4 ms·
I think you're talking about something completely different now. I was just picking on your line about going from the "old answer" that the earth was 6000 year
by 52-6F-62 5y ago
I think you're talking about something completely different now.
I was just picking on your line about going from the "old answer" that the earth was 6000 years old to the "new answer" of science-based reasoning. I didn't mean to come across as confrontational—like I said, just going on a tangent.
So I'm saying that timeline never happened. Animism and universal consciousness, various planes of existence and dimensional properties are concepts that appear to stretch throughout human history. Most leadership participated on a more esoteric level of mysticism throughout human history (even if they themselves didn't fully grasp it). Dogmatic religion was a convenient teaching tool that grew to overpower its creators and operate on its own accord (another tangent). It's best not to mix up its use as a allegorical teaching tool and tool of exercising power and what humans at large have considered a well-considered cosmological model—something that hasn't really fundamentally changed, even with the aid of science. And not out of ignorance, but that sciences like physics have even hinted at some of the old models being consistent. Enough so that it made some real interesting characters out of people who had a sound grasp of chemistry and quantum theories like Jack Parsons who could never extricate the old models with his own growing understanding, even if it was not accurate or complete. It's pretty fascinating to read about.
- hutzlibu 5y ago"I think you're talking about something completely different now." I meant the same theme: That thinking about the universe beyound materialistic advantages can indeed have other advantages - by helping create us societies, closer to our true nature. And not let some dogmatic priest declare that for us. No confrontation ;) And sure, there is no single timeline. I think some ancient philosophic concepts might be closer to the truth, than some mathematic approximations we use today. But mathematic based science is a very powerful tool, for getting verification. So it is indeed fascinating, to see where we are heading.