[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie David, I think it may be much less confusing, for everyone, if we defined science as the special case a-spiritual, and the rest as Michael tries to accomplish as straight spiritual metaphysics. Now, herein lies the problem; neither science or spirit can claim the total ground of knowing. Science, the a-spiritual, can claim all the scientific ground, and the metaphysical can claim the rest, but, as of yet, neither can claim both___the future completeness awaits a final integration___if even possible??? It the same old problem defined years ago; 1.does mind produce matter?, 2.does matter produce mind?, or 3.is the process dualistic?, i.e., 1.transcendent monism, 2.monism, 3.dualism. And the battles continue... IMO, all sides are limited explanations, until united, but is it even possible to unite these humongous differences??? regards

Well said there Lloyd,is there no solution that would be accepted by all?What about the wartime expression,that there are not many
atheists in a foxhole,when grenades are exploding all around you???

kind regards michael.

[archetype]

There is only one true and corect TOE according to our historical conventional paradigm which we have built up out of mathematical nomenclature given to us as Arabic numerals. Specifically, the TOE must utilize the number that is the opposite of 0, and this should be obvious to everyone. I tell you that history has given us the symbol 1/0 and this symbol literally means everything. The sooner we unerstand that, that the most important number in math is not undefined, but represents the concept of everything, the sooner we will begin to see how it shows us the startling and amazing nature of everything. In conclusion, it is a mathematical fact built up from our symbolism and paradigms that 1/0 is the number which means all and so you now have the mathemical and spiritual basis for the TOE in the palm of your hand. I encourage everybody to think about 1/0 and you will realize that it holds all the secrets, all the mysteries, and everything that you could possibly imagine

Originally Posted by humanbydefault I get lost sometimes when I read the expectations some members of this forum embrase about the TOE. The concept was brought to life by Einstein in the sense that he conceived a theory that will be able to unify GRAVITY with ELECTROMAGNETISM and forces observed inside the atom alone. It was also called "unified field theory." I don't deny that such accomplishement will have a direct impact in other fields of knowledge like philosophy and cosmology to mention just a coupple of them but to say that the "TOE" will explain EVERYTHING is not part of my personal expectations. I don't see the conexion between INVARIANCE and a human feeling called LOVE for example... I don't want to sound too "out of harmony" with the rest of you but I found that "up-grading" from a more advanced physical theory to something that will resemble the "mind of God" using Einstein's own words.. I don't know... it appears to me non-sense not science>>> Sorry. Mathematics will be the language of the THEORY as we expect it to be but it won't be math that will take us to its hiding place. Some people call it "FAITH" I prefer the term "INTUITION" insted... It will have to include a little bit of that too... We'll see. HBD

[Benedict Broere]

Lloyd Gillespie,
I always thought science is a method of research directed on researchable parts of reality, looking for patterns that might be significant. While it doesn't say anything about reality in general. If people start speaking of reality in general, they are practising metaphysics. Metaphysics can take on may different kinds of forms. Spiritualism, materialism, dualism, theism, atheism, polytheism, animism, buddhism, etcetera. All these ism's can be traced back to their context's of historical, cultural and psychological charactere. And these context's are certainly part of what can be researched. To me it seems a pattern can be found there. A pattern that might tell us something about the general pattern that is the TOE. But ofcourse this research of ism's and their context's is problematic because we are part of it. Fot this reason it is hard to see what is beyond what we are determined to see or think by our context's. Still it is a wellknown fact out of biographies of scientists and philosophers that their views on reality can change in the course of their research and thinking. So the research of ism's and their contexts need a flexible mind. Or at least it needs the awareness of the relation of ism's and their context's.

[archetype]

Originally Posted by Benedict Broere Lloyd Gillespie, I always thought science is a method of research directed on researchable parts of reality, looking for patterns that might be significant. While it doesn't say anything about reality in general. If people start speaking of reality in general, they are practising metaphysics. Metaphysics can take on may different kinds of forms. Spiritualism, materialism, dualism, theism, atheism, polytheism, animism, buddhism, etcetera. All these ism's can be traced back to their context's of historical, cultural and psychological charactere. And these context's are certainly part of what can be researched. To me it seems a pattern can be found there. A pattern that might tell us something about the general pattern that is the TOE. But ofcourse this research of ism's and their context's is problematic because we are part of it. Fot this reason it is hard to see what is beyond what we are determined to see or think by our context's. Still it is a wellknown fact out of biographies of scientists and philosophers that their views on reality can change in the course of their research and thinking. So the research of ism's and their contexts need a flexible mind. Or at least it needs the awareness of the relation of ism's and their context's.

With all due respect, everything you could possibly ever think about or imagine is already covered by 1/0. There is no higher answer.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by archetype With all due respect, everything you could possibly ever think about or imagine is already covered by 1/0. There is no higher answer.

Archetype, then tell me how inanimate matter produces animate being.

regards

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Benedict, may I suggest a link about categories: http://www.marxists.org/reference/ar...ctics/ch02.htm It's Adorno's Negative Dialectics:Concept and Categories___I think he does the best job of rounding out our philosophical knowledge.

regards

Originally Posted by Benedict Broere Lloyd Gillespie, I always thought science is a method of research directed on researchable parts of reality, looking for patterns that might be significant. While it doesn't say anything about reality in general. If people start speaking of reality in general, they are practising metaphysics. Metaphysics can take on may different kinds of forms. Spiritualism, materialism, dualism, theism, atheism, polytheism, animism, buddhism, etcetera. All these ism's can be traced back to their context's of historical, cultural and psychological charactere. And these context's are certainly part of what can be researched. To me it seems a pattern can be found there. A pattern that might tell us something about the general pattern that is the TOE. But ofcourse this research of ism's and their context's is problematic because we are part of it. Fot this reason it is hard to see what is beyond what we are determined to see or think by our context's. Still it is a wellknown fact out of biographies of scientists and philosophers that their views on reality can change in the course of their research and thinking. So the research of ism's and their contexts need a flexible mind. Or at least it needs the awareness of the relation of ism's and their context's.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick Well said there Lloyd,is there no solution that would be accepted by all?What about the wartime expression,that there are not many atheists in a foxhole,when grenades are exploding all around you???

Michael, I simply choose to put my a-theist hat on when doing science. I wear my mataphysics hat when doing consciouseness... Am presently reading Adorno: http://www.marxists.org/reference/ar...ctics/ch02.htm He offers a lot about the possible union of mind/body___maybe more than we know... Check it out if you have time...

regards

[archetype]

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie Archetype, then tell me how inanimate matter produces animate being. regards

Mr. Gillespie,

Hmmm, a curious thought you have. Is this a trick question?

Inanimate matter does not produce animate being as you seem to assume. Everything is part of everything which has always existed for all of time. The presence of life is a predetermined part of the universe's existence which is not a trivial thing that randomly came into existence spontaneously and for no reason. There is a reason for life and this reason has always existed, thus life has always existed to fullfill that reason and it does not randomly spring from so called "inanimate" matter.

Do you agree? Do you have any other questions that fall under the category of 1/0, i.e. everything? You are a smart thinker!

[Benedict Broere]

Archetype,

You’ve come up with an interesting concept. But what do you mean exactly?

1/0 or ∞

You state a lot, but you’ll realise of course, you need to explain.

[baudrunner]

As interesting as this discussion is becoming I am going to stop right here.

Once science recognizes the fundamental laws of absolutes, the only mysteries remaining will be the understanding of life and consciousness to complete the TOE.

Dave! Your condescending comment to my very first post .."not another consciousness TOE!" is a contradiction of sorts, can't actually describe in a word what sort, but accept the simplistic obviousness of the Premonition, consciousness explained! Don't tell me that it is weirder than quantum "reality". Hah, hah! Gotcha!