), we study the interactions between the two other bodies, hence angles. IP: Logged |
Unmoved
Knowflake Posts: 2160
From: Born in S.Africa
Registered: Jun 2007
|
posted November 02, 2008 03:35 PM
I envy you blue moon. That's probably the only thing I've ever wanted to study. very cool.  But I'm not a good person from which you should guage you cool factor so... Still very nice degree in my eyes though. I totally agree with your drunken friend's statement. Or were you the drunk one? Anyway, I agree because I see physics as highly artistic and creative. Like poetry. Ok. Good night guys. IP: Logged |
23
Knowflake Posts: 4497
From: Outside, to watch the nightfall in the rain
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted November 02, 2008 03:43 PM
It's finally the unification of the three Jupiters in the 1st Unmoved - sleep well IP: Logged |
blue moon
Moderator Posts: 4700
From: U.K
Registered: Dec 2007
|
posted November 02, 2008 04:01 PM
It was me that was listening, he was the erudite and sober one. Philosphy was my statement against Thatcherite Britain and it's oppressive attempts to steam-roller the children of the working-classes into Business Studies and Economics. IP: Logged |
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
