#I love you philosophy of science ! ontology and epistemology !

[thatfrenchacademic]

So deep in the methodology section that the next time someone even mention the word causal inference I am going to start chewing on their laptop without any explanation.

[caustic-splines]

I can be soft and vulnerable, I am willing to let you hurt me because I love you and trust you. I know you are passionate I rediscovered part of the reason why I love you so much. Your love is discrete, inverse pun intended but both homonyms applicable in this analogy. It is private, our unique form of expression

But it is also literally discrete, like recent quantum gravity field theories I may or may not have a hand in. My mind craves clarity, more so, it craves discrete caustic lines an planes. I would like to be like that every day. I want my heart to be in the inner of a particle accelerator bit-west two colliding high energy beams. All the crazy spins and flavor's of normal, charming, and even exotic sub atomic particles smashing apart, smashing together, twirling off in random spirals based on EM fields. That is who I am, not a particle reactor,

but every emergent self and extended phenotype aspect of my projects, world views, emotions, experiences, thoughts and behaviors.

Do you really want to see what I have seen when I was manic, I will make a brief outline, which barely does it justice, nor was the experience worth it in my mind

I saw reality

Across all multi scale layers of objective, subjective, abstract existance. Both perceived and externally existing.

Across all of these non-linear and semi-non empirical scales

Ontology categories of conscious awareness -5 Planc Quantized Wireframe -4 Subatomic Interactions -3 Electron Orbitals -2 Biochemical Interactions -1 Neurological Activity 0 Perception Input and basic awareness/dispersibility [(x n-1…n5) State of dissociation of whatever perceptual order or unconsciousness/dreaming] 1 Awareness of perception and SV 2 Awareness of perception in context or awareness of awareness -Xa Intrapersonal models 3 Awareness of self, regarding one's cognitive topography -Xb Allocentric models 4 Aware of a disruptive axiomatic shift recursively impacting various areas and fidelity of one's consciousness -Xc Global and Orbital Cyberphysical Memetogeographic Space -Xd Cosmology 5 Aware of a fundamental change in perception or PMC affecting POV. Shift in paradigm -Xe Uber Universes/5D+ EGC splines (ego/exo/allo) centric/ totality of EISOA over CT0-9

In the context of modular frames, of which I have objectively real working minimal level of knowledge in all of these domains, some reaching PhD levels of mastery

1 Technology

1 Applied Science/Applied Uses of TSECpm Phenomenon 2 ~Sustainable, Agricultural, Ecological and Environmental 3 Fabrication, Trade/Craft, and Intra/Inter Human Skill/Functionality 4 Military/Security/OMA7 5 Educational, Knowledge, Cognitive, Cybernetics, and Information, DT/PT 6 Electronics, Computers, Software, Spectrum, AI 7 Industries, Material Collection, Cyclical/NA: Supply Chains, Accounting 8 Skills, Fabrication, Synthesis, and Patents, Logistics 9 Civil, Nationality, Era, Civilian, State, and Structural 0 Future Technology/Other

2 Philosophy

1 Logic 2 Epistemology 3 Aesthetics 4 Politics 5 Dialectics, Critical Thinking, and Rhetoric 6 Ethics and Morality 7 Metaphysics and Ontology 8 Meta Linguistics 9 Applied Philosophy 0 Analytic Philosophy/Other

3 Engineering

1 Nuclear Engineering 2 Chemical Engineering 3 Biological Engineering/Medical Engineering 4 Environmental Engineering 5 Systems Engineering  and Cybernetics 6 Electrical Engineering 7 Mechanical Engineering 8 Industrial Engineering  9 Civil Engineering    0 Personal Engineering/Cognitive Engineering/Experience Engineering, ME0002/0013/0034/0049, Other

4 General-Cultural

1 Interactive Mediums/4, 3//Middle World IO MR Interaction/Hobbies/EISOA interactions 2 Geography, Culture, [[SMPH/ME 1/Experiment 0032 TSeCIVii|Experiment 0032 TSeCIVii]] 3 Occult/Niche Allusion/Metaphor 4 Physical, Mental, and Cognitive Skills 5 Day to Day Functionality, House Keeping, BH, and Normative and Exotic Behavior (Anomolies vs Normative Phenomena, timescale/PoF independent) 6 Law, Rules, Conduct, Ethology 7 Finance and Business/Institutions/VSM/States/Governing Bodies 8 Dynamic PPF+/-PoV, People of Interest, UJSF 9 Politics and Society – Collective Conscious Gestalt 0 UM, Pop culture/other, (**(almost) ALL EISOA can be contained in USF(EISOA Correlate))

