Theos-Talk Archives (October 2000 Message tt00122)

Shampan-e-Shindh wrote:
> Bart Lidofsky wrote:
> 
> > Shampan-e-Shindh wrote:
> > >
> > > As our knowledge goes deeper into the molecular structures of our
> > > body, and at certain times soon, we might appear to be a body of
> > > complex chemical reactions only. All the feelings, thoughts,
> > > spirituality ... might appear to be nothing but result of some
> > > definite, particualr, detectable chemical's action and reaction.
> >
> > What is spirituality?
> 
> You tell me Sir..:)) We all have our own defintions.

Exactly. You used the term; how am I supposed to know what your talking
about if you don't define your terms? Far too often, in theosophical
topics (note the small "t"), people throw around ill-defined
terminology, making statements which sound deep on the surface, but when
semantically analyzed, are meaningless. I am willing to believe that the
person who makes the statement knows what he or she is trying to say,
but in order for communication to work, not only must the statement be
made, but it must also be understood.

> > > quantam physics, psychology, automotive engineering, or even
> > > cooking.. all our knowledge can turn upside down any time with a
> > > new info .. any time, about anything.
> >
> > Has that ever happened before? When?
> 
> Now that is a strange question, is this sarcasm?..:)
> One of the most recent major break-through's, Berzillius's theory of
> "vital force" (organic compound could not be created from inorganic
> compounds) proven wrong I think in about 200 years or so, cannot
> remember now.

I did not recall Berzillius' theory, and was unable to find out
anything about it in a web search (although I was able to find theories
of "vital force" in reference to homeopathy and religion). But note that
any theory that says that something "cannot be done", in general, can
only be proven for currently known methods. Also, when examined, when a
theory is said to state that something "cannot be done" is a lot more
specific. For example, the current truism that something moving a
sub-light speed cannot be made to move faster than the speed of light,
is actually a statement that to ACCELERATE an object TO the speed of
light requires an infinite amount of energy. 

In addition, fools have a habit of creating philosophy based on known
science (things like "Social Darwinism", or the mechanistic view of the
Universe common in H. P. Blavatsky's time). For those fools, a new
scientific theory can turn their world "upside-down". But for
scientists, these new theories generally do not disprove the old theory,
but turn the old theory into a special case of a more general theory. 

> Another old one in a different aspect, Caesar once said "I have no
> doubt such a creator might exist as Jesus describes, but would never
> choose one of the Jews to be the Massiah"

Which Caesar, and when?

> What is mysterious? Things we know that happen and cannot explain,
> some might even call it "miracle".

And then think that this explains it all.

Bart Lidofsky