Using field research (Meditation) to discover Consciousness

[Swami]

On Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:39 pm, TSGracchus stated the following:

So you think that flipping coins and checking the I Ching, or laying out Tarot cards, or astrology will substitute for science?

Meditation can calm the mind. But it has not produced scientific discovery.

But, by all means, ignore or discard the findings of "Western science" and consult the lint in your navel for answers.

The statements above clearly show a lack of knowledge and experience with meditative practices. It also shows intolerance. As I proposed before, scientists can discover the origins and nature of consciousness and the Universe using field research. You have no evidence that my approach would not work because you lack the experience that I have with meditation. Your proposal is for science to continue in its failed reductionistic and materialistic approach. Centuries have passed and reducto-materialism has still left mankind with the same important questions that we've been asking since our beginning.

""insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."


Let us address some of your claims and show why science needs to adopt meditation as a means to knowledge.

Why should scientist use meditation?
You stated that meditation "only calms the mind" but you're incorrect. Science shows that meditation leads to higher states of consciousness, changes in brain structure, and to emotional well-being. Science needs to be able to deal with consciousness directly instead of relying on "correlates" of consciousness. Meditation just so happens to be an effective first-person approach to deal with consciousness directly. No one has had more first-person experience with all levels of consciousness than the Eastern religionists - some 2,500 years worth of experience. It's only reasonable that scientists collaborate with Buddhists, Hindus, etc. Many are starting to do just that so that should tell you something!!

How does meditation lead to knowledge?
The simple answer is that meditation leads to a state and experience of pure consciousness. In that state, you can explore and experience how consciousness in its most pure form works which of course opens the door to direct "knowledge".

Locke and Hume, believed that we could gain knowledge about the mind through a careful examination of inner experience. If it is true that meditation makes
available certain kinds of inner experience that would not otherwise be possible, then those forms of experience might possibly result in new knowledge.

At the same time, many contemporary researchers in psychology may object to relying on a method of introspection to learn about the mind. In the past, philosophers and armchair psychologists, relying on introspection, have arrived at widely varying conclusions; they have also missed basic facts about how minds work that can be established by simple experiments. Psychologists might argue that introspection simply allows people to project their hypotheses and presuppositions onto their experience and does not help us learn new truths about how the mind works. Only careful experiments, carried out with scienti�c rigor and from a third-person point of view, can reveal such truths.

Buddhists could reply by drawing a distinction between trained and untrained introspection. In most people, they could argue, the faculty of attention is weak and undeveloped, and, as a result, attempts at serious introspection will typically be overwhelmed by various forms of distraction. But those who, through meditation practice, reduce the intensity and frequency of distractions and gradually develop their capacity for attention are eventually able to look at mental phenomena and see them as they actually are.

------------
Article quotations taken from Dr. Charles Goodman article, Buddhist Meditation Theory and Practice. http://www.academia.edu/36937894/Buddhi ... actice.pdf
You don't have to download anything. Just scroll down and the article will start showing up.

[Swami]

Usually when I bring up 'universal consciousness', many assume that I'm referring to something inaccessible and independent from us. This is far from the truth. Universal consciousness is very natural. It is simply a level of consciousness that is part of us all. It is the fullest expression of consciousness. Most importantly, it is very accessible if or when we focus on it.

Here is one good talk on science and consciousness (factoring in the Hindu perspective)..
[youtube][/youtube]

For those who think that Western scientists are on the verge on figuring out consciousness, you simply have no idea how much more they have to learn. They have not even figured out 'individual' consciousness, let alone 'universal' consciousness.

[John Human]

[Replying to post 96 by Razorsedge]

Based on what I just explained, I question why someone truly seeking to understand consciousness would not be willing to learn about and engage in a tradition (Eastern religion/philosophy) that has spent over a millennia exploring consciousness.

The physical sciences are based on empirical data and the process of testing hypotheses via experiment, observations, measurements, etc. There is no role in this process for spiritual analysis or consideration of the supernatural. [snip]

I think the fundamental problem materialists have with consciousness being created by some nonphysical process (ie. not by the functioning of a brain) is that there is simply no evidence to support it, and no method by which to quantify or measure it via experiments. You have to believe in the supernatural, and materialists don't believe (by definition) that the supernatural exists, because it has never been demonstrated to exist.

In other words, your abject, total ignorance of anything outside the realm of what can be observed by the physical senses is the basis of your summary dismissal of anything outside that realm. That is sort of like a man with his head firmly planted in a hole in the ground insisting that rainbows are a delusive fantasy.

By the way, regarding Razorsedge's earlier reference to millinia-old practice of consciousness exploration behind Hinduism, perhaps the phrase "spiritual technology" is helpful.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 101 by John Human]

In other words, your abject, total ignorance of anything outside the realm of what can be observed by the physical senses is the basis of your summary dismissal of anything outside that realm.

Anything which cannot be detected by the senses, or technological extensions of our senses, is indistinguishable from the the non-existent. We have enough of actual reality to contend with without wasting time chasing after shadows.

As for Deepak Chopra and his ilk, there will always be peddlers of woo as long as there is a gullible audience willing to part with their hard-won earnings to lap it up.

[John Human]

[Replying to post 101 by John Human]

In other words, your abject, total ignorance of anything outside the realm of what can be observed by the physical senses is the basis of your summary dismissal of anything outside that realm.

Anything which cannot be detected by the senses, or technological extensions of our senses, is indistinguishable from the the non-existent. We have enough of actual reality to contend with without wasting time chasing after shadows.

As for Deepak Chopra and his ilk, there will always be peddlers of woo as long as there is a gullible audience willing to part with their hard-won earnings to lap it up.

I'm not familiar with Deepak Chopra, but your conflation of "physical senses" (my phrase) with "senses" obscures the existence of non-physical senses, which are natural and innate and which can be developed and improved by techniques such as meditation.

[Swami]

I'm not familiar with Deepak Chopra, but your conflation of "physical senses" (my phrase) with "senses" obscures the existence of non-physical senses, which are natural and innate and which can be developed and improved by techniques such as meditation.

We are definitely able to experience the world without our bodily senses. Recently, I've thought of perception in out-of-body experiences as an extension of our bodily senses. Many OBErs report seeing a 'silver cord' that connects their physical body to their subtle or spiritual body and that's how the sensory information was passed down and processed between the two bodies. But as you bring up, I also believe there are non-physical senses which are all part of a non-physical type body or system. We access these senses when we use our consciousness to "see" and "hear" in our dreams.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to post 101 by John Human]

In other words, your abject, total ignorance of anything outside the realm of what can be observed by the physical senses is the basis of your summary dismissal of anything outside that realm. That is sort of like a man with his head firmly planted in a hole in the ground insisting that rainbows are a delusive fantasy.

I live in the real, observable and measurable world, not fantasyland. Believing in things you make up yourself is fine ... daydreaming and things like that can be helpful escapes from reality. But it isn't ignorance to not believe in make believe as you seem to think ... it is common sense. Rainbows can be seen so obviously they are real. And we (in the real world) know how they are generated. Do you think they are signs from a god that the Earth will not be flooded again? Would not that be abject ignorance? Dream on.

[Swami]

[Replying to post 101 by John Human
Anything which cannot be detected by the senses, or technological extensions of our senses, is indistinguishable from the the non-existent.

Western scientists thought just the way you did and it led to consciousness being banned from science for much of the 20th century. Here is one good insight from a forum member:

Strictly speaking no-one has ever shown you a consciousness at all, since it cannot be observed or directly detected, only inferred by analogy from similarities of structure (eg. neural networks) and behaviour (eg. appropriate response to stimuli).

Now 'consciousness' is back into the scientific picture. To date, there is no proven 'materialist' explanation for its origin and nature. Many Western scientists and philosophers have expressed how consciousness challenges 'reductive materialism'. Without a doubt, your Western science has had some tremendous success at explaining things but it has all but failed on this issue.

The key thing that many in the West don't get is that the failure is not a matter of "ignorance" (lack of knowledge) but rather it's methodological. So contrary to what DrNoGods and many like him believe, allowing Western science (as defined by their methods) more time will not solve the 'hard problem' because the problem is with the scientific methods that they use to get the knowledge!

Let me put this all into perspective with my Eastern view.

It's a good thing that Western scientists decided to bring back consciousness as an topic for study, however they did not bring it back in the complete way that's needed. Subjective experience and introspection, more so introspection, are still frowned upon. Even if introspection was problematic but Western scientists should've realized that a first-person approach is still needed to acquire knowledge about consciousness. An alternative to introspection is what the Eastern thinkers discovered, i.e. meditation. I'm not even advocating for meditation to be used to verify all Eastern beliefs, but rather to at least be used to show that it leads to a different level of consciousness - one that goes beyond the body and even the mind. Then from there we can worry about the observations made during this state, and whether or not they correspond with reality. Some sample observations would be like perception during this state, discovering Universal consciousness, other realms, etc. - all of which speaks to the nature and origin of consciousness

Actually Brunumb, one by one, Western scientists are becoming open to Eastern views because they are realizing the shortcomings of their worldview. There have been more than a dozen summits involving Western scientists/scholars meeting with Eastern thinkers including the Dalai Lama. I'll post videos of these later on.

As for Deepak Chopra and his ilk, there will always be peddlers of woo as long as there is a gullible audience willing to part with their hard-won earnings to lap it up.

I tend to be more bothered by Western scientists who don't want to experience the things I've brought up in these discussions. They have no good reason to not adopt meditation as part of their scientific method.

[Swami]

By the way, regarding Razorsedge's earlier reference to millinia-old practice of consciousness exploration behind Hinduism, perhaps the phrase "spiritual technology" is helpful.

I like your thinking!! Meditation is a technology. It is also one that can be refined, improved, and perhaps aided with other technology. Real research into it is in relatively new so we have much more to learn about it.

Many in the West use it for relaxation and that's fine and all but that's not the only use it has which is what I've emphasized here. There's an entire philosophy behind it but the good thing is you don't need to know it all to begin to experience and prove that materialism does not explain it all. Through meditation, I discovered that my consciousness is not even restricted to "I" the individual. That's only a limited expression of it. Eastern thinkers long ago discovered that it's a universal phenomenon. It is boundless, formless, but most importantly, it is also AWARE. They called it God, but others refer to it as a Universal consciousness.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to post 106 by Razorsedge]

To date, there is no proven 'materialist' explanation for its origin and nature. Many Western scientists and philosophers have expressed how consciousness challenges 'reductive materialism'. Without a doubt, your Western science has had some tremendous success at explaining things but it has all but failed on this issue.

First (again), there is no such thing as eastern or western science. Science is science regardless of where it is geographically practiced. There may be different philosophies or approaches to conducting experiments, etc., but the results of scientific investigations do not depend on geography. Second, there is a materialistic explanation for the origin and nature of consciousness ... it is the manifestation of the operation of a brain.

The mechanistic details may not be fully understood yet, but there is no reason to believe that this basic description is not correct, and what scientific evidence is there to support the idea that consciousness is not the manifestation of brain activity. The default answer if science does not yet have all the answers is not that a god is responsible, or a spirit, or that some unobserved and unidentified non-physical "thing" is responsible. That isn't science ... it is just wishful thinking.

So contrary to what DrNoGods and many like him believe, allowing Western science (as defined by their methods) more time will not solve the 'hard problem' because the problem is with the scientific methods that they use to get the knowledge!

This sounds like just another excuse to claim that some phenomenon is "outside the realm of science" and therefore can't be studied by scientific methods (regardless of geography). Meditation is basically interacting with yourself (your brain via its functions) so I don't see how you'd expect to learn anything from such a process unless you are hooked up to the latest brain wave and other physical monitoring systems which might shed some light on what is happening with neuron interactions, memory, etc. during the process. Meditation seems to work for many people to calm them down, to cope with problems, or similar things. But that does not preclude it being anything more than you communicating with yourself. This idea that consciousness is something magical and not produced by normal brain functions seems to have no basis in science ... similar to the ideas of supernatural god beings, or other things imagined by humans and their complicated and capable brains but not yet demonstrated to exist in the real world.

[Swami]

[Replying to post 106 by Razorsedge]

To date, there is no proven 'materialist' explanation for its origin and nature. Many Western scientists and philosophers have expressed how consciousness challenges 'reductive materialism'. Without a doubt, your Western science has had some tremendous success at explaining things but it has all but failed on this issue.

First (again), there is no such thing as eastern or western science. Science is science regardless of where it is geographically practiced. There may be different philosophies or approaches to conducting experiments, etc., but the results of scientific investigations do not depend on geography. Second, there is a materialistic explanation for the origin and nature of consciousness ... it is the manifestation of the operation of a brain.

The mechanistic details may not be fully understood yet, but there is no reason to believe that this basic description is not correct, and what scientific evidence is there to support the idea that consciousness is not the manifestation of brain activity. The default answer if science does not yet have all the answers is not that a god is responsible, or a spirit, or that some unobserved and unidentified non-physical "thing" is responsible. That isn't science ... it is just wishful thinking.

So contrary to what DrNoGods and many like him believe, allowing Western science (as defined by their methods) more time will not solve the 'hard problem' because the problem is with the scientific methods that they use to get the knowledge!

This sounds like just another excuse to claim that some phenomenon is "outside the realm of science" and therefore can't be studied by scientific methods (regardless of geography). Meditation is basically interacting with yourself (your brain via its functions) so I don't see how you'd expect to learn anything from such a process unless you are hooked up to the latest brain wave and other physical monitoring systems which might shed some light on what is happening with neuron interactions, memory, etc. during the process. Meditation seems to work for many people to calm them down, to cope with problems, or similar things. But that does not preclude it being anything more than you communicating with yourself. This idea that consciousness is something magical and not produced by normal brain functions seems to have no basis in science ... similar to the ideas of supernatural god beings, or other things imagined by humans and their complicated and capable brains but not yet demonstrated to exist in the real world.

Sir, everything you have said about meditation and consciousness reflects your arrogance and ignorance. Furthermore, your rejection of Eastern ideas and practices exposes your extreme intolerance. These things "threaten" your worldview which is the real reason you are not open to them.

You see this is precisely why I steer away from debate. I'd rather present my proof as being something that everyone can experience for themselves. The simple fact is that everyone who experiences always end up dropping their hardline materialist position. If you think that only happens to the non-scientific crowd, then explain why that happens to even well credentialed scientists, like Harvard neurosurgeon, Dr. Eben Alexander!!

All of the Universe is just a manifestation of consciousness. This Universal consciousness is my inner most nature. This part of our nature is accessible during meditation when 'individual' consciousness (consciousness as experienced through my body) merges with Universal consciousness.


Good intro to Eastern thought:
Eastern Psychology: Buddhism, Hinduism, and Taoism by Dr. William Compton