tenrai5 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Well, what is your definition of mystical forces? I'm not just talking about deep relaxation and fantasizing, I'm talking about coming into contact with other forces inside and outside. For example, I'm sure you've heard of astral projection. Is that mystical enough for you? :) Supernatural is an interesting word, meaning something that's above or superior to that which is natural. If supernatural phenomena exist, then that would make them natural, wouldn't it?

tenrai5 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I agree that mysticism has to be able to withstand a scientific analysis in order to be legitimate, but that demands that the scientific analysis is made correctly, with the right tools that are sensitive enough to be able to measure the phenomenon in question. Of course, if someone claims to have invented a cure for cancer and the results for the intervention group turn out the same as the control group in a scientific study, then one should question whether that cure really has an effect.

tenrai5 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I agree that all mystical phenomena must follow the laws of physics, but can any of us say for certain that we know what those laws are? The laws that are taught today may fail to explain the phenomena of tomorrow.

El135o (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

None of what you say here involves mystical forces' or anything like that, although I question use of the word "access." A deep state of relaxation is not mystical in any way, nor is indulging in one's imagination. The problem is that there's always talk about super-natural forces, and that's where the belief system breaks down.

El135o (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Those who don't are not follwing established and peer-reviewed robust scientific principles. The problem is that you're trying to turn this into a 'my way vs. your way' argument. Science came about in order to question mysticism's inconsistencies and outright fallacies. Mysticism's believers usually refuse to conduct proper peer-reviewed testing, and if they do, their results cannot be duplicated. Don't blame science simply because such beliefs collapse under intelligent scrutiny.

El135o (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

The first "type of scientist"--a very odd term--is the only type. Results must be duplicable. Theories must cover ALL known facts, and withstand the addition of new facts. So far, there has been no proof that 'mystical phenomena' (astrology, say) are anything but products of human imagination. Such phenomena are necessarily part of the universe and therefore they must and will obey the laws of physics. Yet the believers of such say that their beliefs need no proof. Sorry, they do.

tenrai5 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Mystical experiences are not limited to a select few who suddenly gets an experience of God or something like that. They can be accessed by anyone who practices the techniques required for them. Through simple self-observation one can study one's own mind and consciousness, and through meditation one can reach even deeper. In those methods lie the proof you are asking for, but you are the one who has to make the effort to retrieve it.

tenrai5 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

But internal phenomena cannot be shown to others, provided that this is not directly convertible to external phenomena, in this case brain activity. Some think it is, while others don't.

tenrai5 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Okay, forget about the CD. The point I want to make here is simply that there are two types of scientists. The first type studies external phenomena while the second type studies internal phenomena. External phenomena can be shown to others and together they can make an agreement that this phenomena is real and provide a possible explanation for it.

tenrai5 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

"Fine, they disagree. Yet they offer NO proof to suppport THEIR assumptions of 'mystical forces' acting upon the human brain." Maybe that's because mystics are not interested in proving this to others, or maybe it's because it can't be proven. What matters to the mystic is their own personal experience. I'm talking from my own point of view here of course.