Because you have not verified it. Doubting is easy, proving is not.
Neither of which I am doing.
That may be a matter of opinion.
It is not any kind of illusion.
Oddly, the book is about spiritual enlightenment and calls 'facts' rather the illusions that people must cling to so as not to get lost in their muddled world.
I rather think you will like it actually.
It was one of the great hits of seekers of enlightenment in the 1970's and 1980's.
Obviously.
. Out of curiosity do you remember the names of any of these side kicks?
Click my name, then click my profile then check the first lines of the posts I made, or search for realpaladin sidekick in the forum search, as I called them that more than once.
Belief is defined adequately in dictionaries, I hold no beliefs.
So, how do you know there is such a thing as spirituality and that this is not an offset of any of the chemical processes that govern your brain?
Or said in another way, how do you know that the feeling you have on what you 'hear' Doron saying is what he means to say?
In humility there is nothing hiding, you must be mistaking me for something else.
I seldom make mistakes. Your style of writing shows the urge to be taken for a humble, balanced person, but exactly that urge to be taken as such is evidence to the contrary.
So I did. Can you oblige me as easily as not to defend any of the above mentioned points and humbly let my opinion be mine?
Ok lets have a look at the OP.
Yes, let's.
There are a couple of points I would like to make beforehand;
Good idea, always have some bailouts at hand.
I came late to the thread and may have missed something, in which case I may not be aware of some of the claims made.
So you believe you can make a good assessment on 'Doron has something here' without reading up. No problem with me.
I may not be able to communicate something to you through such a hand fisted medium for various reasons.
I would not call the written language hamfisted; it has accelerated understanding and peace more than any other method.
It has spread the concepts (true or false or inbetween) of 'spirituality' and 'science' through more cultures than any other method.
I would appreciate an attempt at understanding and I will return the courtesy.
And so you will have, but since it is you who are joining I find the burden of courtesy of getting some background on you, and this courtesy you have not yet extended.
The adversarial debating method employed on this forum is cumbersome and lacks finesse when addressing refined subjective notions.
The reason this thread is so long may have given you a clue of that and so I will excuse you for not seeing the finer points already made.
What you 'think' you are seeing are merely manifestations of frustration of not getting anywhere with Mr. Shadmi who, if you would have taken the time and made the effort to read (or skim at the very least) through this thread and it's predecessor, is constantly revising information, contradicting himself and even blatantly misrepresenting things.
The feeling of adversity I put entirely at your end, as you decided to 'side' with Doron, and this may just be because you do not like the methodology or thoroughness with which people here are trying to get somewhere.
Please do re-read your own posts and I think you will see quite quickly where you have appeared to take a side and hence started any adversarial behaviour.
There are many examples of threads on this board that show a non-adversarial, disharmonious co-operation that actually gets things accomplished.
You raise an interesting distinction regarding unity
On purpose, as we will see in a bit.
Well we know that absolutely nothing does not exist. There are not many things we can know, but this we do know, because something exists. If something exists there can be no absolutely nothing.
This does not have to be entirely true. The thought experiment (and even real-life experiments that corroborate this) on 'Schroedinger's Cat' shows that two states that absolutely rule each other out can co-exist.
In fact, you mentioned it yourself; quantum entanglement is one of the effects of this.
But this does not rule out one thing existing, if one thing exists then there is unity.
Not necessarily, one thing does not preclude many properties; and when more than 1 property exists, there is no unity.
Perhaps the divide between our opposite conclusions here is that you are considering logical subjective models of unity. Whereas I am considering what we can deduce about existence from what we can experience.
Well, as I mentioned earlier, we experienced from existence that:
- Two opposing states can co-exist at the same time
- From nothing can come something
- Light is schizophrenic
etc...
And the big lesson from all those experiences is that we can only learn by extending our senses with systems that we can communicate, replicate and verify.
Almost all other attempts have been proven wrong at some time or another, but the information of that has not yet disseminated enough so that there are still a lot of people that try to do it by using old philosophies that had no knowledge of methods to go beyond their own senses.
They thought they did, they said they did, but they did not.
As a mystic I employ subjective interpretations of reality as far as they can go, but they are only one tool in a tool box, a hammer say, whereas I seek to utilise all tools available in my various approaches to what exists.
But being selective in tools will rather get you were you want to be, not where you should be.
How come you do not take up reading and studying science as some extra tools?
In the very least I took up just about any spiritual direction that came along my way and actively seeked out some others.
Indeed to be a tool maker becomes essential after a certain point(a pair of pliers makes quite a good traction feeder when pulling out nails).
So, I say, get cracking, there's a world of tools out there you never have laid your eyes on!
Now my initial opinion of what Doron is doing is trying to communicate something about a discovery of unity he has found.
Please read the first posts of the first thread. This 'discovery' has been changed over the years into one where he gets the most people taking his side.
It started out as something completely different and opposing anything you just said.
Perhaps he realises now how difficult this can be, unless the setting is right.
Don't look at any of us; we kept telling him the science setting is not the right one and that he probably would have more luck in a spiritual setting.
But he went on about how his 'invention' would revolutionize maths, how Microsoft would give him millions for it... I gave him the email address of Steve Balmer and pointed him to Israels Microsoft Research labs.
Your reply now more or less speaks against you. You said you did not like the adversarial method, but still took a side without knowing what he is on about.
You said that you hold no beliefs, but still you talk about being subjective and having opinions.
Now, unless you can add to the thread instead of contributing just some balmy bickering, I would ask you to just 'lurk' or 'observe' for a while whilst Doron makes his point.
