-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Spiritual Evolution
- Thread starter Fool
- Start date
people tend to take the familiar with them and incorporate those things into their new environments. people also usually like technology that is easier to use and gives at least the same results, or better production.
I believe by the evidence we physically and spiritually evolve, and the religions and cultures of the world reflect this over time.
There are two possibilities; Divine spiritual progressive evolution through Revelation, and natural humanist spiritual(?) evolution of humanity. I am a theist, but as a philosophical skeptic acknowledge the naturalist possibilities, and a merge of both in a harmonious Divine natural evolution.
The problem with ancient religions, such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam, is they cannot stand absolute singular Revelations, along by their claims, because of the overwhelming evidence against, because is the reality of the world around us spiritually, and scientifically evolves past their ancient paradigm.
judaism and christianity doesn't focus on hard sciences. they discuss the nature of mind; which obviously western science is still in its infancy and can't explain with any certitude in regards to cause and effect of said subject.
what does, "they cannot stand absolute singular Revelations, along by their claims" mean?
This does not reflect the reality of Judaism and Christianity. To say 'they do not focus on hard sciences,' is a dodge, because they do address extensively the nature of science and the science of mind, because in reality they do, and draw conclusions on science and the science of the mind.;
This the unfortunate view of of the fallacy of 'arguing from ignorance' from a position of ignorance of science. The knowledge of science is constantly evolving and progressing, but it is not in its infancy. It is the classic argument from the Christian perspective to propose the 'argument from ignorance to justify their world view in saying science does not currently have an explanation therefore . . . . Science has extensive knowledge of the relationship between the mind, consciousness and the brain, and finding many attributes are common with other animals through evolution of higher animals.
This means ancient religions reflect one cultural ancient worldview, and do not take into consideration the diversity of the religions and cultures of the world through the millennia that evolved all over the world, and are most often behind when it comes to science as your post reflects..
so does every other basic organized religion that espouses self-realization.
i'm not a christian and obviously you don't do much reading regarding neuroscience being unable to determine the cause of mind.
so you can cite me a reference to an actual research study that shows where mind arises from a cause?
sealchan
Well-Known Member
Yes, the development of religion is an evolutionary process and as culture develops the process of the development of religion becomes more self-conscious.
However "just" isn't quite the right word. Scriptures and rituals have evolved out of a creative engagement with what is considered spiritual and as with any form of art what has come before is the starting point for the artist in their effort to express something new.
There is to me one universal Truth which manifests differently at different times and different places due to the differing needs of people then and there. It's like putting on different clothes for exercise, work, dining out etc.
like different clothes for different times and seasons?
[ The Woman and the Dragon ] A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moonunder her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head.
kind of like a war within self between what was and what will be the change
Yes, in one form or another including Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Native American beliefs. As with other issues. Why don't you research this yourself. Is it out of fear?
You could be arguing from anyone of numerous world views, it does not change the weaknesses in your argument. I do a lot reading on neuroscience, and at present you are only proposing the fallacy of' arguing from ignorance,' which fails miserably.
You should be willing to do this research yourself instead of asking to be spoon fed. These are general references with scientific journal reference, and if you simply want review the hundreds of research papers in the field, be my guest.
Neuroscience: Breaking Down Scientific Barriers to the Study of Brain and Mind | Science
Neuroscience: Breaking Down Scientific Barriers to the Study of Brain and Mind
- Eric R. Kandel,
- Larry R. Squire
See all authors and affiliations
Science 10 Nov 2000:
Vol. 290, Issue 5494, pp. 1113-1120
DOI: 10.1126/science.290.5494.1113
Summary
In this month's essay, Eric R. Kandel and Larry R. Squire chronicle how brain research has migrated from the peripheries of biology and psychology to assume a central position within those disciplines. The multidiscipline of neuroscience that emerged from this process now ranges from genes to cognition, from molecules to minds.
Neuroscience, Brain & Mind
Neuroscience, Brain & Mind
Why do humans do what they do? What makes us tick? With increasingly sophisticated technology, experts can image, manipulate and scientifically test the human experience to a depth never before realized. Will this technology give us better insight into why we make the decisions we do? Can it help us understand the nature of spiritual experiences? How will understanding the brain affect our self-perception?
Neuroscience is a rich field devoted to studying the many facets of the nervous system. The nervous system includes both the central nervous system, consisting of a brain and spinal cord, and the peripheral nervous system comprised of the nerves that lie in the extremities, muscles, and organs. Not all neuroscientists directly study the brain, but brain research tends to capture the attention and imagination of the modern audience. Some even regard the human brain as the most complex organism in the entire universe. Millions of years of biological and cultural evolution have made it possible for our species to compute patterns in nature, be conscious of ourselves, and empathize with one another. Understanding how all of this occurs is a fascinating challenge.
