--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote: > > But you used the term "world view," which you should > know is incorrect.
Not to me. The big leap is the buy-in concerning his interpretation of the meditation experiences. His world view is that everything in the world is an expression of the absolute. This is what he spends most of his time discussing, not the political stuff. So if you are saying that you don't buy his world view that human consciousness can experience the home of all the laws of nature of the universe, and that this absolute being is in fact your own higher Self, then you may have a point. Although the distinctions you draw are relevant in certain discussions, they don't diminish my impression that you agree with his world view. You seem to disagree on how he applies his world view in specific contexts. > > As far > > as how emotionally invested your are we probably > > disagree, but who cares right? > > Forgot to comment on this. I care, because "emotional > investment" is a putdown in this context. Is it for you? I am emotionally invested in my POV concerning Maharishi's teachings. It was hard earned and I am proud of it. I think denying any emotional investment in something so obviously important in your life seems a bit slippery. That is why I mentioned it. We are not creatures who can claim such detachment. From my own experience, rejecting the beliefs in Maharishi's POV, reveals how much these beliefs mean to us. For you to consider that he may be wrong about human consciousness would have profound emotional implications due to years of commitment to them. Emotional investment and what Dr. Caldini refers to in his book "Influence" as the unconscious patterns of "consistency and commitment" are huge factors in how willing we are to re-examine long held beliefs. I am just as vulnerable to it's influence as you are. However if you were to use the phrase on me I might react exactly as you have, so I also see your point. I didn't mean that this is your only investment in your beliefs. You have obviously given them more thought than most people involved in the teaching and I give you credit for that as well. > > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > This post has some interesting insight. I think > > > > Judy's description of her own motives seem accurate. > > > > I know she also has a deep emotional investment in > > > > Maharishi's world view, > > > > > > Not his "world view" but his teaching on the nature > > > and mechanics of consciousness (and it's much less > > > "emotional" than intellectual and experiential). > > > > > I *disagree* with a great deal of his world view > > > (political, social, economic, behavioral, etc.). > > > > I understand the focus of what you agree with in > > his teaching and where you draw your lines. > > But you used the term "world view," which you should > know is incorrect. > > As far > > as how emotionally invested your are we probably > > disagree, but who cares right? > > Forgot to comment on this. I care, because "emotional > investment" is a putdown in this context. >
