[nutronjon]

Plato placed knowledge in thought, and reality, therefore, in the ideal form. The Stoics, however, place knowledge in physical sensation, and reality -- what is known by the senses -- is matter. All things, they said, even the soul, even God himself, are material and nothing more than material. This belief they based upon two main considerations. Firstly, the unity of the world demands it. The world is one, and must issue from one principle. We must have a monism.

I will go with the Stoics, and Pythagoras.

Does this make sense Monad is the oneness, perhaps neutrinos, which decay into atomic particles. Dyad is, matter and anti-matter, and also yin and yang, positive and negative. Triad is, proton, electron and neutron, which becomes all the elements, or as it was said- "The triad is the form of the completion of all things." - Nichomachus of Gerasa (c.100 A.D., Greek neo-Pythagorain philosopher and mathematician).

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by nutronjon

Now some post in this thread are an absolute delight, and I am avoiding the ones that will probably make me feel like shit, so I can enjoy discussion with those who are willing to talk about what I have been trying to talk about.

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by nutronjon

Does this make sense Monad is the oneness, perhaps neutrinos, which decay into atomic particles. Dyad is, matter and anti-matter, and also yin and yang, positive and negative. Triad is, proton, electron and neutron, which becomes all the elements, or as it was said- "The triad is the form of the completion of all things." - Nichomachus of Gerasa (c.100 A.D., Greek neo-Pythagorain philosopher and mathematician).

No, this does not make sense.
Which atomic particles do neutrino's decay into?

[nutronjon]

If you google "neutrino decay" you will get several explanations, and they are much better explanations than I make.

Neutrinos may decay - physicsworld.com

The observation of neutrino oscillations - and hence neutrino mass - by the Super-Kamiokande experiment last year was one of the major physics discoveries of the 1990s. However, a team of US scientists is now proposing that the results can be explained by a new phenomenon - neutrino decay. Their model can, they claim, account for all neutrino anomalies with just three flavours of neutrino and is consistent with all experimental results to date. The decay model also implies neutrino mass (Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 2640).

I guess you didn't see the public broadcasting show, were it was suggested everything is the result of neutrino decay. Like the whole of universe is the result of neutrino decay. I am not saying this is so, it is just something that can add to our discussion of past and present concepts.

PS Loosen up, you still seem a little up tight about technological correctness. This up tightness is the same mistake the church made.

[modest]

Originally Posted by nutronjon

I have had a problem with Plato. I am not conformable with the notion that there is perfection in another realm.

I think that can be treated allegorically like so much Greek writing is. If you allow that then you can consider the forms as the models that simply and completely describes nature - the laws of the physical world. I really don't think the other realm has to be another physical place.

Originally Posted by nutronjon

I am concerned that Plato's ideas got Christianity off in a supernatural direction that is unpleasant. Not Plato alone, but all the combined ideas, include Egyptian of a judging god/goddess and after life.

I want to agree with you because there is obviously so much Greek (and in particular platonic) in the new testament and of course Egyptian in the old. However, I don't think we can draw a direct line from those influences to the atrocities of the Christian church. The line would be stretched very thin to make that argument. Europe put a lot into the melting pot of that faith - indeed, Europe was the melting pot.

Originally Posted by nutronjon

On the other hand, Pythagoras and sacrid numbers, which I believe go with Plato's perfect forms, and Aristotlian, logic give us something to chew on. I do not have a good grasp of these ideas, and therefore, I want to study them with others, and see if there are any gems we should keep.

I am not sure if this is futile struggle? In the Nature as God thread I posted a Hindu Consciousness link and may be that should come here? As you know, the Stoics were materialistic, and what we are learning of neutrinos makes the Stoic point of view worthy of consideration.

I can find very little difference between what you have been arguing and the stoic philosophy. Logos and the power of nature to improve people - that is all very, very stoic.

Originally Posted by nutronjon

How is that last statement? I have argued against predetermination in the past, but the way this above arguement is worded, makes sense to me.

You might be missing the important aspect of stoic predestination. Their desire is to become freewilled. To get out of the life of predetermination. A lot of the philosophy is built around that idea.

