Topic: David Bohm on reality

[Taimyr]

This strong belief in science is kinda funny, I mean it sort of means that somewhere someone else can exaplain the world to you, but you can't do it yourself through your own experience? Someone else has to bring the proof and answers?

Maybe one day science is able to explain the world sufficiently, but that might take thousands of years. I don't think we have that time, if we are interested of what will happen to us after death. And besides that, death is a personal experience, so I don't think any scientific explanation will help anyone on the moment of death. I mean the ability of your consciousness to preserve doesn't come from someone else explaining the world to you.

Are you interested of the possibility that you continue to exist in some form after death? Can the scientists somehow offer you this?

[Firestarter]

taimi good questions on this. science can help us understand what is observable, but something like consciousness surviving after death is going to take a leap of faith. maybe oneday they will beable to tell us something about this but i suspect it will not be in our lifetime.

[Jahn]

Why would you accept my experience (my word) over Juhani's? And if it's not a matter of "accepting," then why should I bother "clearing up" things?

Besides concepts of assemblage points here and there, I learned something ver significant from Carlos Castaneda (not Don Juan) and that was: Always tell the truth in history and spiritual matters.

So if your experience holds the truth you might as well tell it. If it serves any purpose.

[Firestarter]

rudi i know you are seeing this as an us them but it really not is that way. we all have a unique view of seeing things. that would kind of lead back to post one of the quote. but it really is not an us them thing going on. we all have various perspectives and experiences and all sides are welcome here.

[Michael]

Steiner referred to himself as a spiritual scientist. By which he meant that even spiritual insights and realisations should be submitted to peer review. That it was not a purely subjective matter. Sure, it's personal, but not necessarily subjective.

Gurdjieff also referred to 'objective reality'. Toltec lore is filled with knowledge that lies beyond the personal - in fact, they recommend we leave the personal behind. That is what is meant by 'a warrior considers himself already dead'.

[Firestarter]

“Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality. When we recognize our place in an immensity of light‐years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual. So are our emotions in the presence of great art or music or literature, or acts of exemplary selfless courage such as those of Mohandas Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both.”
― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

[Muffin]

Steiner referred to himself as a spiritual scientist. By which he meant that even spiritual insights and realisations should be submitted to peer review. That it was not a purely subjective matter. Sure, it's personal, but not necessarily subjective.

Gurdjieff also referred to 'objective reality'. Toltec lore is filled with knowledge that lies beyond the personal - in fact, they recommend we leave the personal behind. That is what is meant by 'a warrior considers himself already dead'.

I don't get it. Are you advocating peer review, Michael, or just quoting people for the sake of quoting other people?
I don't see much interest in peer review and objective reality here.

[Muffin]

if you say Juhanis ccounting is incorrect i accept tht as true and that your experience is different than he said.

Um, I'm flattered by the faith you put in me. Out of all the things I say, how do you choose which ones you accept as true and which ones you don't?

[Firestarter]

rudi, i just take your word for it. simple as that.

[Muffin]

Simple as that? No reason whatsoever? Just accept it because I say it?
Well, then I will say that about 27,56% of what Juhani said was true, 12.54% was false and the rest was his interpretation of the events, which couldn't be farther from the truth. There, I said it, the issue now is settled.

[Michael]

I don't get it. Are you advocating peer review, Michael, or just quoting people for the sake of quoting other people?
I don't see much interest in peer review and objective reality here.

No, I'm not advocating it, I'm demanding it.

The whole of Soma is set up on the basis of that demand.

Interest: if people don't show interest, that is their problem, or choice, but in general, I see a lot of interest in people attempting to validate through their own experience, the realisations from experience of others.

What we discuss in Soma, are typically ways of describing the spiritual experiences and realisations we have had. What we crave is for others to follow the experimental steps we have taken, and to come back with their own set of descriptions. Then we will weigh and challenge those descriptions.

What we have been waiting for with you Rudi, is to apply the techniques we have detailed ad nauseam in Soma. To follow the procedures outlined, and come back with your own realisations.

You have been doing this. Has it not occurred to you that is what you have been doing since you first met this odd bunch of people? This very thread is your latest submission of where you are up to in that process. This is your review to date. Many have been taking considerable effort to challenge you about the conclusions you have reached - that is how it works.

We are all peers in that we sit beneath the sword. We are all peers in that we seek objective truth instead of subjective projections. We are not all peers in the extent and range of experiences we have had, nor in the depths we have experienced, but we come to the table to share and dispute, offering equal rights to all members who come. The only thing we disdain is when a member throws in the towel and decides they no longer need to learn, explore, and experiment with life with sincerity. That others have engaged you means they still see you as sincerely engaged in this quest for truth.

[Nichi]

There, I said it, the issue now is settled.

Except, we still don't know what happened.   

[Taimyr]

You kind of make it sound like all the possible techniques can only be found in this forum? Anything that is not described here, doesn't count? What about life as a teacher, don't you think anyone can find spiritual lessons in life itself, not the books or writings of others, that are unique to this person and his/her situation? All the mundane stuff that we call the ordinary life, don't you think there are also precious exercises hidden there?

What we have been waiting for with you Rudi, is to apply the techniques we have detailed ad nauseam in Soma. To follow the procedures outlined, and come back with your own realisations.

[Muffin]

Except, we still don't know what happened.   

The details do not matter.

[Michael]

You kind of make it sound like all the possible techniques can only be found in this forum? Anything that is not described here, doesn't count?

No. You are mistaken in that.

What about life as a teacher, don't you think anyone can find spiritual lessons in life itself, not the books or writings of others, that are unique to this person and his/her situation?

No. Unfortunately, that's not possible.

All the mundane stuff that we call the ordinary life, don't you think there are also precious exercises hidden there?

Yes. But they require knowledge to interpret.