Neuroscience research is advancing at a rapid pace, making exciting progress on a wide variety of issues. These range from the slowing of degenerative diseases such as Huntington’s Disease, ALS and Parkinson’s, to discoveries on how the brain develops in early childhood. Many recent advances in neuroscience also highlight ethical questions with both societal and personal consequences. Brain-Machine Interfaces (BMI), for example, allow biological organisms to interact with inorganic computers in order to increase a person’s lost or waning mobility. Researchers have found that simply thinking about moving a limb activates dozens of motor-control neurons in the brain, allowing for exterior machines to translate thoughts into movements. Paralyzed patients now have the ability to interact with the physical world in ways otherwise prohibited by their state. This is quite an exciting feat; one can only imagine how far this research will take us.
On a chemical level, mood-altering drugs researched by neuroscientists cause major changes in temperament and personality. In these cases, what does it mean to “be yourself”? Should people be legally obligated to take certain medications that would decrease their threat to society? Is there research into other organic or holistic cures to neurological imbalances that lead to depression, schizophrenia and addiction? To what extent should we be concerned about the ethical parameters of animal testing, which is essential for this type of research? Unquestionably, the service that neuroscientific research provides is unparalleled, but it is imperative that scientists, policy makers and the public be attuned to both the newest discoveries as well as the philosophical and ethical conundrums they raise.
Other concerns center on questions with spiritual ramifications such as the relationship between the human brain and mind. Interdisciplinary research in neuroscience, physics, biology, philosophy and even cosmology has sparked interest in the conversation regarding determinism and free will. The premise is that if actions of minute atoms can be measured with such a high degree of certainty, then can larger aspects of the universe which are comprised of these atoms also be determined with a keenly devised prescription? Do these predictions extend to choices we make, our personalities, and our future? Can we assume biology, conditioning, and probabilistic calculations have declared moot our ability to choose? Theologically speaking, do these determined actions affect our ability to choose good from evil?
As scientists discover more functions and locations of brain activity, other societal concerns may arise. If empathy is identified at a particular point in the brain, could scientists directly intervene to enhance it? Should criminals with abnormal neurological structure receive the same punishment as others? Is there an experimental result that will disprove the traditional assertion of free will, and how will such conclusions affect religious communities and the basis of our justice systems? With such fundamental questions under consideration, it is essential that these and other issues be explored in tandem with neuroscience’s exciting rise from theory to practice.
Last edited:
Yes, in one form or another including Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Native American beliefs. As with other issues. Why don't you research this yourself. Is it out of fear?
You could be arguing from anyone of numerous world views, it does not change the weaknesses in your argument. I do a lot reading on neuroscience, and at present you are only proposing the fallacy of' arguing from ignorance,' which fails miserably.
You should be willing to do this research yourself instead of asking to be spoon fed. These are general references with scientific journal reference, and if you simply want review the hundreds of research papers in the field, be my guest.
Neuroscience: Breaking Down Scientific Barriers to the Study of Brain and Mind | Science
Neuroscience: Breaking Down Scientific Barriers to the Study of Brain and Mind
- Eric R. Kandel,
- Larry R. Squire
See all authors and affiliations
Science 10 Nov 2000:
Vol. 290, Issue 5494, pp. 1113-1120
DOI: 10.1126/science.290.5494.1113
Summary
In this month's essay, Eric R. Kandel and Larry R. Squire chronicle how brain research has migrated from the peripheries of biology and psychology to assume a central position within those disciplines. The multidiscipline of neuroscience that emerged from this process now ranges from genes to cognition, from molecules to minds.
Neuroscience, Brain & Mind
Neuroscience, Brain & Mind
Why do humans do what they do? What makes us tick? With increasingly sophisticated technology, experts can image, manipulate and scientifically test the human experience to a depth never before realized. Will this technology give us better insight into why we make the decisions we do? Can it help us understand the nature of spiritual experiences? How will understanding the brain affect our self-perception?
Neuroscience is a rich field devoted to studying the many facets of the nervous system. The nervous system includes both the central nervous system, consisting of a brain and spinal cord, and the peripheral nervous system comprised of the nerves that lie in the extremities, muscles, and organs. Not all neuroscientists directly study the brain, but brain research tends to capture the attention and imagination of the modern audience. Some even regard the human brain as the most complex organism in the entire universe. Millions of years of biological and cultural evolution have made it possible for our species to compute patterns in nature, be conscious of ourselves, and empathize with one another. Understanding how all of this occurs is a fascinating challenge.
