Sciene Vs Myth

Mythology as in mystifying things that science now attempts to explain through logic.

Mystifying something encourages the imagination, thevisualization of things thus engaging two sides of the brain at once as the person learning has to think both logically and creativly to fully understand what is being taught.

Logical science is therefore inferior to a cultural/mystical explaination as it only engages one side of the brain, the logical as well as being subbornly anti - relgious. A belief in science is the belief that there is no God as he cannot be logically explained.

Definition of Science;

Science seeks to understand how nature behaves by observing and correlating available factual information. Our understanding of science is therefore based upon, and limited by, the factual information available. In science, fact-based explanations are called "theories." Theories may be good, bad, or indifferent.


[align=center]http://www.fsteiger.com/sci-def.html[/align]
[align=left]
Definition of Myth


In this document the word "myth" will be defined as a story of forgotten or vague origin, basically religious or supernatural in nature, which seeks to explain or rationalize one or more aspects of the world or a society.
[/align]
[align=center]http://www.pantheon.org/articles/m/mythology.html[/align]


[align=left]Myth tends to add a personality to an element that otherwise wouldn't have one in science.
[/align]
[align=left]The element of air in Hindu mythology for example;
[/align]
[align=left]Raikva said: "There is this great cosmic air or wind which is an absorbent of everything. Everything is absorbed into it, everything rises from it, everything is maintained in it, and everything goes back into it. When the fire subsides, it goes into it. It is absorbed into this great wind that absorbs everything into itself. It is on this Vayu, the great deity, that I am meditating."[/align]
The Panchamahabhuta, or "five great elements," of Hinduism are Prithvi or Bhumi (Earth), Ap or Jala (Water), Agni or Tejas (Fire), Vayu or Pavan (Air or Wind), and Akasha (Aether)



[align=center]http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/chhand/ch_apx2a.html[/align]

[align=center]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vayu[/align]

[align=left]To them myth isn't myth of course its related factually in place of the scentific explaination of air. Engaging in visualization, religious belief and giving the element a persona. As Rafa-elohiem is tall wearing violet and purple holdinga chalice to the Jewish, Vayu is explained with just as much colour and persona.
[/align]
[align=left]The element of air in science is;[/align]
Earth's atmosphere is a layer of gases surrounding the planet Earth and retained by the Earth's gravity. It contains roughly 78% nitrogen and 21% oxygen, with trace amounts of other gases such as water vapor. This mixture of gases is commonly known as air. The atmosphere protects life on Earth by absorbing ultravioletsolar radiation and reducing temperature extremes between day and night.


[align=center]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_atmosphere[/align]

[align=left]Factual, broken down and explained away into nothingness. A simple,

[/align]
[align=left]'combination of nitrogen and oxygen with trace amounts of other gases such as water vapour'.
[/align]
[align=left]It seems as though it, 'just so happens' to be a combination that protects us from solar radiation just as Rafa-el-ohim or Vayu is said to protcect in mythology. A life giving element surely deserves more credit than science gives it, especially as science is diriven from mythology, the gods names now being -Oxygen- orlikewise,taken from Greek myth and lodged in the logical vortex of the brain to rot and rust away without a real explaination of its uncontrolability... its persona as it floats around us protecting us from ultra violet rays and giving life. [/align]
[align=left]
[/align]
[align=left]Science underminds whereas myth accredits.

[/align]
[align=left]Myth = Religious, creative + logical, personification of...

[/align]
[align=left]Science = Non - Religious, logical, explaination of... [/align]
Modern Science - The worship offact or theoryas taken from Fiction.



[align=center]Opinions?[/align]

Interesting.......

Science and Myths both have downfalls, I was just listening to some audio the other day about what science does, it makes everything an "IT" and doesn't take the "I" and "WE" into account. Sciences problem is if it contiunes not to take "WE" into consideration there may be major problems in the future, there are certain boundaries science shouldn't cross and the human genome is one of them, in my current point of view.

Bare with me whilst I digress a little..........

"I" is first person, "YOU" is second person, if we agree on something "WE" become first person "US", him or her is third person, over there "IT"

Myths....

What can I say,... I'm not a myth lover, although I do appreciate the purpose Myths has had or do have in preserving some sort of knowlegde or historical content over past ages, I just don't take it as literal. Whilst the Rafa-Elohim and Vayu seem to be figurative representations of earths atomoshpere protecting us from solar radiation (according to above posts)

You could say the ancients didn't know the words atmoshpere or solar radiation, either way they gave them personalities, but what would happen if a person was unawareof atmosphere, yet aware of Rafa-Elohim/Vayu? what if there was a problem with the atmosphere, yet the person might be petitioning Rafa-Elohim/Vayu for help? what good is this if the person still uses CFC sprays and constantly pollutes the air regardless, yet at the same time petitioning? none,

This is where science proves itself.

Me personally, I don't take myths as literal ie:

Moses parting the seas, I think if this happend at all, it would have another meaning, I don't know what exactly but I don't believe he stood in front of the waters with a rod and it parted. I put this firmly with Rafa-Elohim and Vayu.

I see your point, most Myth isn't literal its made to engage the mind, a Zulu Shaman explains it in his book quite well, Indaba my children by Credo Mutwa. He says that Myths are meant to stimulate peoples minds, the real meaning being hidden within them. The over exaggeration of things like, ''He fought 10,000 men'' or, ''he was invincible in battle'' really means that he fought as though he could have taken on 10,000 men or he took on so many injuries while fighting it was as though he was invincible. Its to help people see it in their minds eye as it were. Some stories can be broken down and interpreted as being natural disasters etc... I mentioned it in another post.

''The Sun God fought with the God Broomoo andfell from the sky so the Earth Mother sent the wind God who came to his rescue''

Is really the time of the ice age, the battle being between the Sun and a Volcano (Broomoo) the wind God saved the sun by clearing the skies. The attachment of personality to the elements gives them life where science dosen't. As you said, they become lifless, ''Its'' as though they don't hold any meaning to the earth cycles or aren't nessary.

Things like raindances can be proven to have results with the right amount of people generating enough energy, they know that. In the same way if you were to dodaily affirmations to Ra; In the morning, Noon, Midday and night, you'd feelit and you'd probably be able to tell the time of day without needing a watch... the Sun isn't just aball ofburning gas its had a name and persona since the beginning. Even the earth has an aura and personality, people that experience earthquakes and volcanos are reminded that the earth is a living organism. Ok, Im getting all mystical loosing focus again. lol.

What I'm really saying is that Science seems to strip the spirituality of things right away from everything possible, its a souless thing. Big Bang theories and coincidences.

I was just listening to some audio the other day about what science does, it makes everything an "IT" and doesn't take the "I" and "WE" into account.

Yeah, it becomes cold through logic. I don't know what you mean by ''we'' though. Do you mean the human race in general?

Science has its place I'm not dissing that but its sometimes used to explain things away and it contributes to a souless society lacking in culture, a typical European outlook.

God help us if they start messing with genes. Thats some scary stuff. Wonder what Imhotep would have to say? He must've had a more mythical understanding of things... not really sure if its the right word to use, prehaps it should be Science Vs Cultural understanding?

Credo Mutwa...

The man has commonsense don't take myths literally, but... some people do take some of the most fantastical myths literally, whilst not even paying attention to the message.

I remember a video some years ago I saw, where he mentioned "everything you see is from this world" this was regarding ufo's, retillians whatever. So ufos from space? no....top secret plane from this world.

Mystical loosing focas...

There are some things science can't or doesn't even try to explian, I don't know much about raindances but it seems plausible. As for telling the time witout a watch, this is correct.


I, WE, IT...

We the human race in general, but we are all still individuals.

Some things just are and science definitely cannot explain it, but everything is still logical and not fantasical, hardcore science does strip away what mystical puts back in, science negates mythical.

There can also be scientific myths such as those that said black ppl where inferior and lesser intelligence.... Although this where consequently proven wrong.At their time they where presented in a certain which brainwashed alot of european individuals and lead to disastrous consequences.Although i agree with jay jay in that there are certain things which science cannot explain. Which are better left to the human imagination.......

That science myth is still around they use statistics and up hold their findings as fact overlooking other influences. Another intresting one is the evolution theory being used to downgrade us. Definitly myth in science, guess the big bang theory is mythical enough. lol.

What is the scientific explation for the cause or or end of the ice age anyway?

