Hi Marsha, Gav,

That's a great article Marsha, thanks for the link. Reinforces a point
I keep making here that "scientific method" is only a tiny part of
science, the majority being concerned with experience and explanation.
(Good website generally in fact ... I shall be linking others to it.)

Thanks also for the Paul Davies "Cosmic Jackpot" review. Already linked to that.

Regards
Ian

On Nov 27, 2007 10:37 AM, MarshaV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Greetings Gav,
>
> I (who matters little) personally am more comfortable with
> unconditional.  I might prefer empty over unity too, but...  Besides
> my nit picking, I found what you wrote valuable.  Thank you.
>
> Not having been educated as a scientist, I can get annoyed when the
> scientific method is used to justify   facts.  Here is a website that
> I found that is close to my concerns.  It's entitled:  The Myth of
> the Magical Scientific Method.
>
>         http://www.dharma-haven.org/science/myth-of-scientific-method.htm
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
>
> At 04:54 PM 11/26/2007, you wrote:
> >hi marsha,
> >i am using 'absolute' as opposed to 'relative'.
> >relative knowledge is knowledge of good and evil,
> >'absolute' knowledge is the knowledge of the dynamic
> >unity of both - the absolute is Quality / Tao.
> >instead of absolute i could say unconditional...?.
> >
> >
> >--- MarshaV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I understand 'new myth', but what does 'absolute'
> > > mean?  I'm having a
> > > problem with the idea that there exists an absolute
> > > anything,
> > > pre-intellectual or not.
> > >
> > >
> > > At 07:27 AM 11/26/2007, you wrote:
> > > >the problem is not the scientific method.
> > > >the problem is in the interpretation.
> > > >whilst science operates under the inadequate aegis
> > > of
> > > >SOM it will have difficulty understanding the whole
> > > >picture: because it presumes the existence of an
> > > >objective reality separate to the observer.
> > > >quantum physics made this inadequacy glaringly
> > > obvious
> > > >- it still does. how do we interpret quantum
> > > reality
> > > >under SOM? - answer: we can't.
> > > >
> > > >a new context is required and that context is
> > > >emerging. new context = new myth.
> > > >
> > > >the new myth recognises the unity and sentience of
> > > >earth itself - gaia....and by extrapolation the
> > > entire
> > > >cosmos.
> > > >
> > > >as einstein said: the assumption that we are
> > > separate
> > > >is just an optical illusion of consciousness.
> > > quantum
> > > >physics literally shows us the intimate
> > > >interconnection of all space. space and time order
> > > >reality; they are not reality itself.
> > > >
> > > >with an MOQ perspective we can make sense of
> > > >everything because we factor in the primacy of
> > > >undivided experience - pre-intellectual, aesthetic.
> > > >and this is absolute not relative knowledge. it is
> > > >knowledge by communion, by immersion, by
> > > identifying
> > > >with the world, by losing yourself in the world.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >--- MarshaV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Greetings,
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems that the problems with the scientific
> > > > > method have been
> > > > > recognized.  Yet it has been anointed the best
> > > > > method for recognizing
> > > > > truth (provisional).  If the scientific method
> > > is
> > > > > such a highly
> > > > > valued, but very static, intellectual pattern,
> > > how
> > > > > will a better
> > > > > method (pattern) get recognized?   Maybe there's
> > > one
> > > > > emerging, but
> > > > > what would be the probability of me recognizing
> > > it?
> > > > > Everything seems
> > > > > a trap!
> > > > >
> > > > > Chop wood, carry water and paint?
> > > > >
> > > > > Marsha
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > > > > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > > > >
> > >
> > >http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > > > > Archives:
> > > > >
> > >
> > >http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > > > > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >       Make the switch to the world's best email.
> > > Get the new
> > > > Yahoo!7 Mail now.
> > > www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > > >Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > >
> > >http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > > >Archives:
> > >
> > >http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > > >http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> > >
> > > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > >
> >http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > > Archives:
> > >
> >http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >       Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new
> > Yahoo!7 Mail now. www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail
> >
> >
> >Moq_Discuss mailing list
> >Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> >http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> >Archives:
> >http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> >http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to