Neuroscience research is advancing at a rapid pace, making exciting progress on a wide variety of issues. These range from the slowing of degenerative diseases such as Huntington’s Disease, ALS and Parkinson’s, to discoveries on how the brain develops in early childhood. Many recent advances in neuroscience also highlight ethical questions with both societal and personal consequences. Brain-Machine Interfaces (BMI), for example, allow biological organisms to interact with inorganic computers in order to increase a person’s lost or waning mobility. Researchers have found that simply thinking about moving a limb activates dozens of motor-control neurons in the brain, allowing for exterior machines to translate thoughts into movements. Paralyzed patients now have the ability to interact with the physical world in ways otherwise prohibited by their state. This is quite an exciting feat; one can only imagine how far this research will take us.
On a chemical level, mood-altering drugs researched by neuroscientists cause major changes in temperament and personality. In these cases, what does it mean to “be yourself”? Should people be legally obligated to take certain medications that would decrease their threat to society? Is there research into other organic or holistic cures to neurological imbalances that lead to depression, schizophrenia and addiction? To what extent should we be concerned about the ethical parameters of animal testing, which is essential for this type of research? Unquestionably, the service that neuroscientific research provides is unparalleled, but it is imperative that scientists, policy makers and the public be attuned to both the newest discoveries as well as the philosophical and ethical conundrums they raise.
Other concerns center on questions with spiritual ramifications such as the relationship between the human brain and mind. Interdisciplinary research in neuroscience, physics, biology, philosophy and even cosmology has sparked interest in the conversation regarding determinism and free will. The premise is that if actions of minute atoms can be measured with such a high degree of certainty, then can larger aspects of the universe which are comprised of these atoms also be determined with a keenly devised prescription? Do these predictions extend to choices we make, our personalities, and our future? Can we assume biology, conditioning, and probabilistic calculations have declared moot our ability to choose? Theologically speaking, do these determined actions affect our ability to choose good from evil?
As scientists discover more functions and locations of brain activity, other societal concerns may arise. If empathy is identified at a particular point in the brain, could scientists directly intervene to enhance it? Should criminals with abnormal neurological structure receive the same punishment as others? Is there an experimental result that will disprove the traditional assertion of free will, and how will such conclusions affect religious communities and the basis of our justice systems? With such fundamental questions under consideration, it is essential that these and other issues be explored in tandem with neuroscience’s exciting rise from theory to practice.
Consilience, Episode 1: Smarty Plants
you don't have to have a brain to have mind, or consciousness.
Plant neurobiology: From stimulus perception to adaptive behavior of plants, via integrated chemical and electrical signaling
The Quest for Cognition in Plant Neurobiology
Last edited:
At present there is no objective verifiable evidence of a mind without a brain.
The response of plants are not related to a brain nor a mind. Plants do not have brains, In my college background in agriculture and biology at Oklahoma State I know the the details of the plants response to stimulus and no they are not related to the plants having a brain nor a mind.
Last edited:
and at present there is no conclusive evidence that mind is created by a brain.
thats the point. plants don't have a brain, neither do bacteria, but they communicate. they do have neural signaling though.
It depends on what you mean and what you standard is fro conclusive unless you are proposing the fallacy of 'arguing from ignorance' relying on what you claim science does not know, therefore . . . .
The only objective verifiable evidence we have demonstrates that the mind is a product of the brain.
The answer is absolutely no, plants simply respond automatically to stimuli.
classic that you can say that while ignoring the man in your reflection, or man in the mirror.
plants have neural pathways as do bacteria.
“Neural Networks” in Bacteria: Making Connections
they may not be as smart as you and i, but we still have to give them credit where credit is due.
Not ignoring anything. I just simply go by the objective verifiable evidence and real research and science. The above is anecdotal and does not even qualify as subjective evidence for anything. Your arguing with someone wh believes in the soul, and spiritual worlds beyond ours, but I do not try and manipulate and selelctively manipulate science to justify my belief.
Having primitive neural pathways are only primitive responses and not more.
Credit where credit is due is simply the primitive beginnings of evolution, and at this level only automatic responses to stimuli.
Nothing more and no brain and no mind.[/QUOTE]
plants, bacteria, and even slime-molds are able to learn and adapt. that isn't just a response that is evolution.
They are responses that reflect evolution and get more complex as the organisms become more complex. Still no evidence of a brain nor a mind.
argument from ignorance again. a dead thing with a brain doesn't have mind. having brain activity requires neural activity for mind.
brain ≠ mind
neural activity = mind