In my opinion a persons understanding of life should always be from a cultural and religious perspective just as the muslem religion is their politics the same should apply to science. Its the same as leaving christian morals out of the western way of life it becomes inhumane, ruthless in persuit of....

The Egyptians are the best example of it really, their understanding of evolution for example would be of enlightenment a more personal spiritual/physical nothing like that in a scientific study.

lol. Guess this all ties in with the above post on Decolonizing African thought. Just read some of it now...

------------------------

To take only a few examples, consider such categories of thought as those contained in the following dichotomies: the spiritual versus the physical, the supernatural versus the natural, the mystical versus the non-mystical, the religious versus the secular, being versus nothingness. These are modes of conceptualization that are very deeply entrenched in Western thought. I do not mean to suggest that every Western thinker believes that there are things falling under one side or the other of each of these dichotomies. What I think is the case is that most Western thinkers would find these dichotomies at least intelligible. Thus even a Western religious skeptic, while denying that there are any spiritual or supernatural beings, may, nevertheless, at the same time grant that the notion of a spiritual entity is not meaningless. Only logical positivists, and perhaps a few others, have wanted to say that such notions are meaningless. But the requiem for logical positivism is generally considered to be concluded.


When African thought was approached with intellectual categories such as the ones just mentioned some quite lopsided results ensued, although they did not seem to bother people much. Some of the findings of this sort of study of African thought that were, and still are, assiduously disseminated are that Africans see the world as being full of spiritual entities, that Africans are religious in all things, not even separating the secular from the religious, that African thought is, through and through, mystical, and so on. Some African philosophers have followed this way of talking of African thought quite cheerfully. One reason may be that in their academic training they may themselves have come to internalize such accounts of African thought so thoroughly that they have become part of the furniture of their minds. Such minds are what may justly be called colonized. They are minds that think about and expound their own culture in terms of categories of a colonial origin without any qualms as to any possible conceptual incongruities. Such a mode of thinking may correctly be said to be unduly influenced by the historical accident of colonization. It may well be that if the concepts in question had been critically examined, they might have been found to be appropriate, but it may very well also be that they might have been found to be inapplicable in the context of African thought. In either case, an important preliminary question would have been answered and the way cleared for potentially enlightening accounts of African thought and its continuation in the modern world. In either case, moreover, the old accounts would have been decolonized
---------------------

Kinda what I'm on about (havn't read it properly yet lame pc)) trying to decolonise from their sciences' here, didn't notice the thread.

First of all there are certain things science cant explain because some parts of science only looks through a small window, if it took the wider consideration of things then this may help science, I'm only against science tampering with genes of any kind.

Rebel-Lion wrote: of enviroment and our adaption of it.

As for the big bang....well even the mayans calculated our universes start time was a little over 16bn years ago, scientists were at 10 then 12 now I think they're at 15bn yrs ago, they're getting closer to the mayans original calculations(who inherited the same system from the Olmecs). I say our universe because this may even be a cycle.

Is this an impersonal view? to actually relise the scale of things is truly awe inspiring...... to say some mythical person sprinkled sherbet on top of a purple platto, this is how it is and so be it has the ability to leave people in ignorance.

All you have to do is look at what happened in Indoneasia recently, people were told the volcano was going to blow a week ago, by using seismic graphs and whatever else... they used knowledge to help clear people out of danger, At the same time people were praying for the volcano not to errupt, this kept others in the belief that everything was going to be alright.....atleast 4,900 dead.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4990186.stm
Do you think some of those who didn't listen to science were better or worse off?

Quote:

The very fact you mention ice age speaks volume because before that it was known as the great floods, this can also be found from

Flood Stories from Around the World most stories talk about a massive flood then re-population. Nowdays you will know if a floods coming, there are warnings in place.Will you heed scientific warnings or will you stand firm believing that you wont be purged?

JayJaywrote:All you have to do is look at what happened in Indoneasia recently, people were told the volcano was going to blow a week ago, by using seismic graphs and whatever else... they used knowledge to help clear people out of danger, At the same time people were praying for the volcano not to errupt, this kept others in the belief that everything was going to be alright.....atleast 4,900 dead.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4990186.stm
Do you think some of those who didn't listen to science were better or worse off?


What happened a few days ago was an earthquake right? Not related tothe volcanoe?