Pardon me, I have never read that book, fairly well known in the US.
Thanks for showing me one of the first pages of your life.
Info on heaven
- Thread starter Gerhard Kemmerer
- Start date
Pardon me, I have never read that book, fairly well known in the US.
Thanks for showing me one of the first pages of your life.
I've read Two Years Before The Mast. Yes it is very realistic. The scurvy is so bad they have to get onions from another ship to save one guy's life. The gross thing about scurvy, apparently, is when you push your finger into your flesh, the flesh just stays poked in.
Most of the two years are in fact spent onshore in wild and wooly California where the sailors scrape cowhide clean. Yes, it's boring and a cheat: that's exactly what the protagonists feels.
My recommendation: if you're only going to read one book this year - read something else!
Most of the two years are in fact spent onshore in wild and wooly California where the sailors scrape cowhide clean. Yes, it's boring and a cheat: that's exactly what the protagonists feels.
My recommendation: if you're only going to read one book this year - read something else!
The universality of some concepts as possibly explained in the context of embodied cognition:
George Lakoff: "The postmodernists were right that some concepts can change over time and vary across cultures. But they were wrong in suggesting that all concepts are like that. Thousands are not. They arise around the world in culture after culture from our common embodiment. [...] Abstract concepts are largely metaphorical, based on metaphors that make use of our sensory-motor capacities to perform abstract inferences. Thus, abstract reason, on a large scale, appears to arise from the body." (A Talk with George Lakoff)
- - - - - -
Concerning Lakoff's take on embodied cognition, further extracts:
[...] This startling collection of results [in research] pointed toward the idea that mind was not disembodied - not characterizable in terms of the manipulation of meaningless symbols independent of the brain and body, that is, independent of the sensory-motor system and our functioning in the world. Mind instead is embodied, not in the trivial sense of being implementable in a brain, but in the crucial sense that conceptual structure and the mechanisms of reason arise ultimately and are shaped by from the sensory-motor system of the brain and body. [...] There is a huge body of work supporting this view.
[...] Colors and color categories are not "out there" in the world [...] Color concepts and color-based inferences are thus structured by our bodies and brains.
Basic-level categories are structured in terms of gestalt perception, mental imagery, and motor schemas. In this way the body and the sensory-motor system of the brain enters centrally into our conceptual systems.
Spatial relations concepts in languages around the world (e.g, in, through, around in English, sini in Mixtec, mux in Cora, and so on) are composed of the same primitive "image-schemas", that is, schematic mental images. These, in turn, appear to arise from the structure of visual and motor systems. This forms the basis of an explanation of how we can fit language and reasoning to vision and movement.
Aspectual concepts (which characterize the structure of events) appear to arise from neural structures for motor control.
Categories make use of prototypes of many sorts to reason about the categories as a whole. Those prototypes are characterized partly in terms of sensory-motor information.
Abstract concepts are largely metaphorical, based on metaphors that make use of our sensory-motor capacities to perform abstract inferences. Thus, abstract reason, on a large scale, appears to arise from the body.
These are the results most striking to me. They require us to recognize the role of the body and brain in human reason and language. They thus run contrary to any notion of a disembodied mind. It was for such reasons that I abandoned my earlier work on generative semantics and started studying how mind and language are embodied. They are among the results that have led to a second-generation of cognitive science, the cognitive science of the embodied mind.
What a timely reply, when so many philosophies have tried to separate the experience of the mind apart from the body and visa versa.
There is something about our very biology that generates what we think and how we perceive our world, and therefor we can expect many similarities across cultures and eras, as well as variety from the same source of experience.
It is very interesting where your study will lead and it will no doubt reveal a clearer understanding on our ancestors, legends and history.
There is something about our very biology that generates what we think and how we perceive our world, and therefor we can expect many similarities across cultures and eras, as well as variety from the same source of experience.
It is very interesting where your study will lead and it will no doubt reveal a clearer understanding on our ancestors, legends and history.
Yazata;2949811 The ancients often imagined 'the heavens' as a huge dome over the Earth. The stars were conceived as being tiny moving lights up on the dome. The Moon was a bigger light said:
that would be us...
...and that would be you?
we are simple (ignorant), you are knowledgeable?
really? you don't suppose that would have anything to do with the fact that "sky" and "heaven" are one and the same word in Latin - caelis
and what are we being fed now?
What tradition is that? If you want to know the history and etymology from the actual tradition that coined the word, you should refer its founder, the Catholic Church. Here's their take on the subject:
Heaven (Anglo-Saxon heofon, O.S. hevan and himil, originally himin) corresponds to the Gothic himin-s. Both heaven and himil are formed from himin by a regular change of consonants: heaven, by changing m before n into v; and himil, by changing n of the unaccented ending into l. Some derive heaven from the root ham, "to cover" (cf. the Gothic ham-ôn and the German Hem-d). According to this derivation heaven would be conceived as the roof of the world. Others trace a connection between himin (heaven) and home; according to this view, which seems to be the more probable, heaven would be the abode of the Godhead. The Latin coelum (koilon, a vault) is derived by many from the root of celare "to cover, to conceal" (coelum, "ceiling" "roof of the world"). Others, however think it is connected with the Germanic himin. The Greek ouranos is probably derived from the root var, which also connotes the idea of covering. The Hebrew name for heaven is thought to be derived from a word meaning "on high"; accordingly, heaven would designate the upper region of the world.
In the Holy Bible the term heaven denotes, in the first place, the blue firmament, or the region of the clouds that pass along the sky. Genesis 1:20, speaks of the birds "under the firmament of heaven". In other passages it denotes the region of the stars that shine in the sky. Furthermore heaven is spoken of as the dwelling of God; for, although God is omnipresent, He manifests Himself in a special manner in the light and grandeur of the firmament. Heaven also is the abode of the angels; for they are constantly with God and see His face. With God in heaven are likewise the souls of the just (2 Corinthians 5:1; Matthew 5:3, 12). In Ephesians 4:8 sq., we are told that Christ conducted to heaven the patriarchs who had been in limbo (limbus patrum). Thus the term heaven has come to designate both the happiness and the abode of just in the next life.
In the Holy Bible the term heaven denotes, in the first place, the blue firmament, or the region of the clouds that pass along the sky. Genesis 1:20, speaks of the birds "under the firmament of heaven". In other passages it denotes the region of the stars that shine in the sky. Furthermore heaven is spoken of as the dwelling of God; for, although God is omnipresent, He manifests Himself in a special manner in the light and grandeur of the firmament. Heaven also is the abode of the angels; for they are constantly with God and see His face. With God in heaven are likewise the souls of the just (2 Corinthians 5:1; Matthew 5:3, 12). In Ephesians 4:8 sq., we are told that Christ conducted to heaven the patriarchs who had been in limbo (limbus patrum). Thus the term heaven has come to designate both the happiness and the abode of just in the next life.
No sister, no city...just the same traditional view commonly seen in all the art and literature for nearly 2000 years.
In the 4th century, the ascension of Jesus into heaven involves climbing, not blasting off:
6th century: wings and clouds.
and the better known 16th Michelangelo Sistine Chapel panorama, esp. the Creation of Adam. It's all about sky, floating, flying, etc. But no sister, and no exoplanets, no city either.
It seems odd to refer to an extremely old tradition as if the people who created and followed it were being misled. What does that even mean? Tradition is simply what they thought, believed, talked, wrote, sang, painted, carved, sculpted, and sermonized about. That's about as objective as you can get in the field of history.
No, I was not referring to you, but about people in all ages, and the general pattern of social learning. It is not a derogatory statement about common people who are the backbone of society. And I don't include myself as an independent thinker, but more a common collector of anothers.
Thanks for the quote from a traditional source, although such explanations by the church were written as general guidelines, which did not necessarily reflect what some individuals were studying in their institutions. Remember how keen they were at "extracting" knowledge from scientists and researchers. And here we find that latin is not the oldest language by any means, and that the Catholic church is not the only source of knowledge, even though it reigned for over a thousand years.
The term elder sister is used in Judaistic writings, and appears in allegories about heaven and earth.
Last edited:
Quite right, I have found that they have customised many traditional beliefs like quoted above, to make them more attractive and modern.
