Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention

[R C Macaulay]

Howdy Ed,
A very quality analysis of the direction taken in the thread. I always 
understood Sai Baba to be a mystic but I can agree a mystic may not be 
considered a mystic as long as his heart is pure and the gold is 24 karat.. 
Ole Balaam had this problem too, but God helped him out a little by having 
his donkey make a jackass outa him. Balaam was from an ole line of 
soothsayers,cardsharps, con men, magicians, seers, socalled prophets and 
general all around handy people to have around when you had the money and 
needed a favor. A
The two magicians in Pharoah's court were kinfolks of Balaam that lost a 
perfectly good snake during a magic trick they played on Moses.. but ain't 
nobuddy perfect.
I always gave PT Barnum credit for having a sense of humor and he pulled a 
few rabbits outa his hat  for fun and profit.


Ed Storms wrote.

Let me answer your question, Richard.  The issue was how does a person
evaluate reality. Of course, different kinds of or different levels of
reality exist. Therefore, different methods are required. Science uses
objective evaluation of observation in the material world. The question
was raised about thought transfer as an example of a phenomenon that
appears to be outside of the material world. The resulting discussion
involved how this phenomenon is investigated and how would it behave if
real? I provided another example of this type of reality in the person
of Sai Baba. No mysticism is involved. My point is that examples exist
of phenomenon beyond our understanding of the material world that can be
tested and verified.  Faith and religion are not involved. Of course,
these examples impact on religion, but they do not require a religious
belief. The examples have the same reality we attribute to any chemical
or physical reaction, except they have no physical explanation. How does
an open minded person deal with such a situation? Dismissing the
phenomena as mysticism is a cop-out.