Exactly my points. Those 3 things (possibilities, potential, dynamism) are treated by science as non-existents. Pragmatism dominates and limits. This may tie into my thread about value as well.
I have a dictionary. What I don’t have is a peephole into your mind. I know what the words mean but I don’t know what you mean by the words in this particular context.
You write three sentences and they mean something to you … they probably mean a lot to you. They don’t mean much to anyone else.
You speaking on the behalf of everyone else is like science speaking on the behalf of the nature of reality. I have issues with the effectiveness of scientific methods and approaches. Science ignores and discounts too much of what those 3 words I defined just for you can bring to the table of progress, of knowledge, of truth.
I speak as someone who is separate from you … I have no idea what you are talking about. I suspect that I am not alone. I cannot be certain of that but I think that it’s a reasonable suspicion.
If others understand what you are saying, then by all means, let them come forward and discuss it with you. Maybe they will explain it to me. Maybe not.
“sci·ence-
the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.”
Is this definition of science agreeable to you? If not, humor me with one that is.
I firmly believe that God is Math, and thus everything is a number game in the end. The only real problem is to have the perfect mathematical foundations, which are impossible when metaphysics is left out.
The darwinian philosophy gave us scientism, enough is enough, they are failed experiments.
Just a coincidence? Well not exactly: Marty Leeds Live at the Isabel Bader Theatre, Toronto Canada (must watch and keep your remarks til the end). Marty links all belief systems, their universality and human’s 10 fingers youtube.com/watch?v=jS2-UJBrDoc