Curse

Master Fuhon · Apr 23, 2009, 12:33 AM // 00:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silvance

I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. Can you explain more? As I see it, you don't have to go to the subconscious to be influenced by others' words or emotions.

The subconcious was only discovered/created when it was given a name. The creation of the subconcious is a reference to the historical lack of awareness of human beings understanding themselves.

The new method for believing in a science or religion, what I will call the new scientific method is:

1) Read subconcious, or conciousness as far as you can read if you do not believe in the existence of the subconcious
2) Read concious processes
3) Act on them

After thousands of years we actually gained another step in the process to being animals, based on creating it ourselves. Reading concious processes alone had previously resulted in us selecting our own personal beliefs (science is translated as knowledge, which is why I call it the scientific method).

If a person only reads the concious processes within their own head from now on, they have no one else to blame for whether they turn out to be a rock worshipper, murderer, or anything else. We had to gain the understanding that there was still more to know about ourselves.

DreamRunner · Apr 23, 2009, 07:47 AM // 07:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by zwei2stein

Materialism vs. Metaphysics

is about equal to

Scientific Method vs. Wishfull Thinking.

Later gives pretty results based on what we hope is true as mean of self protection (It is hard to accept not being "special" in some way just because we can percieve our existence. Even harder to accept ignorance about important questions that we can never learn (Existence after Death? What was before time? What is outside our Time Cone?) due to lack of information), former gives ugly truth. Bare (Yet complicated), Spartan, Lacking, Not really flattering to ego.

PS: Subjectivity is result of different set of information presented to human in his lifetime. Classical Platos Cave

I'll bite but this post is such a troll. Its so funny because the scientific method is based on 3 things, injunction, apprehension and confirmation.

An injection would be "if you want to know this, you must do this" and so an example would be, if you want to know if its raining outside you need to go look outside. If you want to know about animal cells, you need to build a microscope and as history tells us, it takes ages to know how to build and learn to look through a microscope.
So if bring in a new injection you can take in new phenomenon or new experiences which brings in new data and then we have to confirm it with other people. There are obviously a lot of wrong conclustions which a person could come up with but only a one or few right ones.

I wanted to know what lord of the rings was about, to do that I had to read lord of the rings. After I read lord of the rings I had an experience of what lord of the rings is about. I confirmed it with someone else about what I thought lord of the rings is about because there a few correct conclusions on lord of the rings but they're lots of wrong ones. Lord of the rings isn't about someone going shopping or to a baseball game.

These 3 strands(injunction, apprehension and confirmation) can actually be used in metaphysical knowledge as well. Let's take Buddha nature.
I can use these 3 ways which are used in science to know about Buddha nature(metaphysical). I wanted to know about Buddha nature, so I practiced a form of meditation called zazen and had an experience. I confirmed that experience with Zen masters.

Divinitys Creature · Apr 23, 2009, 09:33 PM // 21:33

Differences are always real even when the referred articles are not real.

The difference between subjectivity and objectivity is precision.

poobert · Apr 26, 2009, 09:58 PM // 21:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamRunner

Let's take Buddha nature.
I can use these 3 ways which are used in science to know about Buddha nature(metaphysical). I wanted to know about Buddha nature, so I practiced a form of meditation called zazen and had an experience. I confirmed that experience with Zen masters.

Bad analogy. The meditation does not always yield the result, nor does it always yield the same result and neither does it yield the same result if another person was to do the experiment. The result therefore is not scientifically valid.

Dualims result from bad teaching or bad understanding. They are a contradiction and contradictions can not exist. Take the wave particle business. The confusion arises because a bad teacher has told you that one time a photon exists as a particle and one time it is a wave. You have inferred that these two properties are physical manifestations and not what they actually are, which are properties.

Quote:

Your axiom 1 is probably one of the most flawed things on the planet. One theory being claimed as wrong does not produce the logic that we must default to any other particular theory.

It does if there are only two solutions. If not, which is usually the case, then you are right, it is a false dichotomy.

Silvance · Apr 27, 2009, 12:47 AM // 00:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by poobert

Bad analogy. The meditation does not always yield the result, nor does it always yield the same result and neither does it yield the same result if another person was to do the experiment. The result therefore is not scientifically valid.

That may be so, but if you start listening to the experiences of enough people, you'll start to see patterns of similarity in the experience itself. This is qualitative validity and is certainly good enough for me.

Quote:

Dualims result from bad teaching or bad understanding. They are a contradiction and contradictions can not exist. Take the wave particle business. The confusion arises because a bad teacher has told you that one time a photon exists as a particle and one time it is a wave. You have inferred that these two properties are physical manifestations and not what they actually are, which are properties.

Contradictions can and do exist, they do all the time. If they didn't, we wouldn't have the language or thought processes to describe them. Furthermore, wave-particle duality has absolutely nothing to do with bad teachers. It has everything to do with the fact that for a certain period of time, all the evidence available dealing with light said it acted as streams of particles. Then, later evidence said it acted as waveforms. Still later evidence shows that it in fact acts as both particles and waves in different contexts.

What's even more interesting is that photons aren't the only things that act as both waves and particles, all molecules exhibit this duality. There's your contradiction right there.

Master Fuhon · Apr 27, 2009, 02:00 AM // 02:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by poobert

Bad analogy. The meditation does not always yield the result, nor does it always yield the same result and neither does it yield the same result if another person was to do the experiment. The result therefore is not scientifically valid.

You're using your own definition of meditation in this argument. Hence why you do not have your scientifically conclusive results.

Meditation isn't just performed off a checklist of actions. A person undergoes training to be able to achieve results through meditation. No scientist has confirmed the effects of meditation, because no scientist has reshaped himself to be able to attain those effects.

The important step to note is that meditation is always defined as a step in a process for anyone who achieves results from it.

DreamRunner · Apr 27, 2009, 03:08 AM // 03:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by poobert

Bad analogy. The meditation does not always yield the result, nor does it always yield the same result and neither does it yield the same result if another person was to do the experiment. The result therefore is not scientifically valid.

If what you said is true then if i start talking about my experiences of meditation, then no one would understand what I am talking about. Yet this is totally different from what we know today because we do know that meditation is practiced in a large variety of religions. People are actually in groups with others because they have experienced or understand similar concepts which other people have experienced.