The difference between anesthesia and pure consciousness is that the brain is
still showing many of the accepted physiological correlates of being alert.
One thing I picked up from chatting with Fred and Alaric and reading their
research on PC and CC is that there are anecdotal reports of
The current physiological model used to explain PC explains why it is
impossible to have sensory perception OR mental perception during the pure
state of PC.
It is possible that the model is wrong. It is also possible taht you are an
exception to the rule.
It is also possible that what
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote :
The current physiological model used to explain PC explains why it is
impossible to have sensory perception OR mental perception during the pure
state of PC.
It is possible that the model is wrong. It is also possible taht you
Perhaps you ahead of the rest of us, or perhaps the model is too limited.
MUM has an advantage over anywhere else i the world when it comes to studying
advanced meditators since as much as 20% of the population does TM, but they
don't have any high-end equipment, so the measurements they
Lawson, I think it's less confusing if you talk about
pure-consciousness-by-itself rather than the 'pure' state of PC.
It looks to me as though Salyavin is describing first PC-by-itself, and then
witnessing during meditation, in which PC coexists with sensory and/or mental
perception (as it
All very interesting and needs much thought and further reading. I do agree
with you about the process of science though, having an idea and then checking
it out is all perfectly reasonable. And the more ideas that are being tested
the sooner any subject gets understood. As long as everyone is
But, but, but Xeno says that having an idea and checking it out is not how to
do science. In fact, he compares it to what fundamentalist Christians do. Are
you saying he's (gasp) wrong?
BTW, this whole exchange, and most of Lawson's recent posts, all very much
demonstrate the wish to find
And yet incredibly she has spent a career writing and lecturing on
consciousness, including a book all about the hard problem in which she
interviews consciousness researchers worldwide about their research into that
very idea and other ways of understanding the mind.
Could it be that
But see my comments. She doesn't take PC research seriously. I've seen her
mentino it in passing, but she doesn't even attempt to incorporate it into her
world view.
She's much like James Austin, who misreads/misquotes the PC research and then
fits the misread/misquote into his theories on
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote :
But see my comments. She doesn't take PC research seriously. I've seen her
mention it in passing, but she doesn't even attempt to incorporate it into her
world view.
Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. Are you sure she
Fred has asked some of the most prominent researchers into Buddhist meditation
why they don't take the PC research seriously.
The response is always along the lines of: show me a Western theory that
suggests that it is important, and I will.
Anomalous measurements that are consistently
Lawson, I remember when I stopped believing in scientific objectivity. Journal
of Conflict Resolution. Research done on the Maharishi Effect, I think in
Israel. A professor from Univ. of West Virginia on the journal's board. They
published his essay along with the research.
At the end of his
What a great historical quote, I don't even have to fix it so it can be read
comfortably for insight by the ignorant modern mind. -Buck
Katha Upanishad: “The Self is without sound, without touch and without
form…You will know the Self when your senses are still, your mind is at peace,
Comments in a nice red with extra boldness.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote :
Fred has asked some of the most prominent researchers into Buddhist meditation
why they don't take the PC research seriously.
The response is always along the lines of: show me a
I don't suppose there is a link to this essay, anyone?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote :
Lawson, I remember when I stopped believing in scientific objectivity. Journal
of Conflict Resolution. Research done on the Maharishi Effect, I think in
Israel. A professor
salyavin, mind you, he was questioning Scientific Method, not any methods used
in that particular study, which would be listed in Collected Papers and that
would give one the Journal citation. I'll see if I can find it. It was a long
time ago.
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 9:53 AM,
salyavin, I found the original article at the Journal of Conflict Resolution
website as well as a reply to methodological critique and even the critique
itself. But that was written by someone from Univ of Kansas and I'm 95% sure
the article that made such an impression on me was written by a
http://jcr.sagepub.com/content/32/4.toc http://jcr.sagepub.com/content/32/4.toc
It'll cost you $30 to see the text of either the Editor's Comment or the study
itself; the abstract of the study you can see on the site.
The editor's worldview wasn't shaken in the slightest, nor was he
Salyavin, who/what has this illusion? Who is being deluded? For there to be an
illusion, somebody has to be having a conscious experience of it. As I say,
it's self-refuting. There can't be an illusion without a conscious mind to
entertain it--but that's what she's saying is the illusion.
Judy, I stand by what I said which is based on the last sentence of the
article. That sentence indicated more than just *tightening up* the scientific
method.
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 10:32 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com
authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
http://jcr.sagepub.com/content/32/4.toc
Share, I've read that essay several times, and the last sentence, in the
context of the rest of the essay, is what I'm talking about. I stand by what I
said (and what Salyavin said). You are simply wrong to suggest the guy's
worldview or trust in the scientific method was shaken. The chap was
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Salyavin, who/what has this illusion?
You.
Who is being deluded?
You. Unless there's someone else in their you haven't told us about
For there to be an illusion, somebody has to be having a conscious experience
Judy, from the beginning I've said that it was my interpretation which can
neither be right or wrong. Anyway, I remember the last sentence as being very
dramatic, something along the lines of: if such an idea can be supported by the
scientific method then we need to question the scientific
From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 5:25 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Neural Correlates of Consciousness?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Salyavin, who/what has this illusion?
You
salyavin, I thought Judy made some good points here and I was looking forward
to your reply. Can you at least comment on the self refuting bit?
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 11:25 AM, salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
wrote:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@...
But according to Blackmore, there is no me to have the illusion. Me IS the
illusion.
Salyavin, who/what has this illusion?