5 Frameworks

1 Gestalt, Non Gestalt (AS/S)_, Spatial and/or Temporal Patterns, and Non-Modular and Modular Ontology, Shapes, Objects, Sounds,  Qualia Framed Experiences which can be Axiomatized (basically an intersystem link to 1, 1 to enable dual +y/1, 1 functionality) 2 PT/MR Mathematical and Mapping/Fields Competition and Game Theory, NWF (applying [[Experiment 0024 LoUtrix]] to 1, 1) 3 UJSF/Society and Culture/Cyberphysical Environments (EISOA cybersocial considertations) 4 TSECpm, +y/PT, Exocognition/LLM integration 5 Mindmap/MEs, and Modelling, Psychology/EISOA, Thought Traces/2, 5/AE/DABPAx (self imposed 3, 4 for the meta task of utilizing +y effectively) 6 Experiential and PMC/5, x /1, 1/3, 1/2, x/PE (1, 1-2-5-6/2, x subjective experience. MM08, x 7 IESOA, CABS, Frames, (OMA7), Fuzzy Logic, 3, 4/VSMs/SMPH Optimal Scheduling and [[Unsignificant Sentience/Mental Experiments/Experiment 0005 Chewing Gum Loading Dock|Experiment 0005 Chewing Gum Loading Dock]] [[SMPH/ME 1/Experiment 0058 Just in Time 1, 31, 5AE+Y|Experiment 0058 Just in Time 1, 31, 5AE+Y]] HMI workflow (EIOA on IS) 8 Language and Linguistics, Metaphor/SWHs, [[SMPH/ME 1/Experiment 0012 Fractal Cosmic Regression|Experiment 0012 Fractal Cosmic Regression]] 9 Cognition, Learning, and Experience/ 09, x 0 Axiomatic Systems, Perspective Theory/other, PoFs

6 Science

1 Physics 2 Astrophysics and Cosmology 3 Chemistry 4 Biology 5 Interdisciplinary/System Science 6 Health Sciences 7 Earth Sciences 8 Formal Science 9 Social Sciences 0 Other

7 Abstract Constructs, Functions, and Relationships

1 Set Theory 2 Ontology 3 Epistemology 4 Metaphysics 5 Digital/Cognitive Twins 6 Abstract Object Mapping 7 Abstract Object Manipulating 8 Elucidating Abstract Space into IS space and vice versa 9 Metaphysical Abstract Space Workshop, CA 0 Communicable and interactive Abstract Entities/Engineering of the Abstract

At the same time, world building a sci fi universe and multiple systems of systems that would be abstracted and logically patterned into some of the most influential books in human history.

The fourth book? You are a main character you wrote your own part you played. It is probably the first case of hypersituatal fictional historic non fiction that guided the development of humanity culturally and scientifically. I became a living fictive, I had all of my human rights removed, but not my natural rights.

When you see everything, you can change everything

I had reality fuck it's way into my brain and leave gaping wounds that have never healed. I can handle some rough love dear

Maybe one day I will be able to share the light show

[biointernet]

Extinction Rebellion - Time against Life

Extinction Rebellion is a global environmental movement with the stated aim of using nonviolent civil disobedience to compel government action to avoid tipping points in the climate system, biodiversity loss, and the risk of social and ecological collapse. Extinction Rebellion - Time against Life https://youtu.be/XMzTWwTw_kQ Extinction Rebellion is an international movement that uses non-violent civil disobedience in an attempt to halt mass extinction and minimize the risk of social collapse. Our world is in crisis. Life itself is under threat. Yet every crisis contains the possibility of transformation. Across the world, heralded by the young, people are waking up and coming together. 

