Philosophy Now Forum

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:58 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:47 am

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:26 am

Such materialism is a silly non-philosophy. Neural activity is totally irrelevant to philosophy.

Again you are hasty on this.
Btw, the understanding of how the neurons work is not materialism, it is neuroscience which is useful to explain other fields of knowledge, including philosophy more effectively than without it.

For thousands of years, Buddhism has been promoting vispassana [mindful meditation] to improve impulse control over one primal instincts and extreme emotions.
However this is done from the "black box" approach via the brain.
This is the trial and error method with testing of certain strategies and practices with the hope of positive effects.

What is the recommended practices of vispassana and its positive effects at present is brought about from experiences and wisdom from thousand of years.
However the Buddha and the Buddhist monks do not go into depth on what is going on inside the brain that generate those impulse controls and positive results.

With the advent and research into the neurosciences, Buddhist monks and others are looking into the details of brain to understand how Vispassana meditation works on the neuronal basis to produce its positive results.
The most famous monk is the Dalai Lama promotion of research into neurosciences to understand how Buddhism and its doctrines and practices works in the brain.

Neuroscientists and the Dalai Lama Swap Insights on Meditation
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... editation/

His Holiness the Dalai Lama had invited the U.S.-based Mind and Life Institute to familiarize the Tibetan Buddhist monastic community living in exile in India with modern science. About a dozen of us—physicists, psychologists, brain scientists and clinicians, leavened by a French philosopher—introduced quantum mechanics, neuroscience, consciousness and various clinical aspects of meditative practices to a few thousand Buddhist monks and nuns.

At present not all those who ventured into meditation driven by its positive results end up being successful and the drop out rate is normally very high.
The point is when the mechanics of meditation and other spiritual practices are understood at the neural level, processes can be instituted to target the specific areas in the brain instead of the trial and error, hit and missed methods used at present.

As such, your point;
Such materialism is a silly non-philosophy. Neural activity is totally irrelevant to philosophy.

is not rational and wise.

When I talk to the many meditators at the university where i supposedly belong, they talk just like you. "Scientific" yoga is now very very popular. I don't like it and I have said that to them many many times. I much prefer the magic of village shamanism. Or the practices of the ancient yogis, which is not today's yoga at all.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 6:21 am

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:58 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:47 am
Again you are hasty on this.
Btw, the understanding of how the neurons work is not materialism, it is neuroscience which is useful to explain other fields of knowledge, including philosophy more effectively than without it.

For thousands of years, Buddhism has been promoting vispassana [mindful meditation] to improve impulse control over one primal instincts and extreme emotions.
However this is done from the "black box" approach via the brain.
This is the trial and error method with testing of certain strategies and practices with the hope of positive effects.

What is the recommended practices of vispassana and its positive effects at present is brought about from experiences and wisdom from thousand of years.
However the Buddha and the Buddhist monks do not go into depth on what is going on inside the brain that generate those impulse controls and positive results.

With the advent and research into the neurosciences, Buddhist monks and others are looking into the details of brain to understand how Vispassana meditation works on the neuronal basis to produce its positive results.
The most famous monk is the Dalai Lama promotion of research into neurosciences to understand how Buddhism and its doctrines and practices works in the brain.



At present not all those who ventured into meditation driven by its positive results end up being successful and the drop out rate is normally very high.
The point is when the mechanics of meditation and other spiritual practices are understood at the neural level, processes can be instituted to target the specific areas in the brain instead of the trial and error, hit and missed methods used at present.

As such, your point;
Such materialism is a silly non-philosophy. Neural activity is totally irrelevant to philosophy.

is not rational and wise.

When I talk to the many meditators at the university where i supposedly belong, they talk just like you. "Scientific" yoga is now very very popular. I don't like it and I have said that to them many many times. I much prefer the magic of village shamanism. Or the practices of the ancient yogis, which is not today's yoga at all.

"Scientific Yoga" "today's yoga" ??
You cannot generalize too hastily.

Before you conclude you have to do a literature review of everything that is related to meditation and meditators, shamanism, etc. plus all other external related fields that has been included at the present.

