Filed under: Spirituality
Welcome back! I hope you find everything you are looking for here. Thanks for visiting again!
The three strands of deep science—injunction, apprehension, confirmation—give us a reliable methodology for learning about both the world without and the world within. Want to know what the moons of Jupiter look like? Look through a telescope. Want to know what satori is? Sit down and count your breaths. While you’re at it, have a couple friends do the same thing, and then compare notes. After all, if your experience of satori involves becoming one with a jelly donut, you, um, might want to see if that happened to anyone else….
Duration : 0:8:1
great speaker, …
great speaker, great post
why are these …
why are these people in the audience writing this stuff down? it is common sense…
Lets Play…
…
Lets Play…
dateherwow._com
Exquisit states of …
Exquisit states of consciousness and satori through meditation is not new age philosophy per se.
We really would …
We really would like to know!
what do you mean by …
what do you mean by that?
Though I love …
Though I love Wilber, he has been converted to the new age.
wow yes thank you …
wow yes thank you for this! how many people say ___ is fake/not true - why because your government, religion, parents, or school told you so - question your ideas/thoughts where do they come from. someone says that stars are real because they saw them and you haven’t seen the stars for yourself so you say “your a liar, thats a scam, thats not real” when in fact this person never did the research or work of thinking and researching for themselves what is true and what is not
i like this guy tho …
i like this guy tho never heard of him. am interested in what others who like him think of my theory on video
What Ken says is …
What Ken says is really clear (to me). This is one of my favorite videos from Integral. It is about the “experience” not the mental apparatus of thought, but as it is expressed as thought it naturaly and predictably creates confusion.
When you dare to …
When you dare to acknowledge spirituality you invoke the concept of God.
Creation is a …
Creation is a continuing process.
The bible is …
The bible is metaphor meant to enlighten not educate.
simplicity is the …
simplicity is the beautiful truth, shining clearly and starkly over the horizon, casting light which cuts through illusion and ignorance.
Still seems to …
Still seems to throw a lot of verbiage out there with no clear coherence, one can use a lot of 10$ words but if they add up to nothing then they are a waste of air. Show me where this so called new system actually works to promote a clearer understanding of the universe and our place within it and I will reconsider the appearance that it is a lot of gobbledygook which confuses rather than clarifies, possibly intentionally so, thus the semblance and not the substance of knowledge.
If he doesn’t know …
If he doesn’t know God.. then how is he the expert? Sounds like another impersonalist trying to make money.
the new term firms …
the new term firms where implicit wares dare sense firminology. Systems impair his terms of old. That means they are inexplicably different, or bold.
the new is the old …
the new is the old dressed in new clothes (terminology) but like the Emperor, seems to be naked. Your response.. nonsensical, terminolgy is applied to systems,old terminolgy can be applied to a ‘new’(so-called) system, but the old ’system’ is not applied to the new ’system’, perhaps you meant he is using new terminology to describe his ’system’ in terms of the ‘old’? This is a comparison but that they can be compared means they are implicitly the same, does it not?
No, he’s using new …
No, he’s using new terminology to explain how the old systems can be applied to the new ones.
this guy uses a lot …
this guy uses a lot of words to say nothing….a new ’system’ consisting of nothing but new terminology for old systems…
I was a little dissapointed.
not how many how …
not how many how objectivly. ilnesses exist which create all sorts of false experiences but for the sufferer the feelings are real. what he claims may be true but i think his evidence is subjective and if i acsept it, it would be no different to acsepting that because children all believe in santa and can acuratly agrea on details of the santa experience, santa exists. his community of the adequate is argumentum numerum. its not true because lots of people believe it.
not how many how …
not how many how objectivly. ilnesses exist which create all sorts of false experiences but for the sufferer the feelings are real. what he claims may be true but i think his evidence is subjective and if i acsept it, it would be no different to acsepting that because children all believe in santa and can acuratly agrea on details of the santa experience, santa exists. his community of the adequate is argumentum numerum. its not true because lots of people believe it.
its not how many. …
its not how many. its can it be reasonably demonstrated. i have personal experience of people asserting experiences which could not have occured. this does not mean that all experiences need objective validation just objective knowledge. because someone experiences something internally does it objectivly exist? thier are conditions where by no matter how much the sufferer eats they still feel hungry. this means the feeling of hunger is false though for them it feels real.
its not how many. …
its not how many. its can it be reasonably demonstrated. i have personal experience of people asserting experiences which could not have occured. this does not mean that all experiences need objective validation just objective knowledge. because someone experiences something internally does it objectivly exist? thier are conditions where by no matter how much the sufferer eats they still feel hungry. this means the feeling of hunger is false though for them it feels real.
Yes, I agree it is …
Yes, I agree it is difficult. I don’t know if we mean (experience) the same thing, but does that mean it is rubbish? Is it non existent because we experience it differently or because one of us might not experience it at all? Perhaps with enough practice we could varify each others experience of something and validate it. Maybe even validate it with a whole community of the adequate. Would validating it with numerous individuals make it ‘real’ or ‘fact’? How many would it take?