Sunday Reading: Through the past, darkly: The '60s at 50, blurred

[Sporkman]

For those with some spare time, an excellent essay about how historical periods on US history are simplified & repacked for the purpose of selling merchandise or evoking nostalgia, with the end result of important historical lessons being forgotten or simplified away.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20101128/D9JOU4LO1.html

[handy]

Thanks for the link. :)

The continual dumbing down & the perpetual distraction of people surely is a problem.

In my country the education system has gone backwards over the years, as the bureaucrats decided that the country can make more money by lowering the standard so as to make it easier for people who's first language is not English to be attracted to pay to study here.

I am not a bigot. I just think that the dumbing down of humanity is absolutely the wrong way to go.

[Dustin2128]

I just think that the dumbing down of humanity is absolutely the wrong way to go.
Bring on the genetic engineering and cyborg augmentation!
Seriously, modern society without eugenics or human enhancement = total end to natural selection and evolutionary stagnation.

[handy]

Bring on the genetic engineering and cyborg augmentation!
Seriously, modern society without eugenics or human enhancement = total end to natural selection and evolutionary stagnation.

There's more than one way to hasten evolution:

http://www.lycaeum.org/~sputnik/McKenna/Evolution/

[Dustin2128]

There's more than one way to hasten evolution:

http://www.lycaeum.org/~sputnik/McKenna/Evolution/ (http://www.lycaeum.org/%7Esputnik/McKenna/Evolution/)
that's just... strange. I never thought about that kind of stuff having an impact on human evolution. </threadjack>

[handy]

that's just... strange. I never thought about that kind of stuff having an impact on human evolution. </threadjack>

Terence was most definitely a cool frude. There are some very interesting movies of him presenting extremely interesting & thought provoking ideas:

Experiment at Petaluma (1990)
Opening the Doors of Creativity (1990)
Taxonomy of Illusion (1993)
Psychedelics in the Age of Intelligent Machines (1999)
The Alchemical Dream _ Rebirth of the Great Work (2008 )

I think you can find all of those for free on the net.

There are also extremely interesting discussions called the Trialogues (http://www.sheldrake.org/Trialogues/), which include Terence (http://www.sacredmysteries.com/public/department54.cfm), Ralph Abraham (http://www.ralph-abraham.org/) (inventor of the Chaos theory) & Rupert Sheldrake (http://www.sheldrake.org/B&R/videostream/).
__________


As far as threadjacking is concerned - I grew up through the 60s, & was naturally heavily influenced by that time. This is the kind of stuff that some of us ex-hippies are into all these years later... ;)

Peace...

[czr114]

Experiment at Petaluma (1990)
Opening the Doors of Creativity (1990)
Taxonomy of Illusion (1993)
Psychedelics in the Age of Intelligent Machines (1999)
The Alchemical Dream _ Rebirth of the Great Work (2008)


All five are great; much recommended.

[handy]

All five are great; much recommended.

The only thing I don't like about a couple of them is the crappy distracting very poor quality psychedelic display in the background.

[czr114]

The only thing I don't like about a couple of them is the crappy distracting very poor quality psychedelic display in the background.
Considering the subject and the audience, that's not a bug, it's a feature.

[weasel fierce]

For those with some spare time, an excellent essay about how historical periods on US history are simplified & repacked for the purpose of selling merchandise or evoking nostalgia, with the end result of important historical lessons being forgotten or simplified away.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20101128/D9JOU4LO1.html

That was a really interesting read. Thank you!

[handy]

Considering the subject and the audience, that's not a bug, it's a feature.

I have good powers of concentration, & psychedelic phenomenon are not something that I'm unused to.

I think that the power of what Terence had to say was somewhat diminished by that crap going on in the background.

But I wasn't one of the ones in the audience that was 19 years old & stoned...

[ikt]

evolutionary stagnation.

evolution does not stagnate and so what about evolution via natural selection, I don't hear many dog owners complaining about how they wish they had a big vicious wolf instead of a Labrador.

[Dustin2128]

evolution does not stagnate and so what about evolution via natural selection, I don't hear many dog owners complaining about how they wish they had a big vicious wolf instead of a Labrador.
What I'm saying is that without any real survival pressure; e.g. everybody more or less has the same chances of procreating, you'll have 0 evolution via natural selection for humans. In fact, the only changes I see happening without genetic engineering, cyborg augmentation, etc are muscular/skeletal shifts from living in space or on low gravity bodies.

[handy]

What about the evolution of human consciousness?

When will the masses ever get around to doing a little inner work & start developing the skills needed to access the other 90% of the brains functions? (When we no longer have the resources to maintain our consumer paradigms perhaps.)

It is possible for a species to take over at least some of its own evolution. I'm not talking about implants or genetic engineering but the true development of the enormous potential that is on the inside of everyone.

Its easier to just watch a good movie, I know.

[ikt]

What about the evolution of human consciousness?

It doesn't evolve sorry.


What I'm saying is that without any real survival pressure; e.g. everybody more or less has the same chances of procreating, you'll have 0 evolution via natural selection for humans.

That's not how evolution works.


In fact, the only changes I see happening without genetic engineering, cyborg augmentation, etc are muscular/skeletal shifts from living in space or on low gravity bodies.

Then you don't understand evolution or how it works.

For example if the planet heats up because we don't react to global warming, people who have better survivability in hotter climates and with less food will out survive people without those traits.

Your thought process is to simple: ok, now we've got eyes, we need eyes with laser beams!

Evolution != better in a linear path.

[handy]

It doesn't evolve sorry.



That's not how evolution works.


Speak for yourself, it works for me... :D

[ikt]

Speak for yourself, it works for me... :D


Evolution is the change in the inherited traits of a population of organisms through successive generations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

If you can explain how the chemicals in your brain which make up your consciousness evolves, I'm all ears.

[handy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

If you can explain how the chemicals in your brain which make up your consciousness evolves, I'm all ears.

In its simplest terms, it is all to do with opening & using the energy centres in the body, which also happen to be integrally involved with the endocrine system of the physical body.

Have a read about the Kundalini. There are even so called "Western" scientific studies currently being undertaken on the subject of the Kundalini. I don't have links for them. I heard it mentioned on an interview with Dr. Rick Strassman, the DMT research psychiatrist.

There have been scientific enquiries that are much broader than those of the West. They have been going on (& very well documented) for many thousands of years. Few in the West will get any funding if they start down those paths of interest.

There was much more genuine open minded intellectual inquiry particularly from Europe on these matters nearly a century ago. Carl Jung, was very interested in this broad area & learned a great deal from his long term study of it.

Only fairly recently have some Western based researchers started making headway in furthering understanding that will hopefully eventually (a long time I'm sure) bring about a meeting between the natural sciences & what must be described as knowledge obtained by a practical & critical scientific study of the self.

You can imagine how hard it is going to be to crack the shell that stands in the way of this new growth of understanding.

Of course the "The Taboo of Subjectivity: Toward a new Science of Consciousness" by B. Allan Wallace, is a very highly regarded book to read on this subject. It could certainly help an educated thinking person who has had their mind closed due to their education & the paradigms they were born into, to see things somewhat differently.

[ikt]

In its simplest terms, it is all to do with opening & using the energy centres in the body, which also happen to be integrally involved with the endocrine system of the physical body.

That's not evolution, to be honest that doesn't sound like anything but a sales pitch to some naturalopathy/homeopathy stuff :/


Have a read about the Kundalini.

ROFL

Ok now I know you're joking :)

[handy]

That's not evolution, to be honest that doesn't sound like anything but a sales pitch to some naturalopathy/homeopathy stuff :/



ROFL

Ok now I know you're joking :)

It is always a pleasure to speak with another enlightened open minded person. :p

Read the book I linked to & see if it can do any good for you. Have a little search, you may be surprised at how many people in high positions in U.S. Universities consider the book ground breaking & of immense importance.

You never know, you might learn something new!

[ikt]

It is always a pleasure to speak with another enlightened open minded person. :p

I am closed minded towards claims that have not a shred of evidence to support them yes.

Humans are great at making up BS, if this particular bs tickles your funny bone and makes you feel great, good for you :)



Read the book I linked to & see if it can do any good for you. Have a little search, you may be surprised at how many people in high positions in U.S. Universities consider the book ground breaking & of immense importance.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2009/02/12/4427408-poll-just-39-believe-in-evolution


And a brand-new Gallup poll tied to Darwin's birthday finds that just 39% of Americans believe in evolution.

I wouldn't put it past the americans to believe in anything ridiculous, they've already proven how dumb they can be.



You never know, you might learn something new!

I'm busy learning about other things, sorry.

[handy]

I am closed minded towards claims that have not a shred of evidence to support them yes.

You don't know what you don't know.



I wouldn't put it past the americans to believe in anything ridiculous, they've already proven how dumb they can be.

I thought I was wasting my time...



I'm busy learning about other things, sorry.

Discernment (& patience) generally comes with age.

Peace.

[ikt]

You don't know what you don't know.

I know I don't know a lot, however I do know that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, of which kundalini has exactly 0.

So as I said, if you enjoy it, go for it, I however don't "do" kundalini or astrology or homeopathy or any of that other stuff.

