Author Topic: The Link Between Science and The Philosophy of Life  (Read 407 times)

Asmodean Prime

  • Tech Admin
  • Administrator
  • Doesn't Believe in Mother Goose
  • *****
  • Posts: 151
  • Father Of All Asmos
The Link Between Science and The Philosophy of Life
« on: December 14, 2006, 10:37:51 PM »
[color=#] [/color]

Over the last three years I have been exploring the connections between the laws of space, time and causality, and the way they shape material existence. Life, quite naturally, conforms to the same universal laws.

This approach yields a phenomenally powerful and yet unobjectionably simple context within which to understand our existence from a rational perspective. It is, if I can be so bold, the atheists answer to the bible. It explains life's meaning, our sense of the spiritual, morality, love, art... you name it, all without leaving the realm of rational, objective logic.

To spare you all a very long post, I'll refer you to my website, where I have posted the entire text of the book. For those who like to read paper, you can also buy the book via my site]http://www.martingwalker.com/page3.html[/url]

Please let me know what you think. If you like the book, please spread the word.

Thanks!
martin
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Anonymous »

McQ

  • Administrator
  • Has an Invisible Dragon in Their Garage
  • *****
  • Posts: 3672
  • Foolproof and capable of terror.
(No subject)
« Reply #1 on: December 15, 2006, 03:36:27 AM »
Speaking of spammers and self-promotion...

I'd say welcome, Martin, but you've already made yourself look like a troll by popping in to promote your website and book.

Thanks for stopping by.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by McQ »
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Jillette

Whitney

  • Global Moderator
  • Don't Pray in My School, and I Won't Think in Your Church
  • *****
  • Posts: 7358
  • Gender: Female
  • Mysteriously Absent - Like God
    • http://fellowshipoffreethought.org
(No subject)
« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2006, 07:31:05 PM »
A few weeks back someone e-mailed me about sending a copy of their book to me...only didn't send anything with that e-mail...he was actually asking where he should send it (I thought that was strange since he obviously already had my e-mail addy).  Anyway, I told him to either provide me with the full text in e-mail format or post it on the forum....so, I guess this could be the same guy; yet the addys don't match up.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Whitney »

Whitney

  • Global Moderator
  • Don't Pray in My School, and I Won't Think in Your Church
  • *****
  • Posts: 7358
  • Gender: Female
  • Mysteriously Absent - Like God
    • http://fellowshipoffreethought.org
(No subject)
« Reply #3 on: December 18, 2006, 09:48:49 AM »
Marting, I have some questions about your book (constructive criticism too):

1)  Who is your intended audience?  I'm asking because you assume there will be an agreement that morality has an absolute basis, when I know many atheists would disagree (there are a lot of relativists out there).

2)  Just a comment, but i'd take out the architecture analogy in part 1...it muddies up what you are trying to say for anyone who's in that field.

3) From the description of the book I was under the impression that it was going to attempt to explain why the universe exists rather than why what we see exists rather than something else.  Do you feel that your explaination is much different then how others have described the way life came from non-life...if so, how?  

4) "The most immediate and fundamental impression of all (before sight, sound, smell, touch, taste) is the impression of our physical being, our sense of our own physicality. The first and fundamental concept is the differentiation of self from nonself."

I'm not sure if I can agree here, especially since the baby example seems to imply that we first act on impulse created by senses then later come to understand ourselves as individuals.  Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what you were trying to say about the nature of self identification.

5)  "By defining goodness through the concept of persistence, we have brought it under the class of pure concepts. We have uncovered the absolute basis of morality."

Persistence of life, species, or individual?  Depending on which sort of persistence it is based on there will be drastic differences in what could be considered appropriate.

I stopped reading at Ethics, Government, and Justice as Conceptual Objects (basicaly a marker for my own benefit if I read more later after the above is clarified)
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Whitney »