Theos-Talk Archives (June 2000 Message tt00070)

----- Original Message -----
From: katinka hesselink <katinka_hesselink@yahoo.com>
Subject: method?

> Dear Govert,
>
> The problem with the scientific method is that it the
> scientific method is not the only thing scientists do.
> What people call the scientific method is an
> approximation of what scientists in general do. But
> when someone is involved in really looking through a
> microscope and observing, then that has nothing to do
> with forming a hypothesis, drawing conclusions and
> then testing the conclusions. There is a magic to
> science as much as there is a magic to art. It may be
> that a lot of art is done by way of a method, still,
> real art starts somewhere else. In the same way: a lot
> of science may be done by the scientific method, but
> the real breakthroughs and therefore the really
> original scientists, have something extra, even if
> their actions may look like the scientific method -
> from the outside and especially in hindsight.
>
> The same probably goes for Krishnamurti - what he
> describes does look - from the outside (and to me,
> when I am not *in the mood*) - like a method, but
> there
> is that something else, and that something else is the
> important issue, not the method.

Dear Katinka,

I agree that there is more to K than just method. The element of magic and art
are indeed there. Aryel makes the argument that there is no method at all
involved in what K is advocating and doing. I' m saying K does follow certain
steps which I recognize from both science and phenomenology. In the same way
phenomenology is neither just a method, but has its own art and magic as well.
So far I can see three important elements involved in both science, K and
phenomenology:

1) A changed or transformed attitude or intention towards the world.

a) Science saying 'let's look only at those phenomena of the world which we can
clasify, explain, measure, experiment with etc.'

b) K saying 'let's look very carefully at what is'

c) and phenomenology saying 'let's suspend our belief in the existence of the
world and only look at what is given directly to consciousness and how
consciousness is aware of what is given.'


2) A method of investigation.

a) Science doing its clasifying, explaining, measuring, experimenting etc.

b) K describing his 'what is' as he finds it.

c) Phenomenology applying its different 'suspensions' and 'reductions' after
which it also tries to faithfully describe its found structures and essences.


3) The art-element of it

a) Science being a very creative process in its effort to see connections,
formulate theories, devise experiments and experimental equipment, quantify its
findings, etc. (The creativity meant here has nothing to do with the
metaphysical question whether scienctific laws are human constructs or
discoveries of truths already there.)

b) K explicitly refering to the art of listening and questioning. Also, and I
deduce this from his philosophy, everytime K says something it's new to him, for
he claims to be in a state of consciousness where he is one with the universal
process of creation.

c) Husserl's Phenomenology was so fruitfull and inspiring that it created a
whole new philosophical movement, to which belong many very original and
creative thinkers. Husserl might indeed have opened an infinite field of
investigation, as he himself and others claim.

Govert



-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.