My understanding of Faust is that he was a character best known for his âdance with the Devilâ (meaning skepticism, doubt, hedonism, and magic). He sought to understand the world, material reality (hence the physical sciences), certainty, freedom, and power. And being so focused, lost all sense of morality. My similar âdance with the Devilâ turned out differently. In my case all doubt and magic got banished in the face of irrevocable certainty while any skepticism was/is invited, leaving me with an irrevocable morality (where real science eventually leads). I played the game differently (dancing to a different tune even though from the same âfiddler on the roofâ. Perhaps I was just tone deaf. ).
It seems that you are distinguishing any verifiable theories or science as âFaustianâ and others as religious (dependent upon handed down knowledge).
That refers mainly to the first part of âFaustâ; in the second part it becomes more obvious than in the first part what I mean when I say: âFaustian cultureâ.
Please read Goetheâs âFaust IIâ or a review, respectively a recension of it. I recommend it to you.
You have to know Goetheâs âFaustâ, especially the second part (but also the first part), in order to understand what is meant with âFaustian cultureâ and why all the other cultures are no specific or at least not as much science cultures as the Faustian culture is a science culture. But the Faustian culture is not only a science culture but just a Faustian culture, and as one of the most important parts it includes the part science. In any case, one has to read Goetheâs âFaustâ or Spenglerâs âDecline of the Westâ when it comes to really and well understand what âFaustian cultureâ means. The absolute, categorical will to knowledge is probably the most important example if one wants to know the impulse of Faust and the Faustians.
Such an absolute, categorical will to knowledge, thus a Faustian culture is in fact merely possible in landscapes with a âcoldâ respectively mild climate.
The other cultures are more religious, but not very much, except one which is the most religiuos of all cultures: the Magic/Arabian/Islamic culture; all so-called âmonotheismsâ have their origin in this culture because in the territory of taht culture are a lot of deserts, and the monotheistic religions have much to do with deserts.
Religion belongs to culture, so each culture is religious, more or less. For example: the Magic/Arabian/Islamic culture is the most religious culture, the Faustian culture is the most scientific culture.
It is no coincidence or accident that the Faustian culture invented and discovered so much, and the consequences which can clearly be seen are the pollution of the planet Earth and its neighborhood, the unresponsible politics, the bad conscience, the hypocrisy, the lies, and as the next goal: the new religion. Science is Faustian science and nothing else, and one can easily guess what it means when it becomes a new religion.
Goethe has not only described the typical Western man with his âFaustâ, but also predicted the future of the Western man.
Northern climate - very much advantageous for thinking and for science, thus for a Faustian culture:
Yes, I think that one statement says it all. Iâm getting the feeling that I should write a thesis on âWill to Ascensionâ, which probably sounds terribly religious to you. Realize that I am at a place wherein religion and knowledge come together into a synthesis that is neither.
If the Sun represents the source of all knowledge and the fires of hell (metaphorically), the safe haven is âon the other side of the Sunâ, beyond it. What they refer to as âascendedâ is a state wherein one has accepted all of the nasty truths of the world of Man and holds no ill will against it, accepting reality for what it is (a whole lot of noise). The problem is that the path to that haven (the âstairway to heavenâ) is buried in the chaos of the horde, ego, and lust for power (thus lust for knowledge = flying into the Sun). And one must get past the Sun, going through it and out the other side. There is a specific way to do that which goes beyond the simple notion of âhave faith and love thy neighborâ.
In the near end of Goetheâs âFaustâ, part II, an angel says to Faust:
[list][list][list][list][list][list]âWer immer strebend sich bemĂŒht, // Den können wir erlösen.â
(Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, âFaustâ, Teil II, S. 376.)
Translation:
âWho strives always to the utmost, // For him there is salvationâŠâ[/list:u][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u]
And amongst others this is what the âChorus mysticusâ sings when Faust is in heaven at last (⊠fortunately!):
[list][list][list][list][list][list]âAlles VergĂ€ngliche ist nur ein Gleichnis.â
(Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, âFaustâ, Teil II, S. 383.)
