Silk Road forums
Discussion => Philosophy, Economics and Justice => Topic started by: ralph123 on July 18, 2013, 04:23 pm
-
Has anyone saw this vid?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0gBoV0ygJc
How many people think it's a bunch of bull shit and how many people think it's close to the truth?
As for me I don't know I don't care
I did an experiment where I tried to make every word I said come out as a song or a tune but not noticeable to others. The results were mind boggling. It was like people could understand me a lot better as well as they could hear me better and they responded with actions more to my liking.
it's very psychedelic
-
Humans generally prefer a high range of prosody
-
There are two meanings of 'everlasting' -- a state that goes on forever and ever WITHIN time, and a state that is simply unconditioned by time.
Life is 'everlasting' in the latter sense. There is the day that passes, and there is the complete day. The future eternally 'exists'.
-
I think that's some real trippy shit, Yo!
I heard of that test a while ago. Makes sense.
There's something going on. Fact is, every ancient society all felt there was more in the bigger picture. Maybe at last, we're beginning to figure some of it out!
-
YOLO.
(just kidding XD )
But yeah, I wouldn't bet the farm on there being any kind of afterlife.
Sure you get eaten by worms and bacteria and such, but your mind doesn't magically transfer to the worms and dirt and germs.
I have to operate on the assumption that my life is that of a mayfly.
Inconsequential, ephemeral, forgotten, in the blink of an eye.
-
Great stuff to meditate on! The search for everlasting life is pure joy, keeps you alive!
-
YOLO.
(just kidding XD )
But yeah, I wouldn't bet the farm on there being any kind of afterlife.
Sure you get eaten by worms and bacteria and such, but your mind doesn't magically transfer to the worms and dirt and germs.
I have to operate on the assumption that my life is that of a mayfly.
Inconsequential, ephemeral, forgotten, in the blink of an eye.
This is curious, coming from some one running no-kill dog shelters, and teen shelters.
No disrespect of course, but If you feel life is of no importance after, then why worry about death?
I'm asking for your insight here.
-
YOLO.
(just kidding XD )
But yeah, I wouldn't bet the farm on there being any kind of afterlife.
Sure you get eaten by worms and bacteria and such, but your mind doesn't magically transfer to the worms and dirt and germs.
I have to operate on the assumption that my life is that of a mayfly.
Inconsequential, ephemeral, forgotten, in the blink of an eye.
This is curious, coming from some one running no-kill dog shelters, and teen shelters.
No disrespect of course, but If you feel life is of no importance after, then why worry about death?
I'm asking for your insight here.
Did you even understand what airshipadmiral was saying or was you just trying to sound clever and if that person is running dog n teen shelters their doing a fuckload what your not so have some respect next time especially if you ain't got a clue wtf your even replying to ok idiot.
-
did you even read what I wrote?
1. I said just curious.
2. I meant no disrespect (READ 1.)
3. I asked for more insight.. (READ 2.)
4. How do you know I am not doing MORE?
5. Chill out man damn. did your mail not show today or what?
-
I believe that we all have an everlasting soul. I think life is a big spiritual school, everyone in different spiritual grade levels, all taking tests and pop quizzes. I've tried to meditate, but every time I try, I'll get an itch on my nose or somewhere else, or there will be some other external distraction. That's why DMT is sooooo attractive to me. I'm planning on a DMT journey soon!
-
Chicagodogs: I want to encourage you to continue in your path of developing your ability to meditate. If your mind alerts, let it do so and then fade away again. That's okay. Thoughts, passing like little leaves down the stream of your consciousness. Just return to base. Breathe comfortably. Perhaps mantra recitation can be fruitful for you?
Furthermore, in the way of supplying DMT into your bloodstream, you may notice that your background in meditation will easily allow you to be transformed by said DMT. You will supply not the action of crossing through the veil. I am reminded of the adage, "The quieter you become, the more you can hear."
Ever read Ram Dass?
