Between belief and intuition

Transport and new transport: energy, pollution, engine innovations, concept car, hybrid vehicles, prototypes, pollution control, emission standards, tax. not individual transport modes: transport, organization, carsharing or carpooling. Transport without or with less oil.
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Between belief and intuition




by Janic » 06/02/14, 09:03

Flytox hello
Quote:
I rather think that you confuse belief and intuition in this case. It is the intuition which us ballad / makes advance but not obligatorily a belief (word much too strong).

Indeed, the two notions can, from certain angles, be confused. If you continue the article you will also find: " In its minimal sense, belief is a universal phenomenon which concerns all individuals, and in a certain way all living beings: to undertake an action, one must "believe" in the possibility of its realization. »What I said before and I didn't copy it, it's just a question of common sense, ... of intuition ???.
Quote:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croyance
Quote:
Belief is the mental process experienced by a person who dogmatically adheres to a thesis or hypotheses, so that he considers them as absolute truth or an irrefutable assertion, and this independently of the evidence, notably empirical, which attest or contest it credibility1 2.

Not necessarily, if I say I believe the sky is blue, is it the result of dogma? and if I consider it as an absolute truth, an irrefutable assertion, it is because it is the only possibility offered to me by culture, by "science" etc ... but the estimate of blue is abstract , subjective since it could just as easily have been called yellow or sock.
So we are referring to "dogmas" for lack of anything better.
There was a long debate, interrupted, on the evolution which is only a dogma too, a particular way of interpreting facts and yet the majority of the current population (French at least), believes it all by being unable to prove this belief.
Quote:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuition
Quote:
Intuition is a mode of knowledge, thought or judgment, perceived as immediate (in the direct sense); it is a faculty of the mind. The term intuition also designates a thought resulting from the action of this faculty. The field of intuition is broad: it concerns both actual knowledge (representation of the world) as well as feelings (about things) or motivations (to act). The word comes from the Latin intuitio, meaning an inner look, tueor, look.

Intuition seems to be immediate because it seems to operate without using reason or verbal thought, and is generally perceived as unconscious: only its conclusion is then available to conscious attention. Intuition would not operate by reasoning: it would never be the conclusion of an inference, at least consciously.

In addition, intuition often takes the form of a feeling of obviousness as to the truth or falsehood of a proposition, the assurance of which is all the more remarkable since it is often difficult to justify its relevance. For example, we will have the intuition that such an idea or action, such a feeling, is right, without knowing why. However, it is often possible to rationalize an intuition a posteriori.

Intuition is generally perceived as immediate, that is to say without mediation and not appealing to empiricism although it can in reality draw its relevance from memories buried in the unconscious or the subconscious; intuitions could be sort of syntheses resulting from information that we memorize and from perceptions that we are not aware of recording.

You do well, moreover, to also emphasize the notion of intuition! We could thus consider that Pascalou has the intuition that there is a parallelism between the Pantone system (not in its material dimension, but in its finality) and therefore believes itself to be in the duty to express it thus (after each reacts according to their culture and beliefs or beliefs). So intuition is more complex and therefore more subjective as well as a simple asserted belief, although the latter cannot exclude the initial intuition.
I have previously (I am not the original author) compared creator and creation with the watchmaker and the clock. It is intuition because in the impossibility of demonstrating it, nor of demonstrating the reverse. This then takes the form of evidence and turns into belief and it is valid for any subject.
Quote:
History clearly shows that this unnatural alliance (science / belief / religions) has done great damage and among other things brought great scholars to their loss:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galil%C3%A9e_%28savant%29

There you make a confusion between religious fanaticism which is only a degraded form, deviated from spirituality and the true spiritual science which consists in knowing, as well in material form as in its spiritual form, the whole of the world which surrounds us and of which we are only a tiny part. Materialism has led to considering only one aspect of it and has therefore adopted an anti-scientific attitude to this fact.
A true believer must accept the two possible dimensions where matter and spirit are only two (at least) sides of the same coin and cannot therefore be separated.

Quote:
This "symbiosis" material / spiritual vision does not bother me as long as it is not instrumented to make bladders take for lanterns ............

Me too, I am often disturbed by certain materialist formulations instrumentalized for the same purpose. But I do with it because I understand that each individual needs to consolidate his beliefs whether they are materialistic or religious. However, I recognize that the way of expressing it, where it is not necessarily expected, can surprise and disturb, hence the reasonable proposal not to mix two reflections which seem so distant from each other (I am used to it with parables, I found that quite interesting, but how many are used to decoding parables on this site?) and I completely adhere to it because it is useless to mix two modes of expressions where each one does not not understand.
Quote:
In addition, most of the great scientific discoveries were (and still are) made by believers, whatever their religions, with the aim of better understanding the beauty of the world and of giving Caesar what is Caesar and God, which belongs to God, ie creation.

“Most of the great discoveries” were made by believers when the population consisted of an overwhelming majority of believers.

In a way: yes! But not all philosophers shared popular beliefs (often timely and even today) and yet adhered to the principle of an extrahuman origin of the visible world and which, for the sake of language, people call god. We must not believe that the current unbelievable reflection is also the result of a conditioning of the mind
Quote:
Now that atheists are not proliferating at all, it is certain that this condition of believer influences in one way or another the quality or quantity of discoveries and this by returning to Caesar what is Caesar etc ...

It seems just as a reflection, but very far from reality. Atheism concerns only a tiny part of the population, but it has taken over the reins of education (or brainwashing, everyone has to choose their option) in schools and universities through the discrediting of religious systems ( It is the same thing in politics where the opposition becomes a majority and imposes its dogmas, its perception of the world which it wants to build, often in simple opposition in principle compared to the previous dogmas, but by taking up the same mechanisms.) but it's part of the game of influence, not of truths.
As I said earlier on another subject, humans lack imagination and only repeat schemes that have proven their effectiveness (in the absence of value!)
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 06/02/14, 09:37

Short version: belief is the intuition of others ...

: Cheesy:
0 x
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7




by elephant » 06/02/14, 10:31

In psychology there is a pyramid of drivers of human behavior, at the top of which are beliefs. (it has a name, I studied it, but I forgot it).

This is what pushes fanatics to commit suicide or to kill others, to build huge temples, to make their wives, etc.

It can start from an intuition, but is reinforced by education in the broad sense.

Intuition, it would rather be a click born of an informal reflection, of a "program loop which runs in the background in the brain" and which ends up appearing in the genre "damn it, but that's good sure".

It is very often the unconscious fruit of experience.
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 06/02/14, 12:20

Short version: belief is the intuition of others ...

to sows, to sows, it’s quickly said! : Cheesy:
more seriously belief is the conscious form of intuition.

elephant hello
This is what pushes fanatics to commit suicide or to kill others, to build huge temples, to make their wives, etc.
indeed it can also lead to extremes; the key is to know the proportion: 1%, 10%; 90%?
In reality, the fanatics are talked about through the media and cover with their noise everything that is silent.
0 x
User avatar
Pascalou
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 89
Registration: 23/01/14, 10:08
Location: Magdeburg, Germany




by Pascalou » 06/02/14, 21:14

I will add that atheism dates from the era of the "Enlightenment" (very black for my taste) in French culture, which will certainly pass quickly. It is for me a faith like any other, but what sadness it represents! The bing-bang is quite funny, just by its name, it is ridiculous! As if all this logic and planetary balance, bodily balance, the laws of physics that we are discussing on this forum, all this wonder of nature was the result of chance, or the bing bang!
But of course, besides, it is much more scientifically logical than to believe in creation!
0 x
The energy is unlimited, it is not a problem, man is the problem!
https://www.econologie.com/fichiers/partag ... xfBlcC.doc
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 06/02/14, 21:52

Energy is unlimited, it is not a problem, man is the problem!

and unlimited use of energy will solve this problem! : Cheesy:
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 07/02/14, 08:11

pascalou hello
But of course, it is much more scientifically logical than believing in creation!
No, it is not more scientifically logical than to say that a submarine is more scientifically logical than an airplane, their purpose is not the same. The submarine is in relation to the water element, the plane in relation to the air element.
for the big bang, it is a substitute for creation: at the beginning there is nothing, then big or bang and by magic the non-existent becomes existing, Some call it god, others chance and most n don't know or care.
0 x
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7




by elephant » 07/02/14, 08:47

The BIG bang, Pascalou! not the bing-bang!

It is already much less ridiculous, and it is a fellow citizen of Canon Lemaître who has already met several of his former students who tells you.

And let's not forget one of the most important assumptions of science:
"everything happens as if ...." (implied: until we find something else)
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 07/02/14, 10:47

Why all these controversies? With evangelists, punctuating each sentence or idea with a Jesus Christ is as natural with them as with materialists with punctuating each sentence or idea with a scientifically proven ... or not. It is a cultural mechanism which can disturb in certain discourses which claim to be only (according to what criteria?) Materialistic.
For the anecdote, when I was conscripted, there were people from all regions of France and who punctuated their sentence by: damn, asshole, ... "And other precious words, especially black feet, which constantly returned:" damn your mother And everyone invoked this formulation with a smile. Falsely naive, I asked the question: " your mother is a whore, then? Which provoked an understandable reaction. This is the culture, the habits of language that only strike those who are not used to it. Our "republican" culture is itself steeped in its religious past and no longer pays much attention to it. Christmas is celebrated by a part of the population who calls themselves an atheist, the calendar year was instituted by a pope, these same non-believers frequently say: " You're welcome »Which is a religious formula, they get married (other religious institutions recovered by a secular state, but in fact atheist,) etc ... then we must go over considering that it is only a formula« boat »and trivialize it as much as invoking chance, Kant or Marx Buddha!
0 x
User avatar
Pascalou
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 89
Registration: 23/01/14, 10:08
Location: Magdeburg, Germany




by Pascalou » 07/02/14, 10:59

I agree with you Janic, so you can't prove anything, nothing makes more sense than anything else, and like you said, even the arguments don't prove anything!
A person who has traveled and knows cultures very different from the centuries will see that everything he sees and judges "normal" is quite different a few thousand km from home. Its "normality", and all that a man considers normal is a small world which is very far from the real reality, and even if some realities are the same everywhere (we all have eyes, the laws of physics are real everywhere, whatever only on earth, go see in a black hole if our physics works!)
Everything is extremely subjective, even the greatest objectivity. So a person who does not accept another point of view is an intolerant. Criticizing this point of view is everyone's freedom. To prevent or exclude a person because he has another point of view is aggression.
In some Asian countries, we eat dogs, cats, smiles, snakes, we find it disgusting, yet it is their culture, it is to be respected, as their beliefs, their customs. It's called respect for others, and accepting of others.
But back to our subject :
Let's take an idea x
Intuition is only the birth of this idea x, belief is to believe in this idea x, faith is more or less objective validation that this idea represents truth.
So a scientific reflection can very well represent an act of faith:
I am pondering why this variant x reacts in such and such a way, I believe it is for this reason y. I therefore choose to scientifically test this reason there. Finally it works! So I have faith (or certainty) that reason y teaches me more about the x variant. If it doesn't work, then I'll test for reason z, and so on.
This science can be physical, spiritual, metaphysical ... but remains and will always remain subjective, and as Elephant says, until we find something else.
0 x
The energy is unlimited, it is not a problem, man is the problem!

https://www.econologie.com/fichiers/partag ... xfBlcC.doc

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "New transport: innovations, engines, pollution, technologies, policies, organization ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 205 guests