Why Scientists need to accept Eastern thought

[sealchan]

Nope. It is NOT objective because it is not public and repeatable for others. The rest is philosophy and not science.

Sure it is public and repeatable. It is repeatable just as personal sensory experience is repeatable and it is public via EEG monitoring.

 

[Polymath257]

Objectivity is not dependent on repeatability. Do you believe only the natural sciences can provide us with objective knowledge? Historical knowledge is not derived through repeated experiment, neither is philosophical knowledge; and science is in fact a branch of philosophy and would be impossible without it. The criteria of falsifiability, the scientific method itself, and all the cornerstones of modern scientific methodology are products of the philosophy of science. Before the modern age, what we now call science was merely known as 'natural philosophy.'

Lots of stuff here. I consider historical knowledge to be valid knowledge to the extent it is testable. So, having more than one treatment of the same event can helpt o ensure consistency. Having archeological evidence (physical evidence) can help to ensure the story was factual (and not distorted).

And we *don't* accept just any written 'history' at face value. We investigate the evidence from several different sources to be sure it is all consistent *prior* to accepting it as 'knowledge'.

Next, the *origins* of modern science were in philosophy, but it has since broken away and become a separate (group of) subject(s). Again, the notion of testing, repeatability, and that all hypotheses have to be clearly stated and testable is central to how we get new knowledge. It is this shift away from philosophy that *defines* modern science. And it is the core strength it has had that has allowed us to learn so much more than anyone suspected 400 years ago.

In particular, for 'eastern knowledge' to be *actual* knowledge, there has to be a way to test it. If two people disagree, is there a procedure to resolve the disagreement? In the sciences, there is: conduct an experiment that serves to highlight the differences and see what actually happens. This is why testability is so crucial. In math, there is a similar dispute resolution procedure: follow the argument using logic until you get back to the axioms.

What is the dispute resolution procedure for 'eastern knowledge'?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Eben Alexander appears at number 1306 in the Encyclopaedia of American Loons: Encyclopedia of American Loons: Search results for eben alexander

So, even among loons, he is essentially nowhere. He is not even a highly-rated loon.

 

[Polymath257]

Modern mathematics itself originated in India through the Indian numeral system and zero, both of which are products of eastern philosophical systems like Sankhya (number) and Shunyata (zero-emptiness), along with algebra, trigometry, arithmetic, decimal system.

This was learnt and expanded upon by the Arabs and later on by the Europeans. The Europeans discarded their long used Roman numeral system considering the practicality of the eastern one and its capacity for indepth calculations and it revolutionised science, technology and commerce in the west and the world. This also enabled europe to emerge from the fog of the dark ages.

Hence the west has a lot to thank eastern philosophy for.

Again, math is not the same as philosophy. And *modern* mathematics is quite different than the *arithmetic* that was started in India (and greatly expanded upon by both the Arabic mathematicians and the later European ones).

In fact, I would say that *modern* mathematics didn't start until Descartes unified algebra and geometry (after the split caused by the discovery of irrationals).

Don't get me wrong. India had some great mathematicians. Their study of what we know of as Pell's equations were exemplary for the time. The development of the decimal system made basic calculations much easier. But, for example, trigonometry was actually invented by the ancient Greeks. This is why the Indian mathematicians knew about it (it was brought by the Geeks following Alexander). Algebra was in a formative stage well past the contributions of the Indian mathematicians and didn't really get going until the transition away from a literary description to a symbolic description was achieved (Italian mathematicians were the main ones for this transition).

 

[Polymath257]

Sure it is public and repeatable. It is repeatable just as personal sensory experience is repeatable and it is public via EEG monitoring.

And to that extent, there is something worthwhile for science to investigate: what is going on in the brain during meditation? How does what we see going on compare to the experiences of the person meditating?

But to think that eastern philosophy can tell us anything useful about, say, the nature of the atom, or of distant galaxies, is a stretch.

 

[Audie]

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?

You will let us know when "eastern thought" actually
leads to some sort of accomplishment?

 

[Audie]

Materialists would have you believe that the scientific method came down from Heaven, fully formed. NOt a word can be added to or taken away from it. The reality is that the scientific method is not closed. New methods are always added, especially when "new" sciences are formed. If we go back to the last century we find that scientists were actually using "first-person" methods - that is, introspection. It was largely diminished afterwards due to unreliability but none of those concerns apply to meditation. Meditation is already an added method when you consider that it is used in medicine. I'm only proposing to broaden its use to also include it as a tool for knowledge.

You know, when you just make up and proclaim
such garbage to be fact, you really blow any
credibility you may have in anything you say.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It is amazing how religious thought pervades the world in the subconscious mind of man, to be brought forth through reflection and mediation.

Science and religion are just the same, search for truth. Christianity and Islam are not religions, but Jesus' or Mohammad's cult. Hinduism is a proper religion which was refined by millenniums of discussions. Reflection, meditation are thinking at its best. RigVeda said 3,000 years ago that existence and non-existence are just related phases. Of course, it was not possible at that time to test the hypothesis. Now we talk of perturbation theory, decoherence and wave-function collapse. Even Einstein's proposition that gravity affects light was proved years after he postulated it.

What is the dispute resolution procedure for 'eastern knowledge'?

Give a better argument, test, the same as in science. That is why so many philosophies in Hinduism and philosophies that forked from Hinduism (Charvak, Ajivakas, Buddhism, Jainism) were atheistic. That is why I am an atheist Hindu.

 

[sealchan]

And to that extent, there is something worthwhile for science to investigate: what is going on in the brain during meditation? How does what we see going on compare to the experiences of the person meditating?

But to think that eastern philosophy can tell us anything useful about, say, the nature of the atom, or of distant galaxies, is a stretch.

I agree. I would also say that the language used in Eastern philosophy should be studied. It will help with phenomenological insights as well. It may be that some of that language might even become recognized as scientific should sufficient experimentation establish that.

What is needed is what I have called a science of subjectivity:

Science of Subjectivity

There are ways of phenomenologically describing our conscious experience that would aid us in identifying the neural mechanism behind the experience. Dream studies are also helpful in this regard. I have found certain motifs in dreams which seem to reflect basic brain structure and function.

 

[Native]

Again, math is not the same as philosophy.

You can say that again Philosophy deals with WHY and HOW things works - Modern math in cosmology is mostly used in order to get the Universe to fit the calculations without even thinking of the philosophical implications.

 

[Howard Is]

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

No.

There are plenty of Eastern scientists. If Eastern thought can radically change science, then it should already be happening.

Science and meditation relate to two different domains.
Science investigates the phenomena of the material world.
Meditation illuminates our experience of the world.

BTW, in reference to a few posts here, almost nobody has any real idea of what quantum physics is about. I find it tiresome listening to syncretists pretending to understand it so they can appropriate it somehow. Or worse, use it to prove that meditators ‘already knew’.
I find that puerile.

Meditation does not rely on scientific knowledge, and science is a process which stands outside cultural and spiritual notions.

 

[Polymath257]

If science doesn't believe in any of this stuff.Why is quantum physics giving it so much attention?

It isn't. There are woosters who try to claim it does, though.

 

[blü 2]

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.

It's plain that the West's scientific method has made possible the acquisition of a great deal of knowledge and that the method has been adopted in the East and forms the basis of, not so much Eastern or Western these days, but world science.

So what knowledge, specifically, are you referring to?

Eastern mystics discovered a practice and tool long ago to explore consciousness and reality, and that practice is 'meditation'.

Meditation has an independent tradition in the West, very largely through particular religious traditions. As well, Western medicine has studied and endeavored to describe the various kinds of meditation, any beneficial or other phenomena associated with them, and from there to explain both the processes and consequences involved.

Are you saying that the benefits of meditation aren't amenable to scientific investigation?

Further, what do you mean by 'mystic' here? What qualifications do 'mystics' have to analyze and explain brain function?

2. Eastern thought has a wealth of knowledge that deals with the same things that scientists deal with- the nature of consciousness and reality.

We need a good, clear, hard-edged definition of consciousness here. My not-very-informed understanding is that 'consciousness' in the East has a significantly different meaning to 'consciousness' as used in the West. For example, 'consciousness' for me refers basically to being awake and aware. It doesn't include being asleep, it doesn't include the very many non-conscious brain functions and it doesn't include anything external to the brain.

What does 'consciousness' mean in the East, in your view?

 

[Aupmanyav]

BTW, in reference to a few posts here, almost nobody has any real idea of what quantum physics is about. I find it tiresome listening to syncretists pretending to understand it so they can appropriate it somehow. Or worse, use it to prove that meditators ‘already knew’.
Meditation does not rely on scientific knowledge, and science is a process which stands outside cultural and spiritual notions.

I agree that I cannot claim to know much about Quantum Mechanics. Polymath knows. I would be very happy if he responds to my post. Meditation, as per my view, is just concentrating on what is to be contemplated. 'Why is it so?' There are other views among religionists that meditation gives you the key of some 'universal truth', or, by awakening one's kundalini, it will give you the power to fly wherever your mind goes (Siddhis). Being a strong atheist, I do not believe in such clap-trap.

But, if you would see, getting into Quantum Mechanics is very easy for one who thinks clearly. The question is 'Wherefrom all that exists arose?' There were two options for the Hindu philosophers - 1. It is eternal (Much like God is beyond physical domain). The reason 'Why is it eternal?' not given. 2. The other option was 'Creatio Ex-Nihilo'. Here one does not have the problem of explaining the source of origin. So, on one hand we have existence, on the other we have non-existence. If there was some relation between existence and non-existence, then it solves the problem. For this reason, 3,000 years ago, the poet of the famous Hindu Hymn of Creation (Nasadiya Sukta), said two things:

1. 'Sages who searched with their heart's thought discovered the existent's kinship in the non-existent.'
2. 'The Gods are later than this world's production. Who knows then whence it first came into being?'
Rig Veda: Rig-Veda, Book 10: HYMN CXXIX. Creation.

 

[exchemist]

Philosophy is the seeking of knowledge in various forms. Science is a form for seeking knowledge.

By that criterion so is any intellectual discipline. You are right that this was the original meaning of the word, but it is not how it has been used in the last two hundred years or so, so far as I am aware.

 

[Jose Fly]

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?

It comes down to one basic thing. If you truly think the scientific process can be improved via what you describe above, then you need to demonstrate it. The above is an interesting set of thoughts and opinions, but until you put it into practice and show how the results are superior to current methodology, it will remain just that....thoughts and opinions.

 

[Polymath257]

I agree that I cannot claim to know much about Quantum Mechanics. Polymath knows. I would be very happy if he responds to my post. Meditation, as per my view, is just concentrating on what is to be contemplated. 'Why it is so?' There are other views among religionists that meditation gives you the key of some 'universal truth' or, by awakening one's kundalini, it will give you the power to fly wherever your mind goes (Siddhis). Being a strong atheist, I do not believe in such clap-trap.

But, if you would see, getting into Quantum Mechanics is very easy for one who thinks clearly. The question is 'Wherefrom all that exists arose?' There were two options for the Hindu philosophers - 1. It is eternal (Much like God is beyond physical domain). The reason 'Why is it eternal?' not given. 2. The other option was 'Creatio Ex-Nihilo'. Here one does not have the problem of explaining the source of origin. So, on one hand we have existence, on the other we have non-existence. If there was some relation between existence and non-existence, then it solves the problem. For this reason, 3,000 years ago, the poet of the famous Hindu Hymn of Creation (Nasadiya Sukta), said two things:

1. 'Sages who searched with their heart's thought discovered the existent's kinship in the non-existent.'
2. 'The Gods are later than this world's production. Who knows then whence it first came into being?'
Rig Veda: Rig-Veda, Book 10: HYMN CXXIX. Creation.

I've yet to see anything that is relevant to QM from eastern thought (prior to 1900, at least).

A few people have written books promoting a mystical interpretation of QM and have made some money on the venture. But what they write either has little to do with QM or little to do with eastern thought (or both).

Anyone who claims to understand QM at any level and has never solved a differential equation is simply lying. Anyone who claims to understand it at an advanced level and doesn't know about unbounded operators on a Hilbert space is lying. And anyone who claims to *really* understand it is lying.

 

[exchemist]

Eastern philosophy is only interested in providing or aiding the moral dimension needed in handling the tool of science for the welfare of humanity and the world, so that the world does not end up getting wiped out by nut cases under the influence of lopsided philosophies.

Modern mathematics itself originated in India through the Indian numeral system and zero, both of which are products of eastern philosophical systems like Sankhya (number) and Shunyata (zero-emptiness), along with algebra, trigometry, arithmetic, decimal system.

This was learnt and expanded upon by the Arabs and later on by the Europeans. The Europeans discarded their long used Roman numeral system considering the practicality of the eastern one and its capacity for indepth calculations and it revolutionised science, technology and commerce in the west and the world. This also enabled europe to emerge from the fog of the dark ages.

Hence the west has a lot to thank eastern philosophy for.

This thread is not about what "the west" allegedly has to thank "the east" for.

The claim is that scientists need to "accept eastern thought", by which is apparently meant a load of metaphysical guff about consciousness and meditation.

 

[Polymath257]

You can say that again Philosophy deals with WHY and HOW things works - Modern math in cosmology is mostly used in order to get the Universe to fit the calculations without even thinking of the philosophical implications.

Other way around:get the calculations to fit what we observe about the universe.

I'd also say that the scientists working on this are probing the *philosophical* implications much deeper than any philosopher. The philosophers simply haven't been bothered to learn about the advances in knowledge over the last century (for the most part). This is quite contrary to, say, what Kant did.

 

[Audie]

It's plain that the West's scientific method has made possible the acquisition of a great deal of knowledge and that the method has been adopted in the East and forms the basis of, not so much Eastern or Western these days, but world science.

So what knowledge, specifically, are you referring to?
Meditation has an independent tradition in the West, very largely through particular religious traditions. As well, Western medicine has studied and endeavored to describe the various kinds of meditation, any beneficial or other phenomena associated with them, and from there to explain both the processes and consequences involved.

Are you saying that the benefits of meditation aren't amenable to scientific investigation?

Further, what do you mean by 'mystic' here? What qualifications do 'mystics' have to analyze and explain brain function?
We need a good, clear, hard-edged definition of consciousness here. My not-very-informed understanding is that 'consciousness' in the East has a significantly different meaning to 'consciousness' as used in the West. For example, 'consciousness' for me refers basically to being awake and aware. It doesn't include being asleep, it doesn't include the very many non-conscious brain functions and it doesn't include anything external to the brain.

What does 'consciousness' mean in the East, in your view?

I think it is just another version of how with the
right attitude one can know so much more than
those foolish people who actually study.