"Scientism" on Wikipedia ...

[Windwalker]

"The olfactory area in humans is about 2.5 cm2 wide and contains a number of about 50 million receptor cells with 8–20 cilia down in a layer of mucus of about 60 microns thick, produced by Bowmann glands in the olfactory epithelium. [1]. Only volatile substances, soluble in mucus, can reach the receptors and interact with them and finally produce sensations. The olfactory epithelium contains a variable number of basal cells, which are capable of mitotic division giving rise to mature receptor neurons. The olfactory neuron's turn over is about 40 to 60 days [1]. The axonal ramifications of these neurons go together in groups of 10 to 100 fibers, they cross the ethmoid cribriform plate reaching the olfactory bulb where they converge and form synaptic structures called glomeruli and then they converge again to mitral cells. The total convergence ratio is 1000:1 and has the important role of increasing the sensibility of the olfactory signal that will be sent to the specialized areas in the brain [2].
The olfactory epithelium contains another sensitive system via sensitive branches of trigeminal nerve. Many odorants cam produce sensations transmitted by trigeminal nerve. For example levo–menthole. If placed in the nasal cavity it produces cold sensations in small amounts and hot sensations in much bigger quantities [3]. Just the same way camphor produces a cold sensation via trigeminal nerve. Olhoff postulates that about 70% of odors also stimulate the trigeminal nerve, but with an intensity several times smaller than that of the olfactory receptors."

"Humans have only 350 functional genes for olfactory receptors, compared with other mammals, e.g. mice, which have about 1.100 active genes [5]. The genes that encode the receptors are grouped in series of introns in the coding region. In mammals, these regions are organized in clusters of 10 or are often located on different chromosomes. In the human genome, there is a large amount of pseudo genes, which suggest that olfaction became less important during evolution. Recent studies showed that, in humans, more than 70% of the olfactory receptors encoding genes are actually pseudo genes, differentiating us from rats or primates which have less than 5% pseudo genes [6].
Other studies are demonstrating that humans have a good sense of smell in spite of all genetic aspects that may tend to deny this theory. Oenologists or perfume creators are capable of distinguishing thousands of odors. Human olfaction can overdue tests like gaseous chromatography in detecting the odorant molecules. All these things are realized with a small number of receptors but with the aid of certain accessory functions gained during evolution.
In the process of achieving the bipedal position, the nose and olfactory receptors have risen above the ground level and the olfactory area became smaller to allow the orbits to come closer and provide stereoscopic view. Being much further from the ground the odors received, stopped being contaminated and mixed with each other. All this, together with the air purification function of the nose, made the smells more easily to perceive and this means that the olfactory area grew smaller without many sacrifices for the olfactory sensations "

Floral plant scents have evolved as an aid to pollination, humans are just lucky benefactors. No need for any appeals to any woo woo.

And all of this tells you nothing about pleasure to your mind, doesn't? Does this explanation make you smile, and feel at peace? I didn't think so .

 

[Windwalker]

Experiences of God are also in the brain but it's a reaction to a thought.

No it's not. Explain then why someone in meditation who has ceased all thought, experiences the Divine? There are entire mystical approaches that aim for just that. The apophatic approach is to negate any and all ideas or concepts of God, in order to free the mind to see simply "what is".

Like I said, you meditate, get a fresh outlook on things, maybe feel better. Spirituality is about living life.

Yes. Spirituality is about a more well-rounded, well-grounded, more open, more joyous way of living life. That can create an experience of life where one can see the Divine in all things, in all others, and in one's own self. How is then you can say that God does not exist, when there are those who live within that?

So you have a so called experience of the Divine that is transcendent in nature and your interpretation of your perception is that God is everything. Doesn't mean it's true or there is any God.

You're hung up on this mental idea of God as something outside yourself, like a magical cosmic yeti somewhere in the universe. That's not what I mean when I speak of God. Why do you persist in this thinking? Why do you keep bringing it up in a discussion with me?

A a perceptual shift is also not evidence.

Yes it is.

Uh, yeah, you said you are "seeing it with different eyes". There is no evidence we can see with a different set of eyes when it comes to external Gods. So it is a fiction.

Have I ever once claimed "external Gods" is something I believe in? The only time I bring up that, an external deity form, is when I am talking about how you imagine God. That's a strawman argument with me. That's not me your debating, but a projection of your own mind. "Tilting at windmills", is what you and all the others are continually doing. That God you don't believe in, I don't believe in either.

No only people who believe there is some God. For that you need evidence. For a new way of seeing you need evidence.

AN OVERVIEW OF THE WORK OF JEAN GEBSER

Start there.

Yes you are told these things and in meditation and such you start to believe you experience them as well. Buying into a spiritual paradim is not self awareness.

I experience things. I don't start to believe I experience them. I know I have experience.

How I understand these experiences, is a matter of symbols, interpretations, understandings, and beliefs. Those I am flexible with all those, and can understand them from many different points of view and ways of speaking about them. Denying I have the experience, is irrational. It's anti-rational. It's a form of religious bigotry, like a fundamentalist denying fossil evidence, or an atheist denying evidence of higher states of consciousness. It's the same behavior.

Well we are our thoughts. The silent witness eternal self isn't real and when we pass away consciousness goes off, just like before we were born
Meditation is for relaxation and psychological help and so on. You don't connect to a spirit world or higher self. You might get distracted by that if you read Deepak Chopra.

You speak so conclusively, for someone with such a limited understanding and knowledge of these areas. I suppose that explains why you do.

Regarding the silent witness, the fact that Awareness is there when thoughts are not, denies your claim that "we are our thoughts". No. We have thoughts, but we are not our thoughts. Else how can you see you are having thoughts? That's the whole point of Awakening, of seeking higher states of consciousness than just the ordinary discursive mine. To realize what we think is reality, is an illusion of the mind. The illusion is identifying the self with the thoughts. Exactly the trap you claim is the truth.

 

[lukethethird]

Can you explain the smell of a rose? I can. And if you've smelled a rose as well, you would also get the idea of what I meant by the words I used. So, it would not be only me that understands what that means.


I'm not arrogant to talk about my experiences. Why shouldn't I talk about them? If it makes you feel insecure, that's your issue. In fact, such experiences are completely humbling, because your ego is laid waste before them. I talk about them, because folks like you want to hear evidence. I'm giving you evidence of my experience. And you attack me as arrogant for talking about it?

Perhaps you actually don't want to hear any evidence? Is that the deal?


What I hear you saying, is don't talk about it if you don't want to be attacked by those who have an allergy to religious experiences and don't want to hear it, and will insult you to keep you quite. That's what I hear.

BTW, Ultimate Reality? That's a common term. You can't insult everyone out there because they both recognize it and study it as a topic: Ultimate reality - Wikipedia

Second, the term “ultimate reality” could be taken to mean how reality ultimately is—i.e., that which is metaphysically ultimate, perhaps a part of every complete ontology—instead of meaning the richer sense of “ultimacy” at issue here, which is not a part of every complete ontology.

God and Other Ultimates (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)​

In fact, you yourself believe in an Ultimate Reality. To you, it's just a materialistic, nontheist ultimate reality. But I get it, you don't want to acknowledge these things because you've got your beliefs just the way you like them, and anyone who deviates from your vision of Truth, is "woo woo". Fundi Christians use the term "lost" or "deceived". The apple doesn't fall far from that tree for you, does it?

I have stated that I do not begrudge your experience but you are too high and almighty to acknowledge that. Your experience is universal and cross cultural. It's described in some cultures as becoming one with the universe, it all takes place within the central nervous system of which the brain is a part of. Acknowledging that does not lessen the experience one iota.

 

[Windwalker]

I have stated that I do not begrudge your experience but you are too high and almighty to acknowledge that. Your experience is universal and cross cultural. It's described in some cultures as becoming one with the universe, it all takes place within the central nervous system of which the brain is a part of.

I have repeatedly said my experience is common, universal and cross cultural. I have never claimed I'm super special. In fact, pointing to the fact I'm not alone, makes it objective. I've been arguing just that point. What have I actually said that gives you the impression I think I'm all high and mighty? I think this is all in your own imagination.

Acknowledging that does not lessen the experience one iota.

I've have acknowledged this repeatedly. I don't know what you're smoking there. Is it legal? The only thing I take issue with is you claiming that because it's something that can be measured in the brain, that means it's not real. That's garbage reasoning. Everything is registered in brain activity, from smelling a rose, to having sex, to smiling at the pleasantness of the breeze on your face. All that is in the brain, just as the experience of the Divine is also registered exactly like all of those.

But they are all responses to something, both externally and internally. It's the type of experience that I'm focused on. Not whether your idea of God as some sort of external supernatural cosmic yeti has scientific proof for that creature's existence. That's just a mental image, not a literal creature.

 

[lukethethird]

I have repeatedly said my experience is common, universal and cross cultural. I have never claimed I'm super special. In fact, pointing to the fact I'm not alone, makes it objective. I've been arguing just that point. What have I actually said that gives you the impression I think I'm all high and mighty? I think this is all in your own imagination.


I've have acknowledged this repeatedly. I don't know what you're smoking there. Is it legal? The only thing I take issue with is you claiming that because it's something that can be measured in the brain, that means it's not real. That's garbage reasoning. Everything is registered in brain activity, from smelling a rose, to having sex, to smiling at the pleasantness of the breeze on your face. All that is in the brain, just as the experience of the Divine is also registered exactly like all of those.

But they are all responses to something, both externally and internally. It's the type of experience that I'm focused on. Not whether your idea of God as some sort of external supernatural cosmic yeti has scientific proof for that creature's existence. That's just a mental image, not a literal creature.

Who said it wasn't real?

 

[lukethethird]

I don't know what you're smoking there. Is it legal?

Why, are you a narc?

 

[Sheldon]

And all of this tells you nothing about pleasure to your mind, doesn't? Does this explanation make you smile, and feel at peace? I didn't think so .

Of course it does, floral scents evolved to aid pollination, as I said, and we are just the lucky recipients in this particular instance, again as I explained, you just ignored it.

I never hear theists waxing lyrical about the aroma of faeces, and just as many flies are attracted to it, as bees are attracted to roses.

 

[Sheldon]

I have repeatedly said my experience is common, universal and cross cultural.

It's not though, go to Tehran or Baghdad or Saudi Arabia and start telling them that, or maybe Afghanistan and explain it to the Taliban.

 

[Sheldon]

Everything is registered in brain activity, from smelling a rose, to having sex, to smiling at the pleasantness of the breeze on your face. All that is in the brain, just as the experience of the Divine is also registered exactly like all of those.

Like the Harry Potter films, experiencing them is real, but this doesn't make wizardry real of course.

 

[wandering peacefully]

Explain then why someone in meditation who has ceased all thought, experiences the Divine? There are entire mystical approaches that aim for just that

I've been in this state hundreds of times over the years. I've experienced having no physical form many times and literally melding into the forest and further into all existence. I don't call it experiencing the Divine which I still don't believe you have explained what exactly that is. I could easily name it that but that word has no meaning to me. I understand that I am able to control my mind through meditation to the point of entering an altered state of consciousness. It is not god. It is an altered state brought about by years of practicing meditation. It is absolutely fabulous and it brings on a peacefulness and understanding unreachable by any other experience. It originates within my mind. It has been experienced since the dawn of self awareness within the human animal. It is so different than the normal state of mind it used to be, and still is apparently, thought of as something that must be connected to some higher consciousness outside of the human mind it originates in. That was then, this is now. Brain imagining clearly shows meditation creates these mental states. Not God.

 

[Windwalker]

Of course it does, floral scents evolved to aid pollination, as I said, and we are just the lucky recipients in this particular instance, again as I explained, you just ignored it.

I never hear theists waxing lyrical about the aroma of faeces, and just as many flies are attracted to it, as bees are attracted to roses.

You must be a total killjoy for a date to be with on a walk before a beautiful sunset at the beach.

 

[Windwalker]

It's not though, go to Tehran or Baghdad or Saudi Arabia and start telling them that, or maybe Afghanistan and explain it to the Taliban.

Yes it is, and yes, even there some people experience this as well. They just choose to not speak about it, because religionists have a way of putting mystics to death.

 

[Windwalker]

Like the Harry Potter films, experiencing them is real, but this doesn't make wizardry real of course.

You imagine it is though, worshipping scientists as grand wizards and soothsayers as you do.

 

[joelr]

Do you have any evidence for your "Uh-huh" and what makes it real?

No, I have evidence for "bub-bye troll"...

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No, I have evidence for "bub-bye troll"...

Yeah, it is hard when it is all meaningless.

 

[joelr]

Of course. That's the point. I fully recognize that how we see reality is filtered through the set of eyes we use. Two people can be looking at the exact same thing, yet see two very different things. Is only one of these right and one wrong? Or is it that both are right? And that both are wrong for thinking that only their understanding or interpretation of what they are seeing is the truth?

It isn't about interpretation, it's about is something there. Your sight only works by hallucination or photons. If it isn't a hallucination then you've seen something that bounces photons off it. There is an answer to what it actually is.

Seeing God in nature, for one. Haven't you ever had any experience in life where you were looking at something the whole time, but never noticed or saw it before? Everyone has.

That can stand as an example. But a better example is something easy for you to related to: a scientific view of reality. How many religious fundamentalists have you talked to, who no matter how much you show them the evidence, they simply are unable to fit it into their ways of thinking? Quite a lot, I'll assume. It's not because they all have low IQ's are something. Some are very intelligent in other areas, but when it comes to seeing the world through a scientific point of view, accepting evolution for one thing, they have a 'blind spot'.
That blind spot is a filter. I recall something I read in Daniel Dennett's book, Darwin's Dangerous Idea, that went into just thing, citing Popper and others in on how the brain works and how we process and perceive. There was an example how that for instance, say someone had never seen an actual angel before, such an encounter would not be recognized by them as an angel, because an angel is not something that fits into reality as they understand it. The brain would then do it's natural thing, and try to associate it with something it did know. And so the brain would tell that person what they were seeing was "an old woman" as the example gave. They would not recognize what they were seeing, but would instead see what they could understand. This is just the way the brain works.

I don't think the brain does that. Why would we be able to view bizarre images in movies and see them fine? If a person dressed as an angel put on a jet pack and flew(they can do that now, a Green Goblin cosplay flew over Times Square on a drone) people would see an angel.

So these "filters" are things that are created for us by a multiplicity of factors: language, culture, development, personality, belief systems, worldviews, and so forth. Quite literally, people live in different realities. What "real reality" is, to the human being is in fact a translation of it, through these filters. Reality is a mediated reality, for all humans beings. What doesn't fit within what the mind can process and understand, will either being filtered out and completely ignored or dropped or shunted to the side, or reinterpreted as something it can understand, the angel seen as an old woman, in Dennett's example.

I understand we see a very misguided version of reality. But there is a reality there. There are laws and matter, energy, spacetime.

This is hard for people to come to terms with, because people normally think that how they see and understand something, is the truth of it. It's the same process for everyone, whether they are using magic, mythic, rational, pluralist, or integral lens to see the world through. Whether those are theistic, pantheistic, panentheistic, or atheistic filters. They all either allow or disallow certain ways of seeing things to hit and be registered in the brain.

