--- In [email protected], Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From a friend: > > Dear Rick > > I forwarded the tm article by Hebert and the comparison buddhist study on to > David Bruce Hughes aka Gaurahari Dasanudas Bhaktisiddhartha or Baba. I > thought he might find it interesting. He asked me to forward on to his > reply. > Here it is: > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" wrote: > > This is your brain on TM. Look at figure 2, page 10: > > http://brainresearchinstitute.org/research/totalbrain/TM&synch_SignalProc05_ > Hebert.pdf > > This is your brain doing one of the Buddhist meditation techniques. Clearly > a difference, > though what it means is anyone¹s guess at this point: > > http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/101/46/16369/FIG1 > > End forwarded message > > > Well, first of all the measurements were made with different analytical > interpretive modalities, electrode placements, baselines and timescales.
LOL. There were more electrodes used in the Buddhist study, but the placement was the same standard 10-20 placement in both. http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/1020.html The TM study: "scalp preparation and electrode application using the ECI International electrode cap with elastic band cap with conventional 1020 placements. Electrode locations included Fp1, Fp2, F3, F4, F7, F8, Fz, C3, C4, Cz, T3, T4, T5, T6, P3, P4, Pz, O1, O2 with a ground between Fz and Cz." The BUddhist study: "EEG data were recorded at standard extended 10/20 positions with a 128-channel Geodesic Sensor Net (Electrical Geodesics, Eugene, OR), sampled at 500 Hz, and referenced to the vertex (Cz) with analog band-pass filtering between 0.1 and 200 Hz. EEG signals showing eye movements or muscular artifacts were manually excluded from the study. A digital notch filter was applied to the data at 60 Hz to remove any artifacts caused by alternating current line noise." So > it is very difficult to draw any comparison whatsoever between the two EEGs, > because any perceived differences could just as easily be artifacts of the > measurements, sampling processes and presentations. Similarly, under these > circumstances, any perceived similarities in the data would most likely be > purely coincidental. What is his background? > > More cogently, we have to ask whether the research approach is really > appropriate to the subject. Are brainwave measurements, no matter how > sophisticated, really indicative of the operation or qualities of > consciousness? Ontologically, consciousness is a transcendental quality of a > transcendental object: the jivatma or spirit soul. Material senses or their > extensions such as scientific instruments and ordinary logic cannot detect, > measure or predict the behavior of transcendental objects. The proof is that > after so much intensive theorizing and experimentation, science is no closer > to an adequate predictive theory of consciousness today than they were 30 > years ago. What is his background? > > The presentation is a classic case of using an ontologically inappropriate > approach and methodology. Consciousness is transcendental, therefore only a > transcendental instrument can apprehend it. Consciousness is subjective, > therefore only subjective processes of measurement and analysis are > appropriate to it. > > If we are to establish a truly scientific platform for the study of > consciousness, it must itself be of the equivalent ontological quality as > the object being studied. Therefore at the final conclusion, the original > Vedic method of submission to the sruti-siddhanta and obediance to guru is > really the best platform for consciousness study. Until the scientific > community accepts this axiomatic truth, they will never make significant > progress in their study of consciousness because they are not even able to > observe it. > > love, > Baba > IOW, studies are worthless: Pay attention to the wizard, not the guy behind the curtain. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
