--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: >
> So these are some of the initial studies done which reflect on > pacification when a meditator has a practice which can effectively > pacify his or her negative emotions--and how that state resonates > spontaneously with others. Sorry for delay, I'm reading so much new > material, it took me a while to find and review this older material, > which from 9 or 10 years ago. Enjoy. The thing that occurs to me straight away on reading your post Vaj is that (a) the study was of ONE "western Buddhist meditator, who was an expert in various meditational styles" (which sounds to me as if The Mystery can be reduced to something like a martial arts training gym). I then read: "Ekman's results were astounding: the expert meditators were two standard deviations above the norm, far beyond what had ever been previously demonstrated". That should read "The single expert meditator tested was two...", no? Then I read: "This same finding was also replicated in another western Buddhist meditator". So we have a sample size of two. Then (b), the researcher (Ekman) was obviously pre-disposed to the results he claims to have achieved. The thing is, would you accept such research standards in the context of TM? I guess you would say that this is "preliminary research" to get it off the methodological hook. But as I recall, that cut no ice with you when considering the TM research on kids with ADHD?
