|
Musicmystery -> RE: Critical Thinking & Logical Deduction Are Becoming Extinct Like The Dinosaur (5/2/2010 6:39:56 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: taleon
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
You went from "way of knowing" to absolute truth, a claim I never made. Then you mentioned using methodology to move to predictive power--and this is indeed a way of knowing.
A claim you never made, but a claim many religions do make. And therein science and religion are opposed. Science doesn't claim to be the guardian and defender of the truth, but religion, in my experience, often does exactly that.
I can't be responsible for claims others make. If you post in response to my post, I have to assume you're talking to me.
quote:
A concept like Tao, which I first learned and studied seriously as a young musician--I can tell you that there is more than ourselves, or that at least it seems that way, and that by letting go one can learn to access and even direct it to accomplish more than one can do unaided. I can even teach other musicians how to do this. Accomplished T'ai Chi practitioners can do the same, demonstrating amazing feats, which I've also witnessed and, to a lesser degree than as a musician, experienced.
What do you mean by "letting go"?
Not everything can be understood with the mind. This is largely the point of meditation. Freeing ego and worry and preconception and more into just being with the art. It is not easy to learn.
quote:
Now, to turn this to science, we'd need a hypothesis about measurable causality. At least at present, we don't have that, only the observable phenomena and the duplicable experiential results. Yet it's a way of knowing that we can use practically.
Back to Newton. You mentioned it yourself, we can experience his laws first hand, and we can test his equations. It would be great if the same applies to the experience you describe. If you can write down how to duplicate that effect, I'll try to duplicate it.
First you'll need to master an art. In my case, you'll need to be a musician or a T'ai Chi practitioner, or a writer. This is why I reference (and linked to) Zen and the Art of Archery, where it is indeed already written down. This was my first guide as well.
The point overall, the one sticking in people's craws, is the false dichotomy of describing experience only in terms of science vs. religion. As Firm pointed out early on, we have religious scientists, so that notion is already suspect. But just as we have people who see anything not conservative as liberal, when in fact there is a world of nuance outside of the artificial left/right paradigm, so too does the science/religion lens distort reality, denying a wealth of experience beyond that constraint. That's not to say religion doesn't unreasonably go after science at times--it does. But buying into that divide doesn't make a debater smarter or less culpable--just gullible, and equally not thinking freely.
|
|
|
|
