home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!inmos!fulcrum!bham!warwick!warwick!not-for-mail
- From: cuhes@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Malcolm McMahon)
- Newsgroups: alt.consciousness
- Subject: Re: Science Superior to Mysticism
- Date: 27 Jan 1993 09:03:24 -0000
- Organization: Computing Services, University of Warwick, UK
- Lines: 26
- Message-ID: <1k5j4sINN82d@violet.csv.warwick.ac.uk>
- References: <1993Jan20.230740.2061@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu> <C18F4y.35C@news.rich.bnr.ca> <1993Jan25.221540.2068@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: violet.csv.warwick.ac.uk
-
- In article <1993Jan25.221540.2068@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu> jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu writes:
- > At the very least, since logic and causality are
- > a part of the universe, you should be able to prove,
- > using logic, emperical facts and such, that there is
- > a need for that leap beyond reason - or that there
- > exists anything worthwhile beyond the emperical universe.
-
- To me the experience of consciousness itself (not reason, not
- meta-logic but the fact that there is a "me" to experience)
- constitutes such proof.
-
- > For all the 'illumination' that the mystically inclined
- > claim to be generating - why did it take science to
- > invent the light bulb ?
-
- Because that isn't the kind of thing mysticism has tried to achieve.
- Mysticism is about controlling your own mind, above all things.
- Success in this is only apparent in the reaction of other people to
- the enlightened one.
-
- To me science is actually based on the same kind of insight. Science
- allows this insight (when it concerns the physical) to be
- communicated, focused and tested but the big ideas are all
- inspirational.
-
- Malcolm McMahon
-