Originally Posted by nutronjon

It is the conditions of our time that set our concepts. Not many of us are comparing the concepts of our times with the concepts of the past, and seeking truth or wisdom. To do so, of course, is what gives us liberty. That is a much broader pool of knowledge on which to base our choices, and as Jefferson understood the pursuit of happiness, it is by expanding our minds with the study of the classics, and the writings of well informed scientist, philosophers and peers that we pursue happiness and enjoy liberty.

You make a popular and long-held plea toward happiness and liberty. I personally make it a point not to tell people how to find those things because I have found they are not constant. I realize this is in stark contrast to the natural law you ascribe to. Nevertheless I would hope it is a position you consider. Stoicism is not right for everybody - just like Buddhism or Christianity is not right for everybody. You are telling people that your way is the way to true happiness and liberty. Yet, it might be that those things are variable from person to person. That laws and morality and even liberty is variable from person to person and culture to culture. This is not a stoic idea and not a platonic idea. But, perhaps something for you to consider.

-modest

[nutronjon]

We respect all people, because we are respectful people.

We protect the dignity of others.

We act with integrity.

[nutronjon]

Originally Posted by modest

I think that can be treated allegorically like so much Greek writing is. If you allow that then you can consider the forms as the models that simply and completely describes nature - the laws of the physical world. I really don't think the other realm has to be another physical place.



I want to agree with you because there is obviously so much Greek (and in particular platonic) in the new testament and of course Egyptian in the old. However, I don't think we can draw a direct line from those influences to the atrocities of the Christian church. The line would be stretched very thin to make that argument. Europe put a lot into the melting pot of that faith - indeed, Europe was the melting pot.



I can find very little difference between what you have been arguing and the stoic philosophy. Logos and the power of nature to improve people - that is all very, very stoic.



You might be missing the important aspect of stoic predestination. Their desire is to become freewilled. To get out of the life of predetermination. A lot of the philosophy is built around that idea.



You make a popular and long-held plea toward happiness and liberty. I personally make it a point not to tell people how to find those things because I have found they are not constant. I realize this is in stark contrast to the natural law you ascribe to. Nevertheless I would hope it is a position you consider. Stoicism is not right for everybody - just like Buddhism or Christianity is not right for everybody. You are telling people that your way is the way to true happiness and liberty. Yet, it might be that those things are variable from person to person. That laws and morality and even liberty is variable from person to person and culture to culture. This is not a stoic idea and not a platonic idea. But, perhaps something for you to consider.

-modest

What a huge difference it makes to discuss things with an informed person! What you have said about what Europe did to Christianity is worthy of its own thread, and the subject could make this one incomprehensible. I think it would be enlightening to discuss what the spread of Christianity into the barbaric wilderness, did to the religion, and indirectly did to the US. But that is a different thread.

I see so many common threads between Stoicism and Buddhism and Hinduism. Don't you think these guys shared ideas and put their own twist on them? I have said learning what humans have deemed worthy of keeping for thousands of years, is liberating, not that anyone path is the right way. Archeology and anthropology and geology are equally important. Quantum physics puts a new twist on everything the ancients said. I have no clue why you have said my thinking is limited, or that I am pushing a limited point of view on anyone?

Our Statue of Liberty holds a torch for enlightment, and a book for the literacy that is essential to enlightenment and liberty. It is the whole of knowledge that is liberating, not specialization in one study.

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by nutronjon

I am sorry, I do not know how to report violations of the rules, but can't someone do something to stop InfiniteNow from being so offensive? Must every thread be open to him to ruin as he pleases?

You can report posts by clicking on the red button in the top right hand corner of any post.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by nutronjon

I am sorry, I do not know how to report violations of the rules, but can't someone do something to stop InfiniteNow from being so offensive? Must every thread be open to him to ruin as he pleases?

Oh... Is this an example of what you were talking about in the "Thought Police" thread you created? I see. How very interesting.

http://hypography.com/forums/theolog...ht-police.html

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by nutronjon

PS Loosen up, you still seem a little up tight about technological correctness. This up tightness is the same mistake the church made.

How am I being uptight?

Nutron, we've already discussed this "technological correctness" accusation that you keep throwing my way. I will repeat, *this a science site*. It comes with the territory. Deal with it.