Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA01408 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:22:15 +0100 Message-ID: <A4400389479FD3118C9400508B0FF230040FF7@DELTA.newhouse.akzonobel.nl> From: "Gatherer, D. (Derek)" <D.Gatherer@organon.nhe.akzonobel.nl> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: mysticism Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 16:17:49 +0200 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Derek:
>So how do we know if alleged mystical experiences really do constitute an
>'expansion of consciouness' (was it Huxley?) or alternatively, how do we
>know if they are a load of old rubbish?
Wade:
Because we can create instruments that 'see' and that can tell us what
they see.
No mystic has ever created an instrument [technology] that shows us what
they see.
Although they've supplied us with a myriad of stories and fables and
yarns.
Derek:
True (or not quite, see below *), but think about the thought experiment
again. On the island of the blind, they also respond:
"No [allegedly seeing person] has ever created an instrument [technology]
that shows us what they 'see'. Although they've supplied us with a myriad
of stories and fables and yarns."
So are we out of the problem yet?
* I think this may actually not be strictly correct, as brain stimulation by
magnetic fields can recreate mystical experiences (as indeed can certain
drugs) - so maybe there is a technology of mysticism......
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 04 2000 - 15:23:31 BST