When Cosmologies Clash

  • 28 Replies
  • 3764 Views
?

Mizuki

  • 356
  • Earth is NOT a Globe
When Cosmologies Clash
« on: May 24, 2011, 12:20:24 PM »
Hello friends.

For many years now, i have held a fascination for why people believe what they believe. Particularly as regards to spirituality, morality and cosmological view-point.

A very dear friend of mine has been a Buddhist for a couple of decades. He was lucky enough to study under a very well respected Tibetan master. He told me a story about when he was driving across a large desert region somewhere in the USA with this master. At one point, they stopped and got out of the car to stretch their legs. This region was very vast with an unobscured view (i hesitate to use the word flat), and the earth they were standing on looked like a large circle, the visible terrain curving around them. The master, on viewing this, said, 'Ah, i can see why some people think the world is round.'

My friend (very much a westerner), on hearing this, took it in his stride. His master, being schooled many years ago in Tibet, had an entirely different view of the world than the conventional western model.

I think the moral here is that we are all very much products of our enviroment. Very often our most dearly-held beliefs are not really our own. Indeed, often, we have put very little thought into why we believe what we believe. We just absorb the contemporary, popular view of the time.

Omedetou, Mizuki.





"Earth is a maximal sphere in a cyclical space and its surface therefore a total plane, the equator plane of the Cosmos. The (total) plane, as well as the straight line and space as a whole, is flat, without curvature yet closed, running back on itself."

Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #1 on: May 24, 2011, 12:30:53 PM »
Which is why it is difficult to convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe.
Cheesus is so wise I sometimes think he's my alt.
CheesusCrust is wise.

Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #2 on: May 24, 2011, 01:07:30 PM »
Really? The horizon being a circle convinces people of the Earth being round? I don't think so.
But you're right. Many people only believe because they want to. For example, some people don't believe "macro-evolution" is possible. Religion is another.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
If you don't know, whenever you talk about it you're invoking the supernatural
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Unknown != Magic.

?

Mizuki

  • 356
  • Earth is NOT a Globe
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #3 on: May 24, 2011, 01:22:49 PM »
Really? The horizon being a circle convinces people of the Earth being round? I don't think so.
But you're right. Many people only believe because they want to. For example, some people don't believe "macro-evolution" is possible. Religion is another.

Hi Harutsedo.

Are you a scientist? I don't know whether the theory of evolution (macro or micro) really wins me over. Saying that, i do know that i have visited small towns in some of the more rural parts of the world where they are in dire need of it.  ;)

Whatever your beliefs are, they're just that - beliefs.

Mizuki.
"Earth is a maximal sphere in a cyclical space and its surface therefore a total plane, the equator plane of the Cosmos. The (total) plane, as well as the straight line and space as a whole, is flat, without curvature yet closed, running back on itself."

Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #4 on: May 24, 2011, 01:30:17 PM »
Really? The horizon being a circle convinces people of the Earth being round? I don't think so.
But you're right. Many people only believe because they want to. For example, some people don't believe "macro-evolution" is possible. Religion is another.

Hi Harutsedo.

Are you a scientist? I don't know whether the theory of evolution (macro or micro) really wins me over. Saying that, i do know that i have visited small towns in some of the more rural parts of the world where they are in dire need of it.  ;)

Whatever your beliefs are, they're just that - beliefs.

Mizuki.

No, I am not a scientist, but I have studied evolution more than anything else. I will probably become a scientist. Or a programmer. Haven't decided yet.
But the evidence overwhelmingly points to evolution being possible. I would prefer not to get into another evolution debate, and I don't want to get off-topic, so I'll leave it at that.
Welcome to FES, Mizuki.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
If you don't know, whenever you talk about it you're invoking the supernatural
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Unknown != Magic.

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16679
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #5 on: May 24, 2011, 01:49:53 PM »
Really? The horizon being a circle convinces people of the Earth being round? I don't think so.
But you're right. Many people only believe because they want to. For example, some people don't believe "macro-evolution" is possible. Religion is another.

Hi Harutsedo.

Are you a scientist? I don't know whether the theory of evolution (macro or micro) really wins me over. Saying that, i do know that i have visited small towns in some of the more rural parts of the world where they are in dire need of it.  ;)

Whatever your beliefs are, they're just that - beliefs.

Mizuki.

No, I am not a scientist, but I have studied evolution more than anything else. I will probably become a scientist. Or a programmer. Haven't decided yet.
But the evidence overwhelmingly points to evolution being possible. I would prefer not to get into another evolution debate, and I don't want to get off-topic, so I'll leave it at that.
Welcome to FES, Mizuki.
Its of no wonder that an enlightened and wise individual like a tibet monk would not be swayed by globularist beliefs.
Quantum Ab Hoc

?

Mizuki

  • 356
  • Earth is NOT a Globe
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #6 on: May 24, 2011, 02:04:42 PM »
Really? The horizon being a circle convinces people of the Earth being round? I don't think so.
But you're right. Many people only believe because they want to. For example, some people don't believe "macro-evolution" is possible. Religion is another.

Hi Harutsedo.

Are you a scientist? I don't know whether the theory of evolution (macro or micro) really wins me over. Saying that, i do know that i have visited small towns in some of the more rural parts of the world where they are in dire need of it.  ;)

Whatever your beliefs are, they're just that - beliefs.

Mizuki.

No, I am not a scientist, but I have studied evolution more than anything else. I will probably become a scientist. Or a programmer. Haven't decided yet.
But the evidence overwhelmingly points to evolution being possible. I would prefer not to get into another evolution debate, and I don't want to get off-topic, so I'll leave it at that.
Welcome to FES, Mizuki.
Its of no wonder that an enlightened and wise individual like a tibet monk would not be swayed by globularist beliefs.

Although the ancient Tibetan model of the world is indeed flat, the wider cosmology is quite complex. For those who are interested this is a good link: http://web.ccsu.edu/astronomy/tibetan_cosmological_models.htm

I also understand that no less a being than the Buddha himself, never contradicted the contemporary held view of his day that the world was flat. Although, self-appointed apologists say that this is because it was irrelevant to the Buddha's teachings, and he was wise enough to not want to upset the long-standing beliefs of the people of that time.
"Earth is a maximal sphere in a cyclical space and its surface therefore a total plane, the equator plane of the Cosmos. The (total) plane, as well as the straight line and space as a whole, is flat, without curvature yet closed, running back on itself."

Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #7 on: May 24, 2011, 02:05:29 PM »
Really? The horizon being a circle convinces people of the Earth being round? I don't think so.
But you're right. Many people only believe because they want to. For example, some people don't believe "macro-evolution" is possible. Religion is another.

Hi Harutsedo.

Are you a scientist? I don't know whether the theory of evolution (macro or micro) really wins me over. Saying that, i do know that i have visited small towns in some of the more rural parts of the world where they are in dire need of it.  ;)

Whatever your beliefs are, they're just that - beliefs.

Mizuki.

No, I am not a scientist, but I have studied evolution more than anything else. I will probably become a scientist. Or a programmer. Haven't decided yet.
But the evidence overwhelmingly points to evolution being possible. I would prefer not to get into another evolution debate, and I don't want to get off-topic, so I'll leave it at that.
Welcome to FES, Mizuki.
Its of no wonder that an enlightened and wise individual like a tibet monk would not be swayed by globularist beliefs.

He's not so wise if he thinks that viewing a round horizon would convince anyone the Earth is round.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
If you don't know, whenever you talk about it you're invoking the supernatural
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Unknown != Magic.

?

fluffycornsnake

  • Official Member
  • 1307
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #8 on: May 25, 2011, 01:13:08 AM »
Hi Mizuki. I, too, am fascinated by philosophical perspectivism and its implications for human beliefs. Fortunately however, the shape of the Earth can be assessed against objective observable standards. So whilst all our philosophical and religious beliefs are undermined by perspectivism, we can still hold to the certainty of the Earth's flatness.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #9 on: May 25, 2011, 07:41:43 AM »
He's not so wise if he thinks that viewing a round horizon would convince anyone the Earth is round.
Of course it would. Too many people lack the ability to think critically about scientific phenomena - which is a big reason why not all of us aced science back in school.

In fact, if an FEer can look out a window and see an overall flat Earth and then conclude for themselves that the Earth is indeed flat without a shadow of a doubt, then many are capable of the same fate for seeing a slightly round horizon.



So I saw fluffycornsnake made a post.
Hi Mizuki. I, too, am fascinated by philosophical perspectivism and its implications for human beliefs.
A little part of me felt that his beliefs will soon surface.
Fortunately however, the shape of the Earth can be assessed against objective observable standards.
Get ready for it...
So whilst all our philosophical and religious beliefs are undermined by perspectivism
Yes, yes!...
we can still hold to the certainty of the Earth's flatness.
BAM! Right in the kisser.
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

*

gotham

  • Planar Moderator
  • 3329
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #10 on: May 25, 2011, 04:30:08 PM »
You can sense a palpable sadness, a coldness, an emptiness in the being of a REer.  I think this could be because once they are exposed to FET, they really want to admit to FET's superiority of truth but this truth gets lost in the confusion stemming from what they know (a flat Earth) and what their books and toys (the miniature "globe" sold in stores) have represented to them.   

?

Mizuki

  • 356
  • Earth is NOT a Globe
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #11 on: May 25, 2011, 05:01:24 PM »
Hi Mizuki. I, too, am fascinated by philosophical perspectivism and its implications for human beliefs. Fortunately however, the shape of the Earth can be assessed against objective observable standards. So whilst all our philosophical and religious beliefs are undermined by perspectivism, we can still hold to the certainty of the Earth's flatness.

Hi fluffysnake!

Well if the theory of quantum interpretation is correct, there is nothing that exists objectively as a fully independent feature of reality. At the quantum level, consciousness is all important.

The earth may be truly flat to some people, but appear as a globe to others. This is the ultimate in diplomacy, but then at least we can all be happy!

Mizuki x

"Earth is a maximal sphere in a cyclical space and its surface therefore a total plane, the equator plane of the Cosmos. The (total) plane, as well as the straight line and space as a whole, is flat, without curvature yet closed, running back on itself."

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #12 on: May 25, 2011, 09:40:13 PM »
(the miniature "globe" sold in stores)
At least we have a globe. You have false maps, good on ya...
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

?

Demouse

  • 323
  • Mods don't like my haiku
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #13 on: May 28, 2011, 06:41:27 AM »
Upon noticing that you greet each person you reply to and sign each post with your name I braced myself for an incoming shitstorm...

I spend way too much time on 4chan.



Did your friend ever try to explain things like the round earth to this monk?

If so what were the results?


____________________________________________

Oh Skycake.... Why are you so delicious?


?

Mizuki

  • 356
  • Earth is NOT a Globe
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #14 on: May 28, 2011, 08:52:23 AM »
Upon noticing that you greet each person you reply to and sign each post with your name I braced myself for an incoming shitstorm...

I spend way too much time on 4chan.



Did your friend ever try to explain things like the round earth to this monk?

If so what were the results?

Hi Demouse.

No, my friend didn't try to explain to the monk about the round earth. He understood that the monk is very aware of the fact that the majority of the Western world believe the earth is a globe, so there was nothing to explain. 

Mizuki x
"Earth is a maximal sphere in a cyclical space and its surface therefore a total plane, the equator plane of the Cosmos. The (total) plane, as well as the straight line and space as a whole, is flat, without curvature yet closed, running back on itself."

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #15 on: May 28, 2011, 11:31:57 AM »
Upon noticing that you greet each person you reply to and sign each post with your name I braced myself for an incoming shitstorm...
I might actually get this rolling soon if things don't change.
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #16 on: May 28, 2011, 01:10:12 PM »
Upon noticing that you greet each person you reply to and sign each post with your name I braced myself for an incoming shitstorm...
I might actually get this rolling soon if things don't change.

I was about to say berny did it too but then again at least he is interesting and he can read.

fluffysnake != fluffycornsnake
Cheesus is so wise I sometimes think he's my alt.
CheesusCrust is wise.

?

fluffycornsnake

  • Official Member
  • 1307
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #17 on: May 28, 2011, 01:14:38 PM »
Upon noticing that you greet each person you reply to and sign each post with your name I braced myself for an incoming shitstorm...
I might actually get this rolling soon if things don't change.

I was about to say berny did it too but then again at least he is interesting and he can read.

fluffysnake != fluffycornsnake

Irrelevant.

?

Demouse

  • 323
  • Mods don't like my haiku
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #18 on: May 28, 2011, 04:09:53 PM »
Upon noticing that you greet each person you reply to and sign each post with your name I braced myself for an incoming shitstorm...

I spend way too much time on 4chan.



Did your friend ever try to explain things like the round earth to this monk?

If so what were the results?

Hi Demouse.

No, my friend didn't try to explain to the monk about the round earth. He understood that the monk is very aware of the fact that the majority of the Western world believe the earth is a globe, so there was nothing to explain. 

Mizuki x


Guess I would make a horrible buddhist.

I would never be able to say nothing knowing that somone thought I was wrong.
Guess spiritual fulfillment doesn't include intellectual fulfillment.


____________________________________________

Oh Skycake.... Why are you so delicious?


?

squevil

  • Official Member
  • 3184
  • Im Telling On You
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #19 on: May 28, 2011, 06:16:11 PM »
Hi Mizuki. I, too, am fascinated by philosophical perspectivism and its implications for human beliefs. Fortunately however, the shape of the Earth can be assessed against objective observable standards. So whilst all our philosophical and religious beliefs are undermined by perspectivism, we can still hold to the certainty of the Earth's flatness.

no you cant hold it with certainty, otherwise this forum wouldnt exist and we would all be in agreement

?

fluffycornsnake

  • Official Member
  • 1307
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #20 on: May 28, 2011, 06:27:16 PM »
Hi Mizuki. I, too, am fascinated by philosophical perspectivism and its implications for human beliefs. Fortunately however, the shape of the Earth can be assessed against objective observable standards. So whilst all our philosophical and religious beliefs are undermined by perspectivism, we can still hold to the certainty of the Earth's flatness.

no you cant hold it with certainty, otherwise this forum wouldnt exist and we would all be in agreement

We who have sight are certain of light. Those who are blind are certain only of their darkness.

?

Demouse

  • 323
  • Mods don't like my haiku
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #21 on: May 28, 2011, 08:05:44 PM »

no you cant hold it with certainty, otherwise this forum wouldnt exist and we would all be in agreement

Anyone can hold anything to any level of certainty


Doesn't make it true, otherwise god would both exist and not exist at the same time...

oh shi-


____________________________________________

Oh Skycake.... Why are you so delicious?


?

Mizuki

  • 356
  • Earth is NOT a Globe
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #22 on: May 29, 2011, 03:39:58 AM »
Upon noticing that you greet each person you reply to and sign each post with your name I braced myself for an incoming shitstorm...

I spend way too much time on 4chan.



Did your friend ever try to explain things like the round earth to this monk?

If so what were the results?

Hi Demouse.

No, my friend didn't try to explain to the monk about the round earth. He understood that the monk is very aware of the fact that the majority of the Western world believe the earth is a globe, so there was nothing to explain. 

Mizuki x


Guess I would make a horrible buddhist.

I would never be able to say nothing knowing that somone thought I was wrong.
Guess spiritual fulfillment doesn't include intellectual fulfillment.

'Believe nothing just because a so-called wise person said it. Believe nothing just because a belief is generally held. Believe nothing just because it is said in ancient books. Believe nothing just because it is said to be of divine origin. Believe nothing just because someone else believes it. Believe only what you yourself test and judge to be true.' [paraphrased]

- Buddha
"Earth is a maximal sphere in a cyclical space and its surface therefore a total plane, the equator plane of the Cosmos. The (total) plane, as well as the straight line and space as a whole, is flat, without curvature yet closed, running back on itself."

?

Demouse

  • 323
  • Mods don't like my haiku
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #23 on: May 29, 2011, 10:55:51 PM »


'Believe nothing just because a so-called wise person said it. Believe nothing just because a belief is generally held. Believe nothing just because it is said in ancient books. Believe nothing just because it is said to be of divine origin. Believe nothing just because someone else believes it. Believe only what you yourself test and judge to be true.' [paraphrased]

- Buddha

At a risk of getting off topic then...


So according to buddhism you have to perform any scientific experiment yourself otherwise you shouldn't believe it?

So understanding anything which requires multiple generations of knowledge and tests is impossible, and noone who doesn't have direct access to the Large Hadron Collider could ever benifit from the knowledge it reveals?
What about the hubble telescope? Evolutionary biology? electromagnetics?

There are so many things that where we must base our knowledge off what is provided by another person that if we did not then it would be impossible to understand the universe.
Taking scheptiscism a bit too far there I think, judge the authority of a source of information sure, but don't discredit it jsut because you diddn't perform the experiment yourself.


The buddha needs to update his philosphy methinks.


____________________________________________

Oh Skycake.... Why are you so delicious?


*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41427
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #24 on: May 30, 2011, 08:05:25 AM »
There is a difference between skepticism and denial.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Administrator
  • 12106
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #25 on: June 01, 2011, 07:20:40 AM »
So according to buddhism you have to perform any scientific experiment yourself otherwise you shouldn't believe it?


I'm not sure Buddhism is particularly concerned with the scientific method. I think Mizuki was most likely pointing out that Buddhism poses an interesting question/challenge regarding the basis for belief.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #26 on: June 07, 2011, 09:54:06 AM »
I just wanted to point out that Buddhism (including, specifically, Tibetan), has no problem with evolving one's beliefs to match current scientific findings / evidence / theory / etc. ("If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change." - The Dalai Lama).

