Many many thanks for helping me through your always- fine inputs.
You raised an interesting question:
You are right, but it is because of their very nature, as a matter of fact, both are not as separate as one may erroneously think. Let me clarify my view point. Speculation may be simply a message expressing an opinion based on incomplete evidence.P-M, it is not clear in your post as to what speculation is and what is fact. You jumble them all together.
According to the grammar of science speculation is a hypothesis that has been formed by conjecturing usually with little hard evidence. A speculation gets hardened into fact after hypothesis is tested by carrying out experiments; data is analyzed to arrive at a conclusion finally in the form of facts.
Meditation is not far from speculation when it is prolong, continuous and profound, in other words, contemplation or musing on a subject or series of subjects of a deep or abstruse nature.
Other difference that I note between ‘speculation’ and the ‘fact’ is that the former is, more or less, of ‘subjective’ nature, and later is ‘objective’. In philosophy that is broadly divided in two camps, we have ‘idealist’ and ‘materialist’ who stand opposite to each other, the former advocates supremacy of the existence of ‘idea’ and ‘consciousness’ alone, and emphasizes that ultimate reality is subjective. On the other hand, materialists advocate that ultimate reality consists of matter only, and hold that thought and consciousness are by- product of matter.
Religion is of subjective nature. The complimentary view brought about by the latest theory of the physics like relativity and quantum mechanics has led to some synthesis of science and religion. Deva Ramananda has made great strides to synthesize science and religion via perpetual motion as perpetual motion by drawing on ultimate source of energy directly links us to ‘Infinite’ and ‘Absolute’.
I also believe that a complementary view of ‘objective’ and the ‘subjective’ describes the ‘ultimate reality’ in the best manner. Since ‘subjective’ and ‘objective’ are opposite, we generally find ultimate reality very much paradoxical.
"The habit of speculation is the basis for all real knowledge." As a matter of fact, the habit of speculation reminds me of great philosopher and scientist Descartes who said –“Cogito ergo sum�. Indeed ‘doubt’ is one of the best methods of inquiry. Through my speculations, I have developed habit of oscillating between different extreme views… of the intensity that I think “since I speculate, therefore, I exist.� In harmony with laws of nature, mind, brain, life and above all perpetual motion, when I write on a particular subject of my interest, I tend to switch very fast between ‘subjective’ and ‘objective’, between ‘concrete’ and ‘abstract’ between ‘higher’ and ‘lower’ and so on, then, it is natural that anyone will find my writings paradoxical or ‘jumbled’ as you have stated. Alex noted my habit as making ‘strides’.
Well, Jim, James have already suggested me that ‘philosophical’ and ‘metaphysical’ is not much welcomed here, I apologize for the long post as it has caused "stress and strain" to many members. so in future, while I write here, I will try to be more ‘objective’, and also “subject specific" as you have suggested.
Best regards,
Sincerely yours,
P-M
