Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!!

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Rick Julian who wrote (25639)	10/20/1998 12:50:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Read Replies (1) of 108807

>Mystics have always claimed that they were practicing a kind of science that can be reproduced by those who follow the experiment.< I imagine a fallacy there. The fallacy arises when the utterly subjective nature of the mystical experience is overridden by its utterly compelling nature. The mind embraces the magnificent non sequitur: "If it is so clear to me, others will experience it thus also." And they're off... For me, the fulcrum of this argument is embedded in your procedure. Here's the key phrase: "cross your legs, sit like this, and observe the mindstream," Step One is easy (assuming a baseline of skeletal flexibility, which can be trained). Step Two is also without ambiguity. Duration of seated attitude also responds to training. But can you explain Step Three to me using mundane (non-esoteric) terminology? Waht is a "mindstream"? How is it differentiated from ordinary, subjective perception and cognition? I don't believe I have a mindstream (it's more of a talus slope), so I can't follow. Not without some definible and communicable "mindstream" object/event. Impasse?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next