> Origyptian Wrote:
> > We probably can say that about every species that
> > has gone extinct - they were either helpless,
> > confused, or both.
> I don't believe this is even vaguely true. I
> believe the reality is that consciousness is
> refined in EVERY individual to make sense of his
> (its) environment. Every individual animal and
> every individual ancient human act(ed)s in terms
> of all its knowledge. It is this consciousness
> and its refinement that actually confers the
> ability to survive.
> Modern humans are the "odd man out" because only
> we have a strong predisposition to act on our
> beliefs rather than our knowledge. We are
> superstitious but animals and ancient men a(we)re
> ALL scientists. We believe what we choose to
> believe and then we act on those beliefs which
> results in our becoming (unfolding as) a
> manifestation of those beliefs.
> This results from our being disconnected from
> nature and each other by language which only
> means what the listener believes it means, and of
> course, our vast ignorance about everything. The
> chief practical difference between a pyramid
> builder and us is that they knew they were mostly
> ignorant and we are incapable of seeing our
> effectively total ignorance. We see only what we
> know and believe so we are blind to our ignorance.
> They never defined things because they knew they
> were ignorant and every definition becomes
> obsolete. Rather they built their language around
> what they did know and "named" EVERYTHING they
> This wasn't accomplished through genius or
> "intelligence". It was accomplished because all
> natural languages shared by all individuals is
> naturally metaphysical. It is this
> metaphysicality that allows beavers to invent dams
> and termites to grow crops and air condition their
> cities. Ancient people used it to invent
> agriculture by means of the introduction of
> artificial bottlenecks and build great pyramids.
> It is complex language which confers the ability
> to build on the work of previous generations which
> created not only ancient science but the very
> means (agriculture) that allowed their
> superstitious progeny to survive long enough to
> invent modern science.
> Since we don't understand the way nature/ reality
> is formatted we have no choice but to build models
> and form beliefs. Consciousness naturally
> strives to understand so modern science was
> invented to make predictions and provide some
> understanding of nature.
> > The distinction between "people" and "animal" is
> > our own abstract construct. When I was in
> > academia, we had a sign over the operating table
> > that said, "Remember, cats are people too!!".
> Cats used to be people but people changed.
> We might say cats are homo sapiens too, but they
> most assuredly are not homo omnisciencis.
> It's not so much I disagree with your knowledge as
> that I see it from a different perspective. We
> believe all science requires experiment but the
> ancients would have seen the concept of
> "experiment" as gaming the system. This is simply
> because experiment lies outside ancient
> metaphysics which was language itself. Anything
> meta-logical or outside observation was bad
> science. "Experiment" would fail on both levels
> to a greater or lesser extent.
> As we learn more the world becomes more complex
> only because we can't see the existing complexity
> already existent in our models. We don't see that
> our models chiefly show how reality acts rather
> than what it is.
I am realizing that after reading your posts over the past few years, you and I may have different definitions for "metaphysical"! Could you please give the short-form of how a metaphysical approach lends itself to survival that hasj allowed humans to walk the earth for at least several hundred thousand years without experimentation in the physical world (if that's what you're saying here)?
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?