Then you need to do further research into each of the relevant and critical points.
I don't see you doing that but rather you are too quick to jump to conclusion.

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 6:48 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 6:21 am

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:58 am

When I talk to the many meditators at the university where i supposedly belong, they talk just like you. "Scientific" yoga is now very very popular. I don't like it and I have said that to them many many times. I much prefer the magic of village shamanism. Or the practices of the ancient yogis, which is not today's yoga at all.

"Scientific Yoga" "today's yoga" ??
You cannot generalize too hastily.

Before you conclude you have to do a literature review of everything that is related to meditation and meditators, shamanism, etc. plus all other external related fields that has been included at the present.

Then you need to do further research into each of the relevant and critical points.
I don't see you doing that but rather you are too quick to jump to conclusion.

Here in Nepal, I don't have to rely on written material. I go to the shamans and meditators themselves and talk. Also this place has a god waiting for you around every corner.

BTW, this part of the world is the home of Tantra and at the core of Tantra is deception. One has to always be on guard. Westerners are too quick to believe everything they are told. https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ma95b1nr4zk4 ... a.pdf?dl=0

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:27 am

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 6:48 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 6:21 am
"Scientific Yoga" "today's yoga" ??
You cannot generalize too hastily.

Before you conclude you have to do a literature review of everything that is related to meditation and meditators, shamanism, etc. plus all other external related fields that has been included at the present.

Then you need to do further research into each of the relevant and critical points.
I don't see you doing that but rather you are too quick to jump to conclusion.

Here in Nepal, I don't have to rely on written material. I go to the shamans and meditators themselves and talk. Also this place has a god waiting for you around every corner.

BTW, this part of the world is the home of Tantra and at the core of Tantra is deception. One has to always be on guard. Westerners are too quick to believe everything they are told. https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ma95b1nr4zk4 ... a.pdf?dl=0

Whatever is touted be good always come with the good, the bad and the ugly.

This is why we need to differentiate the good from the evil ones.

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:33 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:27 am

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 6:48 am

Here in Nepal, I don't have to rely on written material. I go to the shamans and meditators themselves and talk. Also this place has a god waiting for you around every corner.

BTW, this part of the world is the home of Tantra and at the core of Tantra is deception. One has to always be on guard. Westerners are too quick to believe everything they are told. https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ma95b1nr4zk4 ... a.pdf?dl=0

Whatever is touted be good always come with the good, the bad and the ugly.

This is why we need to differentiate the good from the evil ones.

Every Hindu and Buddhist deity has both a "good" side and a bad, ugly side. They go together. You cannot separate them.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:42 am

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:33 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:27 am
Whatever is touted be good always come with the good, the bad and the ugly.

This is why we need to differentiate the good from the evil ones.

Every Hindu and Buddhist deity has both a "good" side and a bad, ugly side. They go together. You cannot separate them.

Good and evil are inherent within human nature.
There is no way we can get rid of the evil potential inherent within all humans.

But there is a need for humanity to manage and modulate to separate and promote what is good and to avoid and prevent evil. This is dealt within the Philosophy of Morality and Ethics.
I am very active in that section of the forum;
viewforum.php?f=8

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 8:21 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:42 am

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:33 am
Every Hindu and Buddhist deity has both a "good" side and a bad, ugly side. They go together. You cannot separate them.

Good and evil are inherent within human nature.
There is no way we can get rid of the evil potential inherent within all humans.

