--- In [email protected], "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@...> wrote: > > > And universal consciousness may be more than just an > > idea; it may be the experiential realization of > > some people. > > I guess the question there is whether you can trust > the experience to be what it appears to be or whether > it is just a consequence of jiggering around with our > heads via drugs or meditation or even mental illness > and concluding that because we have no boundaries that > must be how it is. Surely people in these states > would be able to come up with some sort of testable > statement even if it only compares theoretically,
I don't know whether that last is true. What they can do is tell you how to have the same experience for yourself--that's testable, but of course only subjectively. > but I haven't seen any evidence for that, even king > Tony's "cognizance" only stems so far as a book he > read appearing in human physiology, whatever that > means I don't either. I've never heard what he's done described that way. (and I've read it - utterly surreal that any > scientist could be so uncritical) > > The universe we perceive in our heads is a picture > based on info from our senses, change the way bits > of our brain relate to create that picture and you > have the unbounded sense that we all know and love, > is how I see it. You could well be right. But what I was addressing was your statement that it was only "an idea" or a "guru belief."
