I was surfing Youtube when i stumbled upon this guy...
It amazed me how many points he made that i completely agreed with such as free will and Kantian (non-metaphysical) metaphysics. Wanted to know what you guys thought about this. I am skeptical, but i decided to take the class (its free otherwise i would have immediately dismissed it) to see what reasons he has for his beliefs.

Views: 351

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I watched the vid, I didn't feel so impressed, especially when he started to rant off this as science. Philosophy maybe, science, no. At the beginning it felt a lot like The Matrix also, (I know The Matrix also derived from Kant) and I had a few issues buying that it would somehow be unlimited and outside space time. It almost sounded like he was going to justify a god, also forgetting that we are pretty sure there are more space times than we can perceive. He has no actual proof that that existence outside space time is unlimited, and if a limited object like a human would enter an unlimited space time, then that space time would become limited. Oxymoronic and paradoxal, just like saying nothing exists.
well not to defend this website, but according to some scientific theories that are currently gaining in popularity, space time actually isn't limited. There are infinite parallel universes. The infinite swiss cheese according to brian green.
There are theories that time itself does not exist ("The End Of Time - Barbour") that don't seem completely implausible.

The problem with this sort of theory is that it deals things that our science cannot currently investigate and can neither be proved or disproved.

I've read Barbour's book and found it hard going as a non physicist/mathematician but came to the conclusion that it had strayed into the (currently) unknowable and hence become philosophy. I think he admits as much himself.

However, we should probably all be prepared for a nasty surprise from physics that seriously damages our ego.
I guess I agree with Paul here. Even if space time would be infinite (although that is like you said, a theory) we cannot prove it. Our senses and even sense of reality itself is too limited for us to perceive something as unlimited too, something he touched in the beginning but... I fail to see how this course could somehow remove our physical limitations. It's just the WAY WE THINK. Chances are high our brains are designed a certain way to think like we do, or we couldn't understand the world like we do either. It would be a different reality we would live in. We were talking about that on our lecture today. Interesting topic, but we can merely speculate about the truth of the truths here.
A quote I remember from somewhere went approximately:

"Evolution prepares us perfectly for the past".
"I fail to see how this course could somehow remove our physical limitations."

I also fail to see this. but that is the reason i found it interesting. All of his video's seem to incorporate a higher degree or reason than any other new agy, religious stuff i've seen. So i was interested if there was actually a reason, which i am simply failing to see.
I basically agree with everything you've said Michael.

except this:
"Humans are insignificant nothings in a universe vastly indifferent to their existence, their fears and longings, their dreams and imaginings."

In a sense the universe is obviously indifferent, that cannot be argued. (of course i believe that we are the universe so that changes things a bit.)

Our insignificance though is something i used to believe but have actually changed my mind on more recently.

First of all both significance and insignificance are meaningless conceptions to the objective world so it can't actually be said that we are insignificant. We are neither in fact. I don't believe that a lack of significance entails insignifiance. Just as a lack of insignificance doesn't necessarily entail significance.

I see the universe as one thing that has been evolving/progressing through three different modalities. Existence, Life, and Intelligence. I believe that the universe will keep on progressing in this way. And in my opinion progression is the only possible objective measure of significance.
That is to say, how would significance even be possible? What would the universe have to be like for there to be significance?

It's not simply that these questions are difficult or impossible to answer its that they don't actually even make sense. Just think, If God did in fact exist wouldn't his life be meaningless?

The only possibility is progression. And we actually have that.
I have read a lot of interesting stuff lately. That is basically that we create our own realities through not only our physical inputs (sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch) but also with the LANGUAGE WE USE. Our LANGUAGE creates our REALITY. In English and many other Indoeuropean languages, we like to speak of things, even abstract things (!) like objects. This actually supports our way of thinking and the scientific view. Everything is like that, objective and mechanical. We can speak of time as an object or even as a person. Time went fast. You can't do that in all languages of the world. Basically the way we speak promotes a certain way of thinking. It's very fascinating and even more disgusting when thinking of HOW MUCH OUR LANGUAGE IS AFFECTED BY CHRISTIANITY ON ALL LEVELS.

I kid you not, even the English language itself oozes of Christianity. Why is there a difference between hard and soft science? (Really think of the meanings of those adjectives in this context.) As one example. On every level there is a power structure between male/female and everything male is pretty much going back to Christianity because god is a male, hah! As if we've seen god's genital's of proof. Which is one of the reasons why I refuse ever calling god "he" as a replacement. Then again, in other languages, male and female don't truly exist. Sometimes someone born as a man will become a female and the opposite, or even something completely else. Seriously though, I am getting more and more disgusted with Western culture on many levels, not only the religious part.
I think you would find this to be very interesting.


Don't get too disgusted with western culture though. It has done alot of great things for humanity. Its just as easy to be blind to how your view of the world is filtered through your culture as it is to be blind to the good things your culture has done.

Its just intellectual laziness to point your finger at something without trying to weigh all the factors. Something politians (and most people for that matter) are notrious for.

Not to point a finger or anything, but...
It could even be argued that christianity is actually an oriental (aka middle eastern) culture/meme that has infected western culture. If anything the true western culture of greece and rome had 'better' values, (though not necessarily the greatest either)
I know it has done a lot of things, but I can't stand the fact of our extreme thinking of superiority over other cultures. I know all cultures have this, but no other culture has been so aggressive about it than Westerners. If they wouldn't it wouldn't be so widespread. I agree that Christianity can be classified as a Middle-Eastern (originally anyway) religion which we later imported here into the West.

It's just that Christianity is so ingrained, particulary the female/male powerstructure. God is man, god created MAN (notice not WOman) and thus men are spiritual and closer to god etc etc etc... and we can still find these notions. Well, I am at least ok here in Sweden, we still have our own notion of Western culture. I hope we won't adapt anymore to Americanization, rather hoping for a stronger impression of Asia (I think we will see a lot more of this in the future). I guess somehow Asia still makes me feel more at home, that's strange in a way.

The first link doesn't mention of what I am truly talking about. It's more like how can a culture view art who doesn't even have such a word in their language? What is art to them? In our reality, art is a part of culture, but how does a culture view its own culture without the word art? This is how languages shape our realities. To obviously see everything as objects like we do in our Indoeuropean languages helps our scientific theories since we observe everything as "objects", including things which are living (trees, humans, animals). In a culture where everything say has a soul or consist of a spirit (common in Asian cultures) they would have a completely different notion of what is science! Maybe then science would rather be of how these spirits are working instead of looking of the function of the, say, tree or river. How can we tell if the river spirit is sad or happy instead of why is there a river here?
We invent new words when new concepts are discovered, or use old words in new ways to describe them. Thoughts may be aided by words, but they don't depend on them.


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service