But there is a need for humanity to manage and modulate to separate and promote what is good and to avoid and prevent evil. This is dealt within the Philosophy of Morality and Ethics.
I am very active in that section of the forum;
viewforum.php?f=8

You have a rather bookish, nice view of religion. Here religion is mostly Vamachara. Left-handed Tantra. Black magic. Religion here is not for the sake of enlightenment, which is hardly ever mentioned, but for the sake of overcoming evil curses that have befallen one. If you talk to the men around, they will tell you that Boksis, women wirches, are everywhere. They are often members of one's extended family - a mother-in-law, a second wife, some jealous lover. They have gotten possession of a mantra that will cause you trouble. Accidents will happen. Pains and money troubles. Then a shaman (dhami, jhakri) or Tantrik will have to be consulted to do some counter-mantras in order to free you. Religion is magic. Even medical doctors believe in them and will often tell you that your problem is not medical, but Tantrik. Religion is thus very practical. If you know anything about Pentecostalism, you will see the similarity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtJzPmWs7Rk

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 8:47 am
However I will argue all of religions are reducible to the neural algorithm of the existential crisis, i.e. related to the drive for survival against the fact of inevitable mortality.

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 8:53 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 8:47 am
However I will argue all of religions are reducible to the neural algorithm of the existential crisis, i.e. related to the drive for survival against the fact of inevitable mortality.

If thinking about that turns you on, then go for it. To me is is nothing. If I were to reduce all religion to something it would be Rudolph Otto's Numinous https://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/ ... 1/Otto.htm

Here religion is mostly Vamachara. Left-handed Tantra. Black magic. Religion here is not for the sake of enlightenment, which is hardly ever mentioned, but for the sake of overcoming evil curses that have befallen one. If you talk to the men around, they will tell you that Boksis, women wirches, are everywhere. They are often members of one's extended family - a mother-in-law, a second wife, some jealous lover. They have gotten possession of a mantra that will cause you trouble. Accidents will happen. Pains and money troubles. Then a shaman (dhami, jhakri) or Tantrik will have to be consulted to do some counter-mantras in order to free you. Religion is magic. Even medical doctors believe in them and will often tell you that your problem is not medical, but Tantrik. Religion is thus very practical. If you know anything about Pentecostalism, you will see the similarity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtJzPmWs7Rk

Using Latin, he describes it as a mystery (Latin: mysterium) that is at once terrifying (tremendum) and fascinating (fascinans).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numinous

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 9:29 am

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 8:53 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 8:47 am
However I will argue all of religions are reducible to the neural algorithm of the existential crisis, i.e. related to the drive for survival against the fact of inevitable mortality.

If thinking about that turns you on, then go for it. To me is is nothing. If I were to reduce all religion to something it would be Rudolph Otto's Numinous https://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/ ... 1/Otto.htm

The idea of "numinous" however contradict your other view of religion;

Here religion is mostly Vamachara. Left-handed Tantra. Black magic. Religion here is not for the sake of enlightenment, which is hardly ever mentioned, but for the sake of overcoming evil curses that have befallen one. If you talk to the men around, they will tell you that Boksis, women wirches, are everywhere. They are often members of one's extended family - a mother-in-law, a second wife, some jealous lover. They have gotten possession of a mantra that will cause you trouble. Accidents will happen. Pains and money troubles. Then a shaman (dhami, jhakri) or Tantrik will have to be consulted to do some counter-mantras in order to free you. Religion is magic. Even medical doctors believe in them and will often tell you that your problem is not medical, but Tantrik. Religion is thus very practical. If you know anything about Pentecostalism, you will see the similarity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtJzPmWs7Rk

Your above magic, practical and shamanic elements cannot be reduced the "numinous" as Rudolph Otto intended;

Using Latin, he describes it as a mystery (Latin: mysterium) that is at once terrifying (tremendum) and fascinating (fascinans).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numinous

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 12:09 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 9:29 am

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 8:53 am If thinking about that turns you on, then go for it. To me is is nothing. If I were to reduce all religion to something it would be Rudolph Otto's Numinous https://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/ ... 1/Otto.htm

The idea of "numinous" however contradict your other view of religion;

Here religion is mostly Vamachara. Left-handed Tantra. Black magic. Religion here is not for the sake of enlightenment, which is hardly ever mentioned, but for the sake of overcoming evil curses that have befallen one. If you talk to the men around, they will tell you that Boksis, women wirches, are everywhere. They are often members of one's extended family - a mother-in-law, a second wife, some jealous lover. They have gotten possession of a mantra that will cause you trouble. Accidents will happen. Pains and money troubles. Then a shaman (dhami, jhakri) or Tantrik will have to be consulted to do some counter-mantras in order to free you. Religion is magic. Even medical doctors believe in them and will often tell you that your problem is not medical, but Tantrik. Religion is thus very practical. If you know anything about Pentecostalism, you will see the similarity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtJzPmWs7Rk