Translation:
âAll perishable is only an allegory.â[/list:u][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u]
Add-on:
[list]
âNiemand ist mehr Sklave, als der sich fĂŒr frei hĂ€lt, ohne es zu sein.â
(Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, âDie Wahlverwandtschaftenâ, Band 6, S. 397.)
Translation:[/list:u]
[list]
âNone are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.â[/list:u]
Quantum Physics and Plankâs constant are literally superstition and mysticism in place of science.
No part of the universe is naturally constructed of anti-matter.
And yes, I refer to it as âcommunal particleâ because it follows the same principles as a physics particle. And they also follow the same principles as molecules, even DNA molecules.
⊠and you might want to note that religions form and disperse by those exact same principles. A religion is merely a type of social âparticleâ ⊠all religions, even Human Secularism and its Science.
There cannot anything such which can be called Antimatter. The definition of the matter itself negates any such possibility.
It is bit like saying that we have positve electricity and neative electricity at the same time.
Secondly, this concept of the presence of 96% matter and 4% antimatter does not seem to be logical.
As some define antimatter as a opposite of matter, how 4% of antimatter would have survived that long since Big-Bang? Why it did not intract with the same amout of matter and destroyed at the very moment it came into existence?
The cause of the galaxies holding itselves is not antimatter but matter itself, a subtle kind of matter. We can call it Metaphysical Matter, if we want. This matter is yet to cross the threahold of our preceived Physical Matter, thus cannot detected by us yet and we think that there is a vacuum between the Galaxies.
But, there is no vacuum in the entire universe whatsoever. It cannot be. Every point of the space is filled with some form matter, whether physical or metaphysical.
And, by mataphysical, i am not referring to anything magical. Metaphysical matter means just too subtle of thin to be recognized by present available means. That is all. It is quite possible that one day we would be able to detect this metaphysical matter.
For example, we can devide our presently known matter into to categories; Atomic particles and Subatomic particles. Metaphysical particles is the third category, even beyond subatomic particles. Particles like Higgs-Bosan (if that is true) and even smaller than that fall in this category. These minuscule particles of the matter are present everywhere in the universe. Otherwise, light would have not reached to us from distant stars as its photons would have been dissipated for sure in the absoulte vacuum.
First of all, let me clarify that is my personal view.
As i see it, there is no religion nor science either. The only thing that pushed people all throughout the history is the quest of the knowledge. At its very core, religion is also a science and if we go by the use of the science, it is not less than a religion. For true scholars, whether religious or scientific, the methodology was the same and that was to invesgate in person.
A person who uses eletricity and its appliences, needs not to invent it like either Franklin or Faraday. In the same way, people need not to bear the sufferings of Jeuses or live in the caves of Himalayas for lifetime to practice morality in their daily life. But, it is applicable to those people only, who are only users of it. If one is scholar, he should question and investige everything, otherwise the progress would be checked in a way or other.
This is the precise point where many of the modern intellectuals made a mistake of assuming that religions are nothing but faith. Religions are faith only for those who want to use only its finding. The same is true for the science also. But, if one wants to be true religious scholar, faith would not be sufficient. He would have to go thorough all the process in person to gather the evidence. The evidence provided by the others would not work for him.
No one would be ever able to football just by reading the autobiography of either Pele or Madadona. There is lot to gap between reading and playing in the field.
Secondly, Most of the true religious scholars, always faced a dilemma. They got the evidence but not enough reasoning to explain it completely. They do not know how to put it systamatically as many intermediate stages in their ontologies were missing so they had no option but to fill the gap by mataphors.
Let me give an example to explain my point.
Let us assume that we have invented a time travel machine. And, by accident, a human from the 5th century is transported to the present. He finds himself in a lab and looks at this surrondings surprisingly. As it was going darker, a scientist walks to the wall and switches on a light. That ancient man looks surprising at the light and before he would be able to understand anything, scientists correct their mistake and that man was transported back to his time.
Now, given the understanding and mindset of that man, how would he explain that light in the lab to his people?
I am sure that he would say " Oh, humans have enslved the gods".
That is the language of the religious texts and sages/prophets are just like that person. They were not telling lies but their explanation was incomplete. They were ahead of their time and was unable to comprehend the event completely. Their ontologies lack details and even some steps. They skip many stages too.
Today we are in better position to explain the exidence but the problem is that we do not have such people anymore who can gather those evidence for us now. Thus, the problem is the same. We were handicappped in one aspect and the same is now in another aspect.
What we need desperately today is such a person/league who is capable to investige in depths in both fields and in person too.
Zinnat, I didnât say âthat religions are nothing but faithâ or that religion and science are very much different because I said that they have much to do with each other, but nevertheless: they are not the same, that is also clear. They have the same root: belief.
Every culture is inimitable, and the Faustian culture is a science culture. Most of science is Faustian science, thus Faustian culture.
Faustians have a never-satisfied thirst for knowledge. Therefore the typical Faustian cloisters, abbeys, and consequently the relatively free universities, the typical Faustian systems of education and science.
That all is unique. That all lacks- in Non-Faustian cultures.
Dear Zinnat, your response confirms my statement.
Again:
The root of religion, theology, philosophy, science, and something near is belief as a âFĂR WAHR HALTENâ - âHOLD FOR TRUEâ (âACCEPT AS TRUEâ); but science and philosophy are more elaborated and âhigherâ than religion and theology. For belief there are also two sides and ways: (1.) a practical side and way and (2.) a theoretical side and way. (1.) The practical belief leads to religion and perhaps, if becoming an elaborated form, to science; (2.) the theoretical belief leads to theology and perhaps, if becoming a higher form, to philosophy. All cultures have this sides and gone this two ways - but they did it differently. When the Westerners are saying that there is âa huge difference between religion and science and between theology and philosophyâ, then they are saying more about themselves and their culture because that differences are not as huge as the Westerners always assume.
The Faustian culture has been declining since a time when the number of its population began to increase exponentially because of its first steam engines and their consequences, then the number of its population stagnated, and since about 1970 the number of its population has been shrinking. But if you look at all those machines, then you can say that the Faustian culture has not been declining because all those machines are Faustian machines, and their number has been increasing exponentially since the first Faustian steam engine. Unfortunately - because of the danger - those machines are able to replace all human beings.
Am I a proud Faustian?
All cultures have a good and a bad side. If there were not a Faustian culture there would not be the typical Faustian cloisters, abbeys, and consequently the relatively free universities, the typical Faustian systems of education and science, the technical and consequently the economical and social progress with all its good and bad sides.
Now - please - letâs stick a bit more to the theme, the topic of this thread: âUniverse and Timeâ.
Not â96% matter and 4% antimatterâ, as you say, but 96% âdark matterâ and 4% matter, as they say (here).
Not â4% of antimatterâ but 96% âdark matterâ and merely 4% matter, Zinnat. They say (here): âIn modern physics almost the entire Universe is missing: 96 percent. We can only account for just 4 percent of the Universe. This is because we canât find enough mass in galaxies to maintain their rotational spiral shape and stop stars spinning off into deep space. To explain why galaxies are not breaking up mankind has come up with the idea that 96 percent of the Universe is Dark Matter! Dark Matter is just a name; we donât have a clue what it is. The only thing we know is that Dark Matter does not shine like stars or reflect light or give off any detectable radiation it just creates a gravitational pull.â
They just donât know what âdark matterâ really is.
âAntimatterâ merely refers to atoms that are formed by having a negative nucleus and positive orbitals (anti-protons and positrons) instead of the normal positive nucleus and negative orbitals (protons and electrons).
Antimatter naturally annihilates normal matter simply because the electron and positron are impedance matched and thus annihilate as well as the protons and anti-protons being impedance matched and thus annihilate. The release of radiant energy is horrendous.
And the âdarkmatter/energyâ they refer to is simply regions higher density Affectance in space, a natural and unavoidable occurrence.