The Metaphysical Consciousness

doronshadmi said:
Why do you think that only reading about person A by what it written by person B (where person A uses only negative criticism about person B) can gives you some information about person B, that more reliable than https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeBUFzP9C1w , which actually enables you to examine person B more accurately (to hear and analyze what he has to say, to read his body language, to see how he responses to questions, etc.)?
Click to expand...
I'm satisfied that I've heard enough from TM aficionados to get the gist of their side. I also know that anyone can fall prey to nonsense and defend it against all reason, this forum's many woo threads are testament to that. Indeed, the very thing that started this slight derail was when we asked you to clarify your statements about the source of all knowledge.

It is a relaxation that is achieved by using effortless mental technique that, if it is practiced right, does not try to achieve anything during the practice. ..
It is clear that Joe Kellett did not tune his TM training according .. I can tell you that I experienced periods of heavy unstressing, I reduced the tensity of TM practice, and this period was naturally over.
Click to expand...
I accept that you think Kellett did something wrong, but I don't enjoy the way you wash your hands of him.
Your words reflect a culture of blindness to criticism. You (the general you in TM) would rather hide a problem than help that person. It's a similar pattern to what happens in $cientology: at all costs save face, hide the bodies and keep up appearances.

If TM actually arrived at healthy people with healthy minds, it would have many self-repairing techniques to catch aberrant situations and handle them with compassion and least-harm.
There would also be a modern medical science of TM that stood alongside other giants in the field of real medicine. Neuroscience would be using your advanced techniques. Your lingo would infiltrate all the disciplines of science that touch on the mind. You would be publishing papers in every journal and there would be no controversy at all.

Instead, what have you achieved? You fake science, like the craven actions of creationists, in order to hoodwink. You have to pull stunts to get into the odd journal and you have to rely on a few celebrities to give you a public face.


So it can't be used in order to conclude anything about TM.
Click to expand...
It was making a point about meditation. TM uses meditation.

Once again, any adult person (unless he\she has mental problems in doing so) is responsible to manage his\her own life in any circumstances, and joe Kellet clearly was not able to do that in real time.
Click to expand...
In real time? Does this mean something?

Kellett was damaged by the pseudoscience of TM. Maybe you guys have improved your techniques since his day, but I doubt it.

There is nothing to be shamed. Unfortunately Joe Kellet clearly was not able manage his life in real time.
Click to expand...
Kellett was hurt by his time in TM. The best TM could do was point at him and call him crazy and a deviant.

You will, likely, continue to ignore the problem. I'm sure the other readers here see this.

Please support your claim by using a peer-reviewed scientific long-term research, which clearly supports Joe Kellet arguments against TM about the majority of the population that practicing it around the world.
Click to expand...
Funny.

My game? You are the one who wrote "At any point I could, and did, open a new tab and go look for balance.", so please actually demonstrate it.
Click to expand...
I did write that. Do you want me to teach you how to use a browser too?

How about some evidence for your own claims now? How about you pick one of those "science" papers to be the best that TM has to offer?

(I'm not sure how OT this has become, so I won't keep giving you oxygen on this Kellett stuff.)
 
Donn said:
I'm satisfied that I've heard enough from TM aficionados to get the gist of their side.
Click to expand...
In other words, only one side (not even one look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeBUFzP9C1w , isn't it Donn?) That can't be accepted as a balanced view of the discussed subject.

Donn said:
I accept that you think Kellett did something wrong, but I don't enjoy the way you wash your hands of him.
Click to expand...
Nobody is responsible to Kellet's inability to overcame his problems along the years, but Kellet himself.

Instead of taking care of his problems along the years he choose to open a site that wrongly gives the impression that his personal problems are the typical situation among the majority of the TM mediators around the world.

Donn said:
If TM actually arrived at healthy people with healthy minds, it would have many self-repairing techniques to catch aberrant situations and handle them with compassion and least-harm.
Click to expand...
It was done in Kellett's time and it is done now. I agree with you that in Kellet's time there was less knowledge that unfortunately missed persons like Joe Kellet, and again, I wish him the best.

Donn said:
There would also be a modern medical science of TM that stood alongside other giants in the field of real medicine. Neuroscience would be using your advanced techniques. Your lingo would infiltrate all the disciplines of science that touch on the mind. You would be publishing papers in every journal and there would be no controversy at all.
Click to expand...
There is no such thing like "no controversy at all" in current science. In your case you simply support only the side that finds only bad things about TM.

Donn said:
Instead, what have you achieved? You fake science, like the craven actions of creationists, in order to hoodwink. You have to pull stunts to get into the odd journal and you have to rely on a few celebrities to give you a public face.
Click to expand...
And what are exactly your reliable scientific sources to claim such things?

Donn said:
It was making a point about meditation. TM uses meditation.
Click to expand...
This is another example of your sloppy hands waving style about the considered subject. You are really help to expose the weak character of your arguments.

Donn said:
In real time? Does this mean something?
Click to expand...
Yes. If you feel bad immediately go to the doctor and don't wait until you are seriously damaged.

Donn said:
Kellett was damaged by the pseudoscience of TM.
Click to expand...
Kellett was damaged because of his personal character and not enough knowledge in his time that unfortunately missed persons like Joe Kellet.

But in any moment Joe was able to get professional medical treatment, and he choose not to do so for too long time (according to his own evidence).

Donn said:
Kellett was hurt by his time in TM. The best TM could do was point at him and call him crazy and a deviant.
Click to expand...
Well you simply ignore the following:
James Krag said:
Clearly the vast majority of young people going through notable changes and challenges in their life do not develop psychotic disorders whether they are in the military, colleges, or the TM program. It is unfortunate that Mr. Kellett seems to be among that minority that develops such problems. The world is not perfect and institutions are not perfect. Perhaps it would be more productive for him to not criticize a specific organization that he was involved with when he became disturbed and rather to join forces with those organizations that are working to find causes and treatments for psychotic disorders.
Click to expand...

.

Donn said:
You will, likely, continue to ignore the problem. I'm sure the other readers here see this.
Click to expand...
I do not ignore the problem, it is simply not TM's typical character as Kellett tries to draw in his misleading site.

Donn said:
Funny.
Click to expand...
From your non-balanced point of view of the discussed subject.

Donn said:
I did write that. Do you want me to teach you how to use a browser too?
Click to expand...
No, only to give a balanced list that supports and does not support TM in certain scientific areas.

Donn said:
How about some evidence for your own claims now? How about you pick one of those "science" papers to be the best that TM has to offer?
Click to expand...
How about not completely ignoring the following stuff:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10139097&postcount=180


Donn said:
(I'm not sure how OT this has become, so I won't keep giving you oxygen on this Kellett stuff.)
Click to expand...
What is exactly OT?

Also I do not need your oxygen on this Kellett stuff.
 
Last edited:
Donn said:
Okay, I get that you don't want to pick (one) choice fruit of TM science to discuss here.
What more can I do than ask?
Click to expand...
You can choose anything you like from this post in order to discuss about it. There is no "the best one" (as you put it).
 
doronshadmi said:
You can choose anything you like from this post in order to discuss about it. There is no "the best one" (as you put it).
Click to expand...
None of those papers look like they have any value at all. But I admit I skimmed through the list. Would you like to pick one that's available online for us to examine?
 
doronshadmi said:
You can choose anything you like from this post in order to discuss about it. There is no "the best one" (as you put it).
Click to expand...

How...interesting...that "higher consciousness" stoops to argumentum ad catarracta.

Thanks, BTW, for providing actual links to the papers.

This gem was in one of the "sources" yoou "provided"--have you read it?

All the massive and massless string modes are fully
enlivened as dynamical degrees of freedom at the Planck scale.
Click to expand...

Suppose you explain it.
 
doronshadmi said:
The unified field if overused at the Planck scale, includes all the possible degrees of freedom of strings' vibrations that may appear as massive or massless particles.
Click to expand...

OK. Nice woo!-speak.

Now unpack it.

What is the "unified field", and what physical evidence of its existence do you offer?

What do you, personally, mean by "overused at the 'Planck scale' "?

How does one "overuse" a "field" at the "Planck scale" (supported by what physical evidence)?

What do you, personally, mean by "freedom" of "strings' vibration", and what physical evidence do you offer in support?

How does your claim of "massive or massless particles" of the "unified field" fit with, or inform, what we know about the standard model and QFT (again, physical evidence would be nice)?
 
Last edited:
Slowvehicle said:
OK. Nice woo!-speak.

Now unpack it.

What is the "unified field", and what physical evidence of its existence do you offer?

What do you, personally, mean by "overused at the 'Planck scale' "?

How does one "overuse" a "field" at the "Planck scale" (supported by what physical evidence)?
What do you, personally, mean by "freedom" of "strings' vibration", and what physical evidence do you offer in support?

How does your claim of "massive or massless particles" of the "unified field" fit with, or inform, what we know about the standard model and QFT (again, physical evidence would be nice)?
Click to expand...

You plant it in Quantumtriticale year after year.
 
Slowvehicle said:
OK. Nice woo!-speak.
Click to expand...
Well, it is more like a funny post that was written by a person (me), which English is not his native language, when he uses a speller too quickly.

So the right one is:

The unified field if observed at the Planck scale, includes all the possible degrees of freedom of strings' vibrations that may appear as massive or massless particles.

According to String theory, different types of measured particles are actually different modes of vibrations of a one thing, called a string.

So the unified field is actually the calm source (the Archimedean point) of any possible activity, that if observed at the Planck scale, includes all the possible degrees of freedom of strings' vibrations that may appear as massive or massless particles.

TM is a mental practice that enables to directly be at the Archimedean point of any possible activity (whether this activity is understandable as physical or mental).

The current scientific measurement physical tools can't directly measure the unified field, but we have indirect measurements of its impacts on the improved correlations of Alpha brains' waves.

It is equivalent to the indirect understanding of virtual particles (that currently are not measurable by any known scientific physical measurement tool) on the measured dynamism of, so called, actual particles.

Yet virtual particles' impacts on, so called, actual particles are included (for example: Quantum tunnelling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling)) in the frameworks of modern physical theories and their measured accepted results.
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
Well, it is more like a funny post that was written by a person (me), which English is not his native language, when he uses a speller too quickly.

So the right one is:

The unified field if observed at the Planck scale, includes all the possible degrees of freedom of strings' vibrations that may appear as massive or massless particles.

According to String theory, different types of measured particles are actually different modes of vibrations of a one thing, called a string.

So the unified field is actually the calm source (the Archimedean point) of any possible activity, that if observed at the Planck scale, includes all the possible degrees of freedom of strings' vibrations that may appear as massive or massless particles.

TM is a mental practice that enables to directly be at the Archimedean point of any possible activity (whether this activity is understandable as physical or mental).

The current scientific measurement physical tools can't directly measure the unified field, but we have indirect measurements of its impacts on the improved correlations of Alpha brains' waves.

It is equivalent to the indirect understanding of virtual particles (that currently are not measurable by any known scientific physical measurement tool) on the measured dynamism of, so called, actual particles.

Yet virtual particles' impacts on, so called, actual particles are included (for example: Quantum tunnelling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling)) in the frameworks of modern physical theories and their measured accepted results.
Click to expand...

I apologize for being amused by a typo. OTH, that was not the only woo!-problem with that post.

What made it (and makes today's episiode) woo!-speak is the misapplication of common vocabulary words to assertions about physics-y stuff that are not supported.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom