On Jun 10, 2006, at 8:18 PM, new_morning_blank_slate wrote:
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!'
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Cognitve Biases and Logical Falla... Vaj
- Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Cognitve Biases and Logical ... Vaj
- [FairfieldLife] Re: Cognitve Biases and Logical Fall... sparaig
- Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Cognitve Biases and Logi... Vaj
- [FairfieldLife] Re: Cognitve Biases and Logi... sparaig