Thing is, even metaphysically speaking, you are wrong. , the idea that scientists are just like religious people fails the moment you see how many ideas they are dealing with can be falsified and then they will look where the data from the falsification is going to lead them.
It is indeed a very bad idea, and not grounded in reality, to continue to avoid what needs to be done when physical tools, matter, structure, and engineering need to be explained so then others can then agree or support you.
The differences found are in any real case quantifiable, so then others can see and push the science forward.
What you have proposed in the end is really magic. Not a thing that will show up if you want to press the point that your theories do refer to items that did left us with physical evidence.
Precisely the point, by refusing to consider the use of modern technology, models and experts you only have shown so far a refusal of following that. History has shown that progress and technological advances do not depend on the beliefs of people, once the reality of a phenomenon has been explained others that do not depend on believing or knowing all the intricacies can use it. We use computers to communicate with each other, and yet it is very hard to find anyone that does know how all the devises and networks do their job.
Eventually anyone that pretends to know the whole truth about something that is supposed to be a game changer but does not want to explain it properly to others is only asking to not leave any legacy whatsoever, once they leave this world.
No, not cool at all. Inded, if they had actually used such a method thousands would have died of heaty stroke and they’d have to just toss the bodies off the side to continue work.
Working in a desert when it’s 110 degrees is beyond most people. It wasn’t easier just because they were primitive and didn’t know an easirer way.
Scientists aren’t “just like” religious people and I never said nor intended to imply such a thing. Scientists are just like all people today who speak modern languages. On average they take less for granted but they are still beholden to the means by which they percieve reality; their models and paradigms. Of course these models have many aspects that are reproducuible in the lab so we know these aspects reflect reality as determined by experiment. But this doesn’t mean our model applies to reality. It does not but we believe in them anyway until new experiments overturn it.
You shouldn’t read things into what I say. I mean only what I say and I mean it literally unless it’s obviously some literary device or a joke.
Yeah, we’re really through the Looking Glass here. At first he seemed like someone with a crazy idea and no evidence, but he’s gone well beyond that lately. Now we’re solidly into denying reality and making stuff up wholesale.
In other words, you prefer to hide behind an unsupported claim that it is “common knowledge” (that no one else has encountered).
As to your perspective, that is known as confirmation bias. You begin with a belief, find a random phrase that does not mean what you want to think it does, then claim that you have “found” that the Egyptologists have said it because it matches what you want to believe they said. This is part and parcel of your accusations that they talk about “stinky footed bumpkins” or “superstitious” Egyptians when Egyptologists do not speak of such things–only you do.
So, again, you provide no reason for anyone else to believe your imagined claims.
This highlights exactly the problem. Every single word every single one of us uses is deconstructed by the listener. This process goes astray in every instance because just as 1 + 1 can’tt equal two when no two things are alike no word is deconstructed exactly as the speaker intends. Everyone always walks away with a different meaning. Modern languages are still “confused”. I can’t get through because people deconstruct the meaning and aleways hear “ramps”.
One of the definitions of “metaphysics” is “the means by which knowledge is acquired”. Scientific metaphysics is a very poorly understood subject becausae it is mentioned in first grade and then never again. Science has no meaning outside its metaphysics but we still extrapolate and interpolate the meaning of experiment and theory. We misapply our knowledge just as we misapply math in every instance. This is the way we think. We can’t see we do it and can’t see every listener has a different understanding. We are left to count the number of angels who can dance on the head of a pin just like Egyptologists.
Please, once again: the very big ramp idea is used here as a straw man. No one that is being taken seriously takes it into account, and then:
Please, entire armies in the north African desert endured worse temperatures and even tank crews cooked eggs in the side of their tanks in WWII in northern Africa and Egypt, and still had to enter them with no air conditioning to do battle.
You see, the problem is that there is a lot of items were you are demonstratively wrong, that all those items repeatedly told to you do not modify your presentation only demonstrates that indeed evidence and reality is not being used by you.
709b. when the course is set for the boat of Rē‘,
709c. to his fields which are in the ’iȝś.w-part of heaven,
No fields 81’ up a pyramid.
819c. Behold, he is come (again) as Śȝḥ; behold, Osiris is come as Śȝḥ.
820a. lord of the wine-cellar at the Wȝg-feast,
820b. “good,” as his mother said; “heir,” as his father said,
820c. conceived by heaven, born of the Dwȝ.t.
820d. Heaven conceives thee together with S’ȝḥ;
81’ up a pyramid can’t conceive of a geyser, so if heaven is a height and Osiris is a geyser, it doesn’t fit.
Now, if it’s a mystical realm of fields where spirits go, it fits fine, but that sure is mystical superstition, right there.