Right but things that are real can be demonstrated, it isn't just about a world view. We can demonstrate what is real.

I have no problem in understanding the improved accuracy of science. I do have a problem in the thinking that says we can disregard other modes of knowing about reality other than science. That's not doing science. That's reducing everything down to physics. That's bad philosophy, and bad science.

Yes I understand this. I hear about different "truths" but I find this to be less real than I once thought. If you have a truth it should have some power of demonstration if it's about reality. If other ways of knowing have any merit beyond psychology then they need to demonstrate why they are true. If there is an alternate way of knowing people should be able to correlate and share and come up with ways to demonstrate this truth.

To you. You state this as though you have absolute knowledge, as if you yourself were God.

Again, you're idea of God is what is not real to you. "The God you don't believe in, doesn't exist", as someone once quite accurately said.

Until someone provides evidence for a God from theism they are not real. I would like Thor to be real. He is not.

Or disregard things that may be true. Once upon a time, if I assume you were a "believer", your beliefs disallowed true things for you, but then you changed how you saw things, your perception changed, and then your beliefs allowed things for you to be true. Now, extrapolate that to where you are at right now? And where you will be in the future? You once were sure you knew reality, no you're really sure you do this time too? Are you sure?

No I was never sure? I assumed there was evidence. Then I assumed there was evidence for Eastern mysticism or things related to it. There is not. Total fail on any evidence for all things supernatural/ESP. UFOs .....mmmmmmm, maybe a little...not sure

And your mind is in the world, and your mind tells you what is real. If you see beauty, than beauty is real. Your mind is part of reality, and reality is part of your mind. They are not separate things. Period.

I am not interested in that realism in a religious context. In the same way I'm not going to talk about the Thor movie and when someone mentions fiction I'm going to say "No, Thor is real!" And make a thing out of it because he exists in my mind.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

...

I understand we see a very misguided version of reality. But there is a reality there. There are laws and matter, energy, spacetime.

Right but things that are real can be demonstrated, it isn't just about a world view. We can demonstrate what is real.

Yes I understand this. I hear about different "truths" but I find this to be less real than I once thought. If you have a truth it should have some power of demonstration if it's about reality. If other ways of knowing have any merit beyond psychology then they need to demonstrate why they are true. If there is an alternate way of knowing people should be able to correlate and share and come up with ways to demonstrate this truth.

Until someone provides evidence for a God from theism they are not real. I would like Thor to be real. He is not.
...

Here is the problem with real. Imagine a small body of water, a pond. Now it is not a real pond, but it is real, that you can imagine it. In this pond are 2 ducks. A real duck and a decoy duck. The decoy duck is not a real duck, but it is a real decoy duck.

If you ask the question about real differently, then you could ask this: Is it real that people can believe in the unreal and then act further on it? Yes, you can observe that. So it is a part of the everyday world. Whether you believe it is a part of reality, is philosophy, because all of the everyday can't be reduced down to laws, matter, energy and spacetime. The subjective supervenes on the physical and is caused by it, but it can't be reduced to it.
So to me you are doing the following absurd claim. I in my mind treat what I observe as real, but that I only treat the observable as real, is only real in my mind.

Since I am a critical thinker besides an atheist, I gave up your belief system about real and learned to believe differently

 

[joelr]

No it's not. Explain then why someone in meditation who has ceased all thought, experiences the Divine? There are entire mystical approaches that aim for just that. The apophatic approach is to negate any and all ideas or concepts of God, in order to free the mind to see simply "what is".

They experience a mental state they call the divine. So? Sam Harris went through years of meditation training to reach this state. He believes it's a mental state, no relation to a God or divinity.
The brain can create many profound states. You said a brain may not know how to process an angel visual but you assume one contacts the divine and understands it as the divine?

Why would that even happen in meditation? Why would you not think it's a deep emotional state? We contain all the needed chemicals, opiates, DMT, and meditation manipulates the mind.