-
Unconscious life is everlasting. A materialist atheist may claim that you just cease to exist when you die. That is to say PUFF you disappear. That is as magical as any religion.
I'm neither religious nor atheist. I am the God of my perspective and my universe. When I die my body will give birth to the earth which gives life to the plants, which is food for animals, and humans. My body is everlasting. If you are a materialist then you consider your body as being you. Your body remains when you die and is decomposed into other material things. Thus you remain after you die.
The conscious mind on the other hand is the unknown. I have my own theories. Ultimately I think you live on in some form that is incomprehendable to the human consciousness so there is no point in debating between religious and atheists. Just accept the inevitability of death which comes from your birth and live this life as if it's your last. And then if it's not you will be pleasantly surprised :)
-
I had a mystical experience after a 3 day binge on RC's ( I have no idea which ones i took, or which 1 triggered the hallucinations). I saw creatures from other dimensions, the devil, Jesus on a cross and witches in my TV. Obviously these were drug induced hallucinations, and i'd still class myself as agnostic, but it's strengthened my view that there are things in this (and maybe other) universe(s), which modern science cannot explain.
-
energy, in it's simplist form, cannot be created nor destroyed.. only transferred..
-
Everlasting would be too naive to the nature of things. While time may be a concept of man, we all know that nature is not a concept; but a constant. All stars have a finite lifespan, and therefore so do their offspring; us. Life.
The Nature of the Universe is not ever-expansive, in theory. All that is known to exist 'within' the Universe is Cyclitic. So must be the Universe(in theory). As in the "big bang" will eventually lead to some kind of eventual "tear" in the space-time continuum wherein all that is known(and unknown) would cave in on itself. And eventually that would lead to another "Big Bang", so on and so forth.
I have a firm belief that Life can be simplified in definition as a balance of energy and matter. That we are comprised of matter that both produces, and is produced by energy. Cognitive functions and thoughts are merely an evolution of the energy in which that matter can produce.
The same theories could very well apply to the Nature of Life, and being cyclitic. The matter within the human body recycles; so must it's energy.
The human body loses exactly 21 grams of weight at the moment of brain-death. And nothing can stop 'existing'; all things merely change form. Law of Nature.
Is life Ever-Lasting? No. Life... is inevitable.
-
Everlasting would be too naive to the nature of things. While time may be a concept of man, we all know that nature is not a concept; but a constant. All stars have a finite lifespan, and therefore so do their offspring; us. Life.
The Nature of the Universe is not ever-expansive, in theory. All that is known to exist 'within' the Universe is Cyclitic. So must be the Universe(in theory). As in the "big bang" will eventually lead to some kind of eventual "tear" in the space-time continuum wherein all that is known(and unknown) would cave in on itself. And eventually that would lead to another "Big Bang", so on and so forth.
I have a firm belief that Life can be simplified in definition as a balance of energy and matter. That we are comprised of matter that both produces, and is produced by energy. Cognitive functions and thoughts are merely an evolution of the energy in which that matter can produce.
The same theories could very well apply to the Nature of Life, and being cyclitic. The matter within the human body recycles; so must it's energy.
The human body loses exactly 21 grams of weight at the moment of brain-death. And nothing can stop 'existing'; all things merely change form. Law of Nature.
Is life Ever-Lasting? No. Life... is inevitable.
Materialism still doesn't give an adequate explanation of the beginning of time so why employ it to explain the end of time?
I think all laws of nature are contingent on consciousness. What is consciousness? How does it react with other consciousness or do we all share the same consciousness in the likes of Spinoza's naturalism? If laws are relative then how can you begin to use them to understand that which is outside of the world and universe. We haven't explored enough yet to understand, we only know of physics within a particular sphere while we cannot fathom what has not yet been discovered in space. This is why we do philosophy to criticise what we take for x and y without considering alternatives. We don't know what we will discover as a meaning of the beginning and end of time so there's no point taking a fundamental view. That is granted that we do ever discover it.
Is life Ever-Lasting? No. Life... is inevitable.
