--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "hugheshugo" > > > <richardhughes103@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Rick Archer <groups@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > 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? > > > > > > > > Of course they are, consciousness is a quality of the brain > > > > therefore measuring the brainwaves gives us at least an idea of > > > > what's going on. > > > > > > Whenever I hear something like this, I find myself > > > wondering whether everyone who says it has completely > > > forgotten the Bardo experience, between death and > > > rebirth. Consciousness doesn't stop. It's there while > > > the body is lying dead in its coffin and the brain is > > > no longer functioning, and its there long after the > > > body has been reduced to ashes in the crematorium. > > > So what part of that consciousness do you believe > > > is based on your physical brain? > > > > First, unless someone has had (or at least remembers) > > that experience themselves, there's no way to make a > > distinction between that and some delusional state. > > Even if you HAVE had such an experience, there's no > > way to make the distinction, at least when talking to > > other people who haven't had the experience. > > What is having the "delusional" experience? :-) > > Bottom line, dude, is that some of us are comfortable > trusting our subjective experiences.
Bottom line, twit, is that Lawson is making an epistemological point, not one about "trust." > As we have determined often on this forum, Oops, the royal "we." Or perhaps the divine "we." you are not, and place your faith in > 'science,' most of it of the "If we search hard enough > and slant our interpretations of our 'research' findings > far enough, we can 'prove' that what Maharishi has said > is true" variety. :-) > > Oh, I forgot the "If there is a difference between the > findings for TM meditators and any other meditators, > always assume that the reason for this is that TM is > 'better'" variety. :-) There goes Barry, fantasizing again for the purpose of making a putdown. >From Lawson's post about the TM vs. Buddhist brainwave tracings: "Clearly a difference, though what it means IS ANYONE'S GUESS AT THIS POINT" [emphasis added] And a final gratuitous slam: > If that's the way some people choose to live their lives, > cool. Those of us who actually have subjective experiences > of interesting aspects of the enlightenment process and > who aren't afraid to trust them wish these people well > with that approach. But it does seem to me that your > personal reliance on 'science' seems to have a great > deal of "Those who can, do; those who can't, do research" > about it. :-) Have I mentioned lately what an elitist Barry is? 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/
