• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Does science find truths?

sravna

Well-known member
The endeavour of science is to find truths about nature in an objective manner. Objectivity is achieved by looking for actual evidence as proof of the theories proposed in the external world . But the question is how reliable are these evidences? Are they reliable enough to approve a hypothesis being proposed as part of body of knowledge?

The fact that a theory can be altered or even rejected in light of a different evidence contradicting it, is disconcerting to say the least. The basis for accepting something as part of knowledge is itself shaky.

As technology improves and enable us to more and more accurately perceive the physical reality, the possibility of new evidence rebutting the older ones increases.

Should be rely on such physical evidences which are untrustworthy and build our knowledge based on them? I do not think so. We need to move away from objectivity to subjectivity that can be trusted. I believe even the best technology cannot surpass the accuracy of perception of a very perceptive human mind. We only need to examine the logic of a theory proposed for correctness. I think this is not such a formidable task if we put real efforts in doing this.

So We should look for clarity of thoughts in a theory to approve it than looking for external evidence. Just as we examine only the logical proof for mathematical correctness so should be the case for example in physics too. Even f there is external evidence for supporting a theory it should not be accepted if it is logically flawed and vice versa.
 

sravna

Well-known member
I can show the proof just as science does that physical energy is less real than spiritual energy because it vanishes when under the influence of the latter. I would love to do this if any physics lab is willing to examine this for truth.
 

Jaykay767

Well-known member
Hi Sravna,
in the current definition of science, there is no subject to study the human mind, consciousness and its properties.

Hence this area will continue to remain outside and the study of science will be incomplete.

I am not sure anyone from the scientific community will respond unless you can perform miracles like move physical objects using using mind power aka consciousness !!
 

Jaykay767

Well-known member
Sravna, Best wishes. Just be careful on the meditation and mind techniques, sometimes they have their negative side effects.

I am always wary of any changes to the human mind from its natural state.
 

Brahmanyan

Well-known member
Truth ( Sath in Sanskrit ) is unchangeable.. Science tries to solve the mysteries of nature. Science accept the changes

Brahmanyan
Bangalore.
 

sravna

Well-known member
Sravna, Best wishes. Just be careful on the meditation and mind techniques, sometimes they have their negative side effects.

The increase is happening in a natural way and there is no effort on my part. I have reached a stage now where I am immune to almost any health problem. Once the negative part is taken care of completely and positive energy sets in, miracles may happen.
 

sravna

Well-known member
Truth ( Sath in Sanskrit ) is unchangeable.. Science tries to solve the mysteries of nature. Science accept the changes

Brahmanyan
Bangalore.
Dear Shri Brahmanyan,

I have no real problem with the approach of Science. But why profess superiority of that approach when it is obviously not the case?
 

Jaykay767

Well-known member
Agree with Sravna ! Science has completely excluded the study of the mind and consciousness. Hence any superiority is spurious.

Sravna, Given your focus on this subject, I would suggest you to setup a foundation and perform a formal and systematic study of spiritual energy, it's properties, experiments, review the various schools of thoughts, white papers, and publish them,

Today we have too many people from different schools and ashrams talking about this. And they do not address al the aspects of this area. Also major advances from stellar rishis like Bhagawan Ramana Maharishi, Kanchi maha periyaval etc..after Shankara's advaitam.
 

sravna

Well-known member
Yes Jaykay. Definitely going to do work on spiritual energy. Waiting for the right time. I believe what all science and technology can accomplish spirituality can do much better.
 

sravna

Well-known member
This is the dark age of knowledge with quackery abounding in the name of objective knowledge and evidence based proof. Unless people realize the importance of spiritual knowledge soon we will be spiralling towards knowledge full of contradictions and paradoxes.
 

Vaagmi

Well-known member
Dear Sravna,

The spiritual reality is indescribabble with the available vocabulary. As it is beyond space and time it does not have commonly accepted units and measures to relate to and discuss among knowledgeable members. It is just a perception and so is indeterminate to capture in known languages. But mathematics may be of some help as human beings have a way of describing indeterminate facts with mathematics like for example the uncertainty principle in nuclear science.

So your area of search bristles with apparently insurmountable problems.

Your findings may end up as the dream of a dumb. And one life time is not adequate to surmount the some of the problems I have listed.

So spiritual energy and experience will continue to remain a private domain of individuals.
 

sravna

Well-known member
Dear Sravna,

The spiritual reality is indescribabble with the available vocabulary. As it is beyond space and time it does not have commonly accepted units and measures to relate to and discuss among knowledgeable members. It is just a perception and so is indeterminate to capture in known languages. But mathematics may be of some help as human beings have a way of describing indeterminate facts with mathematics like for example the uncertainty principle in nuclear science.

So your area of search bristles with apparently insurmountable problems.

Your findings may end up as the dream of a dumb. And one life time is not adequate to surmount the some of the problems I have listed.

So spiritual energy and experience will continue to remain a private domain of individuals.
Dear Shri Vaagmi,

Not all of spiritual energy is beyond space and time. Based on my experience I would say there is a spectrum of spiritual energy, a substantial part of which may be used to bulid applications conceivable or and even unconceivable by science. My focus would be on that part of spiritual energy that would be of practical use.
 

sravna

Well-known member
Mathematics as it is, is woefully inadequate to capture spiritual phenomenon. The conceptt of synergy and transcendence has to be incorporated and maths totally reworked upon to make it of any use.
 

sravna

Well-known member
Mathematics as it is, is woefully inadequate to capture spiritual phenomena. The concept of synergy and transcendence have to be incorporated and maths totally reworked upon to make it of any use.
 

sravna

Well-known member
I reiterate my position on science as nothing better than illusory knowledge in the sense it does not help us in elevating self. One can happily be without such knowledge as spirituality can do all that science and technology can do and also do a lot lot more in the objective of edifying our soul
 

Vaagmi

Well-known member
I reiterate my position on science as nothing better than illusory knowledge in the sense it does not help us in elevating self. One can happily be without such knowledge as spirituality can do all that science and technology can do and also do a lot lot more in the objective of edifying our soul
This obsession with deriding all that is science while speaking highly of spirituality is not going to lead us to anywhere. The better course will be to accept science as useful, draw lessons from the way it has developed, use it as a model to improve upon and develop a model for spirituality and finally let the two to coexist will be a better option.
Science developed because it is within space and time and hence could adopt standards, units and measures and a common vocabulary in course of time. So when you say anything about a topic or a fact in science I can understand it and instantly visualise the idea because we speak the same language with the same set of words drawn from a common vocabulary. And the units and measures you use are instantly understood by me because I use the same.
This is not the case with spirituality. When you say you can bend an iron bar just by applying spiritual energy that you generate without being anywhere near it, and presuming that you do it also, I and several others are left wondering with several questions. what was the measure of the energy you generated to achieve the task and from where did you do that. Did it have any relation with the kind of metal and say its diameter and conditioning etc--whethered tempered or not etc. May be I am used to science and am "conditioned" and hence get all these questions. If so I want to know what is the new vocabulary with which to explore your feat.
When you say you have raised your kundalini and have achieved the showering of it on your nervous and physical system and hence is able to travel in the time dimension back and forth, I feel disappointed that you are not able to communicate with me the processes involved in your journey and the metrics of it.

For all these reasons, I tend to look at your spirituality as a lot of hot air and nothing else even if you bend an iron bar just looking at it.

Am I wrong?
 

sravna

Well-known member
Who said one cannot make another understand spirituality just as science can? Science is just incipient in nature and it is too premature to thrust its success metrics on spirituality. I personally dont like the way science communicates its knowledge. I prefer understanding to be subjective because ecah person is unique and has to develop on a different set of experiences and understanding. Ultimately i believe that the focus of development should be inner selves and not ones physical body or the physical reality. On that count spirituality wins hands down and there are many contended people like me with its delivery.
 

sravna

Well-known member
I am not able to edit. Kindly read the first sentence aof previuos post as:


Who said one cannot make another understand spirituality just as science can make itself understood?
 

sravna

Well-known member
Dear Shri Vaagmi,

As regards spirituality creating objective knowledge like science is also not far off. Nobody has made an attempt like that before. It will happen.
 

Follow Tamil Brahmins on Social Media

Latest posts

Top