--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M" <compost...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > I don't believe that causality is ever experienced. It is > > belief that bridges the cause and the effect in a person's mind. > > Very elegantly put. > > But it leads to a wicked thought. Doesn't that make the idea of > "causality" and "scientific law" as much a PROJECTION on to the > shit that happens as is, say, the idea of deities, sprites, spirits, > and other "superstitious" what-not? They're just alternative > "language games" for the same thing (stuff-that-happens)? You > choose the one that floats your boat best down the shit stream. But the > one you choose is not necessarily TRUE, it's just the one that's more > or less able to get you from your chosen A to your chosen B? > > Curtis - I thought you had a more progessive epistemology than that!
Scientific choices are not as random as that. Humans have been at it long enough to no longer need to use characters from literature as starting points for theories. This shift is historically called the "enlightenment" which makes Maharishi's misuse of his "Age of Enlightenment" which proposes going back to the pre-reason model, all the more ironically absurd. You fill in the gaps as best as you can in the scientific method. You give more or less weight to different descriptions as you discover if it applies to more areas that strengthen the overall theory. Then you test the shit out of all the falsifiable theories you can conjure up. Occasionally very good evidence that cannot be denied comes along and blows your theory up, and a new model is necessary to explain it and what you have discovered before. This is happening less and less, not more and more in science, because we do understand some stuff pretty well and we are building on that. Probability, statistics, and vaguely worded unfalsifiable predictions give Yagyas all the wiggle room needed for people who already "know" their effect and how they work to find all the evidence they need. We have so many cognitive gaps, and sometimes it is hard to face how poorly we are equipped to test such claims, especially after we have paid for them. And then you have A-hole scientists who sometimes subvert the process of inquiry into a way to support the latest pharmaceutical, only giving the method lip service(Not the kind that feels good) for some gold coins with "In God We Trust" stamped on them. And finally we have a complex mysterious world that has defied our ability to achieve complete knowledge with absolute certainty and this makes some people so nervous they turn to an explanation from a fairy tale to help them go to sleep. So epistemological humility is appropriate in facing the world. But that doesn't mean we don't know anything at all. We just don't everything. And we always have to be on the lookout for things we KNOW that aren't so. If we care about keeping it real, that is. > > > > But then I do have them > > > done and I don't just spout off about them without ever having had > one. > > > > I actually have had a few and was there in person. Very enjoyable. > They have all sorts of benifits other than the claimed results. I'm > not selling you my POV, but it wasn't gained by me being never having > had one. > > > > > > > > > > > > Some people get on a flippant roll and think they actually are > saying > > > something. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > > > To: <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 1:40 PM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk" <kirk_bernhardt@> > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> I am sorry but this whole Maharishi gayness thread is wayyyy off > track as > > > >> pertains to any sort of import. My original question, I > thought, was > > > >> much > > > >> more ineresting and would provide much more insight into > mechanics of > > > >> consciousness than this flubber. > > > > > > > > You talking about my stomach or my argument? I want you to know > that I > > > > have a perfectly good set of six pack abs under there which I am > > > > protecting with that layer contributed mostly by members of the > porcine > > > > product line. When I grow it thick enough I'm gunna cure it into > bacon. > > > > > > > >> > > > >> My question was, does the ethos of the individual pundit effect > the > > > >> outcome > of a yagya? > > > > > > > > No. The outcome is equally nil except as a believe enhancing > ritual for > > > > the participants and whoever was unlucky enough to give their > money to > > > > have it done. > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you all think? Or is everyone so caught up in their > > > >> maras > > > > > > > > First of all it was Mara who ordered all those disgusting lemon > drop shots > > > > and it was Mara who conveniently spilled one on her tank top > turning her > > > > headlights on and which lead me to invite her back to my place > where she > > > > ate everything in my fridge and then puked into the cat litter > box putting > > > > an end to any designs I had on her at the beginning of the > evening. > > > > > > > > that they can't think coherently any longer? > > > >> > > > >> My guess is yes. > > > > > > > > Well you got that right. Functioning while not being able to > think > > > > coherently is a bit of a hobby for me. My favorite is attempting > to > > > > perform music that way. > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> Anyway, neverthefuckmind. it's all theory, and therefore as > specious as > > > >> the > > > >> present argument. I'll come back tomorrow when people wake up - > > > >> hopefully. > > > > > > > > And after I get all that Mara puke out of my cat box, hopefully. > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > > >> From: "Duveyoung" <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> > > > >> To: <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> > > > >> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 10:13 AM > > > >> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > > >> > So you are still missing the point? It is the hypocrisy of > his > > > >> > position > > > >> > on gayness that I am criticizing. Not that he might be gay. > You remind > > > >> > me > > > >> > of my cats Judy. When I point my finger at a treat, they look > at my > > > >> > finger. > > > >> > > > > >> > Curtis, > > > >> > > > > >> > Now that was funny. Judy in a nutshell....emphasis on the > word > > > >> > "shell." > > > >> > > > > >> > I'm continually amazed that you debate her when you know it > will come > > > >> > to > > > >> > naught in terms of helping her evolve her POV. > > > >> > > > > >> > I'm guessing that you do it as an intellectual exercise for > your own > > > >> > benefit -- practice makes clarity. > > > >> > > > > >> > Edg > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > ------------------------------------ > > > >> > > > > >> > To subscribe, send a message to: > > > >> > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > > >> > > > > >> > Or go to: > > > >> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > > > >> > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > > > > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > Or go to: > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > > > > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
