Post by a***@gmail.comThere is significant overlap between religion and science. For example, both religion and science attempt to explain how the universe and man was created, but while religion offers a fictional explanation, science offers a factual explanation.
True religion is about what cannot be *objectively observed*. Nevertheless it is true. Senses have limitations (prathyaksha), all know.
We cannot see our own face or eyes! Mind and intellect have limitations. Hence inferences are limited -paroksha. But experiences are an interaction between the subject and object. Can the subject can be observed? Not as an object! It is called aparoksha. It is 100 % valid and never any doubt. The only thing of certainty unlike any objective knowledge
Without the subject all experiences are null and void
The subject is the most important factor ignored by most people. Science ( method) ignores this as its method is applicable only to objects!
Now think. What is the meaning of the word I? When you say I, what do you mean? Your body, mind? No because your body, mind have been changing for ever and still there is constancy in I and without that there is no experience. Amidst the changes there is a constant I without which experiences are impossible
This there is a whole realm outside of objects that cannot be studied by the normal scientific method. Rishis knew objective methodology and applied knowledge and analytical methods to grasp the essence of aparoskha and the import of I which is called atma.
Ask yourself who am "I". You know you are. That knowledge is *not based on perception like eyes or inference*. It is self evident, 100 % true and totally independent. Where does that knowledge come from? Find out
Post by a***@gmail.comI don't believe that science can answer every question, but that generally scientific knowledge is superior to religious knowledge.
There is no need for belief. Science is limited to observation and experimentation and replication. It is valid but has limitations
Post by a***@gmail.comPsychology, which is a science, can comment on subjects of love, morality etc.
Nope. Psychology will deal with the mental and physical effects of love etc. Not love itself? For example, what is love?
What is it that makes us love others, animals and even the environment? Why do beings try to live for ever and perpetuate the species? What is the reason for self preservation? Why not just die and accept mortality? Why is there a need to defy death and why do humans always try for perfection? Why are they never content with anything they achieve or possess? Do you agree humans are relentlessly trying for perfection? Why?
Post by a***@gmail.comPhilosophy, which can be studied separately from religion, can give good understanding of subjective and intuitive knowledge. There is no need to study outdated religion. Subjects are not necessarily permanent. Ancient religions are not scientific.
Philosophy is what westerners call. In out tradition it is called religion and is highly advanced compared to western philosophy which is an infantile prattle
Post by a***@gmail.comPerhaps facts don't support you. Resorting to personal insults, is immoral, and used by many as a diversionary tactic.
You have always insulted us. So we serve our bit
Post by a***@gmail.comI apologise if I have hurt your feelings, but I shall continue to discuss the truth in an attempt to improve my understanding of the world, and also to improve others understanding of the world.
I have learnt from my discussions in this newsgroup, both from reading replies and formulating replies.
If this is an apology I accept it
But what matters is how you really discuss and when you stop insulting and when you truly debate
If you insult we will too
Please stop preaching your ideas and issuing fatwas that we should accept what you say
Discussion yes. We are ready. Have always been