--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, ChrisAustinLane <ch...@...> wrote: > > I find reading science to be a habit I have long cultivated, as it makes certain more physical chains of cause and effect more intelligible to me.
> Since I am engaged in practice now, reading science about practice is a pretty natural and fun thing to do. This forum seems likely to be a place to find others who are of a similar bent, ... OK. > Perhaps that is an expectation I bring here that the bulk of the group doesn't share. The road to hell of disappointments is paved with expectations. > And let it be stipulated that a science model of the brain doesn't touch the effort of sitting down day after day. > Thanks, > Chris Austin-Lane A science model of the brain is a science of the brain; sitting is sitting. The two have different objectives - or, as it has been claimed, the latter has no objectives. If a person believes that a science model of the brain helps him understand *whatever* in some way better, that's his business. If a person believes that interest in a science model of the brain interferes with his sitting, then he can act accordingly to rectify the situation for himself. Different strokes for different folk. There is not only one way. --ED
