Carl Sagan´s Materialism, Backhanded or Otherwise

Here´s some fun dialoguing I had around this meme with Carl Sagan: Ma You Well, we do know a great deal more about the universe than when Sagan was alive and we still don't see a god. Reply 5h Ez Ro 📷 @Ma Yo Where did you look? You won't be given a pass on collective ignorance Mark Rego Monteiro Ez Ro Clarity counts. If MY can´t see it, it´s because he can´t see it with the JWS telescope that is astronomy. That´s a powerful point right there, since within scientific natural physical phenomena there are distinctions. And actually, biology is the result of cosmology and the passage of time, resulting in phenomena that aren´t just "physical", but a new category, "life." Microscopes aren´t the only tool in studying "life," moreover, just like even the conduct necessary for astronomy isn´t just a "telescope." The historical sociology of science, as advanced significantly by Thomas Kuhn, but for scientists in particular. G. Vico already made an important distinction back in the 1700s in response to some people trying to apply Cartesian geometric techniques to people. What we know as "emergent properties" like biology and the mind behind psychology etc, causes epistemological distinctions. That means in how the phenomena is recognized with conceptual names and their processes for knowledge systems. All that fancy clarity comes thanks to the historical sociological contemplative method with empiricism, that underlies "science" itself, and centers back on the origins of "science" in the University-based community with multiple disciplines, called the "liberal arts and sciences," that use empiricism. Newton didn´t just call the Royal Society, because scientists were self-sustaining. He read up works from the combined networks centered on University-based philosophical scholarship with empiricism and the mathematical and natural philosophers like Descartes. Who go back to the pivotal monk Thomas Aquinas at the U of Paris who took Aristotle´s esoteric First Cause, made a powerful argument indicating the incoherence of empirical infinity in the real world beyond abstraction (or Divine transcendence), along with his deductive reasoning axioms for God like the one from motion. Ez Ro 📷 @ Mark Rego Monteiro If you put as much time and thought into study as you do deflection, you would be enlightened and enlightening. Ez Ro Author 📷 @Mark Young And all organization is indicative of INTELLIGENCE Mark Rego Monteiro @Ez Ro Yeah, too bad attitude doesn´t give you ground to stand on, as you respond to me and my presentation. That´s the substance here that you try to slip in your pocket. When a holy man meets a pickpocket, the pickpocket picks his own pocket, no matter where his hand started. And gets the chance to appreciate value in more than coins. God is real, God´s love through Jesus is real. Jesus´ legacy in interfaith society is real. And when a seeker becomes a holy man and deals with the unscrupulous, here´s how that goes: Frankly, your expressing yourself using the words "deflection" and "enlightened" get evaluated by the old goodies of philosophical truth that makes Christianity capable of honoring Jesus as Savior in structured pluralism with interfaith master collaboration with the likes of the Buddha. When you say, "deflection," you mean, "I don´t really get it, and it sounds hard to understand." When you say "enlightened", you mean "I think I get it, so I´m going to do some ad hom like I do." As for your comment on "organization," physical reality that science does study legitimately, does actually raise the real question that confuses and deludes them, and others in all kinds of related ways, including yourself in an opposite extreme. And I went over this with you previously, without your actually getting it, clearly. You just leaped to your enjoyment of joining a meme´s ridiculing "randomness." That´s not how communicating about the truth works, with logical coherence and correspondence to reality, and grasping the importance of philosophy, not attitude alone. I have both, by the way. The issue isn´t just organization, since scientists are coherent when they say, "It´s all just a multiverse." No God necessary. They get pretty far if they control the conversation. And your posture of "organization is INTELLIGENCE" is more a reflection of the profiteers funding literalists, but who are actually economic materialists putting everything into the commodified handbasket to Hell. So, the fact that perceiving organization requires people with minds who can cooperate sufficiently to study the Universe didn´t just happen because of ancient Greek natural philosophers like Thales and Socrates´ legacy in Aristotle. Their culture was dying out with the pagan Romans. Their multiple accomplishments on paper required Jesus´ legacy with his 2 loving Commandments, teachings AND suffering to Resurrection and apostolic legacy to get to Thomas Aquinas to show how to Christianize ancient Greek philosophy to make empiricism and modern philosophy. Ma Yo Ez Ro What has that got to do with the conversation To Sit Ma Yo when did you see your mind ? Ma Yo To Sit Do you mean brain? Because the mind is a byproduct of the brain. 💁 Mark Rego Mon Ma Yo You´re actually making TS´s point. You try to reduce the human mind to the brain, but can only do it in denial and by ignoring reality. Freud didn´t make his landmark breakthrough´s in psychology because of a microscope. He was just a tecchie neuropathologist when he ran into patients reporting pain without organic wounds or disease. Freud went to Paris to study with Charcot et al and learn some relaxation and visualization techniques. Back in Vienna, he didn´t pull out the microscope, but a notepad as he sat, helped his human patients relax, and asked them to think about their pain and talk about it. That began to heal them. Freud studied his notes, not slide samples to develop his psychological concepts of "ego" and "id" (the "I" and "it"), along with the healing process of "abreaction (emotional reconnection)" and "catharsis" reflecting the trauma associated with emotional repression. Human symbol using has tool-related and communication-related major areas of use, involving the reality of "Mind over Matter." Human individuals can understand themselves in ways that allow them to ignore and override their biological impulses. Pushing on to conduct an all-nighter is a modern context. Shamanic relating to transcendent reality that generated the Judeo-Christian supershamanic tradition, and Jesus´ legacy and its interfaith needs in structured pluralism are at least two other angles of what might be tentatively posited as human shamanic behavior. Or perhaps spiritual-religious is the more appropriate major category of human behavior, phenomena, and its knowledge factors. It is those dynamics that reflect the empirical demonstrations of shamanic healing by the Great Spirit, as medically attested, medically impossible healing correlated with spiritual-religious testimony, as in L Mehl-Madrona MD´s books like Coyote Medicine, part of the new multi-cultural level in Jesus´ legacy that centers around the even more accessible healing through Christian spiritual practice, as in OC Simonton MD´s work and more. Human minds, exceeding their physical biological foundations and achieving energetic types of healing. Except that "energy" is itself physical, and isn´t a sufficient conceptual framework. Holographic technology gets a few steps closer in its informational paradigm, but is still material. Spiritual-religious healing testimony goes further in combining the human mental faculties of memory, psychosocial and transpersonal relationship, emotional awareness, ecological awareness, and in Christianity´s legacy for Jesus, the direct relationship over generations through Jesus the self-identifying and prophecied Son of God and Man teaching God the Creator´s parental love and accessibility to people who seek. All of which goes beyond any one brain, and goes with in fact a whole lot of visible evidence that requires interpretation by minds. Then a person can catch up to the terms already translated in the Bible as "the mind of Christ," Bishop Berkeley´s "mind of God," and James Frederick Ferrier´s metaphysical analaogy argument for God based on the need for a Divine Mind in relation to the existence of the Universe itself. Ma Yo Mark Rego Monteiro Guess what, we have advanced since Freud. We have far more advanced ways of telling pathologies. We have machines that can see the brains function and see where it's not going normally. You speak from.over 150 years ago. Keep up with the times and stop thinking that your the only one who has done research Ma Yo Mark Rego Monteiro And FYI, you've said nothing about damage to the brain causing damage to the mind. Just ramblings from authority....old authority Mark Rego Monteiro Ma Yo Oh my. Yeah, the materialistic anachronistic fallacy assumes that the passage of time invalidates all things old. That´s a fallacy, and you got your timeframe wrong. Freud´s pioneering and key work was 1896, as far as that goes. And on you go, dropping balls as easy as it is to mix and match words unempirically. Indeed, "we" have advanced since Freud, yet you confuse the meaning of that very reality in your ideological filtering. Empirical reality isn´t your projection. Having machines that identify brain functions is a different phenomena and knowledge system, that exists still in the physical scientific area. It doesn´t invalidate the realm opened up by Freud not merely in therapeutic psychological study and approaches. You deviated into the physical, as usual in denial of and ignoring the relevant areas of Freud´s diverging proteges like Jung, Reich, Assagioli, and Rank and colleagues like Adler, who developed psychotherapeutic techniques elaborating on various aspects of Freud, with the Rank-Rogers-Rosenberg line especially clear about the psychosocial system of emotions, also recognized by Alice Miller and John Bradshaw in their various contexts. Even the DMS has advanced in ways that reflect the psychosocial qualities of mind, handled in terms of human communication and interaction, not brainscans or pharmacology. RD Laing can represent a movement developed to oppose reductionists in that field and the like who have tried to be as reductionist as you. And your claim to having done "research" falls itself into a projection fallacy. If you want to claim to do research, you should actually check your details first of all. It is, however, not even just research. You just missed the ball on the subject of epistemics and epistemology, the areas of phenomena and knowledge. Brainscans don´t address the issues of the material contained in psychologists notepads that they have used to identify the psychological and emotional empirical factors: needs, operating beliefs, feelings, and so on. Mark Rego Monteiro Ma Yo "Damage to the brain and mind" is another category. That´s not in question, although it involves additional points. Your continuing reductionist ideologizing simply remains ignorant of things like the spiritual-religious phenomenon that made Mother Theresa a Catholic saint. A patient with brain tumors was healed in connection to an item recalling Theresa, resulting in a medically attested, medically impossible healing with spiritual-religious testimony. Standard medical records don´t note such accessory patient information, although there is a movement associated with the Medical Humanities to address such issues, and schools and Medical Centers like Harvard have instituted Spiritual and Religious components in their services. Social Workers, on the other hand, operate in terms of patients as people with their psychosocial experiences. Your ideology, based on one or more forms of ideological materialism, is simply insufficient to deal honestly with empirical reality. That´s what a mind capable of grasping the full empirical scope of phenomena relevant to this very site needs to address without your kind of denialism and fallacies.