Joe, That sounds like quite a disturbing state of affairs if scientists are so bogged down in dogma and methods because they could be influenced into ways of thinking that don't come from the scientific method itself I.e, from politics, prejudices, beliefs etc. Could it be said that the scientific method is the zazen of science (in keeping the bastards honest)?
Mike --- In [email protected], "Joe" <desert_woodworker@...> wrote: > > Mike, > > I agree. Some of the Quantum Mechanics practitioners I know are some of the > most dense and obtuse people. They are good in their publications, but their > exorcism of belief in hard-materiality does not percolate deep, or > whatsoever, into their personal life or psyche. And I think that, by now, > since the 1920s development of QM, it is even beginning to harden in their > professional work: their non-deterministic QM has become hide-bound, hard > materialism. > > This is not surprising. Scientists are human. I believe that what has > happened and is happening is what a Tibetan Lama warned about in the 1970s, > and his most popular book bears the title which can stand alone and can even > substitute for a reading of the book: CUTTING THROUGH SPIRITUAL MATERIALISM, > of Lama Chogyam Trungpa. The practice of QM has become an entirely > materialistic practice and behavior. It's not new stuff anymore, and hence > it has hardened in three or four generations. It's practice does not give > insight: it is merely technical, formulaic, dead, and stultifying. > > After the founding of any new religion comes Doctrine, and dogma. "The > thrill is gone!" > > That's what we've (they've) got, now. And their personal lives and psyche > mirror this faithfully, phase-locked. > > What was once quicksand is now cured concrete, and they have both feet > planted in it. Can they really take a step? No. But a few decades of > effective Zen training and body practice could turn them back into some kind > of human beings. Then, maybe Natural Science could progress. Maybe by > taking big backward steps, and getting things right. > > Dark Matter is a big, BIG embarrassment to hard science. Forty-plus years, > now. Nothing done. > > We don't even have to mention Dark Energy. > > --Joe > > > "mike" <uerusuboyo@> wrote: > > > > Joe (well, Edgar actually), > > > > But so what (not the bit about blind people)? Quantum physicists are also > > very knowledgable about the transience of matter, and thus the impermanent > > nature of reality, but the mere knowledge of it doesn't awaken them. It has > > to be experienced. > > > > Mike > ------------------------------------ Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
