|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Date: Oct 21, 2007 13:49
Peter Olcott wrote:
> http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/
> Research at prestigious Princeton University provides a
> scientific basis for this claim.
> Their studies have shown that people can alter the numeric
> values produced by hardware random number generators by an
> act of the purely mental will alone. These results have a
> very high degree of statistical significance.
This lab closed at the end of February.
<
decades, a small laboratory at Princeton University
managed to embarrass university administrators,
outrage Nobel laureates, entice the support of
philanthropists and make headlines around the world
with its efforts to prove that thoughts can alter the
course of events.
|
| Show full article (1.27Kb) |
|
| | 2320 Comments |
|
|
Author: Peter OlcottPeter Olcott Date: Oct 21, 2007 14:07
"Tang Huyen" gmail.com[remove]> wrote in
message news:13hneq4780o7864@news.supernews.com...>
>
> Peter Olcott wrote:
>
>> http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/
>> Research at prestigious Princeton University provides a
>> scientific basis for this claim.
>> Their studies have shown that people can alter the
>> numeric
>> values produced by hardware random number generators by
>> an
>> act of the purely mental will alone. These results have a
>> very high degree of statistical significance. >
> This lab closed at the end of February.
>
> <
> decades, a small laboratory at Princeton University ...
|
| Show full article (1.59Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: Peter OlcottPeter Olcott Date: Oct 21, 2007 14:11
"Tang Huyen" gmail.com[remove]> wrote in
message news:13hneq4780o7864@news.supernews.com...>
>
> Peter Olcott wrote:
>
>> http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/
>> Research at prestigious Princeton University provides a
>> scientific basis for this claim.
>> Their studies have shown that people can alter the
>> numeric
>> values produced by hardware random number generators by
>> an
>> act of the purely mental will alone. These results have a
>> very high degree of statistical significance. >
> This lab closed at the end of February.
>
> <
> decades, a small laboratory at Princeton University ...
|
| Show full article (1.64Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: brian mitchellbrian mitchell Date: Oct 21, 2007 14:49
Tang Huyen wrote:
> If you really believe that physical reality exists only
> in the mind, my classic suggestion is for you to climb
> on a skyscraper and jump off. When you hit the
> ground, you'll know for sure whether that ground
> "exists only in the mind".
You really are between a rock and a hard place on this issue, aren't
you? You speak a lot about Grace and God but you're forced to cast all
these into a purely subjective mode because you just don't know what to
do about matter. Like every good physicalist, you hear the word 'mind'
and immediately re-write it as 'brain'. Did someone say that matter is
just an idea in the individual brain, or did they say that reality is an
attribute or quality of mind? Or that mind and matter are indivisible?
|
| Show full article (1.21Kb) |
| 16 Comments |
|
|
Date: Oct 21, 2007 15:30
brian mitchell wrote:
> Tang Huyen wrote:
>
>> If you really believe that physical reality exists only
>> in the mind, my classic suggestion is for you to climb
>> on a skyscraper and jump off. When you hit the
>> ground...
|
| Show full article (4.94Kb) |
| 9 Comments |
|
|
Author: Charles E HardwidgeCharles E Hardwidge Date: Oct 21, 2007 16:00
> If the Buddha had talked directly about purely
> subjective and strictly sentimental states as peace
> with oneself, people would have taken him to be
> out of his mind. He had to resort to the rigmarole
> or nostrum of talking about the world to establish
> his credibility, after which he could talk nonsense
> (as Wittgenstein called it).
The abstract of Zen is quite simple but trying to explain it has people
thumping chests and preening feathers as mechanically as a wind up toy, and
that's in a world familiar with systems, logic, movies, and advertising.
The Stern report was point by point an approximation of Daoism, yet, if one
tried to explain Daoism to propeller heads and steel jawed captains of
industry, you'd be laughed at, ignored, or thrown into a padded cell.
Charles Kennedy, the former Liberal Party leader, has been hailed as
successful and is in demand by many, yet, he feels content and has not taken
part in the new leadership race. MAdness? Maybe, maybe not.
--
Charles E. Hardwidge
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Oct 21, 2007 16:10
>> If the Buddha had talked directly about purely
>> subjective and strictly sentimental states as peace
>> with oneself, people would have taken him to be
>> out of his mind. He had to resort to the rigmarole
>> or nostrum of talking about the world to establish
>> his credibility, after which he could talk nonsense
>> (as Wittgenstein called it).
>
> The abstract of Zen is quite simple but trying to explain it has people
> thumping chests and preening feathers as mechanically as a wind up toy,
> and
> that's in a world familiar with systems, logic, movies, and advertising.
>
> The Stern report was point by point an approximation of Daoism, yet, if
> one
> tried to explain...
|
| Show full article (1.14Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Son of manSon of man Date: Oct 21, 2007 16:24
"brian mitchell" fishing.net> wrote in message
news:3130303030363230471BD79108@fishing.net...> Tang Huyen wrote:
>
>> If you really believe that physical reality exists only
>> in the mind, my classic suggestion is for you to climb
>> on a skyscraper and jump off. When you hit the
>> ground, you'll know for sure whether that ground
>> "exists only in the mind".
>
> You really are between a rock and a hard place on this issue, aren't
> you? You speak a lot about Grace and God but you're forced to cast all
> these into a purely subjective mode because you just don't know what to
> do about matter. Like every good physicalist, you hear the word 'mind'
> and immediately re-write it as 'brain'. Did someone say that matter is
> just an idea in the individual brain, or did they say that reality is an
> attribute or quality of mind? Or that mind and matter are indivisible?
>
>
> " 23 Eshun's Departure ...
|
| Show full article (1.38Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Oct 21, 2007 16:30
"Tang Huyen" gmail.com[remove]> wrote in message
news:13hnkpgov18986a@news.supernews.com...> Matter and the material world have nothing to do
> with salvation.
just that salvation, whatever that is, seemingly
takes place there, so without that little dose of
elemental nature slothing around in it's path of
the least resistance, that salvation thingie could
never occur.
> Salvation is the adjustment of
> oneself to oneself,
so now there's two oneselves?
> the alinement of oneself with
> oneself,
is this four or is this an exponential logarithym
positionality rearing its ugly head?
> the accord of oneself with oneself,
now there's 6 and thrice compounded
that's 666.
|
| Show full article (1.46Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: brian mitchellbrian mitchell Date: Oct 21, 2007 17:03
Tang Huyen wrote:
> brian mitchell wrote:
>> Tang Huyen wrote:
>>
>>> If you really believe that physical reality exists only
>>> in the mind, my classic suggestion is for you to climb
>>> on a skyscraper and jump...
|
| Show full article (2.76Kb) |
| 12 Comments |
|
RELATED THREADS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