So a natural phenomenon was murdered by his brother in a struggle for the throne?
None of that is anything like an instruction to avoid low-lying CO2. I asked about other safety instructions in the pyramid texts, since you said 722 was a safety instruction for lay people.
By being a mystical manifestation of a mystical god; same way Zeus got ladies pregnant as a beam of light and God appeared to Moses as a burning bush.
It isn’t nonsense, it’s a pretty coherent set of narratives and instructions. You realize that religion isn’t nonsense to the religious people themselves, right?
Thanks for trying, I guess. All I see is an extreme effort to insert geysers into and delete gods from the PT, by having about 90% of the meaning of the text be cloaked in interpretations that one living human, you, are able to divine. Oddly, in light of your views on religion, what you’re engaged in is essentially revelation.
[QUOTE=http://www.scientificmetaphysics.org/]
The IMS offers regular seminars, workshops, discussions and open houses that explore the many areas of metaphysical science and ways to apply this thinking in our daily lives. Scientific Metaphysics is an inquiry into the nature of Reality and the science of being. This inquiry includes exploring the fundamental nature of human being, what makes each of us unique – and what’s present when we, as human beings, show up. The dimension of self-discovering that occurs inside the study of Scientific Metaphysics has you live with peace, joy, and full self-expression. Join with us in the inquiry!
[/QUOTE]
Calling something “scientific” does not make it so.
Quite likely, they worked early in the morning when the sun was rising, and late evening when the sun is setting, and took a long break in the middle of the day when the heat was too much to bear. This, as far as I understand it, is a practice still followed by builders in hot countries.
As a wise man once said:
*Mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the midday sun,
The Japanese don´t care to, the Chinese wouldn’t dare to,
Hindus and Argentines sleep firmly from twelve to one
But Englishmen detest-a siesta.
In the Philippines they have lovely screens to protect you from the glare.
In the Malay States, there are hats like plates which the Britishers won’t wear.
At twelve noon the natives swoon and no further work is done,
But mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the midday sun. *
This is utter nonsense and has nothing to do with metaphysics. It is bad enough that you want to claim to understand ancient Egyptian in a way that no one else in the world is able to understand, but now you are inventing meaning for English.
There are two meanings of the word metaphysics, nether of which is “scientific.”
The first is the word applied to the writings of Aristotle in the book following (meta) his Physics that refers to the studies of the non-material world or our understanding of meaning, but neither is “science” or “scientific.”
The second is the way that the word was taken by Blavatsky and other frauds, and it is also not related to science.
As to the actual assertion, Cogito, ergo sum: Descartes was looking to establish what he could know about anything. He even questioned whether he could know that he existed. However, he reasoned, if he was thinking about the issue, then someone had to be doing that thinking, so he clearly did exist, (even if he was the extension of the imagination of some other being, he at least existed in their imagination). So your claim that it was not logical is false.
Beyond that, rather few people in the world spend that sort of time or effort trying to determine whether or not they are, themselves, real, so the claim that modern thought is based on that statement is just bullshit.
Nothing we believe, today, “springs from” that quote and your belief in that assertion tends to point out your own disconnect from reality.
I do! (Actually, for me, it’s “I perceive, therefore I am.”) It forms the absolute bottom-most baseline below which skepticism cannot go. The entire world might be an illusion, a dream, a holodeck sim – but my own perceptions cannot be.
(Except…heh! They are! They’re illusions produced by neuronal activity. But that depends on accepting the idea of neurons, which depends on accepting some of the terms of the world-illusion, and so…)
Anyway, yeah, at least some of us rely on Cartesian doubt and Cartesian certainty as a basis for thinking (?) about our cosmos.
No two people can seem to even agree on the meaning of a word so, obviously, no two people are going to agree on the importance or meaning of an entire book. But I believe this is one of the most important books written in the last 250 years.
This wasn’t a starting off point for my study of metaphysics but it certainly accelerated it when I read it as a child. Of course my views of the subject have been very much affected by coming to rediscover the metaphysical foundations of ancient science. My views have been very much affected by coming to see the effects of language on metaphysics in general and modern science specifically. Things are not what I believed they were just a few short years ago.
The ancient science’s first axiom was reality exists and it lies outside the observer. The first corollary was that the observer’s senses could deceive him so scientific observation and theory was needed to combat this.
To the Egyptians it would be futile to even struggle if the world were an illusion. A rabbit doesn’t ponder the meaning of a fox or look for the right word to describe a fox; it merely runs.
, the idea that scientists are just like religious people fails the moment you see how many ideas they are dealing with can be falsified and then they will look where the data from the falsification is going to lead them.