As I recall that was Larry Domash: "analogies break down if they are pushed too far." David Clay often made the same point in regard to potentially ad hoc arguments. But, alas, there are no philosophers left at MU (that is because "philosophy is a shear waste of time," I assume). But logically speaking all that doesn't mean the ME isn't true. And if you think Hegelin is not aware of all these issues you're kidding yourselves.
sparaig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jan 4, 2007, at 3:52 PM, sparaig wrote: > > >> It's merely an analogy. Early MIU textbooks on physics (which were > >> self-published) detailed these analogies but then in a responsible > >> fashion gave a concluding chapter which stated these were just > >> analogies and 'you can only take analogies so far.' However I > >> wouldn't be surprised if the map had become the territory given the > >> cultish setting of the TMO. > >> > > > > Yeah, but the concept of constructive interference is the > > quintessence of the analogy. > > There's no analogy whatsoever if this part isn't correct in some > > respect. There's no "taking > > it too far" since if that part isn't right, there's nothing to take > > anywhere... > > > Well wouldn't that assume that the ME is propagated by *waves*? Basic > physics measures these realities by doing fourier analysis of wave > motion and their interactions. Is this being done to posit outcomes? > That's where the analogy may not make sense (or it may). My little webpage on EEG shows what may be quantum mechanical effects of meditation in the brain (though there are certainly other possible explanations). There's certainly a plausible case that the unform EEG traces of meditation are propgated in some way to other people, just as thy are to remarkably distant (in brain terms) groups of neurons within the meditator's own brain: http://web.mac.com/lawsonenglish/iWeb/Site/Meditation%20EEG.html > I'm just reading some work from the late, great neurophysiologist > Francisco J. Varela titled Ethical Know-How: Action, Wisdom, and > Cognition. It posits a different theory from neurobiology and > cognitive science which uses emptiness as it's basis and considers > Unity as a kind of a "virtual Self". It does not require or see a > need for a transcendental "Self" as it's basis nor any wave for > propagation (nor a need for "groups"). It's quite a good read if your > open minded. > All this is fine, but the ME and extended ME are based on the assumption that the constructive interference of waves can be used as an anology to describe/predict what happens to the surroundings of a meditator. Take away that and there is no analogy at all. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
