We Don't Need More Science.

[Leo Gura]

Consciousness and a well-rounded education into the key humanistic fields solves the problem.

You don't need to be an expert in every science. But you do need to be an expert in being human, and you need to be conscious.

[Sevi]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

you do need to be an expert in being human, and you need to be conscious.

@username

That is the fundamental basis for any type of work, scientific or non-scientific.

So right after that, we can get into the discussion.

 

Breadth and depth:

One way to identify how deep & how broad someone is gonna get on a defined subject can be the the urge and the intensity of the desire felt for it.

Especially after certain amount of purification of the self; then it could be said, that's what intended (by Nature) to be accomplished through that mechanism.

 

After -somehow- we identify the quantity of the depth and the breadth; now,

the optimal balance:

If we take a step back for simplification; an optimization will be the average point of the opposing edges.

 

Here in this situation, (a trade-off between breadth and depth) one of the major  governing variables is time frame.

If we had infinite time, it wouldn't have been any problem to choose one or another. So, setting a layout from this perspective can allow us to see the idealistic picture humanly possible on the related context. (which in this case the layout turns out to be more the work of prioritizing) (also this opens some very different discussions like: if I find this topic this important, can I let go of my ego to know it all, do it all, achieve it all myself in my limited life time and setting the layers right and doing my share of it and then pass it to the next generations to come)

Then on the other edge of the spectrum: if I had just 24 hours to give this content, what would have that been? (and also we can add here the animalistic nature of the self: what's the urgent need or desire of my ego -or hopefully of my purified self- to invest in this?)

Now, we have two somehow opposing edges: two perspectives. From this point we can shoot for an average point which can lead us to an optimal balance of the situation.

Of course all of those parts of the context went under investigation by disregarding the human capacity factor which is also one of the very important variables to produce the results and which is very unreliable especially about permanence.

Whenever we want to consider anything related to balance or balancing act, it is very helpful to keep in mind that, it is  also the principle of sequentiality; which relates to timing. But it is a totally different discussion topic.

[Arkandeus]

9 minutes ago, Sevi said:

 

the optimal balance:

If we take a step back for simplification; an optimization will be the average point of the opposing edges.

 

Here in this situation, (a trade-off between breadth and depth) one of the major  governing variables is time frame.

If we had infinite time, it wouldn't have been any problem to choose one or another.

do we not have an infinite amount of time?

 

 

[Sevi]

@Arkandeus @username

(I put username here accidentally)

Well? that's an excellent question! The amount of time we have depends on how we define 'the conditions' and 'the reality'; also depends on where we are at our journey of Truth.

In science, generally before the research starts, the related conditions are set; like linear time, atmospheric pressure and so on... I didn't put the definitions but I was referring to those as default...

[Beyond Words]

On 4/6/2017 at 11:54 AM, Leo Gura said:

@Will Bigger There's a bigger picture at work though. Science is not merely a human invention for our own happiness and gratification. Science is an outgrowth of the evolution of the universe. So you're not going to stop it. It needs to continue to evolve. The universe is seeking to understand itself through humans, through science, and other means. The only way to put this genie back in the bottle would be to wipe the entire human species.

If, 100 years from now, science develops a foolproof technology for enlightenment, it could redeem itself big-time. Science will have to drop the naive realist paradigm pretty soon, so it will start to converge with spirituality at some point. If we can just keep our shit together for a few hundred more years and not melt down the planet or let corporations take everything over, things should look very promising.

Hold up. Are you suggesting there exists the possibility of such a technology? Is there no existential / other reason why such technology can't actually produce enlightenment?

If this tech existed, what breakthroughs need to happen? Would this work?

1. Create general-purpose AI.
2. Interpret brain activity with AI.
3. AI discovers all forms of self-deception and informs human. Human becomes more conscious and is forced to make corrections in light of abundant truth.
4. Everyone's enlightened. Including Trump.

 

More seriously,

Would advancing gene editing help? E.g. use it to modify human genes to increase their predisposition to becoming enlightened?

OR invent an operation that permanently changes the brain the way 5-MeO-DMT does (e.g. make the ego suppression process permanent)? Or do both?

 

So what am I asking?

 

Current methods (meditation, self-inquiry, 5-MeO-DMT) are effective after the person is convinced that enlightenment is worth it, and therefore does the work until enlightenment and beyond.

There has to be a way (through science or any means) to get people closer to that tipping point where the work they do towards enlightenment convinces them to go all the way. Actualized.org would definitely count towards this.

Either way I've committed my life to making enlightenment the norm. My question is, what research / breakthroughs / investigations would that entail? Researching psychedelics, gene editing, machine learning, neuroscience, psychology? Or if you don't know the answer, what research / methodology would lead to knowing what to research to achieve this?

Edited April 8, 2017 by Beyond Words
human existence depends on it

[Tibor]

@Beyond Words I would start with cleaning up water food. Than raising children the way it should be. Teach them meditation from very young age.

Dont use medication dont give them information dont set boundries for them. 

I think that will almost take care of that problem

[poimandres]

On one hand I'd like to know what's out in the universe.  On the other hand, I wonder if there's nothing new to discover.