Upcoming Interview: Dr. Gregory Shushan... please submit questions

#21
Good point. I think this is a common approach taken by academics. Kripal talks about this in his books, he calls it "making the cut". I believe it's a formal approach to research known as "phenomenological research" and is quite standard in some humanities fields. The anthropoligist Jack Hunter talks about it some. Diana Pasulka also talked about this when she talks about just looking at the phenomena without making judgments about whether it's real or not. Toward the end of the Pasulka interview, Alex called her out a bit when she said she wasn't sure if craft had ever visited. Alex called her out and said something to effect of "of course we know--if there's artifacts that exist, it's game over on that question." But I'm not so sure that's the case --- I think there's something to be said for having the discipline to leave space open for phenomena that we can't imagine ... And when a person makes a judgment, which of course is anybody's prerogative to do, it forecloses other perhaps more whimsical interpretations. Just my two cents.
To finish my thought here -- In the spirit of Alex's original request for questions, I think it could be helpful to ask Dr. Shushan about phenomenological research methods. Can he give a brief thumbnail sketch of what it means, perhaps some brief history? Can he give some of the pros and cons of doing research this way?

I think academics come on "layman" podcasts and lightly reference this research method, but are perhaps hesitant to go into the details because the details can get a little hairy. That said, I think if we really want to understand these interesting perspectives from these academics, we kinda/sorta need to get into the philosophical underpinning of their methods, at least a little bit more than is typically done on the different podcasts. I think we are ready for it, and i think it could shed some more interesting light on things, even from the "social engineering" side of things. In my limited experience, research methods can be a contentious topic within academia, and they can be an interesting angle on the broader politics of knowledge, etc.
 
#22
To finish my thought here -- In the spirit of Alex's original request for questions, I think it could be helpful to ask Dr. Shushan about phenomenological research methods. Can he give a brief thumbnail sketch of what it means, perhaps some brief history? Can he give some of the pros and cons of doing research this way?

I think academics come on "layman" podcasts and lightly reference this research method, but are perhaps hesitant to go into the details because the details can get a little hairy. That said, I think if we really want to understand these interesting perspectives from these academics, we kinda/sorta need to get into the philosophical underpinning of their methods, at least a little bit more than is typically done on the different podcasts. I think we are ready for it, and i think it could shed some more interesting light on things, even from the "social engineering" side of things. In my limited experience, research methods can be a contentious topic within academia, and they can be an interesting angle on the broader politics of knowledge, etc.
excellent point. I will try to cover.
 
#23
I think academics come on "layman" podcasts and lightly reference this research method, but are perhaps hesitant to go into the details because the details can get a little hairy. That said, I think if we really want to understand these interesting perspectives from these academics, we kinda/sorta need to get into the philosophical underpinning of their methods, at least a little bit more than is typically done on the different podcasts. I think we are ready for it, and i think it could shed some more interesting light on things, even from the "social engineering" side of things. In my limited experience, research methods can be a contentious topic within academia, and they can be an interesting angle on the broader politics of knowledge, etc.
Yeah! Academics are humans too. It is easy to get into them as 'expert' and forget that so often there is a personal passion that drives the inquiry - and they feel they do not have permission to allow that side out. And yet research can have a profound personal impact. It was utterly transformational for me.

Maybe Alex could ask "How has this research had an impact on your personal perspective?" You remind me of a question put to me - What do you see as follow up research themes you would encourage others to engage with?

It is interesting that the methodological aspect of the research that covers the philosophical dimension is often the dullest - because it is mandatory and of little interest to the candidate who just wants the qual. The examination of methodology at this level can be superficial by assessors. One of my assessors actually remarked that he found my methodology the most engaging part of my thesis - and I was grossly and deeply offended - until I reread it recently and discovered it was pretty radical. If you weren't seriously into my research topic (which was a bit off the wall) I could see the methodology might have had a compensatory interest.

I'd be careful about getting into the philosophical foundations to research. It could be a boring discussion of the bleeding obvious rendered in academic in wanky academic language. So. Alex, check that out first.
 
#24
Dr. Gregory Shushan is coming back on to talk about weather in NDE's may be the source of all religions. as if you're not already tired of me hammering on this point :)

he has a new book that looks interesting:

Why is the book so expensive? It’s like 70-80 bucks
 
#25
It is interesting that the methodological aspect of the research that covers the philosophical dimension is often the dullest - because it is mandatory and of little interest to the candidate who just wants the qual. The examination of methodology at this level can be superficial by assessors. One of my assessors actually remarked that he found my methodology the most engaging part of my thesis - and I was grossly and deeply offended - until I reread it recently and discovered it was pretty radical. If you weren't seriously into my research topic (which was a bit off the wall) I could see the methodology might have had a compensatory interest.
interesting. actually I think the methodology on this one is pretty important.
1. relying on third person accounts
2. differentiating between NDEs and shamanic experiences
3. religious overlay ( kind of cool that he has accounts that changed beliefs)
4. cultural overlay (ditto)
5. indigenous social engineering :)
 
#27
interesting. actually I think the methodology on this one is pretty important.
1. relying on third person accounts
2. differentiating between NDEs and shamanic experiences
3. religious overlay ( kind of cool that he has accounts that changed beliefs)
4. cultural overlay (ditto)
5. indigenous social engineering :)
That's good news. From your 5 points above it does seem that this is going to be a great conversation. Be still my beating heart :).
 
#28
academic book... bummer cause it's very readable.
Should expand on this. A lot of academic books have great information but are better off used as anaesthetics for other than those who really have to read them. So the marketplace is limited to academic libraries and those who do need to by them. That's not many. As a result the books are priced high to make it worthwhile printing them for the limited readership.

As a result there are some damned good reads that are lost to the general public -and an awful lot of really horribly written stuff that we are spared. Consequently you do have to cop the pain, now and then, of great books that can live in both the academic and the general world - and pay the academic price.
 
Top