--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@...> wrote: > > I liked the books quite a bit, having never had any problem with wizards > myself, I like her style of writing too.
I don't like the insto-get-out clause that magic gives you. I saw the Lord of the Rings movies and almost really enjoyed them - part 2 was sublime actually - Trouble was the magic, in the first episode the main hobbit gets a spear the size of a telegraph pole right through his chest pinning him to a concrete pillar! I thought that must be the end and got up to leave but no! He was wearing a magic waistcoat. How it might work I don't know, maybe some sort of quantum superposition? I guess you're supposed to suspend your disbelief at that point but I can't, I have to have a consistent metaphysics or I think the writer is just being lazy. Iain Banks does it in some of his sci-fi, one of his characters will be in an impossible situation with no possible escape and suddenly we find out that he's a shape shifter, which never got mentioned before, and he slides out of an air vent or something. Lazy, lazy... I think if you are going to have spells then they have to be consistently used, if Harry Potter could kill the bad guy with a wave of his wand, why doesn't he do it from a safe distance rather than waiting till he's hanging upside down in a cellar? Sorry. It's a pet peeve. > ________________________________ > From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodlewix@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 1:07 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > >  > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> wrote: > > > > Oh my lord! That means you can't abide that English woman, Jo Rowling!!!!! > > Deary me no, Harry Potter and the Gob of Shite. Admittedly I > haven't read any of the books and why my (female) friends used > to recommend them to me I don't know, but I sat through one of the movies and > wanted to gnaw my legs off after 5 minutes. > > I think I'm a bit too old for Voldemort being past puberty as I > am... > > > ________________________________ > > From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodlewix@> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 11:41 AM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > > > > > > à> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> wrote: > > > > > > Awww, Come on Sal, why you don't like Deepak? > > > > I don't like any of these guru types who make a fortune out > > of seekers, even if it is their own choice. I don't like the > > reliance on quantum physics as a prop for woolly thinking > > and undeliverable promises or pushing untested folk medicine. > > I don't like the whole "veda is truth" thing. Basically my > > same reasons for disliking the TMO. > > > > I am interested in his split from the TMO though, in our old > > tape cupboard at the academy we had a huge box of videos > > featuring Deepak with a "not to be played" sign on them. I > > gather he went from quite the darling to public enemy number one > > very swiftly but I never managed to get a straight answer about > > why from anybody. > > > > Usually it was that he changed Marshy's teaching (I thought it > > was him teaching Marshy about AV) or that he made some personal > > money out of it which TM bigwigs saw as some sort of ultimate > > crime. Bizarrely, as they still sell no end of courses in vedic #wisdom > > promising a fruitful career. Maybe they were annoyed as > > he was the only one who ever did make a buck out of the TMO. > > I know precious few who ever got any "nature" support from that direction. > > > > > > > > I know I have enjoyed his writing - especially his first fiction novel, > > > Return of Merlin which he supposedly wrote the bulk of during the year > > > when he was looking after the Big M subsequent to his being poisoned. I > > > loved that novel. > > > > Didn't know he wrote fiction though, but I never liked fantasy > > novels anyway, if I even get a sniff of a wizard I'm off - It's > > sci-fi for me if I'm feeling speculative. > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodlewix@> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 2:22 AM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > > > > > > > > > > Ãâà> > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Seraphita" <s3raphita@> wrote: > > > > > > > If you're interested in the debate with materialists, you > > > > could do a lot better than Chopra. He's not what I would > > > > call a rigorous thinker. > > > > > > He's an asshole. > > > > > > > You might try Thomas Nagel's "Mind and Cosmos: Why the > > > > Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost > > > > Certainly False." > > > > > > > > Nagel got in a lot of trouble with the big-time materialists; > > > > the book really upset them, so he must have hit close to the > > > > bone. > > > > > > LOL. > > > > > >
