[MD] Intention changes physical world (some questions)

[Heather Perella]

Other questions for Case, Platt, or anybody,

     [Platt]
> The debate is about to what extent should we allow
> science to determine
> what is real and what is true. It's not a matter in
> getting in the way
> of science, but in clearly proscribing science's
> limits.

     ok

     [Platt]
> For example, science explains Rachmaniov's 2nd Piano
Concerto as
> a neurological consequence of the impact of
vibrations on the
> eardrum. I'm sure Case
> as well as you and I would agree that that is an
> impoverished description.
> Science and technology has accomplished wonders in
> providing us with
> material well-being. The I-Pod is a marvel of
> quantum physics and computer
> technology. But the music. Ah, that's what we live
> for!

     Yes, I agree.  Except today departments in
universities have social sciences, too, so "material
well-being" might not be exclusively sciences'
approach.  Societies well-being is advocated as
supportable by scientific methods in certain fields in
this department.  These certain fields don't just
focus upon material, for example applied
anthropologist and sociologists advocate their science
takes notice of the values of the community and
individuals within the community.  Some of these
advocates within these fields have practiced helping
societies that want help, and this help not only
supplies material changes, but the values within these
societies are considered due to how material changes
can change the behavior of its' community.  For
example, once the Iroquois got guns, the pressure to
get more furs to trade for more European goods
overrode the values taught in stories about how the
beaver is their brother.  Soon the beaver lost its'
brotherly human-like value to be killed almost to
extinction for European goods.  Many Amerindians
throughout the whole Warring Times advocated for a
return to the old ways, and this return is still
advocated in such values as in saving their languages,
ceremonies, etc...    
     Some say meditation is a science, so, why people
say they are using science or this latter (meditation)
is a science, or hunting is a science, what are people
actually saying when science is used this way?  I
don't know.  What I do know is science is
not-thoughtful about its' insight.  Science brings
insight, but what kind of insight science offers, at
this moment, I lean towards philosophy to answer these
kinds of questions.  Science will bring its'
perspective to the table, but thoughtful philosophers
will have to describe this perspective science has. 
These thoughtful philosophers could be scientists or
could form a field of science that explorers these
kinds of questions, but what kind of science would
they be practicing, as I said, as of now philosophers
might only have these answers.


thanks.

still raining into the fourth night,
SA

   
 


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never Miss an Email
Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile.  Get started!
http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail