felix dakat wrote:I used stardust to illustrate the fact that common sense is an inadequate guide for explaining natural phenomena. I did not mean to imply that star dust is connected to the ultimate origin of everything what, it seems, you understood me to be arguing.
It doesn't look like you've shown that common sense is really inadequate guide for explaining "natural phenomena". Because first it would come down to what is the criterion for an explanation itself, which seems tough to answer. Second, it would look like start-dust doesn't really say much, but just going beyond what we could actually find it, which is like trying to come up with some "ultimate origin", while that is way more theoretical, in the sense that it goes beyond a simpler common sense answer.
What IS common sense? I think THAT needs defining! When I speak of "common sense" I mean it in a completely personal way, not necessarily applicable to anyone else. So, correct, on that basis, common sense certainly DOES NOT explain natural phenomena, but it does to me, not from any particular scientific discipline background (grade 12 saw me hit the streets to work!) or subsequent reading, although I've read hundreds of fascinating science fiction. My "common sense" comes mostly from observation, from "listening" beyond hearing. I listen to everything and I analyze what I hear. I listen to nature, the birds, the ever-changing winds, the waves, the thunder. I listen to the world of man (and cringe!) and I listen to "Teachers" (not of this world) and I listen to dreams.
I was taught this: "Nothing is impossible." A play on words? Perhaps. It is impossible for there to be nothing? But of course: how can there BE nothing, unless it is something? Or, everything is possible. Here's another: "As below so above." Man has turned that around so it makes no sense, but it remains, as here, so there. We can make things from what is, and so can a universe make things from what it comes from and it can grow. What is "God" but simply that which is forever out of the reach of our understanding? We create problems out of God because we insist on anthropomorphing (is there such a word?) or making God in our own image, rather than using God as a sling-shot effect to project ourselves ever farther into that Star-Trek unknown "where no man has gone before."
Here's a dream I had many years ago while resting from an exhausting paddle up the Fraser River. I was lying in tall, coarse grasses near the water, listening to the sussuration of the wind in the grass and the repetitive sploshing of wavelets on a carved muddy shore. The sky was darkening as a storm rolled in from the West but I wanted to be in it, so resisted the temptation to head back home. I fell asleep and dreamed. I lifted out of my body and rose above the earth, farther and farther, out of the solar system and out past the galaxy until I came to a white place with no distinguishable features. I entered this place and sitting on a white "bench" made of the same substance as everything else was an elder of gentle face. He had long white hair, a long beard, a robe with a hood thrown back. He sat unmoving as I watched him. So I decided to break the silence. I said, "So this is it? You are God and this is the end of the line for me? That's what it's been all about?" He turned to me very slowly and I saw the kindness and humor in his face. He laughed, pointed to the "north" and I saw a wall in the white substance, and in the wall the outline of a very large door. He pointed to the door and said, "I have yet to go through that one." I understood then, the concept of infinity! And I realized I was as much a part of that as that entity sitting there thinking about his next move. And the dream was over. I returned back the way I came, much faster this time, and I was ecstatic. It made sense - everything made sense. I rode the river in a wonderful storm.
I have another name for God: the Cosmos. However we developed or evolved, we are children of the cosmos and we are always at home. You can be a person of the most intent faith, for God as in religious, or against as in atheism, but that changes nothing. Those are the notes on the page, not
the symphony. To understand the symphony one has to listen to the music of the spheres and the voices of the dead for they are what we were.