--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, ChrisAustinLane <ch...@...> wrote:
>
> I find reading science to be a habit I have long cultivated, as it
makes certain more physical chains of cause and effect more intelligible
to me.
> Since I am engaged in practice now, reading science about practice is
a pretty natural and fun thing to do. This forum seems likely to be a
place to find others who are of a similar bent, ...

OK.



> Perhaps that is an expectation I bring here that the bulk of the group
doesn't share.

The road to the hell of disappointments is paved with great
expectations.


> And let it be stipulated that a science model of the brain doesn't
touch the effort of sitting down day after day.

> Thanks,
> Chris Austin-Lane


A science model of the brain is a science of the brain; sitting is
sitting.

The two have different objectives - or, as it has been claimed, the
latter has no objectives.

If a person believes that a science model of the brain helps him
understand *whatever* in some way better, that's his business.

If a person believes that interest in a science model of the brain
interferes with his sitting, then he can act accordingly to rectify the
situation for himself.

Different strokes for different folks.

There is not only one way.

--ED

Reply via email to