The Beef With Science

[EthanT]

I suppose that difference is that you are interested in what science in the abstract might achieve, whereas I am talking about real everyday science in 2014, that tries to suppress ψ and probably propagates a lot of false ideas because it can't seem to change direction.
At a slight tangent, I do sometimes wonder if the sort of intense concentration involved in learning or using hard maths, or certain types of computer programming, may be somewhat akin to meditation! What do you think?
David

In my post above I was definitely concerned with what science has done, is doing and can do in the future. I'm kind of looking at the overall picture that tells us how we got to where we are, why we're here and where we're probably heading. How else can we understand what is happening now and know what best to do about it? Anyhow, when I view it that way, it's really not surprising to me that psi is being suppressed. Again, that it really is just a symptom of living in a materialistic culture. Then again, so are all the literal interpretations we have of our religions just another symptom. They share the same cause. Could we really expect anything different?

Anyhow, it tells me not to get too hung up on it, either. A materialistic culture tends to view the scientific establishment as an authority. In other words, we're collectively giving them the power to suppress psi. If we were collectively more open to our spiritual sides here in the West, nobody would buy the crap that Dawkins, et al, are selling, their message would have no power, psi would get funding, etc. Anyhow, we (us and the scientific establishment) will change and psi will get acknowledged, but there is nothing we can do to rush it along, except be a voice for change. Eventually, we'll hit a critical mass and this stuff will become mainstream, but it all depends on us. Blaming science isn’t going to solve anything.

I definitely think doing math/physics can be a type of meditation. One idea you hear from meditation is focus on something long enough to become absorbed to where subject/object begin to merge and that something reveals its secrets. There is one story of Einstein where he was in the kitchen with a baby crying in one ear, his wife yelling at him in the other ear, feeding another baby with one hand, while blocking all that out and working out the equations of General Relativity with his free hand. Probably a legendary story, but there is a man absorbed, if one ever was. Perhaps he focused on the Universe long enough until it revealed its secrets, just as the medicine man did on plants to get their medicinal secrets ( well, assuming that's not legendary too, hehe)

Anyhow, when I regularly do math/physics my head definitely feels clearer and sharper and more focused, in general. I can feel a difference. But, I also think too much "intellectualism" can be bad too - Bernardo just talked about this. Might only take some folks so far and they need to do something different. In Yoga, there are several "paths to God" - devotion, knowledge, love and others I can't remember. But I think most usually need a mix.

 

[Reece]

In my post above I was definitely concerned with what science has done, is doing and can do in the future. I'm kind of looking at the overall picture that tells us how we got to where we are, why we're here and where we're probably heading. How else can we understand what is happening now and know what best to do about it? Anyhow, when I view it that way, it's really not surprising to me that psi is being suppressed. Again, that it really is just a symptom of living in a materialistic culture. Then again, so are all the literal interpretations we have of our religions just another symptom. They share the same cause. Could we really expect anything different?

Anyhow, it tells me not to get too hung up on it, either. A materialistic culture tends to view the scientific establishment as an authority. In other words, we're collectively giving them the power to suppress psi. If we were collectively more open to our spiritual sides here in the West, nobody would buy the crap that Dawkins, et al, are selling, their message would have no power, psi would get funding, etc. Anyhow, we (us and the scientific establishment) will change and psi will get acknowledged, but there is nothing we can do to rush it along, except be a voice for change. Eventually, we'll hit a critical mass and this stuff will become mainstream, but it all depends on us. Blaming science isn’t going to solve anything.

I definitely think doing math/physics can be a type of meditation. One idea you hear from meditation is focus on something long enough to become absorbed to where subject/object begin to merge and that something reveals its secrets. There is one story of Einstein where he was in the kitchen with a baby crying in one ear, his wife yelling at him in the other ear, feeding another baby with one hand, while blocking all that out and working out the equations of General Relativity with his free hand. Probably a legendary story, but there is a man absorbed, if one ever was. Perhaps he focused on the Universe long enough until it revealed its secrets, just as the medicine man did on plants to get their medicinal secrets ( well, assuming that's not legendary too, hehe)

Anyhow, when I regularly do math/physics my head definitely feels clearer and sharper and more focused, in general. I can feel a difference. But, I also think too much "intellectualism" can be bad too - Bernardo just talked about this. Might only take some folks so far and they need to do something different. In Yoga, there are several "paths to God" - devotion, knowledge, love and others I can't remember. But I think most usually need a mix.

Not to steer the conversation elsewhere, but there is the yoga of action, too, which I believe is woefully missing in today's world and seems seldom thought about by even the "spiritual" groups . . . I tend to think that the way people used to live helped funnel many people - especially those that we'd label now work-a-day Joes - this direction. I tend think it's by and large gone now.

http://www.hinduwebsite.com/karmayoga.asp

 

[Steve]

Tom Campbell talks about the advantages of transcendental meditation while he was a student, he was able to work things out much faster than normal while in a meditative state.

