« Don't let illusory scarcity scare you into religion | Main | Christian missionary killed by remote tribe shows idiocy of religion »

November 25, 2018


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Hi Brian

You wrote

"Religion and mysticism, on the other hand, are thoroughly mental pursuits."

Sadly this is a straw man. Religion and spirituality are lifestyles that involve reality testing all the time.

Meditation is actually a means of sharpening our ability to think clearly and has been shown to improve brain health and cognitive functioning; ie,
Understanding and dealing with this outer reality.

By over generalizing all religions and spirituality together in this way your argument is readily dismantled.

Further, after setting up an argument for observation and testing you then quote an author praising the opposite:

"The ability to understand something before it's observed is at the heart of scientific thinking.....

" In a similar way, Einstein understood that time does not pass uniformly everywhere before the development of clocks accurate enough to measure the different speeds at which it passes.

In the course of making such strides, we learn that the things that seemed self-evident to us were really no more than prejudices."

It is observation and testing in combination with solid theory that makes for good science. Einstein expanded upon hard scientific results in experiments with light. Those came first.

But there is, like religion and mysticism, good and bad thinking in the practice and interpretation of science.

I've never really wrapped my head around the concept of relativity. Yes, apparently this paradigm is spectacularly successful in explaining past observations and making predictions, and therefore it is "true", nevertheless -- like quantum mechanics -- the actual ramifications of this theory, in terms of how one actually sees the world in light of these theroies, escape me.

I admit this frankly despite having put in my share of reading on this subject (from a layman's perspective, that is).

If this book can actually tell you how to think of relative, non-absolute time in an everyday sense, and if you can trannslate that insight for us, then I for one will be very grateful!

Believers in religion or mysticism never get outside of their own heads. They live in a world of concepts, imagination, and other forms of subjective experience. They're never able to demonstrate that they've contacted a reality which isn't the world in which we all live, yet they claim that such exists.

Brian, how do you know where they "get"? Why do you even

By the way, I see there's been an "or" lumping of religion
and mysticism. They're not compatible. A shotgun wedding
in a blog church won't make it so either, Mysticism is
very much an experiential discipline; whereas religion
relies heavily on blind faith.

Mystics aren't demo'ing "moon rocks" from inner journeys
or touting scientific discoveries of the physical world.
There is no "holy dogma". No recruiting drives. No TV

They do describe the reality they've contacted. They do
assert their experiences are provable, repeatable, salutary.
Science has verified the benefits of a meditative practice
as well.

But announce a circus side show to perform tricks or write
scholarly articles for the curious? No. How would a reality
beyond time-space be explained. Mystics only tell stories,
spin yarns, metaphorize, offer appealing hints.

Mystics can and do report what they've experienced within
though. They do explain and instruct others in the mystic
discipline. But that's all. They never assert more than

There's no conflict with science. The problems come from
conjectures without relevant experience. The psycho-babble
of zealotry. The fear and suspicion of what was never really

@ Brian - I have read that book and I’m afraid there is nothing reality about it. On time he fails.

Sorry you must snap out of this delusional belief that you will find solace in science. You won’t my friend - if you had a chance I would not be writing this.

All the best

Arjuna, Rovelli is a theoretical physicist who specializes in understanding the nature of time. You've just an ordinary person with an ordinary sense of time. So who should we believe? I'm going with Rovelli, and so should you.

Several physics historians today simply ignore the influences on Einstein at the time, including the work with Crooke's Radiometer.

How can the interaction of light and matter cause the matter to move if the light has zero mass? This was a serious cause of concern at a time when physics thought they had established Huygen's theory of light as waves (and disproved Newton's theory of light as particles). But a wave with zero mass cannot cause friction or heat in matter, and from such heat differentials, push the Crooke's vane in circles, from nothing but exposure to light.

The invention and test results of Crooke's Radiometer were causing a stir all on their own. It was this existing environment of controversy which Einstein entered.

There was consideration that light might exist as particles that behave as waves, with the capacity to influence matter as though it had mass. But mathematically it made no sense.

Einstein connected the dots in his thought experiments brilliantly, but in truth simply provided the deciding theoretical evidence to a possibility hotly debated and in serious consideration at the time. His solution was the quanta, which had properties of both.

And of course he did this using his imagination as a guide, conducting "thought experiments" including imagining to precise accuracy the experience of riding along a beam of light.

His ability to have such internal experiences was crucial to understanding our world, and to bringing that Insight to the scientific world.

Hi guys, have you heard of Derren Brown, British mentalist and illusionist?

This short video shows how easily our subconscious mind can be manipulated...

Derren Brown Tricks Advertisers With Subliminal Messaging (7:02)


@ Brian - yes I agree I’m an ordinary person and that is all I will ever be - however an ordinary person with an open mind.

But you appear now more ordinary than most - the scientist you quote writes eloquently but they are concepts of his mind based on the foundations laid laid by other great minds who studied the inside of the container but yet knew nothing of what was outside the container.

I wish you all the best in following the dictates of the mind - I hope it helps you when you need rescue from the mind - one day. But not yet.

All the best

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.