| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:00 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
 |
|
Douglas McAdam wrote:
| Quote: | I have no problem with believing the body of man came from evolutionary
descent. However for us to have intelligence and other animals do not
means to me that we were created distinctly human and not animal.
|
Doug:
To my understanding of the model of involution presented by `Abdu'l-Baha
in _Some Answered Questions_, it is the lower kingdoms of creation which
descended, spiritually, from the human kingdom, i.e., with involution as
the gradual spiritual unfoldment of the human kingdom. Over the course
of this involution, categories of entities in the lower kingdoms
branched off from the human kingdom.
However, I consider the above model of spiritual involution to be
separate from considerations of biological evolution. Questions of
biological origin are under the authority of the sciences, not of
revealed religion.
| Quote: | I don't know what you mean by intrude. To my knowledge no Baha'is are
intruding on science or vice verse and if they did the House of Justice
would solve the problem. I often think the problem has more to do with
how non-Baha'is in science and religion are intruding on each other and
thus our own scholars, professionals etc. are fearsome of this in our
own community. But for me I see no worry. As I have said many times the
real problem I see is when a Baha'i asserts his or her interpretation t
o
judge others.
|
I see so-called parallel evolution (the form of old-earth creationism
which some Baha'is accept) as an *intrusion* of revealed religion into
science. However, I doubt that the House of Justice would attempt to
"solve the problem" unless Baha'is were contentiously insisting that
their view was correct. In that case, the House of Justice might counsel
Baha'is to be more tolerant of different understandings.
| Quote: | Yes, but again I see no disrespect from Baha'is in either field. But I
do see communication problems with certain individual assert their
interpretations and beliefs in an authoritative and judgmental way for
that leads to ego battles.
|
IMO, the main sources of problems are, first, the intrusion of one
domain into another and, secondly, contentiousness.
--
Regards, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * http://www.markfoster.net
"... the modern challenge is how to live with uncertainty. The
basic fault lines today are not between people with different
beliefs but between people who hold these beliefs with an
element of uncertainty and people who hold these beliefs with
a pretense of certitude." — Peter L. Berger, sociologist |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:05 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
Kent Johnson wrote:
| Quote: | How does placing His beliefs in the proper context differ from classify
ing
His beliefs? Is it like His belief in "ether" which was a common scien
tific
idea of the day, that you believe we should be deciding what scientific
background and knowledge Abdu'l-Baha had to work with more than what He
believed?
|
Because without an understanding of the context in which certain
statements were made, the classification might be inaccurate.
| Quote: | "Thus this light is the vibration of that ethereal matter, and from thi
s
vibration we infer the existence of ether." (Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered
Questions, p. 190) BTW this is an authenticated text, and the term app
ears
only once in unauthenticated text, while it appears several times in
authenticated texts.
|
`Abdu'l-Baha frequently used common, everyday examples to make His
points. In the case of ether, I don't think He was necessarily affirming
the correctness of the theory. He recognized that ether was a current
explanation for electricity, etc., and He used it as a metaphor for
spirit. Perhaps today, He would instead refer to the electromagnetic
spectrum.
--
Regards, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * http://www.markfoster.net
"... the modern challenge is how to live with uncertainty. The
basic fault lines today are not between people with different
beliefs but between people who hold these beliefs with an
element of uncertainty and people who hold these beliefs with
a pretense of certitude." — Peter L. Berger, sociologist |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:10 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
Douglas McAdam wrote:
| Quote: |
Or could it be possible that we already have had the answer revealed by
the Manifestation and the sciences will eventually prove it?
|
Doug:
I don't think that the Prophets intended Their words to be scientific
texts. That is not to say that one of Them could not comment on some
subject. However, it would not, IMO, have any scientific authority.
| Quote: | We know there are three ways to learn things, i.e. Discovery,
Experience and Revelation.
|
Who knows that?
| Quote: | Could it be that the Manifestation reveals all knowledge to
us but we then must discover and experience it.
|
It seems to me that `Abdu'l-Baha's explanation of the development of
scientific knowledge is more empirical.
--
Regards, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * http://www.markfoster.net
"... the modern challenge is how to live with uncertainty. The
basic fault lines today are not between people with different
beliefs but between people who hold these beliefs with an
element of uncertainty and people who hold these beliefs with
a pretense of certitude." — Peter L. Berger, sociologist |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Douglas McAdam
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:41 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
On Jul 25, 2008, at 2:47 PM, Susan Maneck wrote:
| Quote: | Or could it be possible that we already have had the answer revealed
by the
Manifestation and the sciences will eventually prove it?
What did Baha'u'llah reveal in this regard and where did He reveal it?
|
Hi Susan-
I don't know and am not interesting in doing all the necessary
research, I'm just offering "another point of view" rather than
accepting blindly what anyone concludes. All I can say is that I have
seen enough Writings to conclude that all knowledge comes from God and
we simply discover and experience it and what we discover and
experience is colored by our limitations which is why we need to keep
open minded and self-correcting as we discover new evidence. Science
is open minded and constantly evolving, it is not absolute knowledge.
regards,
doug
> |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:44 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
| Quote: | Or could it be possible that we already have had the answer revealed by
the
Manifestation and the sciences will eventually prove it?
What did Baha'u'llah reveal in this regard and where did He reveal it?
Hi Susan-
I don't know and am not interesting in doing all the necessary research, I'm
just offering "another point of view" rather than accepting blindly what
anyone concludes.
|
Dear Doug,
To my knowledge Baha'u'llah never said anything on this subject.
warmest, Susan |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Douglas McAdam
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 2:35 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
Hi Mark-
Can you name for me any other way in which we learn in addition to
Discovery, Experience and Revelation?
As to the intention of the Prophets, all I can say is the Writings seem
to be saying the Manifestation recreates and endows Creation with a new
potential. I doubt He could do this without knowing what creation is
all about for there are laws to consider, a Master Plan and a Minor
Plan that come into play and the Manifestation would have to know this.
I also believe that the sciences come from Revelation but are hidden
for us to discover and experience. In fact I think there is a quote
about how the arts and sciences come from the next world, or something
like that. If a Manifestation were to comment on a material aspect of
Creation it most certainly would have authority whether or not
scientists accept it or not. They have all the Authority, not
scientists? However as I said I have a problem believing the
Manifestation can reveal a principle of the harmony of science and
religion and then Himself not abide by it.
regards,
doug
On Jul 25, 2008, at 4:10 PM, Poststructuralist wrote:
| Quote: | Douglas McAdam wrote:
Or could it be possible that we already have had the answer revealed
by
the Manifestation and the sciences will eventually prove it?
Doug:
I don't think that the Prophets intended Their words to be scientific
texts. That is not to say that one of Them could not comment on some
subject. However, it would not, IMO, have any scientific authority.
We know there are three ways to learn things, i.e. Discovery,
Experience and Revelation.
Who knows that?
Could it be that the Manifestation reveals all knowledge to
us but we then must discover and experience it.
It seems to me that `Abdu'l-Baha's explanation of the development of
scientific knowledge is more empirical.
--
Regards, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * http://www.markfoster.net
"... the modern challenge is how to live with uncertainty. The
basic fault lines today are not between people with different
beliefs but between people who hold these beliefs with an
element of uncertainty and people who hold these beliefs with
a pretense of certitude." — Peter L. Berger, sociologist
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Douglas McAdam
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 2:37 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
Hi Susan-
I believe the Manifestation did say something about this subject but
not directly in a way that we can classify or index as a subject. I
think one would have to peruse several quotes to find this, but I feel
confident that I cannot blindly accept an assertion any scholar makes.
regards,
doug
On Jul 25, 2008, at 4:44 PM, Susan Maneck wrote:
| Quote: | Or could it be possible that we already have had the answer
revealed by
the
Manifestation and the sciences will eventually prove it?
What did Baha'u'llah reveal in this regard and where did He reveal
it?
Hi Susan-
I don't know and am not interesting in doing all the necessary
research, I'm
just offering "another point of view" rather than accepting blindly
what
anyone concludes.
Dear Doug,
To my knowledge Baha'u'llah never said anything on this subject.
warmest, Susan
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:14 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
Douglas McAdam wrote:
| Quote: | Can you name for me any other way in which we learn in
addition to Discovery, Experience and Revelation?
|
Doug:
Technically, you are shifting the burden of proof. If you believe that
discovery, experience, and Revelation are the only ways in which we can
learn, you would need to make a case for it.
Nonetheless, I will name a category of learning which does not appear to
be accommodated by your model: the social construction of knowledge. In
this case, I am not referring to discovering some preexisting knowledge,
to experiencing (in the sense of empirical observation), or to relying
upon divine Revelation. I mean learning by socially constructing
knowledge (a sociological concept).
| Quote: | I also believe that the sciences come from Revelation but are hidden
for us to discover and experience. In fact I think there is a quote
about how the arts and sciences come from the next world, or something
like that.
|
IMO, the appearance of a Prophet might make knowledge possible (in the
sense of potentiality), not that all human knowledge is contained in the
Sacred Texts.
--
Regards, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * http://www.markfoster.net
"... the modern challenge is how to live with uncertainty. The
basic fault lines today are not between people with different
beliefs but between people who hold these beliefs with an
element of uncertainty and people who hold these beliefs with
a pretense of certitude." — Peter L. Berger, sociologist |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:12 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
| Quote: | As to the intention of the Prophets, all I can say is the Writings seem to
be saying the Manifestation recreates and endows Creation with a new
potential.
I doubt He could do this without knowing what creation is all
about for there are laws to consider, a Master Plan and a Minor Plan that
come into play and the Manifestation would have to know this. I also
believe that the sciences come from Revelation but are hidden for us to
discover and experience.
|
Ah, then Darwinism was Baha'u'llah's idea! ;-} |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Douglas McAdam
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:40 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
Dear Mark-
This is one of those types of postings that I have a problem with and
no offense to you but I don't think in terms of someone having the
burden of proof. On one hand I read where scholars say science does
not prove anything and on another I read where a scholar is saying
"prove it when a conflicting opinion is met". I'm just saying Mark
that I do not see any other way in which we learn and asked for an
example from you because you disagreed. The example you gave doesn't
seem to fit like you say. Where did the knowledge come from that
society constructs? Science constructs knowledge and it does so by
discovery, experience and revelation. Revelation does not necessarily
mean spiritual Revelation it also means a teacher reveals knowledge to
students and the students learn from this by their power of faith
enabling them to believe in the teacher and what is being taught but to
take it out of the realm of belief they must experience it and discover
it consciously.
regards,
doug
On Jul 25, 2008, at 6:14 PM, Poststructuralist wrote:
| Quote: | Douglas McAdam wrote:
Can you name for me any other way in which we learn in
addition to Discovery, Experience and Revelation?
Doug:
Technically, you are shifting the burden of proof. If you believe that
discovery, experience, and Revelation are the only ways in which we can
learn, you would need to make a case for it.
Nonetheless, I will name a category of learning which does not appear
to
be accommodated by your model: the social construction of knowledge. In
this case, I am not referring to discovering some preexisting
knowledge,
to experiencing (in the sense of empirical observation), or to relying
upon divine Revelation. I mean learning by socially constructing
knowledge (a sociological concept).
I also believe that the sciences come from Revelation but are hidden
for us to discover and experience. In fact I think there is a quote
about how the arts and sciences come from the next world, or something
like that.
IMO, the appearance of a Prophet might make knowledge possible (in the
sense of potentiality), not that all human knowledge is contained in
the
Sacred Texts. |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:45 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
Douglas McAdam wrote:
| Quote: | This is one of those types of postings that I have a problem with and n
o
offense to you but I don't think in terms of someone having the burden
of proof.
|
Hi, Doug:
You said that there are only 3 sources of learning, and, of course, I
know where you got that idea. However, I do not generally accept
assertions purely on face value. I want to see the basis for the claim.
| Quote: | On one hand I read where scholars say science does not prove
anything and on another I read where a scholar is saying "prove it when
a conflicting opinion is met".
|
It depends on whether one is referring to scientific or logical
evidence. Logical statements, like syllogisms, require evidence and
proof. However, the scientific method operates inductively, i.e., by
disproving propositions or hypotheses, not by proving them.
| Quote: | Where did the knowledge come from that society constructs?
|
Socially constructed knowledge does not "come from" anywhere. It is
constructed by words, names, or language. That is why I offered that
particular example. I was presenting an idea which was, it seemed to me,
outside of the frame of reference you posted.
| Quote: | Science constructs knowledge and it does so by discovery, experience an
d
revelation. Revelation does not necessarily mean spiritual Revelation
it also means a teacher reveals knowledge to students and the students
learn from this by their power of faith enabling them to believe in the
teacher and what is being taught but to take it out of the realm of
belief they must experience it and discover it consciously.
|
Yes, I understand Lippitt's model. As I indicated, however, that model
is not comprehensive.
--
Regards, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * http://www.markfoster.net
"... the modern challenge is how to live with uncertainty. The
basic fault lines today are not between people with different
beliefs but between people who hold these beliefs with an
element of uncertainty and people who hold these beliefs with
a pretense of certitude." — Peter L. Berger, sociologist |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:13 pm Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
Hi Mark,
The question was: "How does placing His beliefs in the proper context differ
from classifying His beliefs?"
Your answer:
| Quote: | Because without an understanding of the context in which certain
statements were made, the classification might be inaccurate.
|
I am certain you can see how that does not answer the question, does not
even try. Apparently you want to drop your assertion that "`Abdu'l-Baha's
discussion of the subject relies as much on Neoplatonic terminology as it
does on the terms of Charles Darwin and Thomas Henry Huxley. IMO, it is more
than classifying what He believed. It is placing them in their proper
contexts."
Perhaps you still believe "Abdu'l-Baha's discussion is colored by prevalent
philosophical terminology and conceptualities, but you are just dropping the
assertion that contexting is more, or more important, than classifying. If
that is so, I agree, you should drop that assertion.
--Kent
"Poststructuralist" <drfosternotfromgloucester@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
message news:_6CdnQRFOakoqRfVnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@giganews.com...
Kent Johnson wrote:
| Quote: | How does placing His beliefs in the proper context differ from classify
ing
His beliefs? Is it like His belief in "ether" which was a common scien
tific
idea of the day, that you believe we should be deciding what scientific
background and knowledge Abdu'l-Baha had to work with more than what He
believed?
|
Because without an understanding of the context in which certain
statements were made, the classification might be inaccurate.
| Quote: | "Thus this light is the vibration of that ethereal matter, and from thi
s
vibration we infer the existence of ether." (Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered
Questions, p. 190) BTW this is an authenticated text, and the term app
ears
only once in unauthenticated text, while it appears several times in
authenticated texts.
|
`Abdu'l-Baha frequently used common, everyday examples to make His
points. In the case of ether, I don't think He was necessarily affirming
the correctness of the theory. He recognized that ether was a current
explanation for electricity, etc., and He used it as a metaphor for
spirit. Perhaps today, He would instead refer to the electromagnetic
spectrum.
--
Regards, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * http://www.markfoster.net
"... the modern challenge is how to live with uncertainty. The
basic fault lines today are not between people with different
beliefs but between people who hold these beliefs with an
element of uncertainty and people who hold these beliefs with
a pretense of certitude." — Peter L. Berger, sociologist |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Douglas McAdam
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 7:24 pm Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
On Jul 26, 2008, at 12:45 AM, Poststructuralist wrote:
| Quote: | Douglas McAdam wrote:
This is one of those types of postings that I have a problem with and
n
o
offense to you but I don't think in terms of someone having the burden
of proof.
Hi, Doug:
You said that there are only 3 sources of learning, and, of course, I
know where you got that idea. However, I do not generally accept
assertions purely on face value. I want to see the basis for the claim.
|
Hi Mark-
Yes I know you know where I got this idea from and maybe that is the
problem because from my view and all of the Baha'is I know and consult
with they agree and not all of them know where I got this from.
Besides where I got it from matter not. What matters is whether it is
true or not and I asked you to tell me of another way in which we
attain knowledge and you gave an example of social construction which
to me is gained also by those three ways.
| Quote: |
On one hand I read where scholars say science does not prove
anything and on another I read where a scholar is saying "prove it
when
a conflicting opinion is met".
It depends on whether one is referring to scientific or logical
evidence. Logical statements, like syllogisms, require evidence and
proof. However, the scientific method operates inductively, i.e., by
disproving propositions or hypotheses, not by proving them.
|
OK so treat my statement as a hypothesis and prove it wrong.
| Quote: |
Where did the knowledge come from that society constructs?
Socially constructed knowledge does not "come from" anywhere. It is
constructed by words, names, or language. That is why I offered that
particular example. I was presenting an idea which was, it seemed to
me,
outside of the frame of reference you posted.
|
So are you saying we have four ways to attain knowledge, i.e.
Discovery, Experience, Revelation and from Nowhere? How is the
knowledge from "nowhere" acquired?
I'm puzzled by some of your responses, like there is no such thing as
"common thinking", no such thing as "people", no such thing as
"reality" and no there is knowledge that comes from "nowhere".
Again, no offense intended but sometimes when I read some of these
posts I feel like I'm back in Phil. 101 with the Existentialist atheist
professor.
| Quote: |
Science constructs knowledge and it does so by discovery, experience
an
d
revelation. Revelation does not necessarily mean spiritual Revelation
it also means a teacher reveals knowledge to students and the students
learn from this by their power of faith enabling them to believe in
the
teacher and what is being taught but to take it out of the realm of
belief they must experience it and discover it consciously.
Yes, I understand Lippitt's model. As I indicated, however, that model
is not comprehensive.
|
Mark I think for myself and my thoughts are derived from many sources
not just Marian Lippitt and I have asked you many times to not bring
her work into these limited forums. This has nothing to do with the
discussion as to whether there are more than three ways to learn things
and so I'm not sure why you mention it.
regards,
doug |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:56 pm Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
| Quote: |
Perhaps you still believe "Abdu'l-Baha's discussion is colored by prevalent
philosophical terminology and conceptualities, but you are just dropping the
assertion that contexting is more, or more important, than classifying. If
that is so, I agree, you should drop that assertion.
|
Kent,
"Classifying" was your language not Mark's to begin with.
Susan |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 12:00 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
|
|
| Quote: | Mark I think for myself and my thoughts are derived from many sources not
just Marian Lippitt and I have asked you many times to not bring her work
into these limited forums. This has nothing to do with the discussion as to
whether there are more than three ways to learn things and so I'm not sure
why you mention it.
|
Was Mark incorrect about this being one of her concepts? If not,
bringing in her name was not inappropriate. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