Not too many religions 'humanise' God to be in particular place.
A few references indicate the size of heaven, but the Christian Bible which includes Jewish traditions, has the most detail so far as the physical view is concerned.
This helped me to find many contexts where the opinions of other peoples and tribes fell into place. But this also puzzled me because the majority of modern Christians have spiritualised heaven away until it is a ghost land.
But the founders of many modern churches, like the reformers, believed in and taught a literal heaven. This is even evident in the markings on grave stones, with sentences like "Awaiting the blessed resurrection," "Sleeping until Christ returns," etc.
One reason people dismiss the dimensions given in the last book of the Bible, is that the city is as high as it is wide, measuring about 375 miles wide and high. But the error occurred when they reduced its original size, because it was too big for the conservatives. The size is given as 12,000 furlongs in length and breadth, and it lies square with equal height.
They took that measurement and made it the perimeter, reducing the front to a quarter of its described size.
I found that when you take the literal size and put it on a planet roughly the size of earth, that the angle of incline drops down to less than 25 degrees.
The measurement of height is also taken from a single standing point from the corner of the city, along the profile of the City or Mountain. Also the city is built into the planet by a valley created for it, one that has lifted valleys all around to reduce the incline almost to zero in some places. This explains why heaven can be a level city, or a giant mountain at the same time without contradiction. The diagonal size of heaven is as wide as our moon.
This helped me to find many contexts where the opinions of other peoples and tribes fell into place. But this also puzzled me because the majority of modern Christians have spiritualised heaven away until it is a ghost land.
But the founders of many modern churches, like the reformers, believed in and taught a literal heaven. This is even evident in the markings on grave stones, with sentences like "Awaiting the blessed resurrection," "Sleeping until Christ returns," etc.
One reason people dismiss the dimensions given in the last book of the Bible, is that the city is as high as it is wide, measuring about 375 miles wide and high. But the error occurred when they reduced its original size, because it was too big for the conservatives. The size is given as 12,000 furlongs in length and breadth, and it lies square with equal height.
They took that measurement and made it the perimeter, reducing the front to a quarter of its described size.
I found that when you take the literal size and put it on a planet roughly the size of earth, that the angle of incline drops down to less than 25 degrees.
The measurement of height is also taken from a single standing point from the corner of the city, along the profile of the City or Mountain. Also the city is built into the planet by a valley created for it, one that has lifted valleys all around to reduce the incline almost to zero in some places. This explains why heaven can be a level city, or a giant mountain at the same time without contradiction. The diagonal size of heaven is as wide as our moon.
K
keith1
Guest
Using the asteroids abundant resource materials, a "modular mountain" complex is envisioned to be constructed to reach heights outside the atmospheric orbits, for ease of orbital transition, and to increase the Earth's "habitable spaces", while remaining anchored, or fixed to Earth's foundation.
This is like an old dream transfixed in the ancient human psyche.
In archaeological findings that seems to be the case, at least in regards to the mentality of man, nothing has changed really, although I have not found the asteroid resource idea - as yet!
Cities were built around pyramids or towers, with ambitions of creating a central economic base. Tradition has it that the tower of Babel was such an attempt. From what I have gathered it was originally a couple of miles wide and supposed to have reached 3,000 ft. If it was ruined then it has not been identified as yet, because all the places claiming to be the original site are far too small.
The inhabitable space of heaven would be approximately 8,000 square miles, or about 2/3 of Africa. Some legends and scientific concepts suggest that the world before the flood or at some time was a single continent, and about five times higher than Mt Everest, which is nothing compared to heaven, but then again, the earth was supposed to be a replica of some sort.
I love the pic!
On heaven moving more into the spiritual plain, I've often wondered if science has been an influence. As more things are revealed about our natural world science easily discourages the ideas popular amongst people 2000 -1000 years ago. Such as a real physical heaven, an immortal body or rising up from death. As a consequence these ideas gradually moved away from our real world experience. Take flat earth theory, People thought the earth was flat and on a giant tortoise, they made reference to real world things to explain the world around them. Native Americans believed the wind was a spirit, so was the water, it wasn't until after, I would argue, that the idea of spirit existing in another plain began to materialize. Reincarnation is another example of real world expression.
