Why Scientists need to accept Eastern thought

[ecco]

I have presented evidence so the that is not the problem.

No, you have not. You have presented your opinions. Your opinions are not evidence of anything other than that you have opinions.

The problem is that my view is not compatible with the materialistic worldview.

The problem is that your views are not compatible with reality. Eastern woo or Western woo, woo is woo.

To accept it would require a "fundamental" change in views, like converting from atheism to theism.

To accept it would require a "fundamental" change in views, like converting from accepting reality to accepting woo.

Very little change on this scale by just presenting evidence or debating. WHat I have seen is that many change when they experience for themselves.

Yeah. I think we already went over that bit of nonsense.

Meditation is a something that anyone can practice so there is no excuse for scientists and other skeptics to not explore it for themselves. This would be nothing different than field research which is also part of the scientific method.

More self-serving nonsense. You have yet to show anything of value that resulted from meditation (excluding the money that "mystics" make by selling "Eastern Wisdom" to gullible Westerners).

 

[Swami]

.
More self-serving nonsense. You have yet to show anything of value that resulted from meditation (excluding the money that "mystics" make by selling "Eastern Wisdom" to gullible Westerners).

What is apparent is that those who have never meditated, or gave up on it early, are usually always the most skeptical.

This is what my view has to offer:
1. A way to perceive reality without the filter of the mind and bodily senses.
2. Reveals the fullest expression or highest level of consciousness as a universal entity.
3. It offers an accessible and repeatable tool to verify everything that I am saying.

 

[tayla]

I think science will have to address seemingly non-material concepts to get at the root of understanding consciousness. Perhaps someone will postulate a new attribute of the material universe; something weirdly similar to energy, and entropy, and the flow of time, and quantum mechanics. All these are weird, yet they are material. Consciousness is weird too, and there is no reason to think it is not physical in the same kind of weird way.

However, there is also no reason to think it is.......

What are you proposing consciousness is? Certainly it is not supernatural?

 

[cladking]

You've given no examples. Is that because you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about.

Of what exactly do you want an example?

Please explain how you know that "animals use four dimensional thinking".

Please explain how an entity can "use four dimensional thinking but don't experience what we call "thought" at all."

We build three dimensional models of reality in our minds but we observe those models in real time one dimensionally. We think in one dimension but can consider time so it's like a "train of thought" that has velocity (time). Ancient people built no models and observed a three dimensional reality in three dimensional thought. This "thought" was natural to the human brain so they didn't experience thought as we do. Ancient Language must be understood by being modeled because this is the way WE think but many insights into how they "thought" can be seen. Like animals they forced their understanding onto reality itself. We think they anthropomorphized their world but the reality is that they understood their world in terms they knew. Human terms.

Most people want me to understand this for them. It isn't going to work that way. All I can tell you is how you can understand. You must change your perspective and observe, From this it is obvious things opaque to us are clear to individuals (life) that looks from other perspectives.

It is language that created the human race but the current language is not what we started with. We started with an elaboration on the same type of language used by all other life forms. Our history and science were lost because we started "thinking". We'll probably need to stop thinking to understand things like consciousness and perhaps to create the unified field theory.

Of course this sounds absurd to you but if there's a simpler way to say it, it certainly eludes me.

 

[paarsurrey]

Of what exactly do you want an example?



We build three dimensional models of reality in our minds but we observe those models in real time one dimensionally. We think in one dimension but can consider time so it's like a "train of thought" that has velocity (time). Ancient people built no models and observed a three dimensional reality in three dimensional thought. This "thought" was natural to the human brain so they didn't experience thought as we do. Ancient Language must be understood by being modeled because this is the way WE think but many insights into how they "thought" can be seen. Like animals they forced their understanding onto reality itself. We think they anthropomorphized their world but the reality is that they understood their world in terms they knew. Human terms.

Most people want me to understand this for them. It isn't going to work that way. All I can tell you is how you can understand. You must change your perspective and observe, From this it is obvious things opaque to us are clear to individuals (life) that looks from other perspectives.

It is language that created the human race but the current language is not what we started with. We started with an elaboration on the same type of language used by all other life forms. Our history and science were lost because we started "thinking". We'll probably need to stop thinking to understand things like consciousness and perhaps to create the unified field theory.

Of course this sounds absurd to you but if there's a simpler way to say it, it certainly eludes me.

"It is language that created the human race"

Is it meaningful or slip of thought, please?

Regards

 

[ecco]

What is apparent is that those who have never meditated, or gave up on it early, are usually always the most skeptical.

Nonsense. No one has to try every form of woo to know that woo is woo.

This is what my view has to offer:
1. A way to perceive reality without the filter of the mind and bodily senses.
2. Reveals the fullest expression or highest level of consciousness as a universal entity.
3. It offers an accessible and repeatable tool to verify everything that I am saying.

I'll just repeat...

You have yet to show anything of value that resulted from meditation (excluding the money that "mystics" make by selling "Eastern Wisdom" to gullible Westerners).​

Why is that? Why can you not show anything of value that your perception of reality has produced? Surely those who have achieved the "highest level of consciousness" should have come up with something to better mankind.

Yet - NOTHING!

 

[ecco]

Of what exactly do you want an example?

Is it a tactic of yours to duck and dodge by not addressing posts and then saying "huh, what?" If you didn't remember the conversation, you could have taken a minute and clicked back to see what examples I was referring to - for the third time. But, instead, you play dumb because you don't (can't) provide support for your silly assertions.

See post 213.

Now that I've steered you in the right direction, I guess you'll need to find another way to deflect.

We build three dimensional models of reality in our minds but we observe those models in real time one dimensionally. We think in one dimension but can consider time so it's like a "train of thought" that has velocity (time). Ancient people built no models and observed a three dimensional reality in three dimensional thought. This "thought" was natural to the human brain so they didn't experience thought as we do. Ancient Language must be understood by being modeled because this is the way WE think but many insights into how they "thought" can be seen. Like animals they forced their understanding onto reality itself. We think they anthropomorphized their world but the reality is that they understood their world in terms they knew. Human terms.

Most people want me to understand this for them. It isn't going to work that way. All I can tell you is how you can understand. You must change your perspective and observe, From this it is obvious things opaque to us are clear to individuals (life) that looks from other perspectives.

It is language that created the human race but the current language is not what we started with. We started with an elaboration on the same type of language used by all other life forms. Our history and science were lost because we started "thinking". We'll probably need to stop thinking to understand things like consciousness and perhaps to create the unified field theory.

Yadda, yadda yadda.

Of course this sounds absurd to you but if there's a simpler way to say it, it certainly eludes me.

Yes. Having read your posts it is quite clear many things elude you.

 

[ecco]

Most people want me to understand this for them.

Name one.

 

[cladking]

You still have not explained:
What do you mean by "experience what's around you outside of language"?


I ask because I don't have a clue as to what you are talking about. That's also why I asked for examples.

If I didn't understand the question the first time why in the hell do you think UI'd understand it now. If you understand your request then you should be able to phrase it in a way a child can understand. I'm guessing either you don't understand what I'm saying well enough to ask a cogent question or you don't understand your own question. My denseness is irrelevant if you can't even rephrase the question.

 

[cladking]

"It is language that created the human race"

Is it meaningful or slip of thought, please?

The sole thing that differentiates humans from animals is the ability to use complex language. It is language which created the human race and not intelligence, the opposable thumb, or the printing press. The human race was created by a mutation 40,000 years ago that tied the speech center to higher brain functions allowing complex language. Like consciousness this original language was universal, species specific, metaphysical, and a reflection of a binary brain in a binary reality. Language/ consciousness are the very foundation of life and all life is individual even though language itself is species specific.

