--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 8, 2007, at 12:43 PM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mar 8, 2007, at 11:18 AM, sparaig wrote:
> >>
> >>> Are you under the impression that PC is an active mental state,
> >>> filled with thoughts and
> >>> problem-solving activities?
> >>
> >>
> >> There is no mention of PC in the citation Sparaig. I believe the
> >> researchers refer to PC as a "metaphysical
> >> assertion" rather than any sceintific reality. In fact the idea
that
> >> people are experiencing something called PC, is one
indoctrinated in
> >> them before they begin the practice. Unfortunately, it does not
> >> appear the researchers are aware of the tendency for "experience
> >> coaching".
> >>
> >
> > Er, yeah, but the citation of Travis 2004 clearly discusses PC
and CC.
>
>
> Exactly the point, these are all metaphysical assertions, not
> scientific realities, further more TMers--particularly long-term
> TMers are coached as to what these experiences are supposed to be
and
> what they are supposed to mean.
>
> I can't say for sure, but it looks to me as if TM research has
> largely been discredited here. All the claims we've heard for
years
> and years were not only huge exaggerations, but really, really
> reaching beyond what was scientifically feasible. A bunch of more
> research on the same old thing isn't likely to change anything
> (except perhaps make it look even more suspect). What I am forced
to
> wonder is 'was there some high-up figurehead in the TMO
*insisting*
> this is what the data meant', even though it did not. That's what
it
> sounds like is happening.
>
Even if all the research is BS, you just can't argue with Reality,
can ya?