Symbol-of-Time We hear history calling to us from the future. We catch glimpses of a new world of love, respect and regeneration, where we have restored the intricate web of all life. It’s a future that’s inside us all – located in the fierce love we carry for our children, in our urge to help a stranger in distress, in our wish to forgive, even when that seems too much to ask.  And so we rebel for this, calling in joy, creativity and beauty. We rise in the name of truth and withdraw our consent for ecocide, oppression and patriarchy. We rise up for a world where power is shared for regeneration, repair and reconciliation. We rise for love in its ultimate wisdom. Our vision stretches beyond our own lifespan, to a horizon dedicated to future generations and the restoration of our planet’s integrity. Together, our rebellion is the gift this world needs. We are XR and you are us.  https://rebellion.earth/ https://www.instagram.com/p/B3PwZ73HHCC/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link At the core of Extinction Rebellion’s philosophy is nonviolent civil disobedience. We promote civil disobedience and rebellion because we think it is necessary- we are asking people to find their courage and to collectively do what is necessary to bring about change. We aren’t focussed on traditional systems like petitions or writing to our MPs and more likely to take risks (e.g. arrest / jail time). We don’t want or need everyone to get arrested – for some this is not a good idea – but we do want everyone involved to support civil disobedience as a tool. We are promoting mass “above the ground” civil disobedience – in full public view. This means economic disruption to shake the current political system and civil disruption to raise awareness. We are deeply sorry for any inconvenience that this causes.

We can't eat money We have made some decisions about security and our interactions with the police. We have made a strategic decision to communicate with the police about what we are doing when we believe that is more likely to enable things to go well (which we can’t always be sure of). Except for the case where a small group is trying to do a specific action that needs the element of surprise, we generally don’t try to be secure in our communications about plans. We expect that we have been infiltrated by those without our best interests at heart and suggest people bear this in mind. We are about political change, not personal change (though we welcome the latter). We are completely nonviolent, our actions are done in full public view and we take responsibility for them. We have an Action Consensus which outlines how we work together on actions. https://rebellion.global/ https://www.instagram.com/p/B3T3Qndniqo/?utm_source=ig_web_options_share_sheet We organise in small, autonomous groups distributed around the world. These groups are connected in a complex web that is constantly evolving as we grow and learn. We are working to build a movement that is participatory, decentralised, and inclusive. The structure aims to empower anybody to act as part of XR, so long as they agree to follow our ten core principles (see ‘Our principles and values’ section below). You can read a summary of our Self-Organising System (or XR Constitution) for more information. You can also read the full constitution. We are seeking a balance between being able to act quickly in response to fast-changing situations and being able to integrate the collective wisdom of multiple perspectives when needed.

Rebel for Life You can also explore this Interactive Map of the Working Groups that are organising at a UK-wide level. Hover your mouse over circles in the graphic (top right) to see their names, then click through to find the most up-to-date information about the teams in XR UK and what they are working on. Use your browser’s Back button to retrace your steps. https://www.designweek.co.uk/issues/15-21-april-2019/how-extinction-rebellion-protest-graphics/ Extinction Rebellion: A Call for Direct Action In response to the global climate crisis, Extinction Rebellion has emerged as a direct action movement. Originally a UK based initiative, Extinction Rebellion began on 31st October 2018 when a small group of individuals gathered together on Parliament Square in London to make a ‘Declaration of Rebellion’ against the UK Government. Anticipating only a couple of hundred people to attend, organizers were surprised by the 1500 that gathered to peacefully protest for the climate crisis. Encouraged by the show of solidarity, the movement quickly gained momentum with protests springing up all throughout the UK. In the weeks that followed, a group of 6000 converged to block five major bridges across the Thames river whilst others superglued themselves to the gates of Buckingham Palace to read letters to the Queen. Naturally, these protests generated huge national and international publicity, with thousands of people around the world finding Extinction Rebellion’s message to be resonant. There are now groups forming in countries far and wide, with people of all nations banding together to take action while we still have a chance. At Synergetic Press, we want to encourage this movement. Here are links to key talks and networks to help you get involved. https://www.synergeticpress.com/extinction-rebellion-rebel-for-life/

Extinction Rebellion - Time against Life tree See also:

Time symbolism

Time is…

Time in physics and time Science Symbolism of Melencolia I by Albrecht Dürer

Time and Text

Text, Time, MHC

A bright pink rhinoceros emblazoned with Extinction Rebellions signature logo, next to the chancellery at the Reichstag in Berlin Extinction Rebellion – Time against Life Hourglass and Death on St Thomas’ Church Hourglass – symbol of Death Hourglass and Skeleton “Hourglass and Cards” Exhibition Father and Mother of Time Time Hub The Hourglass, Hourglass History Hourglass symbolism Hourglass Body Hourglass Tattoo Symbols of Time

A bright pink rhinoceros Extinction Rebellions EXtRa! EXtRa! Read all about it! Extinction Rebellion is launching a newspaper! Get your Hourglass here! September 24, 2019 by Extinction Rebellion Launching today is Extinction Rebellion-supported independent newspaper The HourglassPrinted on recycled paper with a distribution of over 110K papers, The Hourglass will be distributed around the UK by Rebels from Extinction Rebellion’s regional groups across the UK who believe in telling the truth through the pressAiming to reach people who are not necessarily on social media, and who still read and trust traditional press, The Hourglass’s first edition features a front page exclusive with Dr Wolfgang Knorr, a climate scientist and former Deputy Leader of a major NERC climate research project at the University of Bristol, who apologises for his inaction on the Climate & Ecological EmergencyIn The Hourglass, readers can expect stories similar to that of a mainstream newspaper like The Metro while at times hitting the tone of Take a Break, all the time approaching climate reporting as should already be the norm in the pressThe news comes as Extinction Rebellion today also announces an independent Whistleblower gateway, TruthTeller.life – developed with Extinction Rebellion’s support – which offers a safe way for concerned citizens to anonymously expose what they know about the true scale of the crisis and how it will impact us allOn 7 October, the next phase of Extinction Rebellion’s International will begin in more than 60 cities around the world. Extinction Rebellion has today launched a newspaper called The Hourglass. Printed on recycled paper and with a distribution of over 110k papers, The Hourglass will be distributed around the UK by rebels from Extinction Rebellion’s regional groups across the UK who believe in telling the truth through the press. The Hourglass aims to reach people who are not necessarily on social media, and who still read and trust traditional press. Readers can expect stories similar to that of a mainstream newspaper like The Metro while at times hitting the tone of Take a Break, all the time approaching climate reporting as should already be the norm in the press. More: https://rebellion.earth/2019/09/24/extra-extra-read-all-about-it-extinction-rebellion-is-launching-a-newspaper-get-your-hourglass-here/ DADA Time Time Philosophy The Death Does Not Exist Hourglass Figure Sophia Loren Hourglass body measurements Time Symbolism

Extinction Rebellion - Time against Life

Space and time are the framework within which the mind is constrained to construct its experience of reality. Immanuel Kant Philosophy of space and time is the branch of philosophy concerned with the issues surrounding the ontology, epistemology, and character of space and time. While such ideas have been central to philosophy from its inception, the philosophy of space and time was both an inspiration for and a central aspect of early analytic philosophy. DADA Time today Read the full article

[garywonghc]

Studying Mind from the Inside

by His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama

The joy of meeting someone you love, the sadness of losing a close friend, the richness of a vivid dream, the serenity of a walk through a garden on a spring day, the total absorption of a deep meditative state — these things and others like them constitute the reality of our experience of consciousness.

Regardless of the content of any one of these experiences, no one in his or her right mind would doubt their reality. Any experience of consciousness — from the most mundane to the most elevated — has a certain coherence and, at the same time, a high degree of privacy, which means that it always exists from a particular point of view. The experience of consciousness is entirely subjective. The paradox, however, is that despite the indubitable reality of our subjectivity and thousands of years of philosophical examination, there is little consensus on what consciousness is. Science, with its characteristic third-person method — the objective perspective from the outside — has made strikingly little headway in this understanding.

The question of consciousness has attracted a good deal of attention in the long history of Buddhist philosophical thinking. For Buddhism, given its primary interest in questions of ethics, spirituality, and overcoming suffering, understanding consciousness, which is thought to be a defining characteristic of sentience, is of great importance. According to the earliest scriptures, the Buddha saw consciousness as playing a key role in determining the course of human happiness and suffering. For example, the famous discourse of the Buddha known as the Dhammapada opens with the statement that mind is primary and pervades all things.

The problem of describing the subjective experiences of consciousness is complex indeed. For we risk objectivising what is essentially an internal set of experiences and excluding the necessary presence of the experiencer. We cannot remove ourselves from the equation. No scientific description of the neural mechanisms of colour discrimination can make one understand what it feels like to perceive, say, the colour red. We have a unique case of inquiry: the object of our study is mental, that which examines it is mental, and the very medium by which the study is undertaken is mental. The question is whether the problems posed by this situation for a scientific study of consciousness are insurmountable — are they so damaging as to throw serious doubt on the validity of the inquiry?

Although we tend to relate to the mental world as if it were homogenous — a somewhat monolithic entity called “the mind” — when we probe more deeply, we come to recognise that this approach is too simplistic. As we experience it, consciousness is made up of myriad highly varied and often intense mental states.

There are explicitly cognitive states, like belief, memory, recognition, and attention on the one hand, and explicitly affective states, like the emotions, on the other. In addition, there seems to be a category of mental states that function primarily as causal factors in that they motivate us into action. These include volition, will, desire, fear, and anger. Even within the cognitive states, we can draw distinctions between sensory perceptions, such as visual perception, which has a certain immediacy in relation to the objects being perceived, and conceptual thought processes, such as imagination or the subsequent recollection of a chosen object. These latter processes do not require the immediate presence of the perceived object, nor do they depend upon the active role of the senses.

The question is, what defines this diversity of phenomena as belonging to one family of experience, which we call “mental”? I remember most vividly my first lesson on epistemology as a child, when I had to memorise the dictum “The definition of the mental is that which is luminous and knowing.” It was years later that I realised just how complicated is the philosophical problem hidden behind this simple formulation. Today when I see nine-year-old monks confidently citing this definition of consciousness on the debating floor, which is such a central part of Tibetan monastic education, I smile.

These two features — luminosity, or clarity, and knowing, or cognisance — have come to characterise “the mental” in Indo-Tibetan Buddhist thought. Clarity here refers to the ability of mental states to reveal or reflect. Knowing, by contrast, refers to mental states’ faculty to perceive or apprehend what appears. All phenomena possessed of these qualities count as mental. These features are difficult to conceptualise, but then we are dealing with phenomena that are subjective and internal rather than material objects that may be measured in spatio temporal terms. Perhaps it is because of these difficulties — the limits of language in dealing with the subjective — that many of the early Buddhist texts explain the nature of consciousness in terms of metaphors such as light or a flowing river. As the primary feature of light is to illuminate, so consciousness is said to illuminate its objects. Just as in light there is no categorical distinction between the illumination and that which illuminates, so in consciousness there is no real difference between the process of knowing, or cognition, and that which knows or cognises. In consciousness, as in light, there is a quality of illumination.

Western philosophy and science have, on the whole, attempted to understand consciousness solely in terms of the functions of the brain. This approach effectively grounds the nature and existence of the mind in matter, in an ontologically reductionist manner. Some view the brain in terms of a computational model, comparing it to artificial intelligence; others attempt an evolutionary model for the emergence of the various aspects of consciousness. In modern neuroscience, there is a deep question about whether the mind and consciousness are any more than simply operations of the brain, whether sensations and emotions are more than chemical reactions. To what extent does the world of subjective experience depend on the hardware and working order of the brain? It must to some significant extent, but does it do so entirely? What are the necessary and sufficient causes for the emergence of subjective mental experiences?

Many scientists, especially those in the discipline of neurobiology, assume that consciousness is a special kind of physical process that arises through the structure and dynamics of the brain. I vividly remember a discussion I had with some eminent neuroscientists at an American medical school. After they kindly showed me the latest scientific instruments to probe ever deeper into the human brain, such as MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) and EEG (electroencephelograph), and let me view a brain operation in progress (with the family’s permission), we sat down to have a conversation on the current scientific understanding of consciousness. I said to one of the scientists: “It seems very evident that due to changes in the chemical processes of the brain, many of our subjective experiences like perception and sensation occur. Can one envision the reversal of this causal process? Can one postulate that pure thought itself could affect a change in the chemical processes of the brain?” I was asking whether, conceptually at least, we could allow the possibility of both upward and downward causation.

The scientist’s response was quite surprising. He said that since all mental states arise from physical states, it is not possible for downward causation to occur. Although, out of politeness, I did not respond at the time, I thought then and still think that there is as yet no scientific basis for such a categorical claim. The view that all mental processes are necessarily physical processes is a metaphysical assumption, not a scientific fact. I feel that, in the spirit of scientific inquiry, it is critical that we allow the question to remain open, and not conflate our assumptions with empirical fact.

A crucial point about the study of consciousness, as opposed to the study of the physical world, relates to the personal perspective. In examining the physical world, leaving aside the problematic issue of quantum mechanics, we are dealing with phenomena that lend themselves well to the dominant scientific method of the objective, third-person method of inquiry. On the whole, we have a sense that a scientific explanation of the physical world does not exclude the key elements of the field being described. In the realm of subjective experiences, however, the story is completely different. When we listen to a purely third-person, “objective” account of mental states, whether it is a cognitive psychological theory, a neurobiological account, or an evolutionary theory, we feel that a crucial dimension of the subject has been left out. I am referring to the phenomenological aspect of mental phenomena, namely the subjective experience of the individual.

