11-29-2019, 01:15 PM
(11-26-2019, 08:26 AM)Shannon Wrote: But emotions and logic are mutually exclusive ways of thinking. That's why "hard science" rejects, ignores and ridicules things like psychic ability, even when hard science is used to prove that there is in fact something there. Which is actually ironic, because it is showing an irrational response to something that threatens the "hard science" belief that "it only exists if we can measure it with machines and mathematics".
It's funny because the "hard scientific" discourse is based on Descartes' "I think, therefore I am" and logical proof towards the existence of a static, all-knowing outside observer that actually allows for the existence of any sort of knowledge at all.
Trouble is, the Descartian scentific discourse has been disproven with the proclamation of the theory of relativity (there's no static, constant observer; the only constant is the speed of light in vacuum, lol). And yet, it's still being resisted to this day.
This reminds me of Albert Einstein's reaction to when he was informed that some very learned heads have published a book "1001 Voices against Einstein" (or however many, I don't remember exactly); it was a collection of essays trying to show how very wrong the theory of relativity is, or rather - should be.
To this, our friend Albert supposedly retorted: "Well, were I actually wrong, a single voice would have sufficed". 
"A man who is doing his True Will has the inertia of the Universe to assist him." - A. Crowley