Now the question is begged to be asked, was the real world expression just an attempt by the commoner to understand something more profound in regards to human experience? Inadvertently perpetuating real world explanation? Out of body experiences hint at a much different understanding of our reality and so does schizophrenia. Perhaps those who'd experienced out of body things were trying to explain their experiences and the common man having no point of reference materialized it. Even today, skeptics would argue that out of body experiences related to death are just that, death of the brain, because their perspectives don’t allow any other conclusion, they just assume the experience will cease.
All interesting stuff
Now the question is begged to be asked, was the real world expression just an attempt by the commoner to understand something more profound in regards to human experience? Inadvertently perpetuating real world explanation? Out of body experiences hint at a much different understanding of our reality and so does schizophrenia. Perhaps those who'd experienced out of body things were trying to explain their experiences and the common man having no point of reference materialized it. Even today, skeptics would argue that out of body experiences related to death are just that, death of the brain, because their perspectives don’t allow any other conclusion, they just assume the experience will cease.
All interesting stuff
Last edited:
There are a number of points you have bought up, so I can only respond to one or two, but what you are saying of interpretations about the connections between the spiritual and the physical worlds is evident across the board. The shifts in view have changed under different empires and with different tribal folk, as you mentioned. I like the reasons you give for it as well.
Out of body experiences is an unavoidable topic. Science has a number of reasonable conclusions about it, one that appeals to me is that the hormones or chemicals in the brain can continue communication and construction of thought patterns even after the direct electric functions have ceased.
The chemicals can continue to shift and change by 'habit.'
Once the electrical part kicks back in, you get the reconstruction of those changes. But the person had no conscious living while gone.
The question is, how come we hear of accurate descriptions of events that transpired while the patient was brain dead.
There are plenty of examples of how people can do amazing mind and body feats, sometimes after brain damage, when the electrical side has been held back or hampered. It seems like there are supportive chemical processes that work for the subconscious which can give outstanding results.
Some of those abilities are demonstrated by sevants. One of them is to be able to reconstruct past events and even future events with unusual accuracy, just by a few clues.
Another ability is to be able to understand and construct an aerial view of your own city without ever flying over it, and so on.
Out of body experiences is an unavoidable topic. Science has a number of reasonable conclusions about it, one that appeals to me is that the hormones or chemicals in the brain can continue communication and construction of thought patterns even after the direct electric functions have ceased.
The chemicals can continue to shift and change by 'habit.'
Once the electrical part kicks back in, you get the reconstruction of those changes. But the person had no conscious living while gone.
The question is, how come we hear of accurate descriptions of events that transpired while the patient was brain dead.
There are plenty of examples of how people can do amazing mind and body feats, sometimes after brain damage, when the electrical side has been held back or hampered. It seems like there are supportive chemical processes that work for the subconscious which can give outstanding results.
Some of those abilities are demonstrated by sevants. One of them is to be able to reconstruct past events and even future events with unusual accuracy, just by a few clues.
Another ability is to be able to understand and construct an aerial view of your own city without ever flying over it, and so on.
K
keith1
Guest
Virtual reality effects mimicking flight, dream-states, mapping, surreal role-playing environs, perspectives exclusive to enhancing aspects of individuality....would effect such dynamics, if such was actually present, as has been discussed here. The computer may be adjusting more than can be analyzed at this time...
It is interesting how artificial intelligence can only be 'real' if variables are thrown into the equations, and that the outcome is not a feared chaos but a workable world, as if the very mathematics of nature centre on freedom and not constraint. It seems like our conscious minds limit that rescource for some reason, or maybe we only take what we need.
Conscience experience is not reducible so we can't apply the scientific method. Instead we rely on what else is happening in the brain and draw out tentative connections in the name of science.
Last edited:
Interesting, thank you for that post, I'd never heard about the role of chemicals on the subconscious mind that use real world examples.
On the aerial view, I'd like to learn more about that. I've only watched a documentary where a savant was able to draw, with amazing accuracy, a city's features from the air because he spent some time in a high building studying a panoramic view of the city. Then he later drew a panorama of the city. What you're suggesting is much more profound and I'd love to learn more.
Last edited: