John Dewey was amongst those saying that science had disenchanted the world and even Dawkins has suggested we need to re-weave the rainbow (a truly awful book). I don't think this is about 'chanting monks' in any direct sense, but do think Molly's statement above is on the right lines, though my back is open to Gabby's 'sharp stick' in that there is a constant danger that we so easily end up with yet another 'elite theory' to be 'inflicted' on others. There is no reason to suppose that Pat's outline is wrong or dismissable - why, given all we know about culture should we not look to potential explanations of spiritual movement and better ways to be? We are open to constant misinterpretation by others. This is hardly surprising, and is compounded by much poor educational practice. I can teach people to produce excellent essays of competitive advantage as propounded by Michael Porter, but this is rather like teaching people to mass-harvest trees and maximise the timber profits without giving any thought to flood damage 'down-line'. The business model is no doubt to keep chopping down the trees and trying to manufacture and sell life-rafts to the down-line 'customers' in the market created. Taking current economics as 'read', the UK faces making more debt interest repayments in a couple of years than we spend on schools and policing - things will be much worse if the recession is more structural than being supposed. One way to 'deal' with this is to cut public spending. No one currently seems prepared to openly publish the spreadsheet on which decisions about what to do will be made. Rather than a public sector pay freeze and job cuts, we might look to a restructuring of the wage bill with a cap at £80,000 a year and progressive cuts down to £13,000 to achieve necessary savings (this would also impact on the pension schemes we can't pay for either). This, and other solutions, could be put forward and we could vote on them. Something 'spiritual' seems connected with both the failure to do this and what might happen if we took the more democratic and open review and actions. I haven't done the sums, but in principle they are easy. To extend this (without full argument), we could also guarantee work in both public and private sectors to help more people be productive rather than languish on benefits.
I'm broadly materialist in that I think a fairer and more decent world 'follows' a fairer and more decent set of basic living conditions. What we don't have is sensible discussion about this, incorporating sensible notions of human nature involving creativity and control and a technology of facts we can trust. Much, for instance, as I like direct democracy, I don't really trust individuals to make the right decisions in our current context. This in turn, does not justify current decision-making practices which are ridden with an iconography of elitist tradition. I think the human population has risen three- fold in my lifetime - not much of an intelligent or rational solution - yet a fact that should be telling us our systems are out of control. I don't believe good spiritual guidance on this concerns edicts on population control being limited to keeping virtuous tools in virtuous trousers, or being told my well-being rests on the actions of elite bankers without whom my (our) efforts are futile, feeble and irrelevant. On 17 Sep, 11:49, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > The healer is already in place- one's rational mind/brain. I tend to > think of shrinks as snake-oil salesmen. But that is a different topic, > isn't it? > > On Sep 17, 12:55 am, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > I believe that every one should work on forging a solid identity. I like > > what Joseph Cambell has to say about this in his book The Hero with a > > Thousand Faces. He says the modern hero is a person who dares to take a > > trip into his or her inner space, identifies their inevitable splits and > > dedicates themselves to reconcilling them. Any one can do this but patients > > have the added advantage of hopefully having a relatively objective guide. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Wed, Sep 16, 2009 3:06 am > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Newton's Spiritual Laws of Motion... > > > ibbs, do you also believe that non-patients should/need to work on > > forging a solid identity...'? > > hanks. > > On Sep 15, 7:42 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > I believe that science and spirituality can mix in the process of a patient > > orking on forging a solid identity if by spirtuality is meant connecting > > with > > asic 'spiritual' concepts of faith, hope, trust. love and persistence all > > ssociated with the consciousness of a one year old child. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vam <[email protected]> > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tue, Sep 15, 2009 10:24 pm > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Newton's Spiritual Laws of Motion... > > > ustin is right, elsewhere, when he says that mixing religion or > > pirituality and science belittles both. Not because they cannot be > > rought together in the same frame but, in my view, because it calls > > or an > > extreme sharpness to learn in one and apply in the other, > > nterchangeably, all the way, untill there remains just one. > > Sadly, Neil, your post merely follows the stereotypical mode : > > eligion vs science. It adds nothing and only seems like one more > > ailing against. I can see you are ' for ' ' something,' but with such > > hought patterns I believe you may be doing no good to your cause, > > hatever it is ! The methodology ( to me, today ) seems extremely > > egressive. Entertaining ? Perhaps, to one who is looking for that. > > I hope you get the job in Dubai. I know it would change your life > > uch, for the better. But, you ? > > > n Sep 16, 4:18 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Science has overturned many fables (though not necessarily the power > > of fable) - I often wonder how we might expose the liturgies > > of > > capitalism for what they are and thus discover what was working given > > that it wasn't. Instead the bwanking priests are still blackmailing > > us along old religious lines - if we don't pay their ransom (tithe) > > they won't do the chanting that ensures our prosperity. They are > > saying this to us even after all their runes and litanies have just > > failed and we have had to empty our social