 |
 |
Hi Ray and Bernie. Reality largely is another word for truth. In other words, our truth is our reality. We basically have two kinds of truth: absolute and relative. Absolute is what *is*, period, but what no one really knows, because we all have different ideas about what it is. We could say that time and space and life--as I mentioned in an earlier posting--are the closest to being absolute truths, since most every human recognizes their existence (albeit in different ways). For the most part, though, we all operate on relative truth, that which each of us *believes* to be true. The key word here is belief. We can't *know* truth; the best we can do is *believe* it. Science, for example, is not based on truth. It is based on facts. Facts simply represent an absence of falsehood. We can *know* facts; we don't have to believe them. Of course, this knowledge does contribute to the formation of individual "realities," but realities based on knowledge rather than truth. For example, with my scientist's hat on, I believe nothing, because belief does not require evidence. (In science we require evidence in order to make factual statements.) In my scientist mode, then, do I have a sense of reality? Of course, but it is a different kind of reality than that of a believer. Can one wear both the scientist's hat and the believer's hat at the same time? Sure. Science doesn't have all the answers to reality. Scott >===== Original Message From Parkinson's Information Exchange Network <[log in to unmask]> ===== >Hi Bernie, > >I think Lanza would say that "reality" is relative (wonder about origin of >this word - from the Latin "to carry back") to the perceiver, although I >would guess dogs perceive a dog-centered or as Amanda Phillips put it a >"biscuit-centered" universe, while humans experience a reality that is also >common, yet different for each person based on their experience. As you >might imagine, I tend to agree with you. >Ray >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Bernard Barber Ph.D." <[log in to unmask]> >To: <[log in to unmask]> >Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2007 10:38 AM >Subject: Re: "Biocentric" theory of universe > > >> Hi Scott and Ray, >> >> Good for you regarding; Dr.Lanza's article. Now what is a good definition >> of >> "Reality". It seems to me that all knowledge is relative to the human >> experience. It is driving force for the continuation of the human quest. >> >> Thanks >> >> Bernie >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of rayilynlee >> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 10:18 AM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: "Biocentric" theory of universe >> >> Scott: >> Lanza was the researcher who did the gene biopsy type study that showed >> that >> one cell could be taken without destroying the blastocyst. His work >> became >> the subject of much argument. >> >> I think what he meant was that space and time is how we experience >> consciousness. Certainly before we were born or existed we experienced >> neither. I think his idea that all living creatures are bound by >> themselves >> is a good one. For example, it is difficult especially with respect to >> religion to escape anthropomorphism whether you are a believer or not. >> I'm >> guessing my dog Spike does not see the issue in the same way I do. We are >> both restricted by who and what we are. >> >> I only posted this because Lanza is a stem cell researcher and I thought >> his >> ideas were interesting. >> Ray >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Scott E. Antes" <[log in to unmask]> >> To: <[log in to unmask]> >> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 7:44 AM >> Subject: Re: "Biocentric" theory of universe >> >> >>>I wanted to say something earlier, but too many students this semester! >>>I'm >>> not sure what this has to do with PD, but: I do not know Dr. Lanza, nor >>> have I >>> read his work, so I am going strictly by the interview posted on this >>> list. >>> This is not--by any stretch of the imagination--a biocentric universe. >>> Biology is a relative latecomer to the big picture. Plus, of all matter >>> that >>> exists in our universe, biology makes up only a tiny fraction. Most of >>> the >>> universe is void of life, and--as best we know--always has been. >>> >>> If Dr. Lanza is saying that we humans basically construct and reconstruct >>> our >>> universe (actually, our *notion* of the universe) as we gain more >>> knowledge >>> and understanding of it--and as previous notions get pushed aside, then >>> all of >>> us in the scientific community would agree. It's all a matter of >>> operating >>> under the current paradigm (either social or scientific). >>> >>> Time and space. Time and space and life are about the only three >>> absolute >>> truths in existence. The devout Buddhist might say that even these are >>> simply >>> illusion. Thus, humans define these terms in all sorts of cultural ways. >>> Whether illusion or truth, we practical people have to recognize that we >>> work >>> within their infinite borders. Infinite for time and space, that is. >>> Not >>> for >>> life. Life begins and ends, whereas time and space do not. A biocentric >>> universe? Hardly. >>> >>> Scott Antes >>> >>>===== Original Message From Parkinson's Information Exchange Network >>> <[log in to unmask]> ===== >>>I think Dr. Lanza is one smart guy. I never did believe "time" was >>>real. >>>Ray >>> >>> Scott E. Antes >>> Department of Anthropology >>> Northern Arizona University >>> Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5200 >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: >>> mailto:[log in to unmask] >>> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: >> mailto:[log in to unmask] >> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: >> mailto:[log in to unmask] >> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] >In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn Scott E. Antes Department of Anthropology Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5200 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn