--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jr_...@...> wrote: > > Barry, > > In my dealings with you, I found that you have already a > predisposed opinion about TM and the vedic sciences which is > not positive to say the least.
That is a fair thing to say about my opinion of the so-called "Vedic Sciences." I don't think I have a non-positive opinion about TM per se (the technique itself). I think it's a potentially valuable beginner's technique of meditation, and wish that it was still taught at a reasonable cost, and without all the TMO baggage. > We have also noticed that no matter what the facts are > or what the rationales are, you continue to disbelieve in > these sciences. You have noticed that no matter what arguments you have presented so far, I remain unconvinced that practices such as Jyotish are valid, much less that they are "sciences." > So, it would not be reasonable for me to get into this > experiment since I already know what you are thinking and > that you are going to prove it wrong whatever I say. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt by assum- ing that you are replying to the posts in order, as you come across them, and have not read what I have done to ensure that I can't do what you are accusing me of above by claiming that you "already know what I am thinking." The data is already in the hands of Rick, Alex, and Gull. They have my full permission to repost it if what I say in response to your posted analysis of this person's chart differs in any way. > Jyotish is also for people who are sincerely looking for > help. It is not for people who have a bias against it. My contention, and my reason for posting this little test, is that I believe Jyotish *depends* on people having a bias *for* it. My contention is that if that bias were not present, its customers would not view the predictions they receive as being as accurate as they think they are with that bias in place. You have the opportunity to disprove my contention. What you do with that opportunity is up to you. > Given this background, it would not be wise to get > involved with this so called experiment--which is > really a set up for your own entertainment. It is definitely, no bullshit, 100% a setup for my own entertainment. It will be entertaining whether you take me up on the challenge or not. > Nonetheless, I will take a look at the chart and analyze > it. If I see anything earth shaking, I will notify the > group...or maybe not. With all due respect, John, if you *fail* to notify the group of whatever you find, earth-shaking or not, you do not have the right to ever refer to Jyotish here in the future as a "science." Science is about predictions that can be verified. The mechanism is in place to verify the accuracy of yours. It is not in my hands; it's in the hands of the FFL moderators. If your "science" requires that someone believe in it before it "works," it's not much of a "science," now is it? You will either see something interesting in the chart or you won't. You will post what you see or you won't. Your call. But I'm just sayin'...if you fail to post anything, that says a great deal more about the validity of Jyotish than if you post something and it's wrong.