Even from this brief discussion, it is, I think, clear that the third-person method — which has served science so well in so many areas — is inadequate to the explanation of consciousness. What is required, if science is successfully to probe the nature of consciousness, is nothing short of a paradigm shift. That is, the third-person perspective, which can measure phenomena from the point of view of an independent observer, must be integrated with a first-person perspective, which will allow the incorporation of subjectivity and the qualities that characterise the experience of consciousness. I am suggesting the need for the method of our investigation to be appropriate to the object of inquiry. Given that one of the primary characteristics of consciousness is its subjective and experiential nature, any systematic study of it must adopt a method that will give access to the dimensions of subjectivity and experience.

A comprehensive scientific study of consciousness must therefore embrace both third-person and first-person methods: it cannot ignore the phenomenological reality of subjective experience but must observe all the rules of scientific rigour. So the critical question is this: Can we envision a scientific methodology for the study of consciousness whereby a robust first-person method, which does full justice to the phenomenology of experience, can be combined with the objectivist perspective of the study of the brain?

Here I feel a close collaboration between modern science and the contemplative traditions, such as Buddhism, could prove beneficial. Buddhism has a long history of investigation into the nature of mind and its various aspects — this is effectively what Buddhist meditation and its critical analysis constitute. Unlike that of modern science, Buddhism’s approach has been primarily from first-person experience. The contemplative method, as developed by Buddhism, is an empirical use of introspection, sustained by rigorous training in technique and robust testing of the reliability of experience. All meditatively valid subjective experiences must be verifiable both through repetition by the same practitioner and through other individuals being able to attain the same state by the same practice. If they are thus verified, such states may be taken to be universal, at any rate for human beings.

The Buddhist understanding of mind is primarily derived from empirical observations grounded in the phenomenology of experience, which includes the contemplative techniques of meditation. Working models of the mind and its various aspects and functions are generated on this basis; they are then subjected to sustained critical and philosophical analysis and empirical testing through both meditation and mindful observation. If we want to observe how our perceptions work, we may train our mind in attention and learn to observe the rising and falling of perceptual processes on a moment-by-moment basis. This is an empirical process that results in firsthand knowledge of a certain aspect of how the mind works. We may use that knowledge to reduce the effects of emotions such as anger or resentment (indeed, meditation practitioners in search of overcoming mental affliction would wish to do this), but my point here is that this process offers a first-person empirical method with relation to the mind.

What occurs during meditative contemplation in a tradition such as Buddhism and what occurs during introspection in the ordinary sense are two quite different things. In the context of Buddhism, introspection is employed with careful attention to the dangers of extreme subjectivism — such as fantasies and delusions — and with the cultivation of a disciplined state of mind. Refinement of attention, in terms of stability and vividness, is a crucial preparation for the utilisation of rigorous introspection, much as a telescope is crucial for the detailed examination of celestial phenomena. Just as in science, there is a series of protocols and procedures that contemplative introspection must employ. Upon entering a laboratory, someone untrained in science would not know what to look at and would have no capacity to recognise when something is found; in the same way, an untrained mind will have no ability to apply the introspective focus on a chosen object and will fail to recognise when processes of the mind show themselves. Just like a trained scientist, a disciplined mind will have the knowledge of what to look for and the ability to recognise when discoveries are made.

It may well be that the question of whether consciousness can ultimately be reduced to physical processes, or whether our subjective experiences are nonmaterial features of the world, will remain a matter of philosophical choice. The key issue here is to bracket out the metaphysical questions about mind and matter, and to explore together how to understand scientifically the various modalities of the mind. I believe that it is possible for Buddhism and modern science to engage in collaborative research in the understanding of consciousness while leaving aside the philosophical question of whether consciousness is ultimately physical. By bringing together these two modes of inquiry, both disciplines may be enriched. Such collaborative study will contribute not only greater human understanding of consciousness but a better understanding of the dynamics of the human mind and its relation to suffering. This is a precious gateway into the alleviation of suffering, which I believe to be our principal task on this earth.

[g-hanbax]

Q&As: Biblical Interpretation

5/22/18

Now on, I will try posting about my online christian apologetic work in my various social media accounts. I’ll try to post the questions together with my short answers. I will keep their identities private since they want it to -- some people don’t want others to know that they are questioning, doubting, or skeptical. Here’s one question I got today:

(I’ll try to do my best to keep my answers clear and concise.)