I meditate for an hour most days but I can't get what he means? I have my eyes closed and my mind free of thoughts as possible ? Is he talking about getting 'in the zone ' like I used to when I played asteroids as a kid, I could take it round the clock back to zero on the score, I was totally absorbed in it whilst playing ? You young guys maybe have no idea what asteroids is, look it up in a history book. :)

 

[malf]

Tom Campbell talks about the advantages of transcendental meditation while he was a student, he was able to work things out much faster than normal while in a meditative state.

I meditate for an hour most days but I can't get what he means? I have my eyes closed and my mind free of thoughts as possible ? Is he talking about getting 'in the zone ' like I used to when I played asteroids as a kid, I could take it round the clock back to zero on the score, I was totally absorbed in it whilst playing ? You young guys maybe have no idea what asteroids is, look it up in a history book. :)

Steve! You know, on a different sort of forum, we would have had a huge bromance...

 

[Steve]

Steve! You know, on a different sort of forum, we would have had a huge bromance...

Aaah that takes me back :) Those small flying saucers were evil !

 

[Reece]

This weekend my wife and I pulled up a video of PONG to show our child just how spoiled he is concerning video games.

 

[Mel Smith]

Interesting stuff, E. Thanks for posting.

This just got me thinking about something somewhat related. And it is this: When folks talk about a theory for Psi, often times it seems they are actually referring to a mechanism. I think it is a big mistake to anticipate an actual mechanism for psychic functioning, whatever the particulars might be. Psychology doesn't have a mechanism, unless the considered mechanism is mind in a vague sort of way. The parapsychological mechanism should be considered the same- the substrate of the mental. And then obviously any theory of Psi shouldn't require a mechanism.

Materialism demands there be a mechanism, since from that viewpoint mind equals brain. Switching the mental into the physical, current thinking demands there be a physical mechanism for mental communication. Strangely, this is the assumption of many forum members, so we hear about various possible QM means by which telepathy might happen and so forth. I'm pretty sure this is absurd. It just shows the grip of materialistic thinking even on immaterialists. If parapsychology needs a mechanism for acceptance, then I'd say parapsychology is pretty much doomed, because there probably isn't one. This is all in my super humble and inferior opinion, of course.

I see you use the term 'immaterialist', as opposed to 'materialist'. I'm still confused by this odd terminology. Somebody had suggested that a materialist is a guy that accepts the material world, but NOT any supernatural ones, as opposed to those who criticize materialists for not accepting all the wu wu stuff. But to those guys self-identify as 'immaterialist'? I haven't seen that yet. In the real world, neither do we see people using the term materialist.

 

[malf]

I see you use the term 'immaterialist', as opposed to 'materialist'. I'm still confused by this odd terminology. Somebody had suggested that a materialist is a guy that accepts the material world, but NOT any supernatural ones, as opposed to those who criticize materialists for not accepting all the wu wu stuff. But to those guys self-identify as 'immaterialist'? I haven't seen that yet. In the real world, neither do we see people using the term materialist.

Welcome Mel... We're a long way from the "real world" on here ;)

 

[Mel Smith]

Welcome Mel... We're a long way from the "real world" on here ;)

That's what I'm discovering. At first I thought it was an open discussion forum and the skeptiko shows, and other topics, but even that doesn't seem to be the case. I had posted a few messages in the censored forums, the MOD+, ones without reading their rules. The moderator scolded me and told me that I couldn't post there because they don't accept any criticism. I had originally discovered the skeptico podcasts by accident, and took the host's word for it that he welcomed any sort of comments, but it seems that is not the case.

 

[malf]

That's what I'm discovering. At first I thought it was an open discussion forum and the skeptiko shows, and other topics, but even that doesn't seem to be the case. I had posted a few messages in the censored forums, the MOD+, ones without reading their rules. The moderator scolded me and told me that I couldn't post there because they don't accept any criticism. I had originally discovered the skeptico podcasts by accident, and took the host's word for it that he welcomed any sort of comments, but it seems that is not the case.

Heh. From what I can see, unless you have received a PM, the only mods you have been scolded by are "self appointed". Alex and Andy are the only mods.

I continue to be disappointed with the treatment of new seekers on this forum.

 

[steve001]

I see you use the term 'immaterialist', as opposed to 'materialist'. I'm still confused by this odd terminology. Somebody had suggested that a materialist is a guy that accepts the material world, but NOT any supernatural ones, as opposed to those who criticize materialists for not accepting all the wu wu stuff. But to those guys self-identify as 'immaterialist'? I haven't seen that yet. In the real world, neither do we see people using the term materialist.

If you have not come to realize it yet, you soon will, that you can't look sideways here without someone bringing up those two words, it's usually psi proponents that do. I swear to god there are times I think this site isn't a paranormal site, but a philosophy forum instead.

 

[Mel Smith]

Ok, that might be it, that it's just a peculiar term used by the psi types. It seems like they use it as a sort of 'name-calling' technic, as if they could ridicule people who don't believe in their woo-woo concepts. I don't see real philosophers doing that. I think they would have more credibility if they just said that they believe in things like consciousness after death in spite of being able to prove the notion. Or they could just say that they believe it to be true and accept anecdotes as evidence. But to call people who don't as 'materialists', just sounds stupid.

 

[Mel Smith]

Heh. From what I can see, unless you have received a PM, the only mods you have been scolded by are "self appointed". Alex and Andy are the only mods.

I continue to be disappointed with the treatment of new seekers on this forum.

Thank you. I accept that they can run the site any way they want, I just don't want to have any dealing with people who can't handle having to account for their positions. I told them I wouldn't write into those censored fora, nor even bother reading them.

 

[Sciborg_S_Patel]

I see you use the term 'immaterialist', as opposed to 'materialist'. I'm still confused by this odd terminology. Somebody had suggested that a materialist is a guy that accepts the material world, but NOT any supernatural ones, as opposed to those who criticize materialists for not accepting all the wu wu stuff. But to those guys self-identify as 'immaterialist'? I haven't seen that yet. In the real world, neither do we see people using the term materialist.

Materialism/Physicalism.

Immaterialism - in the past this was used as a synonym for Idealism, but more recently it just means there is some aspect of reality that cannot be accounted for by nonconscious matter/energy.

 

[Mel Smith]

Materialism/Physicalism.

Immaterialism - in the past this was used as a synonym for Idealism, but more recently it just means there is some aspect of reality that cannot be accounted for by nonconscious matter/energy.

So it looks like I'm honing in on it now. It seems like an 'immaterialist', can be a materialist at the same time. He can accept was actually exists in the natural world, but also believes in various super-natural notions. This seems to be very awkward terminology. It seem more like you guys just call people who don't accept woo-woo stuff as 'materialists' as a form of name calling, instead of defending your positions.

 

[steve001]

So it looks like I'm honing in on it now. It seems like an 'immaterialist', can be a materialist at the same time. He can accept was actually exists in the natural world, but also believes in various super-natural notions. This seems to be very awkward terminology. It seem more like you guys just call people who don't accept woo-woo stuff as 'materialists' as a form of name calling, instead of defending your positions.

You're new. Don't use the w--w-- here.

 

[Mel Smith]

You're new. Don't use the w--w-- here.

I thought this was the uncensored area. I had promised them not to write in to the MOD+ ones. In fact I've heard the host, Alex say the w word, and I've heard his most recent guest say it too, when she said that people call her a ''journalist into w....''. I could see them censoring the f word, or the d word, or the c word, but the w word too? Who are the moderators, the taliban?

 

[malf]

I thought this was the uncensored area. I had promised them not to write in to the MOD+ ones. In fact I've heard the host, Alex say the w word, and I've heard his most recent guest say it too, when she said that people call her a ''journalist into w....''. I could see them censoring the f word, or the d word, or the c word, but the w word too? Who are the moderators, the taliban?

It seems to be more like the N-word. You can use it if you "own" it.

 

[Sciborg_S_Patel]

So it looks like I'm honing in on it now. It seems like an 'immaterialist', can be a materialist at the same time. He can accept was actually exists in the natural world, but also believes in various super-natural notions. This seems to be very awkward terminology. It seem more like you guys just call people who don't accept woo-woo stuff as 'materialists' as a form of name calling, instead of defending your positions.

Huh? Materialist is a commonly accepted word in philosophy. It's not a pejorative.

I do find it amusing that you're using a pejorative such as "woo-woo" - I've yet to see you defend your position after all.

Why does it matter if people believe in Psi or not anyway?

 

[Mel Smith]

Huh? Materialist is a commonly accepted word in philosophy. It's not a pejorative.

I do find it amusing that you're using a pejorative such as "woo-woo" - I've yet to see you defend your position after all.

Why does it matter if people believe in Psi or not anyway?

I don't think so and one of the problems with it is that it's awkward since I've found out that that a person can be a materialist and an immaterialist at the same time. So some of you guys have told me that you are indeed materialist when it comes to the natural world, but are also immaterialists when it comes to so many super-natural notions. That's pretty awkard. And it couldn't really mean the term is derogative, although it seems like some guys try to use it that way. If fact I'm proud to say that just like everybody on this forum, I'm a materialist, but unlike most, I'm NOT an immaterialist.
On the other hand I do indeed see people use the word woo-woo to describe all sorts of super-natural stuff, and I've heard the host Alex say it, and even his last guest, Patricia, who said that people describe her as a ''journalist into woo-woo''