I didn't get this part. Why is life inevitable?
-
Everlasting would be too naive to the nature of things. While time may be a concept of man, we all know that nature is not a concept; but a constant. All stars have a finite lifespan, and therefore so do their offspring; us. Life.
The Nature of the Universe is not ever-expansive, in theory. All that is known to exist 'within' the Universe is Cyclitic. So must be the Universe(in theory). As in the "big bang" will eventually lead to some kind of eventual "tear" in the space-time continuum wherein all that is known(and unknown) would cave in on itself. And eventually that would lead to another "Big Bang", so on and so forth.
I have a firm belief that Life can be simplified in definition as a balance of energy and matter. That we are comprised of matter that both produces, and is produced by energy. Cognitive functions and thoughts are merely an evolution of the energy in which that matter can produce.
The same theories could very well apply to the Nature of Life, and being cyclitic. The matter within the human body recycles; so must it's energy.
The human body loses exactly 21 grams of weight at the moment of brain-death. And nothing can stop 'existing'; all things merely change form. Law of Nature.
Is life Ever-Lasting? No. Life... is inevitable.
I would rather not believe that people are still quoting that bogus study from 1907... Regarding 21 grams of weight lost at the moment of death. Referencing that work as if it were valid science completely undermines your credibility.
-
Everlasting would be too naive to the nature of things. While time may be a concept of man, we all know that nature is not a concept; but a constant. All stars have a finite lifespan, and therefore so do their offspring; us. Life.
The Nature of the Universe is not ever-expansive, in theory. All that is known to exist 'within' the Universe is Cyclitic. So must be the Universe(in theory). As in the "big bang" will eventually lead to some kind of eventual "tear" in the space-time continuum wherein all that is known(and unknown) would cave in on itself. And eventually that would lead to another "Big Bang", so on and so forth.
I have a firm belief that Life can be simplified in definition as a balance of energy and matter. That we are comprised of matter that both produces, and is produced by energy. Cognitive functions and thoughts are merely an evolution of the energy in which that matter can produce.
The same theories could very well apply to the Nature of Life, and being cyclitic. The matter within the human body recycles; so must it's energy.
The human body loses exactly 21 grams of weight at the moment of brain-death. And nothing can stop 'existing'; all things merely change form. Law of Nature.
Is life Ever-Lasting? No. Life... is inevitable.
I would rather not believe that people are still quoting that bogus study from 1907... Regarding 21 grams of weight lost at the moment of death. Referencing that work as if it were valid science completely undermines your credibility.
I was not regarding anything as valid science. I was taking a verbal shit in this thread making fun of everyone's seriousness on this topic.
God is real. Fact.
-
Everlasting Life? Depends on what you consider life. Actually it doesn't matter what you consider life. It's true that all the matter there is was created during the big bang and it just keeps getting regurgitated. We (our bodies) are a collection of that regurgitation. However, our conscious mind is not a physical property and I think that is what you are referring to. My belief is that the conscious mind operates on an off/on switch, the brain, which completely and independently fabricates the conscious mind, where we mentally live. This conscious space is a matrix, not unlike the movie, except ours is biologically based. All of our sensory inputs receive outside data and our brain interprets these stimuli and presents a fabricated reality to "us", to our thinking, conscious minds. There is no such thing as color. It only exists in our minds. Everything we see is a reflection, a mirror, except those things that can shine on their own. You don't actually see objects, but rather their reflection. Your mind fills in about 80% of your periphery vision with color that you can't even perceive because you have no cones with which to see color, only rods which perceive black and white. Yet when you stare straight ahead. you see color in 180 degrees...but it's not there. Have someone take a brightly colored object and stand behind you. Look straight ahead as they bring the object into your field of vision, from the side and toward the front of your field of vision. You won't be able to tell the color of that object until it is about in the 2 o'clock position as you stare straight ahead. The optical nerve and the network that radiates out from the base creates a blind spot the size of silver dollar at arms length plus a number of blind branches emanating from it. None of you see anything in these areas. Your mind fills it all in for you. When we experience de ja vu, what is actually happening is the brain is stuttering and restarts its reality transmission in milliseconds. You are re-presented the same reality picture and overcome with a feeling of having the experience before, because you did, just miliseconds ago. There are tons and tons of examples like this. We experience a manufactured reality. We are not in control. Our brains are in control. The conscious mind is a tiny subset of what's going on in the brain. It may very well be that we think of as being alive, isn't -- it doesn't exist, and therefore we don't either, not in the conscious sense.
Some feel that consciousness is actually a "dumbed down" experience, not the higher order mechanism we all think it is. Now, that isn't to say that hasn't been a useful feature, it certainly has been a fantastic evolutionary advancement and put us right at the top of the heap as a species. But it doesn't make us any more special than that. Does anyone here know what's going on in your pancreas right now? Anybody feel that polyp growing in your intestine. Does anyone know how to attack that cell that just went rogue before it splits and becomes a tumor using your white blood cell army? Can anyone explain why Red + Green = Yellow? Do you see red in yellow? Green?
There was a trippy theory sometime back before they started finding more purpose in the DNA strand. When it was first coded, a very large percentage (like 2/3) was called "Junk DNA" because it didn't appear to have any useful function, it was considered an evolutionary leftover without a contemporary purpose. This is now known not to be true. But back then there was some murmuring, a fucking weird ass "what if". What if this "Junk DNA" was the sole purpose of existence? What if we are just hosts for this junk DNA? Hmmm....
-
"The same theories could very well apply to the Nature of Life, and being cyclitic. The matter within the human body recycles; so must it's energy."
That's not the current thinking which envisions a dying and eventually, totally dead and utterly cold universe that keeps expanding forever. So dead that even the black holes die by completely evaporating through Hawkings radiation.
Smoke 'em if you got 'em.
-
There are two meanings of 'everlasting' -- a state that goes on forever and ever WITHIN time, and a state that is simply unconditioned by time.
Life is 'everlasting' in the latter sense. There is the day that passes, and there is the complete day. The future eternally 'exists'.
This is a very interesting concept and here's a twist on your "the future eternally exists" concept. Sure, the future is internal, or perhaps better said "it's infinite". That's true, whereas the past and the present are finite. But taken all together.....hmmmm.
We've all heard the lofty guru-ish statement that "Time is an illusion" but I never really understood what that meant until recently. Usually it's couched in terms like Einstein's theory of relativity, where time is relative to the observer and that's what I thought that saying meant. But that's not it at all according to a philosopher (as in Plato, not Ram Dass) I had the pleasure of speaking with a few weeks ago. He explained that it may well be that time is static -- all time -- past, present, and future. We experience time as an arrow, the past is behind us, the present is now, and the future is ahead of us. Yet that may be unique to our experience and what is really happening is that we are simply moving through a static dimension of time and so it feels as though time flows. But imagine if it's just one eternal thing, one infinite thing, all that ever was and ever will be all wrapped up as a static dimension, frozen if you will.
No consider the implications. That means you don't have free choice -- free choice is an illusion. Every choice you make, ever action you take is predetermined, static. Time is an illusion.
Fascinating concept. Kind of a bummer, but hey...
-
...all laws of nature are contingent on consciousness.
Ahhh...a romantic. I love it. If you're right, then you could be God. Pleasure to meet you. I mean, to meet myself, I mean your own self from myself (yourself) because you would be conversing with yourself but cleverly disguised as another entity because it's boring to be God. I hope you're God and not me. It would get so tiring working yourself out of those knotty mind twisters if you are God and staying in the Romantic camp. How do you do it?
-
"The same theories could very well apply to the Nature of Life, and being cyclitic. The matter within the human body recycles; so must it's energy."
That's not the current thinking which envisions a dying and eventually, totally dead and utterly cold universe that keeps expanding forever. So dead that even the black holes die by completely evaporating through Hawkings radiation.