Yes. Spirituality is about a more well-rounded, well-grounded, more open, more joyous way of living life. That can create an experience of life where one can see the Divine in all things, in all others, and in one's own self. How is then you can say that God does not exist, when there are those who live within that?

There is no evidence of any external Gods. Those people live within that the same as Christians walk around thinking they are talking with Jesus and he is sending them thoughts and energy. Both groups were told a narrative and their minds are going along with the spectacle.

You're hung up on this mental idea of God as something outside yourself, like a magical cosmic yeti somewhere in the universe. That's not what I mean when I speak of God. Why do you persist in this thinking? Why do you keep bringing it up in a discussion with me?

Because you think an external God exists that is everything and it's really just nature.

Yes it is.

Yes it's evidence of a perceptual shift.

Have I ever once claimed "external Gods" is something I believe in? The only time I bring up that, an external deity form, is when I am talking about how you imagine God. That's a strawman argument with me. That's not me your debating, but a projection of your own mind. "Tilting at windmills", is what you and all the others are continually doing. That God you don't believe in, I don't believe in either.

A God that is everything but is still a God is no different. God in any form along with spirits or souls are likely fiction.

I experience things. I don't start to believe I experience them. I know I have experience.

How I understand these experiences, is a matter of symbols, interpretations, understandings, and beliefs. Those I am flexible with all those, and can understand them from many different points of view and ways of speaking about them. Denying I have the experience, is irrational. It's anti-rational. It's a form of religious bigotry, like a fundamentalist denying fossil evidence, or an atheist denying evidence of higher states of consciousness. It's the same behavior.

I don't deny different experiences where you gain different insights. we can measure different brain waves in deep meditation. Sam Harris reached a meditative goal with his guru and described the experience. It isn't anything beyond brain chemicals and insights and such. I don't believe in spirits, the spirit world, souls, Gods or any such thing so anything related to that, no I don't believe it.
When someone can do that then read peoples minds or demonstrate some supernatural ability then that might be something.

You speak so conclusively, for someone with such a limited understanding and knowledge of these areas. I suppose that explains why you do.

What areas? Vague changing notions of a God? The word "divinity" used in a slippery way? I haven't heard anything that suggests and "area"?

Regarding the silent witness, the fact that Awareness is there when thoughts are not, denies your claim that "we are our thoughts". No. We have thoughts, but we are not our thoughts. Else how can you see you are having thoughts? That's the whole point of Awakening, of seeking higher states of consciousness than just the ordinary discursive mine. To realize what we think is reality, is an illusion of the mind. The illusion is identifying the self with the thoughts. Exactly the trap you claim is the truth.

So there you go. You buy into that nonsense. So if you bother to look at images of consciousness at work, or areas of the brain that light up when we think it isn't just a localized thing. The entire brain is firing. When people have brain injury sometimes other areas pick up the slack and do things they don't normally do.
I never said we are our thoughts? Now you are going by past things.
We do not have "a thought" and then the underlying awareness is your soul? That is a Deepak Chopra myth. Do you think maybe neurologists might take notice? The brain is very complex. Thoughts are happening even while we have an underlying awareness.
Stopping thoughts and experiencing awareness is a great meditation practice. No master of meditation ever went into that state and came out with knowledge beyond what was possible for them to know? It doesn't suggest a soul, it shows the brain is complex. When they turn you off for day surgery your "spirit" will not have any experiences. You will go under and wake up the next instant. No dreams.
People have had multiple personalities in one brain. Thoughts often form from the analytical side while in meditation the other can be relaxed and aware. We are not our thoughts. Unfortunately I think we are our brain. Kind of a bummer.

 

[joelr]

Since I am a critical thinker besides an atheist, I gave up your belief system about real and learned to believe differently

And look how well it's working out for you!

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

And look how well it's working out for you!

Thank you. I am doing fine. I have a overall content life and enough periodical happiness, so it is good enough for me.