> > Alleged "pure consciousness".
> >
sparaig:
> Well, Pure Consciousness, as defined by the TM
> researchers using guidelines provided by MMY, yes...
>
"Other relaxation techniques have led to the same
EEG profile..."
http://www.rwilliams.us/archives/Meditation.pdf
'The Cambridge Handbook o
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardjwilliamstexas"
wrote:
>
>
>
> > > I've already posted a list of published research
> > > on Pure Consciousness during TM and on the
> > > physiological/psychological profiles of people
> > > who report pure consciousness 24/7 for years/
> >
> > I've already posted a list of published research
> > on Pure Consciousness during TM and on the
> > physiological/psychological profiles of people
> > who report pure consciousness 24/7 for years/
> > decades at a time.
> >
Vaj:
> Alleged "pure consciousness".
>
> The experience of sama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
>
>
> On Jun 21, 2011, at 1:58 PM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > I've already posted a list of published research on Pure
> > Consciousness during TM and on the physiological/psychological
> > profiles of people who report pure consciousness 24/7 fo
On Jun 21, 2011, at 1:58 PM, sparaig wrote:
I've already posted a list of published research on Pure
Consciousness during TM and on the physiological/psychological
profiles of people who report pure consciousness 24/7 for years/
decades at a time.
Alleged "pure consciousness".
The expe
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> > The only thing really impressive about TM research is the amount
> > of work going on to keep the sinking ship afloat. TM research is
> > more about misinformation and PR type
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
>
> On Jun 21, 2011, at 1:16 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > As I have pointed out to you before, almost all the TM
> > research cited in the The Cambridge Handbook of
> > Consciousness was published before 1980, and the
> > Transcendental Consciousness s
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote:
[quoting Buck]
> > This to me was the interesting paragraph that popped out
> > of this article, "... in the geographic vicinity of such
> > a meditating group, people experienced physiological
> > changes".
>
> What kind of person who w
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
>
> The only thing really impressive about TM research is the amount
> of work going on to keep the sinking ship afloat. TM research is
> more about misinformation and PR type campaigns than it is
> substance or science.
Hear, hear.
That's the
On Jun 21, 2011, at 4:21 AM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
[...]
The only interesting thing about the latest TM org employee research
is that a landmark independent study way back in the 80's show
On Jun 21, 2011, at 1:16 AM, sparaig wrote:
As I have pointed out to you before, almost all the TM research
cited in the The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness was published
before 1980, and the Transcendental Consciousness studies and
Cosmic Consciousness studies cited below are definite
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
[...]
> > The only interesting thing about the latest TM org employee research
> > is that a landmark independent study way back in the 80's showed
> > definitively that TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 1, 2010, at 11:19 AM, tartbrain wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mar 31, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
> > >
> > > > The authors said that these findings shed light
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine wrote:
>
[...]
> While this and other studies are interesting, Rick,
> they mostly strike me as a little desperate and
> a lot self-important. A "researcher" doing research
> on something in which he has a vested interest?
> Hardly objective.
As I have pointed out to you before, almost all the TM research cited in the
The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness was published before 1980, and the
Transcendental Consciousness studies and Cosmic Consciousness studies cited
below are definitely not evaluated:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/
nd Lut
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" wrote:
>
> New Study Outlines Differences Among Types of Meditation
>
Please cite this article in press as: Travis, F., & Shear, J. Focused
attention, open monitoring and automatic self-transcending:Categories to
organize meditations fro
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" wrote:
>
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of authfriend
> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 2:37 PM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Fairfield
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "WillyTex" wrote:
>
>
>
> > > > "Meditations differ in both their ingredients and
> > > > their effects, just as medicines do, so lumping
> > > > them all together as 'essentially the same' is
> > > > simply a mistake,' Dr. Shear said...
> > > >
> Vaj:
> > >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain wrote:
> And thus, while a double blind is not possible in all cases,
> and its possible that none of the above possibility of subtle
> takes, marks or signs influenced the experiment, I personally,
> and I should carelessly venture that most read
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > Notice that Stupid Sal
>
> Sounds like a great new doll line, Betsy Wetsie, Tea-Party Barbie and Stupid
> Sal.
And to be fair and balanced we perhaps should als
> > > "Meditations differ in both their ingredients and
> > > their effects, just as medicines do, so lumping
> > > them all together as 'essentially the same' is
> > > simply a mistake,' Dr. Shear said...
> > >
Vaj:
> > The only interesting thing about the latest TM org
> > employee research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > > >The study doesn't tout T
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> > >The study doesn't tout TM, it
> > > merely makes distinctions among three types of
> > > meditation, T
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mar 31, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Rick A
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mar 31, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
> > >
> > > > The authors said that these findings shed l
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> But taking your comment on its own terms, double-blind is
> an appropriate method for some types of studies and not
> for others. (For some studies it isn't even *possile*.)
"Possible." Sometimes my "B" key sticks. Yeah, that's the
tick
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> The only interesting thing about the latest TM org employee
> research is that a landmark independent study way back in
> the 80's showed definitively that TM was not unique, but
> these bozons still keep trying to tell us it is.
Not in the stud
On Apr 1, 2010, at 11:19 AM, tartbrain wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 31, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
>
> > The authors said that these findings shed light on the common
> > mistake of lumping meditations together.
> >
> > "Meditations differ i
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >The study doesn't tout TM, it
> > merely makes distinctions among three types of
> > meditation, TM being one.
> >
> > Also note the *automatic* assumption that no study
> >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 31, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
> >
> > > The authors said that these findings shed light on the common
> > > mistake of lumping meditations together.
> > >
> >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 31, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
>
> > The authors said that these findings shed light on the common
> > mistake of lumping meditations together.
> >
> > "Meditations differ in both their ingredients and their effects,
Why do we need a study. Its totally clear there are good types of meditation
and bad types.
(Didn't anyone here listen to their intro lecture!!!???)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 31, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Rick Archer wrote:
> >
> > > New Study Outlines Differences Among Types of Meditation
> > >
> > > A study to be published in April use
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mar 31, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
> > >
> > > > The authors said that these findings shed lig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 31, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
> >
> > > The authors said that these findings shed light on the
> > > common mistake of lumping meditations together.
> > >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
>
> On Mar 31, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
>
> > The authors said that these findings shed light on the
> > common mistake of lumping meditations together.
> >
> > "Meditations differ in both their ingredients and their
> > effects, just
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of authfriend
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 2:37 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New Study Outlines Differences Among Types of
Meditation
--- In FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine wrote:
>
> On Mar 31, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Rick Archer wrote:
>
> > New Study Outlines Differences Among Types of Meditation
> >
> > A study to be published in April uses EEG characteristics
> > to show that different types of meditation show dif
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" wrote:
> I just post stuff which I think will stimulate discussion.
> I don't necessarily share the viewpoint of the things I
> post.
You didn't post a link for this one, Rick. Where did
you find it?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" wrote:
>
> New Study Outlines Differences Among Types of Meditation
This is the study Vaj mocked recently, BTW (in a post in
which he misrepresented it, not surprisingly).
40 matches
Mail list logo
