Will Science ever prove Non-Duality?

[Leo Gura]

@Nahm Nah, there's much more to it than that.

What is the connection between science, truth, and understanding?

You cannot just dismiss all science as delusion, since there is no fundamental division between science and spiritual inquiry. Spirituality is the science of spirit, you might say.

[kieranperez]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

What is the connection between Western science & spirituality? << That's a really good question to contemplate.

Can’t tell you how much I think about this. 

Especially with technological advancement, I think where a lot of people get stuck is idolizing the past and not envision what’s possible with nonduality with things like AI and what not and also modern day chemistry (psychedelics).

We need to stay current and keep our vision in line with what’s unfolding in all the other domains.

However, like any model, it will not be universal for all people... as far as I can conceive. At the end of the day, everybody is unique in their strengths, talents, cognitive weaknesses, brain chemistry, personality types, (social) conditioning and indoctrination, (mental) health issues, etc. I think the search for an ultimate integral process (and I distinguish that different than model - even though I think models will still collapse if we take it to this degree) will fall apart if we’re honest in the needs of every individual which I think can’t be avoided in a consensus for a new integral spiritual process that merges science and spirituality. 

[Leo Gura]

What is it that makes a model work at all?

How is it possible to understand anything in life? How it possible to know how a car works, for example?

[Hellspeed]

Newtonian, reductionst paradigm never.

[ajasatya]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

What is it that makes a model work at all?

How is it possible to understand anything in life? How it possible to know how a car works, for example?

it's an extension of the knowledge about how to "move your arm", for example.

there isn't really a "knowledge" entity, so to speak. we simply become aware of higher levels of reality's mechanics. you don't know how to activate each cell separately from your muscle tissues. but you are aware of how to make your arm move, or an apple fall, or a car move or an airplane fly.

[Nahm]

@ajasatya Am I hearin you right....in the sense, in the west there is a belief that the person is separate from the science, and also separate from God. This separate self which ‘understands’ and ‘has knowledge’, thus missing that there is no understanding of ‘moving the arm’ for example...and therefore there is no actual understanding of a separate “science”, nor “model”. Experiencing directly is one thing, but believing there is a me which “knows” knowledge is another thing all together...? Or more simply put, the connection between science & spirituality is being without the belief they and ‘me’ are separate to begin with? (This thought / expression isn’t separate, nor ‘actually explainable’ either) The models are false ‘ownerships’ of actuality. Same for the ‘predictability’ of what is in actuality still potentiality, ‘unowned’. 

 

[ajasatya]

@Nahm scientific/abstract models of Reality is like "knowledge" about how to move your arm. you can create the most accurate models, but those models will never reach Truth.

It's the same about moving your arm. some people do not have much dexterity and some people are acrobats. that's like the difference between lay people and scientists.

[Nahm]

@ajasatya In the sense the Truth is creating the models, by mentally “limiting out” all else (infinity), in the appearing mental sense. Ultimately, in the same vein that the person observing, is ‘a separate person’ to begin with....? (Or, nothing was ever actually limited, just knowledge believed to be know, and communicated and received in the same limited light)

[ajasatya]

Just now, Nahm said:

@ajasatya In the sense the Truth is creating the models, by limiting out all else, in the appearing mental sense. Ultimately, in the same vein that the person observing, is ‘a separate person’ to begin with....?

nope, it's just Reality doing its own magic. but we can be aware of the magic being done.

[Nahm]

@ajasatya Right. We can not actually claim the understanding, without separating ourselves from it as, an ‘understander’. This is how every person and every word in actuality, is total bullshit.  It is only the Truth seemingly “aware of” Truth.

An image comes to mind of a scientist accepting an award and taking credit, as if there were a separate self which ‘did it’. (Not that the experience of receiving the award & ‘doing the work’ should not be enjoyed)

[ajasatya]

2 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@ajasatya Right. We can not actually claim the understanding, without separating ourselves from it as, an ‘understander’. This is how every person and every word in actuality, is total bullshit.  It is only the Truth seemingly “aware of” Truth.

a little story:

1. i see the apple falling
2. i know how the apple falls
3. i don't know who i am
4. i know that i am reality
5. reality is aware of the reality falling
6. profound awe

[Nahm]

@ajasatya Yep. ? One heck of story though. 

[Nahm]

@ajasatya The short & sweet ‘explanation’ is....MU!

[Dodo]

@SQAAD the truth is not an object, science deals with the world of objects.

[kieranperez]

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

What is it that makes a model work at all?

Now this I need to contemplate! Thanks for this! Got to log this question!

[Dumb Enlightened]

The better question should be, will science improve the quality of human life ? Science has evolved a lot in the last hundred years, major scientific discoveries were made, but, are people happier now ? We sure have more comfort, I can order a pizza using my phone while I watch some 4k porn, or maybe a VR porn, but am I happy ? Depression rates are higher than ever before, a huge number of people have all sorts of psychological problems, Science isn't doing a good job about making people happy.

If non dual understanding had had the same development as science among the world population the last hundred years, maybe things would look very different. Non duality has a far greater potential to improve people's lives, why does it matter if science ever proves it or not ?

Edited April 18, 2019 by Dumb Enlightened

[kieranperez]

6 hours ago, ajasatya said:

we simply become aware of higher levels of reality's mechanics.

I would like to counter this point. I would not make the case that we are more aware of the mechanics. This goes back to not knowing and getting lost in concepts. The concepts are useful and amazing as they (the ones who created these concepts and conceptual systems) present new distinctions as possibilities that we can explore and discover in our own direct experience and thus create new states of mind. However, we are not intrinsically more aware of what they concept is pointing to as the realm experience, distinctions, and state of mind. These concepts tend to (like cultures) have a golden age period and then start to deteriorate. You can see this in paradigms that “hang around” for one too many top generations in things like athletics. Athletics is a great domain to study how models are used, how they work, how they don’t work, how they get taken for granted over time, etc. 

A model is useful when you have the experience or state of mind that you’re looking for. 

But I would flat out disagree that models make us more aware of the “mechanics” to reality. This is false in fields like science, music, spirituality, athletics, etc. because as the quote goes, “the map is not the territory” and man were in an age that has a chronic addiction to maps and it’s hard to unwire. It’s hard to really unlearn this habit of trying to learn and be aware of reality through concepts. You can have a few enlightenment experiences but man you have not escaped this habit. 

However... certain models help add perspective and potentially add openness to one’s worldview of what is possible and so forth and that’s very useful. 

Edited April 18, 2019 by kieranperez

[ajasatya]

39 minutes ago, kieranperez said:

But I would flat out disagree that models make us more aware of the “mechanics” to reality.

models do not make us more aware of the mechanics of reality. becoming more aware of the mechanics of reality empowers us to build more precise models.

models are useful for taking shortcuts in decision making. there is no warranty of optimality or corretude.

Edited April 18, 2019 by ajasatya

[kieranperez]

30 minutes ago, ajasatya said:

becoming more aware of the mechanics of reality empowers us to build more precise models.

Sure but what I think is worth taking into consideration when creating new models is the following question: how will this new model and paradigm  become limiting down the road? 

Its usually a useful tool for those that have become aware - which you and I are on the same page on. 

The problem is when that model becomes distributed to the masses. 

And by model I mean new systems, processes, etc.

Again, you and I don’t disagree. I’m just saying this is an issue that I see is very overlooked and often not brought into questioning. 

A lot of people then take on and adopt these new practices, systems, concepts, worldviews, etc. just inherently and then eventually the understanding becomes diluted over time. 

[ajasatya]

@kieranperez it's alright. people will keep misunderstanding what models are and why they exist. every model is a dumb simplification at some point. even the most sophisticated equations in physics.