what would a physical science look like at a deeper level?

[electroBeam]

What would a deeply spiritually evolved physical scientist create? Would the scientist quit science or continue it? What would the scientist's life purpose evolve to? Is it possible to revolutionise the physical sciences to a deeper level? 

[Leo Gura]

@electroBeam All very good questions. Spend a few years contemplating them and you'll probably arrive at some profound answers.

[electroBeam]

@Leo Gura thanks, you're right, I should stop looking for shortcuts. 

[Salvijus]

Spiritual science = occult

 

[electroBeam]

18 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

Spiritual science = occult

 

interesting, maybe a hyper advanced version of science will be like a magnificent ancient egypt occult. 

[Solace]

I read this the other day. It may help with your contemplation.

https://facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2095494060506397&id=100001374698201

Edited March 30, 2019 by Solace

[Rilles]

[Leo Gura]

@electroBeam The short answer is something like Einstein, Da Vinci, Newton, Kurt Godel, or Leibniz. They are good examples of integrating science, philosophy, & spiritual intuition.

The sad irony is that our top scientists used to be visionary geniuses, philosophers, and mystics. And now we have a bunch of materialist hacks in lab coats thinking they are advanced.

Philosophy is badly in need of a renaissance.

[electroBeam]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The sad irony is that our top scientists used to be visionary geniuses, philosophers, and mystics. And now we have a bunch of materialist hacks in lab coats thinking they are advanced.

yeah Stephen Hawkins was definitely wrong when he said philosophy is dead. But at the same time i totally understand why he said it, bad philosophy is also very toxic, and its very easy to be a bad philosopher. 

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The sad irony is that our top scientists used to be visionary geniuses, philosophers, and mystics. And now we have a bunch of materialist hacks in lab coats thinking they are advanced.

Do you think there is some value in looking at combining science and art? They way renaissance architects and Da Vinci envisioned? Do you think science needs to be more psychologically focused rather than materialist focused? Is there a place for mathematics in a world without materialism?

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Philosophy is badly in need of a renaissance.

In small regards to this comment, Imagine there was a person who would in 30 years revolutionise the hard sciences. He built a temple which got people into extraordinary states of consciousness. He used new perspectives and paradigms he developed in his 30 years of combining traditional science with spirituality and art, to formulate the design of the temple. 

Does this scenario sound likely? Or is this a pipe dream that shouldn't be attempted in your opinion?

 

[Consilience]

25 minutes ago, electroBeam said:

yeah Stephen Hawkins was definitely wrong when he said philosophy is dead. But at the same time i totally understand why he said it, bad philosophy is also very toxic, and its very easy to be a bad philosopher. 

Do you think there is some value in looking at combining science and art? They way renaissance architects and Da Vinci envisioned? Do you think science needs to be more psychologically focused rather than materialist focused? Is there a place for mathematics in a world without materialism?

In small regards to this comment, Imagine there was a person who would in 30 years revolutionise the hard sciences. He built a temple which got people into extraordinary states of consciousness. He used new perspectives and paradigms he developed in his 30 years of combining traditional science with spirituality and art, to formulate the design of the temple. 

Does this scenario sound likely? Or is this a pipe dream that shouldn't be attempted in your opinion?

 

This sounds like it could be effective, but it may have to be a community wide effort rather than from a single individual