Q: What in your opinion is the best way to interpret the bible?

A:  

   For me, and based on experience, it's difficult to answer this simply in a sentence, it takes various familiarizations and requires an intimate relationship with God in order to clearly understand what He's trying to say. Just as how we intuitively understand a vague sentence someone we know so close has said, we experience the same way in scripture; that we won't have a hard time in trying to understand a passage once you know God and His character. But this begs a question, that is, “how do we get to know God more” (without first understanding scripture)? 

  Well, there are narrative passages in scripture where there are clearly no "hidden meanings" in it or even a "deep interpretation" is not required, reading the text can be enough to understand the situation and God's part and attribute in such event. William Lane Craig, in one of His debates, said sarcastically, that "before we try to read between the lines, we should first read the lines." A lot of passages are in prima facie, meaning they can already be understood in face value - this doesn't require scholarly works.

   But this is not really what the question is all about isn’t it? Like how about other passages that require a serious 'interpretation'. It takes a serious familiarization of texts and studies, including methods, to truly understand the experience of a situation. To say, one must consider the contextual and textual flow of narrative (hermeneutics), traditions (creeds and confessions), reason (philosophy: logic, metaphysics, ontology, and epistemology and etc.), and empirical evidence (environment, science, and experience)- and of course, with this all, being filled by the Spirit is the most important (one can pray about it). 

   I also would like to add that the church (authorities, elders, friends, theologians, philosophers, etc) can help you with this, but I suggest that you also try to have your own personal reading and study, always, and if possible, compare your answers and evaluate them - Which makes more sense? Which one is more consistent in context and in church history? Which is true to how God is viewed in all of scripture?

Assuming that this reading and study of yours is a solo act, that all you have is yourself (Christianity isn't like that btw, it's a community and we ought to help each other out in all things), then my answers above and below might be practical steps.

   Biblical Interpretation is one thorough thing to do, not just a simple “God tells me” kind of reading. It is best to have an exegetic interpretation rather than a personal interpretation (eisegesis) since scripture is objective. Although God can always use a verse and a passage to speak specifically to someone in a particular circumstance, but this just reflects to what the bible really is: That is wasn’t written to you, but it was written for you. Always try to know the intent of a verse, chapter, or book, the author and his condition and situation, the audience, the cultural background and environment, and the context itself by reading through. Not only should you be focused on the verse you’re reading, but to the extent of reading the whole chapter, or even the whole book; or better - books, and to the point of reading the whole bible itself. Having a picture of the whole will make it easier for you to understand the parts.

   Always remember, a real scriptural interpretation will never change through time, since there is only one real interpretation and intent that the author must have had to his audience, or even God Himself , in which you have different applications that can be used in various situations.

"Intent is prior to content."

  Going back to the point, let me just tell you that It's hard to say that there's only one way to interpret the bible and its overall content, it takes a legitimate process and scholarly work, backed up fundamentally with a genuine relationship with the Lord. 

  So, if you really want to know what the interpretation is for a text, pray to the Lord and ask for the Spirit’s help and wisdom. 

But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

John 14:26

Surely, a Father would love to explain the details of His book to His child, who is willing to know and is asking for help.

  In a more scholarly manner, it is my advise to everyone (specifically Christians) to have a deeper study of scripture (a formal study and studying extra-biblical materials, traditional texts that are related to the subject, creeds and confessions, and fellow Christian works as well), it's not being legalistic nor is it compulsory, but because it is truly necessary, especially in a church setting. In trying to seriously study the bible, one must have a heart not only to study the Theos but also to know more about the Logos part, thus theology. With this, you can spend time with people that may know some more things that you don’t and maybe you can share what you know that they don’t. It’s being a church basically, helping each other in the name of Christ Jesus, for the purpose of growth, fellowship, and worship. 

  In special cases, there are “special revelations” in which a person gets a direct help from the Lord in understanding a passage via a ‘revealed’ manner (dreams, visions, etc.). I am open to this, since I am highly skeptical with such events. But one thing I say, as long as the interpretation is biblical and not compromising then I’m fine with it. There may be circular arguments coming out from this but they pretty much are self-explanatory in such issue. I believe in God’s power and in such possibility, but because the issue is uncertain, I leave my self open in this particular situation.