Gav, thanks for joing up the dots ... Certainly if I had used the phrase "faith in science" as I have many times before, I would have been accused of drivel and intent to confuse. (My "best" piece on that was "End of Faith in What ?" but it's all drivel I'm sure.)
I'll need to read you post again and comment further. Ian On 7/23/08, gav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > heya chickadees, > think that we are getting closer to some sorta breakthrough. > > a quote from terrence mckenna started some neurons firing last night. - > paraphrasing - if anyone honestly reports a close encounter with alien beings > it sounds like the person is nuts or taking the piss. this, says terry, is > part of the point of this phenomenon. > > [btw, both terry and bill hicks maintain that they have had close encounters > and both were on psychoactives when it happened - making their stories less > convincing to the 'authorities'] > so what is the meaning of the ufo phenomenon? > > well according to jung and mckenna it is a modern myth, whose purpose it is > to ERODE FAITH IN SCIENCE. > > now this phrase - faith in science - is the one that got me buzzing. faith is > a social value, but isn't science intellectual? > > dawkins and his ilk are examples of this 'science as faith' breed. their > belligerence precludes an open and fair-minded pursuit of knowledge for its > own sake - they are ideologues. they are transparently tendentious - seeking > evidence for their own steadfast conclusions, rather than being genuinely > interested in reaching a new conception that is capable of integrating and > satisfying seemingly opposed viewpoints. > and this, as margaret and marsha will be aware, is classic patriarchal > bullying. > > science is patriarchal. all the big guns have been men and it is this male, > solar, rationalist perspective that needs to be exposed as a faith (social > value). > > as i have mentioned, the ufo phenomenon occurs in a manner that makes > corroboration difficult and marginalises those that report such phenomena. it > says, in effect, that these folk imagined what happened - putting precedence > not with the EXPERIENCE of the individual but with an explaining away of > these experiences...not very MOQ. > > mckenna and jung think that the ufo phenomenon exists to throw dogmatic > (social) science into doubt....the mystery remains unexplained...mckenna > calls it the insertion of the goddess (gaia) into the collective psyche. > to be open to DQ is to be open to the mystery. the MOQ is incontrovertibly > mystical in essence. > > evolution requires an openness to DQ, by definition. if we are to evolve (and > i believe, along with millions of others, that we have to evolve, that we are > in the process of an unprecedented evolutionary punctuation) we need to let > go of faith, of certainty. > > an aside: as i mentioned in a previous post, eckhart tolle and oprah winfrey > have teemed up and oprah is getting a fair bit of shit from fundamental > christians (social value) because she is denying the 'one true way of jesus' > idea. she is saying that faith/belief is faux spirituality (right on sis!); > and that genuine spirituality is felt, experienced - direct personal > connection. this is an opening up - and a moral stance according to the MOQ. > the intellectual level (authentic individual) trumps the social level > (passive belief) when there is conflict. > > pirsig points out that the original insights of religious traditions end up > getting strangled and obscured by the vines of static knowledge that grow up > around them. the same can be said for science. just as whoever wins the war > writes the histories, so whoever runs the institutions dictates what is > accepted scientific belief. white men run the institutions and of course the > particular characteristics of this group are reflected in how science > operates and what is proclaimed 'real' or not. > > whereto from here? > well another familiar point to us moqers is the psychedelic experience. > pirsig's peyote experience, apart from its direct value to his awareness and > ideas, is an example of something common to all indigenous cultures - their > grounding mechanisms. the shamen, rituals and psychoactive plants and fungi > of indigenous cultures are there to skweegy the third eye so to speak. they > clean away the obfuscating debris of accumulated static patterns so that DQ > shines through - giving direction, coherence, connection. in other words - > ensuring the psychic health of the community. > > we don't have this. the western culture is bereft of these anchoring and > guiding mechanisms and the result is mass neurosis. the western culture is > mentally ill, obviously. we are fucking the planet, which is ourselves. it > don't get more stupid than that. > > we need more female voices! the feminine principle must rise into awareness > to balance our sick patriarchal society - heed the wisdom in marsha's posts, > in margaret's, in the women around you. we men have to balance ourselves - we > need to look to the women in our lives and, in particular, the one woman in > all our lives - gaia. nature is the teacher, nature is the tao, nature is DQ. > WE NEED TO STOP POLLUTING AND DESTROYING AND BEGIN TO LIVE IN CONSTRUCTIVE > HARMONY WITH THE EARTH. forgive the capitalisation but really it is past time > for all of us to take responsibility for the situation. > > science is limited, as it stands. the MOQ can probably widen the effective > aegis of science because it recognises value. this is a very important point > - but value recognition is experiential, aesthetic, immediate. it is not > about right and wrong; it is about beauty as truth. > > i am not saying we should gladly accomodate all points of view. the drivel > that comes from some on this list should be honestly exposed as drivel > (although there comes a time to just ignore posters who refuse to evolve). > DMB is a champion at this. but even dmb is human and fallible and capable of > hubris (love ya mate). > > in closing a simple point: if we are to differentiate between intellectual > and social we need to pose the existential question: what does this pattern > mean to me? how does it resonate with me - how do i feel about this pattern? > we are the litmus test. am i upholding this pattern through habit or reaction > (social), or does this pattern help me become fully human - free, aware, > enlightened. > > for this is the purpose of intellect - enlightenment. we now have no choice > other than to become a planet of enlightened beings....and fast. > > > > > > > Start at the new Yahoo!7 for a better online experience. > www.yahoo7.com.au > 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/
