Constipation problems could be counted as a non-spiritual indicator for the correctness of your hypothesis. No?
On 17 Sep., 12:45, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > How do you know that science isn't waiting for lagging poets? > > On Sep 16, 4:49 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Poets, the way Molly defines herself, are waiting for science to catch > > up with her. You argue exactly along the same lines. She opposed to > > being a scientist in this context. Would you define yourself as a > > synthesized proser then? > > > > On 16 Sep., 14:44, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 16 Sep, 13:21, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I think we (humanity) are headed toward a reconciliation of science > > > > and spirituality or, an elucidation of what is always occurring for > > > > us. In a perfect world, these attempts would be concise, and yet, > > > > because we are not there yet, none of them are. I think we get closer > > > > all the time and I can appreciate the brave attempts. Anyone who puts > > > > themselves out there in print or digital imaging invites the critics, > > > > and there seem to be many more critics than creatives. Yet al it > > > > > > is our nature, collectively and individually. This is how we learn > > > > and develop our viewpoint. This, of course, and dialogue. Thanks, > > > > folks. > > > > Exactly! Well said. Any science begins with speculation, which, > > > in turn, gives the materialists something to test. Sometimes, it's > > > easy to speculate, but, when you try to make sure that your > > > speculation is in keeping with 'facts as we know them' as well as > > > 'facts about which we know little or nothing', you expose yourself to > > > criticisms from those who are all to happy to point out that, by > > > speculation, you've proven nothing. As for me, it's not my office, as > > > it were, to prove my speculations, only my responsibility to ensure > > > that they are accurate to within current observations (as I don't have > > > access to future observations) and internally consistent. As for > > > Newton, my extrapolation of his laws of motion as being, potentially, > > > valid for spiritual bodies as well as physical bodies, is consistent > > > to the laws and consistent with Hindu theory (that's been known for > > > millennia). I'm a 'synthesist'; I seeminglyingly dispaconcepts >pts > > > and find the middle ground where they overlap. Others, who come > > > later, will hopefully, then be able to prove or disprove as science > > > catches up. Now, it's easy to disapprove (criticise), but not so easy > > > to disprove. > > > > > On Sep 15, 10:24 pm, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Just > > > > > in is right, elsewhere, when he says that mixing religion or > > > > > > spirituality and science belittles both. Not because they cannot be > > > > > brought together in the same frame but, in my view, because it calls > > > > > for an extreme sharpness to learn in one and apply in the other, > > > > > interchangeably, all the way, untill there remains just one. > > > > > > adly,, your, your post merely follows the stereotypode mode : > > > > > religion vs science. It adds nothing and only seems like one more > > > > > railing against. I can see you are ' for ' ' something,' but with such > > > > > thought patterns I believe you may be doing no good to your cause, > > > > > whatever it is ! The methodology ( to me, today ) seems extremely > > > > > regressive. Entertaining ? Perhaps, to one who is looking for that. > > > > > > I hope you get the job in Dubai. I know it would change your life > > > > > much, for the better. But, you ? > > > > > > On Sep 16, 4:18 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > cienc overturverturned many fables (though not necessarily the > > > > >> > > > 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 ld rus liness lines - if we don't pay their ransom (tithe) > > > >ey won't do t'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 forces very familiar in relatonalcs. >sics. > > > > > > Physics was never my bag, but my colleagit always 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 > > > > > > trougrnment dnment directly and openly consulting the people - now > > > > > > there's sg to pray f pray for. > > > > > > > On 15 Sep, 17:54, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Gunas are fundamental to Sanhya phhy, also tealso termed Sankhya > > > > > > > Yoga. > > > > > >> Krhimsea himself says i Bhaita thGt, among almong all ygas, > > > > > > > > > > Sankhy And, amAnd, among al yo iis Kapil muapil muni, th sta> > rt > >> > > > > > Sanhya> > > > > > > > > > > kenas takes oattrn ooftour oolfobeyond theyond the ego wht of >o> > > > > > > > > > ourunding sanding stophe ego is oth is nothing but constituted of > > > > > > > gunas. > > > > Even Prakrin Prakriti, the nature both primordial and individuated, is > > > nohin> > > > > > > > but constitteds. Only as. Only Purusha, or the Witness - Self, is not. > > > > > > > > > The most d wel - kkd we o allnown o , Patangas, Patanjal Yoga, is > > > > > > > entirely based of Sankhya principles > > > > The > > eer, werhhout exr, withhout exception, when all three gunas > > > > > > > > > > present in any . Ong orccassg.ns when cassions when one may> > > > > e, whdleominate, while the other two are dormant or attenuated.y on > > > > > cho > > > > > > choicend in thoughton, and in thought and action, one may cause the > > > > > > > predomination of one. > > > > > > > > In Prakriti, or the penultimate realisation, all three g > > > > > > > > complete b > > > > complete balance, a each ot ehe effect of each other. > > > > > > > > ans to liomecomes a means to liberation, i> > >respoappngly > > > > > > > appropriate situations. > >, 4:32 pm, PSen 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 Everything, 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 sure > > > > > > > > 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 Ency > > > > > > > > > > >1997’,97’, not > > > > > > > > the best source, but, I think, it’s good enough. > > > > > > >es that “hn “unless acte that “un “unless acted upon by a net > > > > > > >force, a > > > > > > > > body at rest stays at rest, and a moving body e > > ues mov > > same > > > > > > > > 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 aver, detai glosgloss over, as his know> >ge > > > > > > > > indHinduism > > > > > > > > far exceeds mine, but, I’ll describe this as I see it > > e > > > > > > > > gunas ar > > > > > > > gunas areas. They aajas and Tamas. They are spiritual qualities/ > > > > > > > > forces that, together, express the ‘nef at ri for > > >sa > > at > > > > > > > > > us. Sattva is usually depicted as simple (!), clarity of mind, > > > > > > > > Rajas > > > >e, di>turbing influencve, disturbing influence and T> > > llnessness and > > > > > > > > lethargy. In this anaepres I settva tva as representing an > > > > > > > > individual’s true own unsull self, their own unsullied > > > > > > > > consciousness, > > > > > neral aisrRajahe gen general disruptive, interactive force) and Tamas > > > > > > > > (spiritual inertia), is how one individual experienc > ind > > > > > > > > > individual’s Sattva. Whilst it is true that one can be > > > > > > > > affected by > > > > > > > > another’s Sattva, it i noarmonic enough as to not distress t> > > > > > > > > do t > > > > > > > > > > depressed person depressed and why it’s harder to motidepres > > > > > > > depressed > > > > > > >ividudividual than one ivo is not depressed. So, too, a mind/soul > > > > > > >fillan on > > > > > > > with Tamas will tend to remain at rest (and depressed and slothful > > > > > > > > and, in extreme cases with the right com > > > > > > ajas, self- > > > > > > > > harming) until acted upon by sufficient Rajas (and/or Sattva > > > > > > > > [but it > > > > > > > > takes more Rajas at first!]) sat ithat it can, once again, > > > > > > > > achieve its > > > > > > > > own Sattva. once uch Rajasake anake an individual aggressive, > > > > > > > > lik> > > > > > > > anak> bull in vidual ... > > Erfahren Sie mehr » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
