Nonbelievers and Buddhism

[Meadmaker]

There are many, many such true stories....want to here another one?

No. Certainly not in this thread, which is about a different topic. The appeal of Buddhism to nonbelievers does not involve stories about prayers and healing. It's kind of outside the scope of "nonbelievers".

 

[Complexity]

No. Certainly not in this thread, which is about a different topic. The appeal of Buddhism to nonbelievers does not involve stories about prayers and healing. It's kind of outside the scope of "nonbelievers".

Seconded.

 

[MikeSun5]

No. Certainly not in this thread, which is about a different topic. The appeal of Buddhism to nonbelievers does not involve stories about prayers and healing. It's kind of outside the scope of "nonbelievers".

Thirded.

Of course NordaVinci has frequently displayed quite glaring comprehension problems regarding simple definititions, which would explain his confusion about the phrase "on topic," as well.

Case and point:

Scientific context of "Anecdotal"

In science, anecdotal evidence has been defined as:

* "information that is not based on facts or careful study"
* "non-scientific observations or studies, which do not provide proof but may assist research efforts"
* "reports or observations of usually unscientific observers"
* "casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis"
* "information passed along by word-of-mouth but not documented scientifically"

Smileys denoting the definitions of "anecdotal evidence" as they apply to each of your statements...

The point is I am relating a true, factual account:

1) Rev. Moon and Bill Shepherd, the wife and the daughter are real.
2) The daughter was born with with no chance of survival.
3) The Shepherds prayed that way.
4) The daughter was completely healed in the morning
5) Rev. Moon's explanation was as stated.
6) Bill Shepherd listened and believed it and became a disciple of Rev. Moon in prison.
7) Buddhist belief says that things that come to me are for me. My restorational karma has drawn it out of the woodwork for my benefit.
8) Rev. Moon can be seen by Buddhists as having taught Bill about a principle of Buddhism in terms that Bill, as a Christian, would understand.

I'm sure you understand the WORDS in the definition NordaVinci because they're all English, but I'm trying to get you to understand the definition ITSELF.

Although such evidence is not regarded as scientific, it is sometimes regarded as an invitation to more rigorous scientific study of the phenomenon in question. ... Researchers may use anecdotal evidence for suggesting new hypotheses, but never as supporting evidence..

The problem you and the rest of the New Age are having is your attempts to present anecdotal evidence AS supporting evidence. As you have just explained (but obviously still don't understand), the rigorous scientific study that your anecdotal evidence has invited has yeilded NO empirical supporting evidence for anything you've claimed.

You will need to do more than link to churches and spout "I-once-knew-a-guy"-stories to prove your claims. Also, please learn the definitions of the words you are using.

 

[dafydd]

Thirded.

Of course NordaVinci has frequently displayed quite glaring comprehension problems regarding simple definititions, which would explain his confusion about the phrase "on topic," as well.

Case and point:



Smileys denoting the definitions of "anecdotal evidence" as they apply to each of your statements...




I'm sure you understand the WORDS in the definition NordaVinci because they're all English, but I'm trying to get you to understand the definition ITSELF.



The problem you and the rest of the New Age are having is your attempts to present anecdotal evidence AS supporting evidence. As you have just explained (but obviously still don't understand), the rigorous scientific study that your anecdotal evidence has invited has yeilded NO empirical supporting evidence for anything you've claimed.

You will need to do more than link to churches and spout "I-once-knew-a-guy"-stories to prove your claims. Also, please learn the definitions of the words you are using.

NordaVinci uses the Humpty Dumpty approach to definitions,as all woo merchants are prone to do.

 

[Complexity]

I wonder what it would be like if everyone smiley-coded every line of their posts?

 

[Dancing David]

The point is I am relating a true, factual account:

1) Rev. Moon and Bill Shepherd, the wife and the daughter are real.
2) The daughter was born with with no chance of survival.

By what standards and who made that determination?

3) The Shepherds prayed that way.
4) The daughter was completely healed in the morning

By what standards and who made that determination.

5) Rev. Moon's explanation was as stated.
6) Bill Shepherd listened and believed it and became a disciple of Rev. Moon in prison.
7) Buddhist belief says that things that come to me are for me. My restorational karma has drawn it out of the woodwork for my benefit.

And what text , where says that?

8) Rev. Moon can be seen by Buddhists as having taught Bill about a principle of Buddhism in terms that Bill, as a Christian, would understand.

Not really, there is no transmission of karma. It is choices and cosequences, you have not demonstrated the following:
1. There was a past error that led to the daughter's illness.
2. The level to which the daughter was ill.
3. That there were not other erasons that daughter became unwell.
4. The level of health of the daughter after the miracle.

 

[NordaVinci]

Let's say that paying attention to one's breathing and field of vision while eyes are closed while sitting cross legged on the floor is something that no one here has any objection about discussing as part of this thread.

Assuming so..here's an experience I had that is very interesting and from which I concluded several things:

It was during the day. I was sitting cross legged on the floor with my eyes closed, paying attention to my field of vision and doing a breathing that was equal time breathing in as breathing out. In my field of vision there were bright reddish-violet circles moving from the outer edge into the center. After about five minutes this developed to the point where my field of vision with my eyes closed became a solid reddish-violet color. Then this filed exploded and "my eyes" opened (but my physical actual eyelids were still closed). I could suddenly see the room around me as well as through the walls to the outside. Also my hearing had suddenly changed, such that I could hear what I assumed cosmic particles zipping by me. I could hear them approaching and also as they departed.

From this experience I concluded that one's eyes and ears are actually sensing this level of information all the time, but only when we train ourselves to pay attention long enough in a different frame of reference, does our brain organize it and present it to us as "sight" and "sound".

 

[MikeSun5]

I wonder what it would be like if everyone smiley-coded every line of their posts?

Colorful.

 

[Complexity]

Colorful.

What a wonderful response!

Thank you.

 

[NordaVinci]

What a wonderful response!

Thank you.

Yeah, that's nice.

 

[Dancing David]

Also my hearing had suddenly changed, such that I could hear what I assumed cosmic particles zipping by me. I could hear them approaching and also as they departed.

Say, how fast do you think they were going and how far away can you hear them?

 

[dafydd]

Let's say that paying attention to one's breathing and field of vision while eyes are closed while sitting cross legged on the floor is something that no one here has any objection about discussing as part of this thread.

Assuming so..here's an experience I had that is very interesting and from which I concluded several things:

It was during the day. I was sitting cross legged on the floor with my eyes closed, paying attention to my field of vision and doing a breathing that was equal time breathing in as breathing out. In my field of vision there were bright reddish-violet circles moving from the outer edge into the center. After about five minutes this developed to the point where my field of vision with my eyes closed became a solid reddish-violet color. Then this filed exploded and "my eyes" opened (but my physical actual eyelids were still closed). I could suddenly see the room around me as well as through the walls to the outside. Also my hearing had suddenly changed, such that I could hear what I assumed cosmic particles zipping by me. I could hear them approaching and also as they departed.

From this experience I concluded that one's eyes and ears are actually sensing this level of information all the time, but only when we train ourselves to pay attention long enough in a different frame of reference, does our brain organize it and present it to us as "sight" and "sound".

Delusion.

 

[NordaVinci]

Nordavinci said:
7) Buddhist belief says that things that come to me are for me. My restorational karma has drawn it out of the woodwork for my benefit.

Dancing David wondered:
And what text , where says that?

NordaVinci replies:

That's from Robert Thurman's Book, Essential Tibetan Buddhism
(Harper San Francisco, 1996),

I'll get you the page, when I get home and look it up from the book.

 

[NordaVinci]

Say, how fast do you think they were going and how far away can you hear them?

Well that particular experience, seemed like hearing them was very localized, within about 12 feet or less diameter sphere. The doplar effect was very distinct.

 

[dafydd]

Nordavinci said:
7) Buddhist belief says that things that come to me are for me. My restorational karma has drawn it out of the woodwork for my benefit.

Dancing David wondered:
And what text , where says that?

NordaVinci replies:

That's from Robert Thurman's Book, Essential Tibetan Buddhism
(Harper San Francisco, 1996),

I'll get you the page, when I get home and look it up from the book.

Do you have proof of the existence of karma?

 

[Meadmaker]

If you ever "get into" Buddhism, you will certainly meet plenty of people who talk a lot like NordaVinci. As a nonbeliever, it's something you'll have to deal with.

As for the specific experience NordaVinci describes, I suspect he is dealing with self induced hallucinations. The leader at the Zen Center frequently said that through meditation, it was possible to attain a state similar to being on acid. (i.e. LSD. He always said just plain "acid". I can only assume he had spoken from experience.)

One might ask whether that is a good thing, and whether experiencing hallucinations could ever be described as experiencing "reality" in any way. How can it be more enlightened to see things that aren't there, as opposed to things that are? I can't answer that question definitively, and I don't know if anyone can. For all I know, the Buddha put himself into a self induced acid trip and thought he was enlightened. However, I think the answer, from a "pro-Buddhist" perspective is that it demonstrates two things. First, it demonstrates that your senses fool you, not just during the "acid trip", but the rest of the time, too. What we experience through our senses has already been filtetered by our brains. Second, by achieving this state, what you "see" is directly the product of your own mind, which could give you some sort of insight into the workings of your own mind.

Is that all a bunch of pro-Buddhist BS? Possibly. I know that this phenomena (the meditation induced hallucination state) has been studied scientifically, but I have no clue what, if any, interesting findings have come from that study.


ETA: Interesting google result from searching on Zen+LSD+Scientific. It's a book introduction from a neuroscientist studying (and experiencing) Zen meditation. Published by MIT Press in 1988. Haven't examined it extremely closely. Posted for those interested in pursuing the subject.


http://csp.org/chrestomathy/zen_and.html

ETA2: An Amazon search yields a 1999 issue of the same title, and several other by the same author.

 

[dafydd]

Well that particular experience, seemed like hearing them was very localized, within about 12 feet or less diameter sphere. The doplar effect was very distinct.

The Doppler effect? Do you know how fast those particles are moving?Plus the fact that they are too small to cause sound waves.This is just your fantasy.

 

[Dancing David]

Well that particular experience, seemed like hearing them was very localized, within about 12 feet or less diameter sphere. The doplar effect was very distinct.

Well it would be hard to hear them in the first place (the vibrations they create in the atmosphere are very small), and cosmic rays travel close to the speed of light until they enter the atmoshpere, say they were slowed by 50% (just made up that fraction), the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second, so halved that would be 93,000 mps.

So if you heard them from a distance of twelve feet, they would have been in your locale for 2.44 X10 ^-8 seconds. So not really long enough to hear them, or alternatively if you heard them for two seconds , at start and end they would have been 93,000 miles away.

I hate to break this to you, but it seems unlikely they were consmic rays.

 

[MikeSun5]

Delusion.

Marijuana.

 

[dafydd]

Well that particular experience, seemed like hearing them was very localized, within about 12 feet or less diameter sphere. The doplar effect was very distinct.

You ought to go the the LHC you could save them millions by hearing the Higgs Boson.