Your above magic, practical and shamanic elements cannot be reduced the "numinous" as Rudolph Otto intended;

Using Latin, he describes it as a mystery (Latin: mysterium) that is at once terrifying (tremendum) and fascinating (fascinans).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numinous

I can't follow your reasoning here. It seems to me that vamachara, dark magic, is the most numinous of all. The ones who practice this magic are the followers of the Great Goddess. Mahadevi. She is dark and very frightening, demonic and powerful. How could one not feel Holy Dread in Her presence. That is Mysterium Tremendum par excellence. And the fact that She is so greatly and joyfully worshiped (especially in the form of Kali) shows how She is also Mysterium Fascinans.

Numinous was derived in the 17th century from the Latin numen, meaning a "deity or spirit presiding over a thing or space".[1] It describes the power or presence or realisation of a divinity.
It is etymologically unrelated to Immanuel Kant's noumenon, a Greek term referring to an unknowable reality underlying all things.
-wiki

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 5:13 am

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 12:09 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 9:29 am
The idea of "numinous" however contradict your other view of religion;



Your above magic, practical and shamanic elements cannot be reduced the "numinous" as Rudolph Otto intended;

I can't follow your reasoning here. It seems to me that vamachara, dark magic, is the most numinous of all. The ones who practice this magic are the followers of the Great Goddess. Mahadevi. She is dark and very frightening, demonic and powerful. How could one not feel Holy Dread in Her presence. That is Mysterium Tremendum par excellence. And the fact that She is so greatly and joyfully worshiped (especially in the form of Kali) shows how She is also Mysterium Fascinans.

I was reading this re the Numinous;

Numinous was derived in the 17th century from the Latin numen, meaning a "deity or spirit presiding over a thing or space".[1] It describes the power or presence or realisation of a divinity.
It is etymologically unrelated to Immanuel Kant's noumenon, a Greek term referring to an unknowable reality underlying all things.
-wiki

Divinity in this sense relate to God which is good.
Your "vamachara" "is dark and very frightening, demonic and powerful" which is evil and satanic, this opposes 'divinity'. Thus cannot be in the same sense with the numinous.

In any case, your 'numinous' is reducible to an illusion, while for me, all religions are reducible to something that is empirical and verifiable.

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 5:44 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 5:13 am

tapaticmadness wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 12:09 am

I can't follow your reasoning here. It seems to me that vamachara, dark magic, is the most numinous of all. The ones who practice this magic are the followers of the Great Goddess. Mahadevi. She is dark and very frightening, demonic and powerful. How could one not feel Holy Dread in Her presence. That is Mysterium Tremendum par excellence. And the fact that She is so greatly and joyfully worshiped (especially in the form of Kali) shows how She is also Mysterium Fascinans.

I was reading this re the Numinous;

Numinous was derived in the 17th century from the Latin numen, meaning a "deity or spirit presiding over a thing or space".[1] It describes the power or presence or realisation of a divinity.
It is etymologically unrelated to Immanuel Kant's noumenon, a Greek term referring to an unknowable reality underlying all things.
-wiki

Divinity in this sense relate to God which is good.
Your "vamachara" "is dark and very frightening, demonic and powerful" which is evil and satanic, this opposes 'divinity'. Thus cannot be in the same sense with the numinous.

In any case, your 'numinous' is reducible to an illusion, while for me, all religions are reducible to something that is empirical and verifiable.

I am always baffled by the propensity of writers on these fora to quote philosophical dictionaries. Then I seem to have to argue with the person who got paid to write that article. And is now absent. I wish you would speak for yourself instead of quoting some authority figure.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:09 am
In any case, your 'numinous' is reducible to an illusion, while for me, all religions are reducible to something that is empirical and verifiable.