We can't see any of this because we think in a wholly unnatural language that arose at the "tower of babel". Modern language is confused, analog, and individual specific though it is still complex and still can relay knowledge across generations which is THE MEANS BY WHICH language created the human race.

I'd love to be able to say this more simply and someday I have little doubt someone will. Life is consciousness and consciousness is metaphysical but we can't see it with analog thought.

 

[cladking]

Name one.

Are you trying to understand anyone or are you just here to sing the praises of science and the depth of its knowledge? Are you here just to debunk religion, meditation, prestidigitation, aliens, and EVERYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE for which you lack empirical data or an applicable equation?

 

[night912]

What is apparent is that those who have never meditated, or gave up on it early, are usually always the most skeptical.

To me, it's different. What I noticed is that those who have meditated but either stopped or slowed down are the ones that believe it the most. And those who have meditated and continuely doing it, are the more skeptical ones.

This is what my view has to offer:
1. A way to perceive reality without the filter of the mind and bodily senses.
How do you know the difference between having those "filters" and not having them? Also, how do you determine which of the perceived reality is more accurate?

2. Reveals the fullest expression or highest level of consciousness as a universal entity.
How do you determine the perceived reality as being true or the level of awareness? Keep in mind that someone can feel like they are having the highest level of consciousness and yet they perceived reality inaccurately. And/or having the feeling of being at the highest level of consciousness and yet they are at the same level as everyone else.

3. It offers an accessible and repeatable tool to verify everything that I am saying.

Even if that feeling is repeatable, you haven't provide any evidence to support that idea, the idea of being in the state of consciousness at its highest level.

 

[Swami]

To me, it's different. What I noticed is that those who have meditated but either stopped or slowed down are the ones that believe it the most. And those who have meditated and continuely doing it, are the more skeptical ones.

Psychologists are trained to dismiss mystical, spiritual, or supernatural claims a priori. They have not experienced many of the things that they dismiss.

How do you know the difference between having those "filters" and not having them?

We all have experience of the body and mind. We experience thoughts, emotions, a sense of self - our boundaries and location in space. We experience consciousness through all of these things. But in meditation, you don't experience consciousness through these things since the goal is to do away with thoughts, feelings and all other mental and sensory input. When all mental and sensory input ceases, you experience awareness by itself. This experience comes feelings or perceptions of boundlessness, connectedness (no sense of self), and ever-expanding.

The above is a clear difference between perceptions of the body vs. perceptions of pure conscious state. In the latter, I only talked about experiencing the self without the "filters". But you can also experience anyone and anything else in the Universe without the filters.

Also, how do you determine which of the perceived reality is more accurate?

I can not prove to you that I can merge with the Universe because you are not in my mind to see what I see. But I can show that it is true by showing evidence that confirm the implications of such experience or you can experience it for yourself.

Even if that feeling is repeatable, you haven't provide any evidence to support that idea, the idea of being in the state of consciousness at its highest level.

Before bringing up what my worldview has, let's also remember what your view has. It has no real understanding of consciousness. Western scientists do not know how to study consciousness directly. They study it indirectly by measuring "correlates". Given what scientists do not know, I don't think skeptics are in a position to dismiss much.

I brought up evidence in another discussion. Eastern perspective and Science: Regarding Omniscience

 

[night912]

Before bringing up what my worldview has, let's also remember what your view has. It has no real understanding of consciousness. Western scientists do not know how to study consciousness directly. They study it indirectly by measuring "correlates". Given what scientists do not know, I don't think skeptics are in a position to dismiss much.

There you go. You are 100% wrong. I know somewhat what your worldview is, from what you said about your worldview. But I have not said anything about what my worldview is. And since your feelings told you what you perceived to be my worldview, but was clearly wrong, how did you diffriciate what is true from false.

You are also wrong about skeptic. Skepticism is not about right or wrong . If someone thinks/believe that something is either right or wrong without having evidence to support it, he/she is not a skeptic. A skeptic does not have a position of right or wrong. They don't accept that it's true until sufictiant evidence is shown. Same goes for accepting it being wrong.

 

[ecco]

If I didn't understand the question the first time why in the hell do you think UI'd understand it now.

You made a nonsense post and I responded:

You still have not explained:

What do you mean by "experience what's around you outside of language"?​

If you don't understand my asking you to clarify something you posted, then we have evidence that the Ancient Language Wisdom you have been promoting is less than useless.

Without your Ancient Language Wisdom, most people would be able to understand a request to clarify a comment they made.

Apparently your years of acquiring Ancient Language Wisdom have made even such a simple request incomprehensible to you.

 

[ecco]

Most people want me to understand this for them.

Name one.

Are you trying to understand anyone or are you just here to sing the praises of science and the depth of its knowledge?

YOU made the assertion: "Most people want me to understand this for them."

I felt that was just another of your baseless assertions. So, I challenged it. It should be easy to put me in my place, just name one person who wants you to understand this (or anything) for them.

Are you here just to debunk religion, meditation, prestidigitation, aliens, and EVERYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE for which you lack empirical data or an applicable equation?

Hmm. That's a really good question. Let's just say I find woo to be very distasteful. If I can virtually poke a few woosters in the eye with the stick of reality, so be it.

 

[cladking]

Hmm. That's a really good question. Let's just say I find woo to be very distasteful. If I can virtually poke a few woosters in the eye with the stick of reality, so be it.

Good luck with that.

How's it been working for you so far?

 

[stvdv]

I will try to keep my topic simple. There are multiple reasons why Western scientists need to adopt but I will only offer two:

1. Eastern thought provides an objective approach to acquire knowledge.
Eastern mystics discovered a practice and tool long ago to explore consciousness and reality, and that practice is 'meditation'. This method is objective because it removes the filters that tend to distort reality - the mind and senses. If you cease all mental and sensory input, then you are no longer subject to bias, feelings, limitations but rather you experience reality as it is.

2. Eastern thought has a wealth of knowledge that deals with the same things that scientists deal with- the nature of consciousness and reality.
Eastern thinkers did not intend to explore every bit of physical Universe like science does. Eastern thinkers main focus was on the nature of consciousness and reality. As such, the mystics have discovered different states of consciousness that go beyond the limited classifications of scientists. One fact from Eastern thought is that consciousness does not exist independently of matter. Another fact is that consciousness can transcend "self" when it exists in everything (or as part of everything) as opposed to being fixed to one thing. Call this universal or Cosmic consciousness. Given the fact that Western materialist scientists are stumped when it comes to consciousness, it would be wise they seek insight from Eastern thinkers. To date, many scientists are flocking to the Dalai Lama so that should tell you something.

Your thoughts. Do you agree that science needs to adopt Eastern thought?

Well described OP, I like it.

Of course science does not need to adopt it; all are free to ignore good info, like the value of meditation.

If a scientist is smart, he accepts it IMO
Many scientists already did.

 

[Milton Platt]

What are you proposing consciousness is? Certainly it is not supernatural?

As far as we can tell it is an artifact of a living brain, or at least of a functioning nervous system, depending on how one defines the word "consciousness".

I was not personally making any proposal with my previous post, however. I am not a neuroscientist and defer to those who have education and experience in such area.

I'm happy with saying that I don't know.....and you should be, too.....because you don't know.

 

[paarsurrey]

Why Scientists need to accept Eastern thought

Religion is a private matter of a person. A Scientist, if one is worth it, is to concentrate on the problem of Science in hand and solve it as per the dictates of the Science while remaining open to one's Religion or other Religions/No-Religions whatsoever.

Many people had done that and there has been no problem or mythical/superstitious/phantom hindrances some people have been suggesting unnecessarily.
Right, please?

Regards