|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
AYPforum
351 Posts |
 Posted - Jul 08 2005 : 1:14:24 PM
|
1216 From: "david_obsidian1" <david_obsidian1@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed Jul 6, 2005 11:34am
Subject: Continuing on Science/Philosophy thread david_obsidian1
Offline
Send Email
Randy said:
>>> It seems to me regardless of their interest, proving it and
allowing it to be studied would benefit all mankind, and someone
stepping forward to win the money could then donate it to a
worthwhile charity. Therefore I wonder on what higher plane this
enlightenment is occuring?
Hello Randy,
I've just been asking the identical question in the preceeding posts.
I believe that 'critical thinking' is, shall we say, a
Light to the World. It was a great light that flickered and glowed
in many cultures and times throughout really started to flower in in
the Western 'Enlighenment'. And this has changed the world, like
nothing that has gone before it.
I haven't seen much praise for critical thinking among the guru-
types, by the way. This may be a common failing among them. In
fact, it's much more common to intimate that the intellect is
hobbling along in comparison to some great Light or Vision that the
guru has. This particular intimation may be destructive.
I'd like to refer people to yoganis lesson
http://aypsite.org/260.html
in which the falsely presumed perfection of the enlightened is
examined.
There is a bigger question here --- are the intuitions which arise
from enlightenment and critical thinking just different powers, each
specialized in their own way, one better at some things and the
other at others -- but then, what are their respective domains....?
How can these powers be separated?
On the question of 'psychics' who have true, reproducible paranormal
powers, and tell people they have them, but don't prove to science
that they have them, let me finally just ask if the following three
things can be logically all true at the same time:
1. That Science's disbelief in their abilities is bad for humanity.
2. That they have the power to eliminate Science's disbelief in
their abilities.
3. That they care for humanity and do not.
If they cannot all be true at the same time, which one of them gives? Shall we say that it is good that Science does not believe them, and encourage, say, teaching in school in the science class that these powers are false? Or accept that they cannot prove their powers after all? Or conclude that they just don't care about humanity?
-David
1217 From: Randy Callaway <randycallaway@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed Jul 6, 2005 0:12pm
Subject: Re: Continuing on Science/Philosophy thread randycallaway
Offline
Send Email
Hi David, in regard to your three questions, all three can be true at the same time, but if so, the real question then is why and their motivation. If they hide behind some "secret" reason apparent only to them, then they are going against yoga teaching. There is an interesting treatise on philosophy that discusses "critical thinking" and why it doesn't or can't apply to eastern yogic philosophy. Part of it is the inherent nature of yoga philosophy, which could be true or conversely just a wall to hide behind from "critical thinking" analysis. . If "critical thinking" cannot be applied to eastern philosophy, then where does that leave us, the difference in the west and east between wanting to know and wanting to believe.
david_obsidian1 <david_obsidian1@yahoo.com> wrote:Randy said:
>>> It seems to me regardless of their interest, proving it and
allowing it to be studied would benefit all mankind, and someone
stepping forward to win the money could then donate it to a
worthwhile charity. Therefore I wonder on what higher plane this
enlightenment is occuring?
Hello Randy,
I've just been asking the identical question in the preceeding posts.
I believe that 'critical thinking' is, shall we say, a
Light to the World. It was a great light that flickered and glowed
in many cultures and times throughout really started to flower in in
the Western 'Enlighenment'. And this has changed the world, like
nothing that has gone before it.
I haven't seen much praise for critical thinking among the guru-
types, by the way. This may be a common failing among them. In
fact, it's much more common to intimate that the intellect is
hobbling along in comparison to some great Light or Vision that the
guru has. This particular intimation may be destructive.
I'd like to refer people to yoganis lesson
http://aypsite.org/260.html
in which the falsely presumed perfection of the enlightened is
examined.
There is a bigger question here --- are the intuitions which arise
from enlightenment and critical thinking just different powers, each
specialized in their own way, one better at some things and the
other at others -- but then, what are their respective domains....?
How can these powers be separated?
On the question of 'psychics' who have true, reproducible paranormal
powers, and tell people they have them, but don't prove to science
that they have them, let me finally just ask if the following three
things can be logically all true at the same time:
1. That Science's disbelief in their abilities is bad for humanity.
2. That they have the power to eliminate Science's disbelief in
their abilities.
3. That they care for humanity and do not.
If they cannot all be true at the same time, which one of them gives? Shall we say that it is good that Science does not believe them, and encourage, say, teaching in school in the science class that these powers are false? Or accept that they cannot prove their powers after all? Or conclude that they just don't care about humanity?
-David
For the AYP Lessons and Books, go to:
http://www.geocities.com/advancedyogapractices --
To change your email delivery to "daily digest," send a blank email to:
AYPforum-digest@yahoogroups.com --
To stop email delivery and use "web viewing only," send a blank email to:
AYPforum-nomail@yahoogroups.com --
To resume "individual email delivery," send a blank email to:
AYPforum-normal@yahoogroups.com
You can also make these changes in "Edit my Membership" on the group home page.
---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit your group "AYPforum" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
AYPforum-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
1218 From: "david_obsidian1" <david_obsidian1@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed Jul 6, 2005 0:58pm
Subject: Re: Continuing on Science/Philosophy thread david_obsidian1
Offline
Send Email
--- In AYPforum@yahoogroups.com, Randy Callaway <randycallaway@y...>
wrote:
> Hi David, in regard to your three questions, all three can be true
at the same time, but if so, the real question then is why and their
motivation.
They can all be true from an 'external' logical point of view. But
if one expects logic in their motivations, that is when the
questions get tough.
>>> There is an interesting treatise on philosophy that
discusses "critical thinking" and why it doesn't or can't apply to
eastern yogic philosophy.
I am interested in that treatise --- is it on the web?
>>> If "critical thinking" cannot be applied to eastern philosophy,
then where does that leave us, the difference in the west and east
between wanting to know and wanting to believe.
Hmmm, that characterization of the West versus East as 'wanting to
know versus wanting to believe' --- it's new to me. Where did you
get it from? Did you come up with it yourself? Any links?
Does 'wanting to believe' really characterise the East versus the
West???
By the way, I've found nothing in my own yoga practice which clashes
with critical thinking --- in fact, it just challenges my critical
thinking all the more, the further I get with it.
BTW, and here is an observation for the board --- I think that there
is no fundamental clash at all between enlightenment and critical
thinking, but what might have happened is that there were very few
or even *no* people who reached TRULY strong enlightenment who were
also highly developed as very powerful critical thinkers --- it may
be that simple --- so the 'camps' were never properly bridged.
I don't think that this non-overlap comes from any inherent conflict
either, it was just a supply thing, historically. Really gifted
critical thinkers are rare anyway, and the culture of the West can
enhance them; people really gifted in enlighenment potential are
rare (at least to become enlightened in a world like this), and the
culture of the East can enhance them. There may be even fewer people
who are gifted in both, and find the opportunity or place to enhance
both ( I would imagine that Gautama Buddha was potentially a very
powerful critical thinker (and extremely strong for his time) but he
lived in an age which was very far behind the modern western world in
terms of critical thinking. )
-David
1219 From: "Joel" <afc@hiselectmsp.com>
Date: Wed Jul 6, 2005 2:21pm
Subject: Re: Continuing on Science/Philosophy thread anthrojoel2
Offline
Send Email
David, Randy, all:
Perhaps you would be interested in the work of Rudolf Steiner and the
path he founded called Anthroposophy. Have you heard of it?
He was a natural psychic/mystic who forsook that path for the study
of philosophy and Goethean science. Out of that, and experience with
Theosophy among other influences came a unique art he
called "spiritual science". The chief goal was to develop "feeling
thinking" or "living thinking". Not everything translates into
English so well (he was German), especially as he was trying to
express directly experiences in the spiritual world. He didn't
advocate anyone taking his word for what he described, but follow the
path of development until they can "see" for themselves.
The problem with trying to "prove" this stuff with materialistic
science (IMO anyway) is that these experiences are as much spiritual
as they are physical. It's like trying to measure gravity with a
microscope. Wrong tool. Until we learn to devolop our senses to
perceive "reality" as it is, there is no point trying to prove things
with material science - the scientific process, yes. Can you develop
the skills and experience what they did? yes? Then that's a
scientific proof, the only kind really possible with this stuff.
The yogis, etc. know this, and hence don't try to persuade anyone.
Without experiencing it, they wouldn't understand or believe it
correctly. Belief structures have to change from the inside.
Practice, and encourage others to practice - the rest will take care
of itself. :)
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
 |
|
|
|
Continuing on Science/Philosophy thread
Forum Locked