Smoke 'em if you got 'em.
That entire post was nonsense on my part. I was just trying to fit in with as much crazy pseudoscience as I could cram into one post and make it sound semi-convincing. The irony is it worked; and now people think I'm a nut-case in this thread. I'm trying to avoid using emoticons, and 'lol', it seriously seems to make people take everything you say on the forums literally!
On a side note, while under DMT(blasted off fully) there is a state of awareness, but a separation from the physical world. A completely submersive disconnect from reality, time, and self. I have had experiences where I was under for 30-40 minutes, and while I was under it felt like 20 years but when I woke, it felt like the single blink of an eye. That does wonders for opening the mind to new concepts surrounding time, life, spirit, etc.
The craziest part about blasting off is seeing yourself from a 3rd person perspective; which has happened to me 50% of the time, maybe less. But when it happens, I'm always wearing the same clothes, and in the same place I was when I took the hit. It's weird as fuck. :)
-
Those 21 grams you will lose if you die is bullocks.
Show me a scientific publication!
The 90% water in your body is old. like the iron and chalk.
Every partical is at least 500 million years old.
So you are 500 million years old, but the fire/spark of life is starting when the sperm enters the egg.
So your hardware has always been there and will ever be there. It's the spark of live that you have to pass trough (kids)
The purpose of live, every live. Take a plant, is to make kids (seeds). The plant grows to only to make a flower, so it can make seeds. Then it's job is done. So it is. Like the fish salmon or human. Be born, reproduce and die.
-
When I was younger I used to be absolutely terrified of the thought of just not existing when I died. In fact I was more terrified of there being to life after death than I was of going to Hell.
All it really takes is some deeper thought though. Complete oblivion after death isn't bad at all. It seems scary, but when you think about it, what is there to be scared of? What is there to feel anything about? The idea of nothing is so completely foreign to us that it seems terrifying, but in reality, it's impossible for it to be fun or scary, pleasurable or painful. If you can come to terms with the fact that contemplating what happens after we die is essentially a pointless endeavor, then you can be even more free to live the life you have to the fullest!
-
are we having deep thoughts again Ralph??
;)
i hope all is well homie!!
-
...all laws of nature are contingent on consciousness.
Ahhh...a romantic. I love it. If you're right, then you could be God. Pleasure to meet you. I mean, to meet myself, I mean your own self from myself (yourself) because you would be conversing with yourself but cleverly disguised as another entity because it's boring to be God. I hope you're God and not me. It would get so tiring working yourself out of those knotty mind twisters if you are God and staying in the Romantic camp. How do you do it?
All I'm saying in regards to this sentence is that human consciousness is capable of perceiving limited dimensions. Our study of empirical science is only based off our own consciousness and therefore are contingent upon them. So taking a scientific perspective on answering the question of eternity assumes that eternity is something that is capable of knowing empirically a posteriori. But if this were true then we would have adequate explanations for such trivial questions such as the beginning and end of time, the size of the universe, free will and determinism, etc. Which I do not think materialists can provide (refer to my post in its entirety rather than a single sentence).
If you disagree with what I write then you must have an alternative grounding for your own arguments. You're welcome to dispute this and to defend materialism, if this is the point of your post.
I believe you're taking a slice from Spinoza so therefore you mean to say a "Spinozist" instead of a romantic. I am neither of those however I do love his philosophy and the belief in pantheism.
-
It's true that all the matter there is was created during the big bang and it just keeps getting regurgitated.
What caused the big bang? If there was no matter before the big bang then how do you explain what the big bang was?
Everything we see is a reflection, a mirror, except those things that can shine on their own. You don't actually see objects, but rather their reflection.
I'm willing to entertain the Kantian notion which you present being that no object can be perceived in and of itself by the human apparatus. I would like to know your opinion about the afterlife then. Do you think we can perceive beyond our brain's capacity after we die?
It may very well be that we think of as being alive, isn't -- it doesn't exist, and therefore we don't either, not in the conscious sense.
