ETHICS BEYOND the MIND

ETHICS and A TALE OF TWO PHYSICS

It’s important to know up front that what follows has nothing whatsoever to do with religion (religions are institutions, which have agendas—we’re simply seeking truth).  It has to do with life, with being, with self, and therefore with ethics. We’re about to consider the very foundation for being itself—consciousness.

Which requires that we lose touch, literally, as well as the other four senses (sight, hearing, taste and smell).  We’re going beyond the physical into the metaphysical.  Until about a hundred years ago this was decidedly spooky territory.  It still is, but with the advent of quantum theory in the 1920s it’s become fertile ground for serious study.

To review: “Mind is the complex of cognitive faculties that enables consciousness, thinking, reasoning, perception, feeling and judgment…”  (Wikipedia).  Notice that mind is not a physical

ETHICS of the MIND

ETHICS ISSUES:  SCIENCE and the MIND

“Mind is the complex of cognitive faculties that enables consciousness, thinking, reasoning, perception, feeling and judgment…”  So says Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia.  Notice that the term is mind, not the mind.  Mind is not a physical thing, but instead a metaphysical ‘complex of faculties’ (abilities, capacities), a function of the brain and nervous system (things of substance).  While mind is not material, it still is. Without it we would be not.

Your mind is yours alone, working within your individual self.  It processes information that comes from without as well as what it itself generates, combining real and imagined data, random associations, unique experiences and every other input seen or unseen, heard or unheard, touched or untouched, smelled or unsmelled, tasted or not, to create an increasingly unique (metaphysical) structure. The process doesn’t follow a direct

NO FREE WILL? Sorry, Sam…

ETHICS, FREE WILL and ATHEISM

Sam Harris says there’s no such thing as free will and very cleverly makes his case.  Sam Harris may be clever, but he is wrong.

Every human being who ever was, is or will be has unique fingerprints.  Every one of us is as different as a snowflake from every other one in spite of being cut from the same cloth as water vapor, the planets, constellations, black holes, you name it.  All of it is a direct result of the Big Bang, whereby all of this started from…nothing? (Sounds remarkably like creation to me…)

Science cannot and will not ever explain everything—especially itself—because science is a tool that relies on assumptions for its very being, a product of philosophy that requires philosophy to offer whatever explanation can be provided.  Physics is superseded by metaphysics after all.

The Big Bang

THE ETHICS OF ACCEPTANCE: BELIEF

THE ETHICS OF ACCEPTANCE:  BELIEF, TRUST and FAITH

There’s an old story about Amos at his baptism.  After the first submersion he surfaces shouting, “I believe!  I believe!”  Coming up after the second dunking he sputters again, “I believe!  I believe!”  After the final immersion he’s asked:  “Just what do you believe, Amos?”   Amos:  “I believe you’re tryin’ to drown me!”

We all believe—have beliefs—call it trust or even faith.  You trust that you’ll be alive in the next instant, otherwise why bother surviving this one? The fact is that you believe it.  You go to sleep fully expecting–trusting–that you’ll wake up alive.  That takes faith.  If you thought you’d die during the night you probably wouldn’t be so ready to fall asleep.

But just what do you believe?  Well, you may as well believe

THE ETHICS OF ISLAM

IS ISLAM ETHICAL?

Ethics being founded in truth, Islam is demonstrably unethical on its face. The Qur’an and its supporting documents deny the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus 9781627874267of Nazareth, claiming that He died a natural death at a much later date. Additionally, Islam denies the Christian Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In doing so, Islam denies the very foundations of Christianity, effectively nullifying it as a religion. It does this on the basis of convenient alterations to the Christian Bible made hundreds of years after the fact (early Seventh Century), claiming theirs to be the ‘genuine’ bible.

Regardless of one’s views concerning religions and their validity, the life and death of Jesus of Nazareth are historical fact, and may not be changed or dismissed as irrelevant. The denial of history is not only inexcusable, IT IS UNETHICAL. A few examples: According to Islam, Allah/God would

ETHICS ISSUES: Peak Experiences

ETHICAL ISSUES: THE PEAK EXPERIENCE

American psychologist and philosopher Abraham H. Maslow (1908-1970) coined this term to describe nonreligious quasi-mystical and mystical experiences.  Peak experiences are sudden intense feelings of well-being, and an awareness of “ultimate truth” and the essence of all things. Accompanying these experiences is a heightened sense of control over the body and emotions.

Maslow described peak experiences as self-validating, self-justifying; never negative, unpleasant or evil; disoriented in time and space; and accompanied by a loss of fear, anxiety, doubts, and inhibitions. Relative are those peak experiences in which there remains an awareness of subject and object, and which are extensions of the individual’s own experiences. Absolute experiences are characteristic of the mystical—timeless, spaceless, characterized by unity, in which the subject and object become one. These highest peaks include “feelings of limitless horizons opening up to the vision, the feeling of being simultaneously more powerful and