22 May 18
A friend in the most eastern part of the country has contacted me wanting to discuss "Noetic Science". I had to look it up just to be sure.
"The Institute of Noetic Sciences describes noetic sciences as "how beliefs, thoughts, and intentions affect the physical world"." [wiki]
"A multidisciplinary field that brings objective scientific tools and techniques together with subjective inner knowing to study the full range of human experience.
In other words, there are several ways we can know the world around us. Science focuses on external observation and is grounded in objective evaluation, measurement, and experimentation. This is useful in increasing objectivity and reducing bias and inaccuracy as we interpret what we observe.
But another way of knowing is subjective — or internal — including gut feelings, intuition, hunches — the way you know you love your children, for example, or experiences you have that cannot be explained or proven, but feel absolutely real nonetheless. This way of knowing is what we call noetic." [more here https://tinyurl.com/y8bbtydq ]
Does anyone have any thoughts on this field of study?
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
22 May 18
Originally posted by @fmfPerhaps this thread will lure Karoly back from his self-imposed exile.
A friend in the most eastern part of the country has contacted me wanting to discuss "Noetic Science". I had to look it up just to be sure.
"The Institute of Noetic Sciences describes noetic sciences as "how beliefs, thoughts, and intentions affect the physical world"." [wiki]
"A multidisciplinary field that brings objective scientific tools and t ...[text shortened]... https://tinyurl.com/y8bbtydq ]
Does anyone have any thoughts on this field of study?
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
22 May 18
Originally posted by @fmfThis has the potential to be an interesting topic but I think you need to expand on the OP, Kiddo.
A friend in the most eastern part of the country has contacted me wanting to discuss "Noetic Science". I had to look it up just to be sure.
"The Institute of Noetic Sciences describes noetic sciences as "how beliefs, thoughts, and intentions affect the physical world"." [wiki]
"A multidisciplinary field that brings objective scientific tools and t ...[text shortened]... https://tinyurl.com/y8bbtydq ]
Does anyone have any thoughts on this field of study?
22 May 18
Originally posted by @fmfI don't know anything about it. But I think such studies are futile. I'm sure some occasional, fleeting results can be achieved but nothing repeatable.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this field of study?
Maybe you're familiar with the double slit experiment in quantum physics. It has been discovered that electrons take on the form of particles while observed and waves when not observed. Some come away from this believing that we control the nature of reality around us. I believe it's the opposite. I believe the reality around us behaves, by design, one way when we aren't watching and another way when we are.
22 May 18
Originally posted by @tom-wolseyI think the multi-disciplinary scientific investigation into human consciousness is important and worthwhile; I also think it arises naturally and understandably from our human nature. I'm not sure what you're on about with talk of what is and isn't "repeatable". I think scientists have a great deal of difficulty explaining consciousness so studying represents a frontier of human endeavour.
I don't know anything about it. But I think such studies are futile. I'm sure some occasional, fleeting results can be achieved but nothing repeatable.
22 May 18
1 edit
Originally posted by @fmfI was specifically referencing the "gut feelings, intuition, hunches" part of the study. If there were ever any consistency in these "ways of knowing," and could be controlled and repeated, the world would change immediately. That's what I was talking about.
I think the multi-disciplinary scientific investigation into human consciousness is important and worthwhile; I also think it arises naturally and understandably from our human nature. I'm not sure what you're on about with talk of what is and isn't "repeatable". I think scientists have a great deal of difficulty explaining consciousness so studying represents a frontier of human endeavour.
22 May 18
Originally posted by @tom-wolseyThat's why I think the multi-disciplinary scientific investigation into human consciousness is important and worthwhile. I see it as a frontier of human knowledge and I am under no misapprehension that it is a field that will be challenging - and perhaps ultimately elusive.
I was specifically referencing the "gut feelings, intuition, hunches" part of the study. If there were ever any consistency in these "ways of knowing," and could be controlled and repeated, the world would change immediately. That's what I was talking about.
22 May 18
Originally posted by @fmfYes! Elusive. That's the word I'm looking for. I know there's something to it but I picture water running through their fingers, trying to decipher patterns and try to control it.
That's why I think the multi-disciplinary scientific investigation into human consciousness is important and worthwhile. I see it as a frontier of human knowledge and I am under no misapprehension that it is a field that will be challenging - and perhaps ultimately elusive.
22 May 18
Originally posted by @tom-wolseyYou predict scientific investigation into human consciousness will not yield much?
Yes! Elusive. That's the word I'm looking for. I know there's something to it but I picture water running through their fingers, trying to decipher patterns and try to control it.
22 May 18
Originally posted by @fmfI don't know enough about it to say either way, but it seems like any real breakthroughs would be earth-shattering. I don't think science is moving along near as fast as everyone once thought. We were supposed to have colonized the Moon by now. We can't even make decent walking robots yet. We were supposed to have internet via contact lenses about 10 years ago.
You predict scientific investigation into human consciousness will not yield much?
But we're human beings and we're OCD about this stuff. Eventually there will be a breakthrough. Everything will change.
Originally posted by @tom-wolsey"We can't even make decent walking robots yet."
I don't know enough about it to say either way, but it seems like any real breakthroughs would be earth-shattering. I don't think science is moving along near as fast as everyone once thought. We were supposed to have colonized the Moon by now. We can't even make decent walking robots yet. We were supposed to have internet via contact lenses about 10 ...[text shortened]... d we're OCD about this stuff. Eventually there will be a breakthrough. Everything will change.
They can in Japan.
22 May 18
I think consciousness used to be the realm almost exclusively of philosophers and theologians.
But it seems to me that philosophy and religion represent reactions to and applications of consciousness rather than explanations for it.
So what's interesting in more recent times has been how consciousness is being looked at by people in other fields and looking at it from other angles: neuroscience, natural sciences, the physical and biological basis of consciousness, mathematics, artificial intelligence, computer science, psychology, psychiatry, and the list goes on.
It may well be that all these pursuits will ultimately only be more conjecture about - and demonstrations of - consciousness, as opposed to comprehensive explanations for it, but it will undoubtedly be interesting.
22 May 18
Originally posted by @fmfIn psychology, the term 'noesis' is simply defined as 'cognition, or the functioning of the intellect'. I'm not sure how the rest of what you're speaking about gets dragged into it.
A friend in the most eastern part of the country has contacted me wanting to discuss "Noetic Science". I had to look it up just to be sure.
"The Institute of Noetic Sciences describes noetic sciences as "how beliefs, thoughts, and intentions affect the physical world"." [wiki]
"A multidisciplinary field that brings objective scientific tools and t ...[text shortened]... https://tinyurl.com/y8bbtydq ]
Does anyone have any thoughts on this field of study?
22 May 18
Originally posted by @suzianneIf you're not sure, you could start by looking at The Institute of Noetic Sciences.
In psychology, the term 'noesis' is simply defined as 'cognition, or the functioning of the intellect'. I'm not sure how the rest of what you're speaking about gets dragged into it.
22 May 18
Originally posted by @fmf"But it seems to me that philosophy and religion represent reactions to and applications of consciousness rather than explanations for it."
I think consciousness used to be the realm almost exclusively of philosophers and theologians.
But it seems to me that philosophy and religion represent reactions to and applications of consciousness rather than explanations for it.
So what's interesting in more recent times has been how consciousness is being looked at by people in other fields and looki ...[text shortened]... usness, as opposed to comprehensive explanations for it, but it will undoubtedly be interesting.
I agree with this -- it seems obvious.
"So what's interesting in more recent times has been how consciousness is being looked at by people in other fields and looking at it from other angles: neuroscience, natural sciences, the physical and biological basis of consciousness, mathematics, artificial intelligence, computer science, psychology, psychiatry, and the list goes on."
Yes...
"It may well be that all these pursuits will ultimately only be more conjecture about - and demonstrations of - consciousness, as opposed to comprehensive explanations for it, but it will undoubtedly be interesting."
No, I must disagree. While philosophy and religion may exist as "conjecture about consciousness", it's fairly clear that science holds the only paths toward "comprehensive explanations" about consciousness.