[MD] Scientific Method?

[gav]

hi marsha,
i am using 'absolute' as opposed to 'relative'.
relative knowledge is knowledge of good and evil,
'absolute' knowledge is the knowledge of the dynamic
unity of both - the absolute is Quality / Tao.
instead of absolute i could say unconditional...?.


--- MarshaV <marshalz at charter.net> wrote:

> 
> I understand 'new myth', but what does 'absolute'
> mean?  I'm having a 
> problem with the idea that there exists an absolute
> anything, 
> pre-intellectual or not.
> 
> 
> At 07:27 AM 11/26/2007, you wrote:
> >the problem is not the scientific method.
> >the problem is in the interpretation.
> >whilst science operates under the inadequate aegis
> of
> >SOM it will have difficulty understanding the whole
> >picture: because it presumes the existence of an
> >objective reality separate to the observer.
> >quantum physics made this inadequacy glaringly
> obvious
> >- it still does. how do we interpret quantum
> reality
> >under SOM? - answer: we can't.
> >
> >a new context is required and that context is
> >emerging. new context = new myth.
> >
> >the new myth recognises the unity and sentience of
> >earth itself - gaia....and by extrapolation the
> entire
> >cosmos.
> >
> >as einstein said: the assumption that we are
> separate
> >is just an optical illusion of consciousness.
> quantum
> >physics literally shows us the intimate
> >interconnection of all space. space and time order
> >reality; they are not reality itself.
> >
> >with an MOQ perspective we can make sense of
> >everything because we factor in the primacy of
> >undivided experience - pre-intellectual, aesthetic.
> >and this is absolute not relative knowledge. it is
> >knowledge by communion, by immersion, by
> identifying
> >with the world, by losing yourself in the world.
> >
> >
> >
> >--- MarshaV <marshalz at charter.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > It seems that the problems with the scientific
> > > method have been
> > > recognized.  Yet it has been anointed the best
> > > method for recognizing
> > > truth (provisional).  If the scientific method
> is
> > > such a highly
> > > valued, but very static, intellectual pattern,
> how
> > > will a better
> > > method (pattern) get recognized?   Maybe there's
> one
> > > emerging, but
> > > what would be the probability of me recognizing
> it?
> > > Everything seems
> > > a trap!
> > >
> > > Chop wood, carry water and paint?
> > >
> > > Marsha
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > >
>
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > > Archives:
> > >
>
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >       Make the switch to the world's best email.
> Get the new 
> > Yahoo!7 Mail now.
> www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail
> >
> >
> >Moq_Discuss mailing list
> >Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> >Archives:
>
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> >http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> 
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
>
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> 



      Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now. www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail