torsdagen den 10:e december 2009

Indeterminism: Zoroastrianism and probabilities Part 2

Yes!!!

Or rather, indeterminism and probabilism are WITHIN the proper laws of nature, into which we increasingly look with ever sharper eyes. This is in turn why we credibly can indeed say a few timeless things about existence (and adher to a philsopher who lived 3,700 years ago). After all, pragmatism is not new, probabilism is not new, indeterminism is not new, they have merely (as Gilles Deleuze pointed out) been the philosophical principles of a small minority rather than the vast majority throughout the centuries.
The trick is to understand what is truly timeless (such as the flux of existence as its very condition, the fact is that logically a deterministic universe could not exist, because DIFFERENCE could not exist within a deterministic context, as determinism does not allow for a single exception from determinism, ANY deviation would automatically disqualify determinism as principle and open the door to INdeterminism) and then keep the timeless seperate from that which is speculatively timebound.
Zarathushtra was simply a lot better at getting at that which is TIMELESS than his Abrahamic competitors. The same goes for Lao Tze in China which is why Taoism is the other major school of philosophy besides Mazdayasna which advocates flux, pantheism and monism.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/10 Special Kain

Dear Alexander,

EXACTLY!!!
This is exactly what I wanted to explain all the f***ing time! Pragmatism goes hand in hand with indeterminism and probabilism. Anything else is fundamentalistic gibberish. Even the laws of nature are nothing but persistent habits that slowly change over time. So Zarathushtra was the ORIGINAL pragmatist and process philosopher. That's why I started to speak of Peirce, Dewey and Whitehead on Ushta in the first place many, many months ago. I still think that those three American thinkers were Zarathushtra's nephews. ;-)

Ushta, Dino


--- Alexander Bard schrieb am Do, 10.12.2009:


Von: Alexander Bard
Betreff: [Ushta] Indeterminism: Zoroastrianism and probabilities
An: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Datum: Donnerstag, 10. Dezember 2009, 12:18



Dea Dino and Ardeshir
And if indeterminism is closely connected to, even dependent on, pragmatism, does this not again emphasize that Zarathushtra was the originator of pragmatism and process philosophy?
In addition, indeterminism is also a requirement for choice, or the Zoroastrian version of what we would clumsily term "free will", right?
Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/9 Special Kain



Dear Ardeshir,

This is truly fascinating! !!
By the way, I'm sure you'd love Gilles Deleuze's «Nietzsche and Philosophy».
Christian cosmogony starts with God entering the room and starting to sort things out and also creating new things. That cute story only got interesting the moment the talking snake appeared.
When it comes to cosmogony, I've always LOVED Charles Sanders Peirce's brilliant and intuitive understanding of the universe and the physical laws: he intuitively grasped the nature of our universe as essentially indeterministic and in a state of flux when everybody else took the universe for a big and well-oiled machine. When everybody was talking about necessity and determinism, Peirce believed in absolute chance (tychism) and described the physical laws as quite persistent habits. And decades later modern physics would prove him right! Peirce's evolutionary understanding of the universe is truly brilliant!
When I used to conduct parapsychological research eight years ago, everyone involved - from theologians to physicists - described and explained the universe probabilistically. There are probabilities only. And this is where Zoroastrian cosmogony could step in.

Ushta, Dino


--- ardeshir farhmand schrieb am Mi, 9.12.2009:


Von: ardeshir farhmand
Betreff: Re: [Ushta] Zoroastrian ethics vs Zoroastrian cosmology
An: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
CC: "mehrdad farahmand"
Datum: Mittwoch, 9. Dezember 2009, 21:07



Dear Alexander and Dino,

i find ur writings very interesting. but i have to say per Yasna 31.7 and 31.8, our seer does talk about cosmogony. it is however, a complete different approach than the biblical one. it is about the thought of ahurmazd mixing with spiritual lights and creating new manifestaions. there is a wonderful exegesis on this subject on the Varsht-manthar gathic book of commentaries. again, i ask everyone of to please cite the gathic text, and justify ur explanations on the words, etymology of the words and wonderful body of exegesis.

now what i found fascinating about gathic cosmogony is the view of the prohet about the amazing possibilities present in various levelS of being or myriad of worldS and their corresponding creative orderS.

i alluded in my ahun-var article to this, the very name "mazdâ," not only suggests inherent wisdom and intuitive understanding, but it is connected to thoughts, memory and brilliant ideas, Lith. mintis "thought, idea, and vision mantis "one who divines, prophet, seer. more interestingly the word is related to Skt. mahan/mahas "the great world of possibilities."
"this is strongly confirmed by the ancient exegesis. accordingly, this shows most interesting connection to O.E. mæg (inf. magan, pt. meahte, mihte), from P.Gmc. root mag-, O.N. mega, Ger. mögen, Goth. magan "to be able"), from PIE *mogh-/*megh- "power to realize." O.C.S. mogo "to be able," mosti "power, force," ." "mazdâ" is not only vision and wisdom, but also the power to realize that vision and make it happen and möglich.

Furthermore, "shyaotha-na- nãm" in ahunvar or Yasna 27.13 refers to the manifesting act of "spentâ mainyû" or the auspicious spirit of ahurmazd.

ardeshir

Inga kommentarer: