--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo" <richardhughes103@> > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 15, 2008, at 3:26 PM, John wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/skunk.htm > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Being the skunk at an atheist convention > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Very interesting article. Notwithstanding the > possibilities he > > > > has > > > > > > offered in the essay, he may still be an atheist for the > most > > > > part. > > > > > > For my take, it all comes down to what the vedic literature > has > > > > > > narrated. That is, in the phenomenal existence, there is > the > > > > good and > > > > > > the bad, the devatas and the asuras, or the angels and the > > > devils. > > > > > > Whatever is from above, so is the condition here on earth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Get a grip dude. Most of what you've been lead to believe > > > > is "Vedic > > > > > literature" ain't really even "Vedic"--it's just that you > were > > > > > programmed by a Vedic Supremacist to believe that. Literature > > > > dictated > > > > > by the state of brain, nervous system and social development > of > > > > people > > > > > thousands of years ago will have little application for > modern > > > > humans > > > > > as they were written when the human race was (collectively) > at a > > > > > different state of development, no? > > > > > > > > > > > > > As far as I can tell, human consciousness has not differed > greatly > > > > from those people who lived during the vedic ages, or the time > of > > > > Moses in the desert. IMHO, the human consciousness has always > been > > > > the same throughout the ages. > > > > > > I beg to differ, that consciousness has evolved along with > > > everything else can't really be disputed. Originally I would > > > have thought that we haven't changed much since we left Africa, > > > then I read The Origin of Consciouness in the Breakdown of the > > > Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes and the world changed, many > > > things became clear that once were mysteries. > > > > > > > And it is total nonsense, too. > > Total nonsense? Just because it doesn't fit in with how YOU > see the world as being? > > http://www.julianjaynes.org/myths-vs-facts.php > > If nothing else it's a fascinating idea and what is the > point of having a mind if you aren't going to think about > how it works. > > > A tiny bit of thought might reveal how silly the book's premise is: > > And that really is a tiny bit of thought. > > > TM is a natural technique found in all the world's religions and > > spiritiual traditions > > Are you sure or are you just quoting the brochure at us? > > > > and it *reduces* the mental chatter towards/to zero. > > > > At the same time, the EEG and brain imaging shows that the brain is > becoming > > more in-synch which is correlated with the less mentally active > state, both > > during and outside of meditation. > > Can't see what that has to do with bicameral consciousness. >
OK, define "bicameral consciousness." > Most of the stuff on his site you have to pay for, but > this is a good look at where he is coming from. > > http://www.julianjaynes.org/pdf/jaynes_consciousness-voices-mind.pdf > > > > To ignore these facts and suggest that religious practices are all > > about creating an "other" to talk to is beyond silly. > > > > It's just stupid. > > I think judging books you haven't read or understand is stupid. > > I've browsed it. I note you don't address my point. > > Lawson > > >
