And when I say "eternal truths" I'm speaking in terms that are already distorted by the western mind set, which requires that things be eternal to be true.
I don't actually think we're disagreeing. On the other hand, this topic is not exactly email sized. I agree about the error and was trying to get away from the idea of "laws".
Joanna
----- Original Message -----
On Aug 5, 2012, at 9:54 PM, 123hop at comcast.net wrote:
>
>
> The lessons of the Devotio Moderna were less about the laws of god,
> as they were about apprehending the infinite through the finite.
> This was a turn from the absolute separation of the fallen world and
> the perfect realm of the spheres that preceded.
>
> The notion that eternal truths might be reached through close
> observation of a mutable world is the gift of the Devotio. A deep
> and rich insight.
I think not. The closest observation of a mutable world remains and can only be time-bound--it can apply only to the period of time during which that close observation takes place. Eternal truths apply over a rather wider time-span, and temporally-limited truths observed can be applied outside their span only thanks to heroic assumptions, notably that everything in the past and future, and presently in the unobservable parts of our universe, observes the same regularities ("laws") that we deduce from those of our present observations we wish to base such "eternal truths" on. This error is pervasive in what Gurdjieff calls "sorry science" and is exhibited most spectacularly by what passes for modern astronomy and cosmology.
Shane Mage
This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire, kindling in measures and going out in measures.
Herakleitos of Ephesos
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk