Share Long: > ...I had heard about the thoroughness of Wilbur's > system but this is the first time I've read about > it... > Don't be intimidated, Share. You already know more than you realize, just by your practice of TM, without even considering the hard problem.
>From what I've read, Ken Wilber has been practicing with Zen Master for some time and his parents have tried TM. For the average TMer it's enough for most just to understand that consciousness is the only reality, the Absolute Being. TMers only need to understand that individual consciousness is just relative, a 'spectrum of consciousness' in the individual. Excerpt from Mandukya Karika IV by Gaudapada: "Duality is only an appearance; non-duality is the real truth. The object exists as an object for the knowing subject; but it does not exist outside of consciousness because the distinction of subject and object is within consciousness." (IV 25-27) Sharma, p. 245-246. The hard problem' is the question of how physical processes in the brain give rise to subjective experience. It's a good question, but what's needed in order to understand consciousness is a 'practice' such as Zen or TM, so that individuals can experience an inner spiritual paradigm. In TM this is called CC and in Zen, 'kensho'. According to Wilber, in order for scientists to understand consciousness there must be a change in consciousness on the part of researchers themselves. A review of the various interpretations of quantum mechanics and its possible role in consciousness studies: 'Eye to Eye: The Quest for the New Paradigm' by Ken Wilber Shambhala, 1996 > > > Judy why do you think it's not useful to try > > > to make any connections or draw parallels > > > between the "hard problem" approach to > > > consciousness and any Eastern system? > > > > > Share: If you find Judy's discussion lacking, > > Ken Wilber has provided a synthesis of virtually > > all psychological theories and spiritual > > perspectives in this short introduction to his > > spectrum of consciousness. > > > > 'No Boundary: Eastern and Western Approaches to Personal Growth' > > by Ken Wilber > > Shamhala, 1979 > > Much better she read this: > > http://www.imprint.co.uk/Wilber.htm > > Written in 1997, it represents almost two decades of > Wilber's thinking after "No Boundary" and actually > mentions the "hard problem" (Chalmers didn't even > introduce the term until the early '90s). And Wilber's > had another 16 years since then to develop his theories. > > If nothing else, Share will see why I was discouraging > her from attempting to make her own synthesis when she > doesn't even understand the nature of the "hard problem" > (and won't until she deals with it on its own terms > rather than trying to "explain" it via Maharishi's > teaching). >
