psikeyhackr - 12 May 2012 10:37 AM
RevLGKing - 12 May 2012 10:05 AM
psikeyhackr - 12 May 2012 06:47 AM
I (LGK) like to think of G~0~D as like LIGHT. Have you heard about ...:
Light is a phenomenon of physics, but no I never heard of him, psik
Is physics one of your skills?
Electrical engineering involves a bit of physics. I thought lasers were so cool in high school. I never thought they would be used to play music off CDs. 
That is one thing that amazes me about this society. Selecting science fiction books with GOOD science for grade school kids to read seems such an obvious thing to do and yet our so called educators don’t even seem to even be interested in the concept. They have these new guidelines that are supposed to get approved by June. I searched them for “Newton”. They mention Newton’s 3rd Law but the 1st and 2nd seem to have disappeared.
http://www.nextgenscience.org/
I must have fallen through a hole into a parallel universe. Reality has gotten really strange since the 60s.psik
psik, you say, “Reality has gotten really strange since the 60s.”
When you wrote this, psik, what did you have in mind? If you meant somatic (physical) reality, I certainly agree with you. However, because I feel reality is a very complex concept, let us have a dialogue about what I call the three-component hypothesis of reality. BTW, my best subjects in high school were maths, physics and chemistry. My interest in the arts came later, at university.
THREE-COMPONENT HYPOTHESIS OF REALITY
In my opinion, without being doctrinaire about it, the three components, which I feel make up who I am as an integrated person, are: PHYSICALITY, MENTALITY & SPIRITUALITY—body, mind and spirit. Some writers prefer to talk about biology, psychology and sociology. So be it! Regardless of your theory of personality, comments and questions are welcome.
BUT IS PHYSICAL REALITY THE ONLY REALITY?
Is reality nothing more than just a physical thing? Is there not such a thing as a psychological, or mental, reality?
Do not most, if not all, medical scientists now agree that that psychosomatic diseases and pains are for real? Is it not true that poisonous thoughts inflicted on others by us can be as deadly as darts? We accept that we can, for sure, break the bones of others with our fists, sticks and stones, agreed? But can we not also break the hearts, the lives and even the health of others by throwing stress-inflicting dart-like insults at them?
IS THAT THE END OF THE STORY?
No, for me it isn’t. Let us pause for a moment and think about what I like to call the pneumatological, religious or spiritual component of reality. Keep in mind that there are thousands of religions out there. And quite a few of them, like Buddhism, are non-theistic. They think of reality as they experience it as being sacred, eternal and infinite.
With or without the gods, or a god, how do we account for the diseases and pains—addictions and the like—that, for no obvious reason often come our way—the kind, such as addictions, which we often inflict on ourselves? And what of the kind caused by stressful circumstances, or by toxic people? It is a complex matter that must be explored.
As a child of the Great Depression (I was born in 1930), I witnessed the death of both my parents, my two older and married siblings, two of their young children and other family members—between 1932 and 1944. I still feel bothered when I think about this time of great poverty and disease, especially TB.
However, at that time, the church, the minister, the adult church members and the teachers of the church-operated school were all very helpful, despite their own modest resources. Had the religion in which I was at the time taught me, and my younger sister, that our suffering and pain came as the result of god’s anger because of our sins, such a bad religion—which it was NOT—could have done us a lot of harm. I am still thankful, it did us a lot of good. The point is that, like all things we humans create, religion and spirituality can be instruments for evil or for good. Constructive criticism of hypocrisy—a frequent target of Jesus’ teachings—is, of course, welcomed; but I find it less stressful to avoid being negatively critical and vapidly judgemental. Such posturing does no good for anyone and is of no real help to the public good.
I APPRECIATE THE SINCERE AND CHALLENGING KIND OF ATHEISM
I am thankful for the challenge of sincere and honest atheism. When I talk about the god-hypothesis—the subject of this topic and dialogue—while I am not an atheist, I do not have now—nor have I ever had—the need to believe in a god who is a supernatural being with dimensions, one who lives separate and apart from us and our experiences. To my mind, such a god-concept is simply a super idol created in the mind. The opportunity to find that which is Good, Opportune and Desirable in Reality—including people, community and things—is all the reality that I need. Because of my personal experience, I sincerely respect all people, including atheists/agnostics, whose day by day living, based on the agape-love-based Golden Rule, says it all.