However, Demouse's question suggesting that the extreme opposite viewpoint may hold sway:

Quote
So according to buddhism you have to perform any scientific experiment yourself otherwise you shouldn't believe it?

is taking the point too far. The prevailing Buddhist teaching on "belief" - from the deathbed quote of the Buddha accurately paraphrased by Mizuki through modern times is more or less as follows:

Blind faith is to be avoided!! You should not hold any important, life-defining beliefs just because they've been fed to you. You must evaluate their truthfulness for yourself - and if the complete evaluation of truthfulness is impractical (for instance, to borrow a FE example, until someone hands a FE'er a free roundtrip ticket on Virgin Galactic, it is impractical to "see for yourself" if the earth really is round or not), then in that case, use your best critical mind to make a judgement call as to whether the information is at least credible, and go from there (to follow my same example, since FE'ers do not find NASA to be a credible source, it is unreasonable to ask an FE'er to accept their conclusions as fact). So be skeptical of baseless claims, but also be open-minded when the source appears trustworthy.

But don't make snap judgements when longer-term study is necessary; for instance, an overweight person going to the gym to work out for the first time would - with no other information available to him - draw the conclusion that working out makes him feel terrible! He'd be sore, tired, sweaty, probably in pain, and conclude that no good can come of this activity and he should not do it any more! However, he should look at the credible evidence that if he keeps it up, it will get easier, and that ultimately he will feel better, and be in better health. Buddhism primarily concerns itself with the evaluation of our own minds, and so this is very often the experience meditators have: "This is difficult / boring / scary / pointless / whatever!" Buddhist teaching at that point would say, yes perhaps, but be curious about your own mind, be open minded (on the basis that all these other many millions of people throughout history have stuck with it, obviously for SOME reason!) that it may lead to something beneficial / interesting, and then trust the process laid out by the teachings - that is, as long as the source(s) remain(s) credible and the process continues to resonate for you over the long term.

To sum up: Successful ongoing evaluation / understanding / navigation of the phenomenal world (including our own minds) and a happy, fruitful life within it, requires a healthy balance of both skepticism (towards not only the beliefs fed to us by others, but our own preciously-held beliefs as well!) as well as open-mindedness manifested as slowness to judge, label, compartmentalize, and solidify all the thoughts / emotions / beliefs / what have you that find their way into our mind, be they externally contributed, or, again, of our own devision / construction. Try to be child-like in your wonder and curiosity about the world, but apply your well-won wisdom and discriminating awareness about what is beneficial vs. not.

I hope that helps. But do keep in mind that Buddhism really doesn't spend a lot of time worrying or debating (much less pontificating) about this kind of stuff, given its focus. Unlike many other religions, cosmology is unimportant to the Buddhist teachings; nothing would be taught, done, or viewed differently if the world were flat, globular, or shaped like the damn Easter Bunny. (In fact, Buddhism is equally unmarried to the literalness of its own religious mythology; for instance, in stories of masters of old facing scary demons, the teaching behind the story is not affected by whether or not you think of the demons as real, live demons, or as a metaphor for the ancient master's psychological "demons". In fact, such stories are generally taught at the outset as being outright metaphorical.)

« Last Edit: June 07, 2011, 10:01:25 AM by samiamco »

?

Mizuki

  • 356
  • Earth is NOT a Globe
Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #27 on: June 07, 2011, 11:42:19 AM »
Samiamco. Thank you for that wonderful post.

Mizuki x
"Earth is a maximal sphere in a cyclical space and its surface therefore a total plane, the equator plane of the Cosmos. The (total) plane, as well as the straight line and space as a whole, is flat, without curvature yet closed, running back on itself."

Re: When Cosmologies Clash
« Reply #28 on: June 07, 2011, 11:56:11 AM »
Thanks Mizuki; I hope it was helpful.

Oops; I realize I didn't mention anything to give anyone reason to trust MY credibility on the topic, so in the interest of full disclosure: I have been a practicing Buddhist in the Kagyu/Nyingma schools of Tibetan Buddhism for the last 20 years, am a former ordained monastic, and a current/on-going teacher and meditation instructor. NOT like a high-up mucky-muck kind of guru-like teacher by any stretch of the imagination, mind you! And I claim no special realization. I just happen to have been fortunate enough to have had wonderful teachers myself and the opportunity in my life for lots of long-term practice and study in the form of meditation retreats, seminary, living in a monastery, etc.

Also, please call me Sam.  :D
« Last Edit: June 07, 2011, 11:58:42 AM by samiamco »