Theos-Talk Archives (November 2005 Message tt00219)

Hey Chucky,

Besides all your sarcastic, if not religious opinionating about how 
nonsensical is theosophy and its metaphysics, It would be most interesting for us to 
hear what specific "brain research" you can quote that *proves* any of it is 
wrong.  

>From my view, as a serious student of cutting edge scientific progress in all 
disciplines -- after more than ten years of serious work in both physics and 
neuroscience, not to mention the researches in cognitive psychology, it's 
perfectly obvious that science hasn't even come close to explaining consciousness 
or solving the brain-mind binding problem -- which theosophical metaphysics 
has all the answers for.

Other than speculative theorizing based on brain probing with advanced 
imaging systems that merely indirectly measure "neural correlates" of consciousness, 
that "prove" nothing -- brain scientists haven't even arrived at a logically 
reasonable explanation, let alone a scientific proof that can explain 
consciousness in purely physical or neurological terms, and thus disprove theosophy -- 
without creating enough holes to drive a tank through. Maybe you should 
read some of the thousands of online forum letters and articles posted and 
published by the Journal of Consciousness Study or the Journal of Consciosness and 
Cognition over the past ten years or so, since such studies became the leading 
disciplines of modern science. If you do, you might see how far from any 
scientific disproof of theosophy they are.

On the other hand, it's interesting that leading edge developments in 
Superstring/M-brane theory are coming closer and closer to verifying the 
multidimensional hyperspace fields enfolded in the so called vacuum betweenthe quantum 
particles and the zero-point... Something that theosophy and occult sciencehas 
been talking about for countless ages. Some say that a definitive proof of 
this will be forthcoming very shortly, if not already proven by the "Casimir 
effect" experiments and the recent instantaneous particle-wave "action at a 
distance" experiments at Cern. After that all they will have to do to fullyverify 
theosophy, as HPB predicted, is accept consciousness as the fundamental 
nature of pre cosmic space, along with the root or noumena of phenomenal matter... 
Proving, if not theosophy, that neither the chicken nor the egg came first, 
but that they both came together. :-) 

Barring the few inadvertent errors or wrong interpretations made by some of 
its self professed teachers, maybe it would help clear the air of these 
unfounded opinions about the truth or falsity of theosophy, if the closed minded 
skeptics would do their own logical analysis rather that spit out empty denials 
using ridicule and sarcasm to win their arguments. (Not to say that a little 
humor is not welcome in such discussion.:-)

Lenny, 
the heretical skeptic's nemesis :-)


In a message dated 11/29/05 8:11:05 AM, Drpsionic@aol.com writes:


> Of course Theosophy is belief because we can be certain that a lot of it 
> is 
> wrong (unless there really IS an ashram somewhere where there is a piano 
> built
> into one side of the living room wall and an organ built into the other
> side)  which pretty much means there is quite a bit of nonsense floating 
> around.  
> (I wonder if there is still anyone alive stupid enough to think that poor,
> crazy  Rukmini Devi really was an airhead-er-arhat.)
> 
> The brain research hits everything, not just Theosophy and if the data is 
> good and we are honest we may have to admit the possibility that that may 
> very 
> well be the case and we are back to the starting point.  Of course I have 
> always thought that a lot of it was just an intellectual past-time (with all 
> due 
> respect to my friend Jerry, I really see no practical use for rounds and 
> chains).
> 
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]