Revolution in the Mind Sciences P6

Daniel Vinograd

 

The final point here is suggest   towards a first revolution in the mind sciences. if suggest that we haven’t had one  blue there has been  too much dogma suppressing  the empirical study of  mental phenomena themselves  as oppose to real physical <>. Now there is a possibility as we have access to Buddhism, Hinduism, <> tradition, psychology, neuron science we no longer are isolated.

 

Here at Google you maybe know this better than anybody else. You are on the globe, physical plant happens to be in Mountain View but it could be on amazon. We’re now living in a globe where we can integrate like ever before. integrate these <> first person and third person methodology  from the  contempative, the psychological , the neuro scientist in collaboration with the cognitive  scientist  the whole broad range and  contemplatives who has  exceptional mental cu c insights  resulting from  rigorous sustain mental training and observing and experimenting with states of consciousness.

 

there will be a change  to break down the barriers, to throw out dogma and uncorroborated assumption and open up a new renaissance  of americium  and  the scientific study of the mind that would be confound contempt  and experiential  and diet rigorously scientific. that  could revolutionize the <> ,  it could revolutionize  science and it could bring this unfortunate rift between religion and science, creationism of the school district that makes most of us gag and  start breaking those barriers and  see  about integrating  west and west , ascent and  modern and cats that fresh light on the nature of the mind  and on human identity. It’s a possibility, that’s my hope.

 

Audience: going back to the rift that instead of looking through some criticism that <> within the Greek god is one of the original ways to be <> and then there’s always <>?

 

Second speaker: it’s just one away. If was using taste in a short presentation.  If was saying here’s a good sampling. This was not promotion Buddhism vs. Hinduism roar the Muslim trading or the <>. If was saying this is a good example form the very rich, well developed, intellectually, very sophisticated contemplative trading but the Santa Barbara Institute, which if found is not a Buddhist institution. It is an inter contemplative tradition drawing from the wealth of east ND west competitive from all over the world interfacing these with a bust of science. It’s not plugging any one tradition and it’s certainly not trying to validate Buddhism or any particular school. It’s very much the contrary.

 

These great contemplative tradition have been after universal truce and not just trying to collaborate Buddhist ideas and I’m not <> in that at ll. if think going back to Greek though, back to Plato, back to <> themselves to the notion of <> which is the hyper mental perception by means of which we can directly observe non sensual meant kl phenomena, tests   a Greek notion but we’ve forgotten it.

 

I don’t want to leave anybody out. That’s indigenous people, west and east bring it all together because the stakes Rae high now. We’re dealing with something that is central   to everybody’s existence and that’s consciousness. let’s  throw out dogma of all sorts  and not leave anybody out , not leave out the contemplative , not leave out  the burro scientist, not leave out anybody and really start  fusing and  taking advantage of the technology including transportation that  we have now so that  we can  really droop in thus wealth of <> insights and  multiple methodologies. This <> pluralism I think is actually the key.

 

Audience :<>

 

Second speaker: so the question is if this so going to be scientific and of course science gained its laws by studying objective stuff. You can even look at it from a third person perspective. Quantifiable but measure. If one lab dies <> another can cohobated it and its pretty clear.   Mental phenomena are subjective. As john <> irreducibly, <> first person. U think a good analogy for this, the question deserves not a two minute sewer. It deserves conferences` and really detailed investigations so we don’t come up with cheap answers.

 

If we take of example mathematics. Mathematics is not scribbling thins on a board.  That’s the outer display of it but anybody here who don’t know mathematics can memorize the equations and write with the best of them with no understanding at all.  When study higher mathematic s in my training in physics its really subjective.  It’s working thigh a proof. Its thinking you may do something out here on the board, you may not but the rule juice of mathematics is smoothing taking <> internally and say how can mathematicians ever speak with each other. How can they know who’s great.

 

They get a similar training. They go through an undergraduate, the go through graduate, the go through post do and after a while they know who gets the field medal. It’s not that you write things on the board, it’s through dialogue and you say we speak a similar language. everybody else thinks they can’t understand what we’re talking but you I and I have gone through eight years of training in mathematics and we knot the elegant proofs, we know <> mathematics, we know the short stuff and so even though its largely internal they develop a language in common training do that they can communicate amounts themselves in ways that’s outsiders can   understand.

 

let’s imagine, this is hypothetical  in a ways that  is slaps historical l in another and that is  you spent a lot of time with Tibetans , laboring in Tibetan culture and we have <> there who would go for ten to thirty hours of training.  with the common  basis of  ideas and  training , contemplative technology and so  forth and they develop a refined, professional  language that they  can speak amongst  each other and they know what they’re talking about because  like the mathematical they share training and development , they share their vocabulary and then amongst tem we  know that this is true in the Tibetan  tradition all the great  contempative , the great  scholars they  know how the cream are. It was <>, those people the peers know. To an outsider it looks like a really sweet much, really nice guy. God charisma but the professional knows it’s more than that. This guy really has the Skippy, this man really know what’s going on.

 

I would not ask you to accept   that7 because I’m saying it but I’m saying this issue has been grappled with. If we take a more <> example wine <>.  when  I drink I got  my pallet ringed when I was eighteen because I got r drunk on red mountain wine, whiskey and beer at the  same time and that tolled my tongue for like . So I can’t tell any good vintage from anther. I’ve hung out with people who has had that training. Its three years for training and then years of getting experience so two wine ><> come together and say “was it a 1948 or 1949 and what part of France was this raised in?” the state of swine is very subjective.  You can’t pick up the taste offline with some external technology that will tell you that this is a $500 dollar bottle as oppose to a $5 bottle. No technology will tell you that.

 

They train a d then they use things like <>, they have a specialize vocabulary and they know who the brilliant wine <> are and who is just mediocre.  That’s a specialized vocabulary and they know what they’re talking about and outsiders like me if I don’t have a clue. Wine testing is every imperial, the mathematical is very internal. If we try to inward inspiration on those only by analogy them perhaps we can get some idea but again the danger there’s all kinds of danger here, a mind field   and that is they’re all being brainwashed in the same way. that was  how introspection felled to its knees and died the different labs were simply collaborating their own assumptions and the trainees and observers  their observations were so laden  with  the theories and assumptions of their Mentos that they  were; ‘not getting this inter lab cohabitation , it fell apart but they gave  up too soon and they didn’t go through a  tenor twenty hours  training , not <> , not James at  Harvard. those requires training if its going to be  professional, dint give them five hours of training or a week of  trading , how about three years of training , ten  tear if training.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)
Revolution in the Mind Sciences P6, 10.0 out of 10 based on 1 rating

Leave a Reply




View Larger Map

Dr. Daniel Vinograd, DDS |
10450 Friars Rd, San Diego, CA 92120 |
Phone: 619-630-7174    •    Dr. Vinograd, DDS, is a Dentist in San Diego, CA, offering services as a periodontist, and providing teeth whitening, dental crowns, invisalign, implants, lumineers, dentures, root canals, holistic, family and cosmetic dentistry.


Promoted by: San Diego SEO & Dental Marketing
All Copyright © 2017 drvinograd.com or its affiliates.