So you've given a good explanation of what isn't existence. Do you have an explanation for what existence is?
Some feel that consciousness is actually a "dumbed down" experience, not the higher order mechanism we all think it is. Now, that isn't to say that hasn't been a useful feature, it certainly has been a fantastic evolutionary advancement and put us right at the top of the heap as a species. But it doesn't make us any more special than that.
I completely agree with you; our mind operates in a utility to maximise chances of our survival and to prioritise the things that keep us alive. That's why my brain hates when I do philosophy when I'm hungry. I think we've become more capable of intellectual challenges as our comfort zones have evolved - i.e. no longer having to spend time hunting for food or finding shelter. However the question arises what do we lose out on by not having these experiences? Do we lose out on living life as it is supposed to be lived? There's a delicate balance required between experiencing natural living and living for minimum effort. It's a tangent from the topic at hand but an important one to note nonetheless - it's important to feel the hardshed and wonders of nature so as not to convert to a complete nihilist, in which I think society has become.
But back then there was some murmuring, a fucking weird ass "what if". What if this "Junk DNA" was the sole purpose of existence? What if we are just hosts for this junk DNA? Hmmm....
If we didn't have people asking what if then we would have a slow time advancing to where we are now.
-
No consider the implications. That means you don't have free choice -- free choice is an illusion. Every choice you make, ever action you take is predetermined, static. Time is an illusion.
Fascinating concept. Kind of a bummer, but hey...
I think it's a correct statement that we don't have free will in the true sense. I am determined to perform actions within the capabilities of my body as a human. My genetics are about 50% those of my family and so there was some predeterminism as to how I would be shaped as a being. My upbringing determined how intelligent I would become. I believe we are on a determined path but the path has many alternatives endings based on what paths we choose in life (which differentiates determinism with fatalism). Determinism is the view that it must be that, if earlier determining conditions obtain then the determined event will occur.
The fallacy of free will has an evolutionary advantage of conferring the illusion of responsibility. So it's probably a good thing that people don't realise this ;)
-
If Endless Life exists and it is Eternal as the Hindus believe, if you then perceive that Existence to be a form of slavery then Buddhism offers Annihilation and an end to the Wheel of Samsara.
Physicists have argued that very little of the atomic matter of the Earth leaves the gravity well. So whatever people think about hovering or going to outer space, it was probably their mental software dealing with their physical hardware shutting down. 22 grams or whatever doesn't leave the gravity well of Earth.
The question becomes: Is it possible that evolution is the universe trying to perceive itself as painlessly as possible?
What if we modify our personal behavior to correspond more with the resonance of the universe, or nature, or society, or your family, etc. Flow with the resonance.... Then we see that the path of least resistence actually decreases suffering here and now, whether life is eternal or not.
-
Some serious scientists believe that there are an infinite number of "yous", in an infinite number of universes, all slightly different. They say there is a multiverse, with new universes being created all the time. So if you buy into this theory, time may be everlasting, even if life is not.
-
IMO- Life is eternal and death is only something the living have to deal with. We come to ourselves only after having had a history. With regard to our own death, we never really get to I'm dead. Life is all that anyone has ever really known.
-
Even if death means oblivion doesn't necessarily mean we should fear it. We've all experienced it before we were born and it was neither a positive or a negative - just neutral. I do, however, yearn to believe that there is something (anything) after death, but it is a question which can never be proven, either by science or religion, so maybe we shouldn't concern ourselves with what happens when we die.
-
What caused the big bang? If there was no matter before the big bang then how do you explain what the big bang was?
I'm willing to entertain the Kantian notion which you present being that no object can be perceived in and of itself by the human apparatus. I would like to know your opinion about the afterlife then. Do you think we can perceive beyond our brain's capacity after we die?
So you've given a good explanation of what isn't existence. Do you have an explanation for what existence is?
"...the question arises what do we lose out on by not having these experiences? Do we lose out on living life as it is supposed to be lived?"