confers to save them. What > > we haven't done is formulated a science of living without their magic > > wand. I actually think Pat is wrong here, though one can see in Vam's > > exegesis notions of f > > orces very familiar in relational physics. > > Physics was never my bag, but my colleagues in it always seemed the > > most religious and inclined to a certain rhythm even if even more > > appalling social misfits than I. These days they are seeking all > > kinds of Indian rhythmic mathematics to see if it somehow sways in > > harmony with the universe they can prod. Even quarks sound like > > mystical history - originally 6 there are now just two, clinging > > together because they are so much more attractive to each other when > > apart. Bwankers in sack-cloth and ashes and worker control of capital > > through government directly and openly consulting the people - now > > there's something to pray for. > > > On 15 Sep, 17:54, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Gunas are fundamental to Sankhya philosophy, also termed Sankhya Yoga. > > > Krishna himself says in Bhagwat Gita that, among all yogas,=2 > > 0he is > > > Sankhya Yoga. And, among all yogis, he is Kapil muni, the stalwart > > > Sankhya yogi. > > > > Gunas takes our realisation of our self beyond the ego, where most of > > > our understanding stops, for the ego is nothing but constituted of > > > gunas. > > > > Even Prakriti, the nature both primordial and individuated, is nothing > > > but constituted of gunas. Only Purusha, or the Witness - Self, is not. > > > > The most popular and well - known of all yogas, Patanjal Yoga, is > > > entirely based of Sankhy > > a principles. > > > > There is never, without exception, when all three gunas are not > > > present in any being or thing. Only occassions when one may > > > predominate, while the other two are dormant or attenuated. By one's > > > choice of realisation, and in thought and action, one may cause the > > > predomination of one. > > > > In Prakriti, or the penultimate realisation, all three gunas are in > > > complete balance, annulling the effect of each other. > > > > Each guna becomes a means to liberation, in correspondingly > > > appropriate situations. > > > > On Sep 15, 4:32 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > When I got home last night, it dawned on me that Sir Isaac > > > > Newton’s main goal and deepest interest was to discover how spirit and > > > > the universe interact; which is why a huge percentage of his writings > > > > were alchemical—the scientific findings were, more or less, a by- > > > > product of his overall search for a Theory of E > > verything, which would, > > > > necessarily, include spiritual phenomena. I then had the thought > > > > that, perhaps he had intended his ‘Laws of Motion’ not just to include > > > > physical bodies, but spiritual bodies, as well. Now, his laws have > > > > been expressed in many ways, but, at home (which is where I am at the > > > > moment of writing this), the only book that I found (I’m s > > ure there > > > > are a couple more, but I couldn’t find them and went with what I found > > > > first) that has them listed is ‘The Hutchison Encyclopaedia—1997’, not > > > > the best source, but, I think, it’s good enough. > > > > The first law states that “unless acted upon by a net force, a > > > > body at rest stays at rest, and a moving body continues moving at the > > > > same speed in the same straight line (direction)”. Now to me, that > > > > just screamed out “That is the Western scientific version of the gunas > > > > of Hinduism”. Vam, I expect, may want to set me straight here with > > > > respect to a few details I gloss over, as his knowledge of Hinduism > > > > far exceeds mine, but, I’ll describe this as I see it. The three > > > > gunas are: Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. They are spiritual qualities/ > > > > forces that, together, express the ‘net spiritual forces’ that affect > > > > us. Sattva is usually depicted as simple (!), clarity of mind,=2 > > 0Rajas > > > > as a disruptive, disturbing influence and Tamas as dullness and > > > > lethargy. In this analogy, I see Sattva as representing an > > > > individual’s truest sense of self, their own unsullied consciousness, > > > > and Rajas (the general disruptive, interactive force) and Tamas > > > > (spiritual inertia), is how one i > > ndividual experiences another > > > > individual’s Sattva. Whilst it is true that one can be affected by > > > > another’s Sattva, it is harmonic enough as to not distress the soul as > > > > do the other forces of Rajas and Tamas. Tamas is what keeps a > > > > depressed person depressed and why it’s harder to motivate a depressed > > > > individual than one who is not depressed. So, too, a mind/soul filled > > > > with Tamas will tend to remain at rest (and depressed and slothful > > > > and, in extreme cases with the right combination of Rajas, self- > > > > harming) until acted upon by sufficient Rajas (and/or Sattva [but it > > > > takes more Rajas at first!]) such that it can, once again, achieve its > > > > own Sattva. Too much Rajas can make an individual aggressive, like a > > > > bull in a china shop and is what keeps the manic, manic. Sattva is > > > > the quiet forward motion with no external forces impinging on it. (Too > > > > much Sattva usually leads to moksha and is not considered > > > > problematic!) > > > > So, to paraphrase Newton’s first Law: A (more) Tamasic soul will > > > > tend t > > o remain Tamasic until acted upon by Rajas (and/or Sattva) and a > > > > (more) Sattvic soul will continue to be Sattvic until acted upon by > > > > Rajas (and/or Tamas). (I inserted the word ‘more’ in there to denote > > > > that20each soul is, in most but the rarest of cases, comprised, to > > some > > > > extent, of all three gunas.) And, we have a sound spiritual concept > > > > (that’s been recognised by Hindus for millennia) that is an almost > > > > perfect corollary to Newton’s first Law. > > > > Looked at another way—probably Newton’s alchemical way—Sattva > > > > becomes Salt, that perfect combination of opposing (with respect to > > > > charge) elements that forms a complete bond with itself (its Self). > > > > Rajas is Sulphur, the fast burning element that scorches its way > > > > disrupting and disturbing. Tamas is, then, Mercury, the heavy, liquid > > > > and poisonous metal. I think Newton understood the gunas in this way > > > > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
