On Jun 10, 2006, at 8:18 PM, new_morning_blank_slate wrote:

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Jun 10, 2006, at 3:26 PM, new_morning_blank_slate wrote:

You have quite missed the point about magical thinking.  And about

subjective science.

I'm merely replying to your brief remarks and less all this other  

stuff, which honestly simply does not interest me in the least.

My points on magical thinking should stand on their own.

It does. In mid air. You have using it in a quite different way as the

discussion (without clarification --or apparently even understanding

that.) Not a path for clear communications.

But it seemed Lawson got it right on, so that (to me) is a good sign. But OTOH Lawson is a pretty deep thinker, so some might not get it.

I tend to assume a fairly high caliber of discussion here and people with some above average understanding, above and beyond any particular paradigm. I'd bet most people got it. It might be less so for you because you were deeply interested in Kurtz's unique presentation from the *inside*, while someone like me who has little interest in him or his book, sees it from the *outside*.

I guess to state it plainly I'd have to restate one of Arthur C. Clarke's three "laws" of prediction:

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

I would modify that slightly and say:

"Any sufficiently advanced State of Consciousness is indistinguishable from magic (or magical thinking, depending on what is being "distinguished") to people of conventional states of consciousness."


To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to:
and click 'Join This Group!'

Religion and spirituality Maharishi mahesh yogi



Reply via email to