"If we didn't have people asking what if then we would have a slow time advancing to where we are now."
Sharonneedles, what a pleasure to meet you. I have been jones-ing for a thinking person like you for soooooo long. Apologies for my somewhat flippant "You May Be God" comment, although it's a valid point and interesting topic.
I'll address your first question for now and return shortly with answers to the rest and questions/challenges for you. But first, let me say that I'm not wedded to any particular philosophical construct and willing to entertain pretty much anything, even fantastical notions and thought experiments. Further, every view I have is a temporary explanation that invites challenge. Finally, you're clearly more formally educated in philosophical theory than I am, but I'm pretty sure I can hang. Cool?
Big Bang: It doesn't require a cause. Something can come from nothing. This has recently been proved scientifically. Check out the YouTube video "A Universe From Nothing" by Lawrence Krauss -- excellent overview of the contemporary cosmological view, although it's a little too long and his style is annoying.
Back soon!
~Besos~
-
When you die on Earth, you are reborn as a new life form on another planet, and you lose all memory of your past lives and experiences. Jesus the Christ was an alien who came to the Jews to tell them that they were once part of a species of alien that lived on gold(as food). But in their human form, they have to actually survive on matza and diamonds. Later, the Romans would take to the words of Christ as fact, and proof of God because they saw the Jews consumption of Matza and precious gems come to fruition. Thus, the Vatican is in Rome. Well, not 'really' Rome, they call it Vatican City. But we all know it's Rome.
Moral of the story is that in 1907, it was proven that the Soul is worth about 3 quarters of weed.
And that Hell is real. But so is re-incarnation. Life is definitely not ever-lasting though.
-
"... human consciousness is capable of perceiving limited dimensions. Our study of empirical science is only based off our own consciousness and therefore are contingent upon them. So taking a scientific perspective on answering the question of eternity assumes that eternity is something that is capable of knowing empirically a posteriori. But if this were true then we would have adequate explanations for such trivial questions such as the beginning and end of time, the size of the universe, free will and determinism, etc. Which I do not think materialists can provide (refer to my post in its entirety rather than a single sentence)."
True we have cognitive limitations and operate with a fabricated perception of reality. But our minds are not limited to 3-space 1-time. With mathematics, for example, we can quite easily work with dimensions beyond the basic 4. We are not limited to our physiological perception either. True, we can only see within a tiny range along the electromagnetic spectrum (visible) light), yet we can observe and measure every wavelength of the spectrum with specialized instruments. That said, I agree that we are limited, but that doesn't mean that what we know or discovered are half truths, it only suggests that there could be more we are incapable of knowing because of our limitations. Further, it's self evident that the body of knowledge humans have assembled is dependent on the humans to have assembled it in the first place. But that's not the same as saying that facts, laws, and theories are dependent on conscious minds. We discovered them, not invented them.
"So taking a scientific perspective on answering the question of eternity assumes that eternity is something that is capable of knowing empirically a posteriori. "
Forget about empirical observation, how about just doing it? How about human immortality within 100 years? Yes, everlasting life, eternity, made possible by Science, nanotechnology specifically.
"...beginning and end of time, the size of the universe, free will and determinism..."
There's a great explanation on the beginning of time, the big bang. The end of time? Do you mean the Big Crunch? The time on that is calcuable. But current thinking is infinitely expanding universe, there is no end of time. Free will and determinism? Ok, got me there. Science can't explain those (currently) and if your point is that science is incapable of answering everything, I agree. The scientific method is limited to that which is observable, measurable, and repeatable. And our little ol' brains are limited too. That said, science has explained a helluva lot more that any other discipline by far. The fact that it can't explain everything doesn't mean it's flawed.
Btw, Science is not separate from Philosophy, but a branch. Before it was called Science, it was called Natural Philosophy. Before they were called Scientists, they were called Natural Philosophers. If you're a philosopher, you're just a couple concepts away from being a scientist! ;-)