--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: > > > On May 5, 2009, at 9:15 PM, dhamiltony2k5 wrote: > > > Epistemologically > > > > day to day. > > > > Similarly, from our friend on campus: > > <paste> > > ",,,truth is an experience that occurs when our personal belief (s), > > be they individual or socially-consensual, intersect with our > > experience. > > > > My argument is not to say that what we believe is true at one moment > > in time is not extremely valuable. On the contrary, it is upon the > > foundation of apparent-truths that the entire relative world > > progress from. > > > > I therefore expect virtually everything I think I know to be true > > about the world to change. I also expect that, that change will > > become more and more frequent as we progress forward through time. > > As I said, I'm not really qualified academically to shed much light > > on whether alpha-waves coherence indicates higher states of > > consciousness. I don't believe that neuroscience has developed a > > significant enough understanding of the entire brain measurement > > process to make a definitive determination. > > Well fortunately researchers have had access to yogis in higher states > of consciousness, particularly over the last 16 years or so. What > they've found is there are remarkable changes indeed. > > > > > However, my expectations based on personal experience, is that this > > measurement process is going to become more and more and more > > refined over time as new knowledge or "truths" are revealed. > > Personally, I have serious doubts as to whether we will ever be able > > to physically measure the mechanics of consciousness. I believe > > that at best we may hope to get some indicators which can be cross > > referenced with sufficient confidence to provide theoretical validity. > > > > Like many long term meditators I have experienced 'Being' beyond > > time-space. At that level of consciousness there is no relative > > world, no relative universe. How then, can a measurement be taken of > > the deepest level of consciousness when nothing physical like the > > brain exists to measure." <end paste> > > Such states are easily demonstrable by methods known for thousands of > years. So if the state is legit., it would be relatively easy to know, > even without a lot of fancy science. What I've found is TMers learn to > talk and think in flowery language as a part of the TM mythos and that > ends up having little basis in reality, although they're quite > convinced what they're experiencing is something remarkable. > > Remarkable experiences require remarkable proof. So far no proof... >
Aside from the thousands of non-TM hits on the term "pure consciousness event" cointed by someone writing about TM research and adopted by all sorts of non-TM reserachers over teh past decade or so. Lawson