[handy]

For anyone who actually IS interested in learning something new, here is a review of B. Alan Wallace (http://www.alanwallace.org/)'s book "The Taboo of Subjectivity: Toward a new Science of Consciousness":

By Brian Hodel (New York, NY, USA)

This review is from: The Taboo of Subjectivity: Towards a New Science of Consciousness (Hardcover)

Normally the word science conjures up images of the new technologies in communications, medicine and manufacturing that are the hallmark of modern life. But science's influence extends beyond matter to the mind. Its main impact there has been to question, if not invalidate, everything from religion to the commonplace components of our inner lives - our thoughts and emotions, values and ideals. Such subjective phenomena are not to be found on science's objective map.

The Taboo of Subjectivity takes on both science and religion in an attempt not to reconcile the two, but to reveal their common connection in consciousness itself. To accomplish this, Alan Wallace, whose academic background includes both physics and religion, sets out to show that science and religion have each embraced "fundamentalist" attitudes that distort their essential natures.

Science, he suggests, has fallen under the spell of scientific materialism, a philosophical interpretation of science, based on Newton's mechanical model of the universe: if something can't be measured objectively, it doesn't exist. This view maintains a hold on both the public and many scientists despite its having been debunked over 100 years ago. The quantum physics pioneered by Max Planck reintroduced subjective human consciousness into nature, emphasizing the importance of the observer and questioning the existence of a universe made up of solid particles unconnected to human perception.

Religion, according to Wallace, has largely abandoned its roots in contemplation, which the author views as a science of consciousness. Religious fundamentalism denies direct human contact with the divine - the aim of contemplation - in favor of unquestioned belief. Science similarly denies validity to consciousness - the realm of free will, the soul, and the possibility of life after death - by reducing all mental phenomena to mere electro-chemical patterns in the brain. Thus there is double taboo against our subjective selves.

How effective are Wallace's arguments? Sound critiques of scientific materialism have already been crafted by philosophers of science, Paul Feyerabend and Bas C. van Fraassen among them. Contributions from the humanistic tradition have come from William James, Aldous Huxley, Alan Watts, and, more recently, Ken Wilber. Wallace synthesizes these strands into a scathing, three-pronged attack claiming that: 1) Scientific materialism is antiquated in its refusal to accept the conclusions of quantum physics. 2) It inflates the conclusions of valid experimental science - especially where neuroscience reduces consciousness to brain processes, for which there is no compelling scientific evidence. 3) The requirement of scientific objectivity ignores the bias of science's own assumptions, which include mathematics and the inculturation process of scientific training.

But most fascinating and compelling are Wallace's chapters on the subjective exploration of the mind - contemplation. The author's contention is that the meditational practices of many Eastern religions are no less reliable and "objective" in their own sphere - the mind - than is experimental science in the realm of the material. It's not all voodoo and hocus-pocus.

Wallace, a religious studies professor at the University of California at Santa Barbara, has expertise in this area. He spent 14 years as a Buddhist monk, teaches meditation, and is a student of and translator for the Dalai Lama. A variety of approaches to contemplation are explained in some detail, showing that the techniques are extremely exacting. As with proofs in experimental science, similar outcomes can be obtained by the meditator using different practices. Results can be repeated and then confirmed by meditational experts.

These arguments cannot be shunted aside as easily as Ken Wilber's more poetic approach in The Marriage of Sense and Soul (1998, Broadway Books). Whereas Wilber speaks in general terms and relies on a grand theory all his own, Wallace is more specific, demonstrating a firm grasp of physics and the history of science. He cements his case with logical arguments that opponents may find challenging to refute.

A response is called for, especially from the neurosciences, because the implications of Wallace's book are sweeping. The incorporation of subjective, contemplative methods within a scientific framework for the exploration of the mind could lend credence to many subjective aspects of human mental life and effect a repositioning of science - as a brother discipline to the arts and humanities rather than as their unforgiving father.

[Sporkman]

Science, he suggests, has fallen under the spell of scientific materialism, a philosophical interpretation of science, based on Newton's mechanical model of the universe: if something can't be measured objectively, it doesn't exist. This view maintains a hold on both the public and many scientists despite its having been debunked over 100 years ago. The quantum physics pioneered by Max Planck reintroduced subjective human consciousness into nature, emphasizing the importance of the observer and questioning the existence of a universe made up of solid particles unconnected to human perception.


This paragraph is BS - it implies that we should accept the existence of things that can't be physically measured.

[handy]

This paragraph is BS - it implies that we should accept the existence of things that can't be physically measured.

Superficially it may seem that way.

Read his book that I linked to earlier & you will see that he presents his case & method extremely well.

Which is something that I can't possibly do here.