You.
Who is being deluded?
You. Unless there's someone else in their you haven't told us about
For there to be an illusion, somebody has to be
Yes, he meant fix the holes in it so it doesn't let studies like this get
through. It isn't stringent enough, IOW.
(BTW, how is it that your interpretations can neither be right or wrong?)
Judy, from the beginning I've said that it was my interpretation which can
neither be right or
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
http://jcr.sagepub.com/content/32/4.toc http://jcr.sagepub.com/content/32/4.toc
It'll cost you $30 to see the text of either the Editor's Comment or the study
itself; the abstract of the study you can see on the site.
The
Valkyries don't have horned hats, sorry.
Salyavin, who/what has this illusion?
You.
Who is being deluded?
You. Unless there's someone else in their you haven't told us about
LOL. The mind boggles at the possibilities of postulating the various alternate
Judy, from literary and cinema studies I learned that an interpretation is
neither right nor wrong. It is simply well founded or not well founded. Same
for opinions.
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 11:42 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com
authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
Yes, he meant fix the holes in
And you're applying what you learned from literature and cinema studies to
statements a scientist makes??
guffaw
Judy, from literary and cinema studies I learned that an interpretation is
neither right nor wrong. It is simply well founded or not well founded. Same
for opinions.
Time series analysis is right (and Box-Jenkins analysis, whatever the hell
that is).
I'm short on time right now; I'll try to get back to this tonight sometime.
There are some interesting angles to it.
http://jcr.sagepub.com/content/32/4.toc http://jcr.sagepub.com/content/32/4.toc
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Valkyries don't have horned hats, sorry.
I was at the super new Viking exhibition at the British Museum the other day
and they are claiming the same thing, but there's an old helmet from some raid
or other that had attachments
Judy, it's even worse than that! I apply that to interpretations about life
itself. Go figure!
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 11:49 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com
authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
And you're applying what you learned from literature and cinema studies to
statements a scientist
Now what would the wife think about such thoughts on your part!?!
On Thu, 3/27/14, salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Neural Correlates of Consciousness?
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday
...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Neural Correlates of Consciousness?
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, March 27, 2014, 5:00 PM
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
P'raps if Emma hand delivered it to her?
On Thu, 3/27/14, salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Neural Correlates of Consciousness?
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, March 27, 2014, 6:11 PM
Well, in any case, Valkyries had winged helmets:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Valkyrie_bearing_Hero_to_Valhalla.jpg
(The guy she's hanging onto is dead, slain in battle, BTW. She isn't
kidnapping him. Presumably he'll be revived once they get to Valhalla.)
Oh,
...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Neural Correlates of Consciousness?
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, March 27, 2014, 6:11 PM
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
I would love to get into this particular discussion but probably could not
devote the time to extended discussion. But I would like to drop a few bombs.
Lawson said:
'...PC is without any kind of perception at all -sensory, thinking, intuition,
whatever.'
Now when I was in the hospital
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Well, in any case, Valkyries had winged helmets:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Valkyrie_bearing_Hero_to_Valhalla.jpg
(The guy she's hanging onto is dead, slain in battle, BTW. She isn't
kidnapping him. Presumably
On 3/27/2014 11:29 AM, TurquoiseBee wrote:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Salyavin, who/what has this illusion?
You.
Who is being deluded?
You. Unless there's someone else in their you haven't told us about
So, it's all about Judy.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote :
I would love to get into this particular discussion but probably could not
devote the time to extended discussion.
I think you did just fine there Xeno, you seem to have got into it rather
well! Most interesting perspective.
Who has the false idea of the persisting self? Who is deluded by this
illusion?
Susan Blackmore has a new essay about consciousness research on her website.
Food for thought:
Consciousness is not some weird and wonderful product of some brain processes
but not others. Rather, it is an
I'm not sure what exactly she's saying. But it appears that she's saying
humans don't have consciousness and a free will. If that is true, then I'd
disagree.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
Susan Blackmore has a new essay about consciousness research
This leads all too easily to the idea that while someone is awake they must
always be conscious of something or other. And that leads along the slippery
path to the idea that if we knew what to look for we could peer inside
someone's brain and find out which processes were the conscious ones
As I said, she doesn't see any value in the TM Pure Consciousness research so
she doesn't take it into account and consider the implications of a state of
alertness in the brain without any content to be alert about.
L
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Who has
She's very Buddhist in her outlook. She's even developed intellectual
affirmations to reinforce teh Buddhist slant to her scientific perspective and
acknowledges quite frankly that it is the only slant worth having, all others
being illusion.
Since mindfulness and focused attention
She needs first to realize she's making a gigantic cognitive error in saying
consciousness and the sense of self are an illusion. She can't possibly get
anything else right (including TM pure consciousness research) if she doesn't
see that the illusion idea is self-refuting. Doesn't really have
Well, teh buddhist idea is that when you peer deeply into your own mind,
you'll see that sense of self is an illusion, and in fact, they are correct:
if you practice mindfulness and concentrative practices long enough, the
disconnect between self-centers and the rest of teh brain that
That should read:
...should become a trait outside of such practices...
L
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote :
if you practice mindfulness and concentrative practices long enough, the
disconnect between self-centers and the rest of teh brain that occurs during
IT seems to be mostly a Tibetan Buddhist idea, actually.
Zen and Ch'an practices at least sometimes show the same coherent alpha-1 EEG
in teh frontal lobes, which becomes teh trait outside of TM practice that is
supposed to be the reason fro people describing their self differently.
52 matches
Mail list logo
