Yogic Science?

in #science8 years ago (edited)

Now come on boys and girls; ladies and gentlemen, yogi and yogini--is it possible, to be honest here and not project endless bull-shit? Are you asking me? Well...Yes, I believe such a thing is possible but one would have to go about such an inquiry with the greatest skill combined with the most curious unbiased minds as humanly possible.

What we can't do? We can't define Enlightenment in advance and then go about having ethnic-based 'scientific claims' made about enlightenment! That is simply not science and that is not how science works. Science works via, hypothesis, experiment, observation, data collection, verification, or falsification, wherein experiments are demonstrable and repeatable. The experiments are then verified by different scientists all over the world and a consensus happens via repeated empirical observation that something has been verified to be true and consistent with any given hypothesis. So that's the framework and minimum conditions which would need to be met if we are to study spiritual claims using the scientific method.

Of course, there are the soft sciences like psychology and philosophical phenomenology wherein we study the inner world of human experiences. Things like dreams and emotions and love, etc. The issue here though if we concede that honest research accurately demonstrates authentic knowledge is to not elevate interior human experience over and above empirical, ontological, metaphysical, and cosmological knowledge. In other words, this research, if done with integrity should be a vital part of human knowledge but it needs to be carefully parsed into a greater whole.

So how do we avoid faith-based gullibility, quackery, and woo-woo? Well, at this juncture along the human 'civilizational' trajectory I would say we need a new cross-cultural academy dedicated solely to exploring ALL spiritual claims in a controlled environment. I've suggested in past posts that this should be an Integral aspect of any evolving post-post-modern society which is attempting to integrate all fields of human inquiry and endeavor. Now, true, we may not get to the heart of any universal mysteries even doing this but if we don't do something like this then the current lunacy, woo-woo, and quackery will continue to exploit and manipulate the gullible. How long is humanity going to accept such absurdities when there could be a way to 'solve' most spiritual claims for authenticity?

Let's take two out of potentially thousands of claims that could be studied. Breatharianism. And here I don't mean 40-days of fasting but rather extended indefinite claims of living biologically solely on air. The first thing that could be done is to study if it's even physically possible! But secondly, Breatharians, if honest, should submit themselves into this new academy for study. And only after repeated demonstrable experiments should humanity make a reasonable judgment on the results. Until such a time as something like this happens, I just can't see that these claims should be taken seriously. Now, sure, the skeptics may say that it's already been debunked but I'm suggesting more of a systemic approach to the myriad and sundry spiritual claims of humanity as I think it's too soon to declare us nothing but meat-puppets.

The claim that humans can be awake in deep-sleep. This is known as Causal Meditation or witness meditation and it should be able to be studied under controlled conditions. I'm not a scientist but surely scientists could find ways to test this claim under controlled conditions. The rub here, and it's why I'm suggesting a NEW cross-cultural spiritual academy is to have scientists study this who are skeptical of the claim; it simply doesn't work to have Buddhist science; Hindu science; Young Earth science; etc...What I'm suggesting is that humanity grows up institutionally and studies this area of life thoroughly and honestly so we can move on and truly dismiss that which is false.

Are you tired of the endless debate between religionists and scientists? Between atheists and apologists? I know I am! And I'd love for there to be a way that could 'solve' most of these issues in a thoughtful systemic way. This is what I'm suggesting as the cacophony of madness between all the warring factions is draining and unnecessary--well, certainly to the degree that it's happening.

An integral branch of the new academy would be to re-explore esotericism, alchemy, Kabbalah, kundalini, gnosis, etc.,  as much of these ideas and claims are resurfacing and 'bubbling-up' again in late post-modernity anyway--so hey, why not shine the light of science on these claims if they are re-emerging at this point in human history...I think one of the most intriguing aspects of this idea is who would be most adamantly opposed to such a thing happening? And then to ask why?

And, of course, I have a potential answer to that query: because not everyone here is who they appear to be. But that's a conspiracy post:D 

Sort:  

The only Yogi I trust is "Yogi Bear!"

Yogi Bear.jpg

Yogi was a good bear in that he only stole from those who deserved to be stole from:D

On a serious note, though, trust is at the heart of this post. I believe civilization is doomed if we don't re-install trust on a macro scale. 911 is at the heart of broken trust in recent years and this post is offering one idea as to how to go about avoiding the disaster of broken trust...Not that we'll get it.

"Reinstall" as though it were "installed" at some previous point in the past?

Trust is earned - not installed nor reinstalled. And, yes, there is an extreme lack thereof, especially following the horrific crime of 911.

In order for the masses as it were to "get it" one must appeal to such on a universal scale of common knowledge.

Esoteric forms of enlightenment serve the enlightened, not the masses...

Perhaps a rethinking of the game plan may be in order... Okay... 1, 2, 3, ... huddle... :-)

I can see why you say that if you don't believe the narrative of modern cosmology. But I do for the most part, so I stand by my framing although I completely disagree with hard atheism or gnostic atheism and detest the antimony that it creates within society; at the same time I hate religious delusion (obvious irrational and illogical religious claims--not to mention blatantly dishonest claims), so I seek a new way of trying to explore these most fundamental human questions--one that isn't mired in sectarianism.

I have ZERO-faith and stridently distrust all "narratives," as in my view, "narratives" by design, are inherently biased upon aligning themselves with one agenda or another - a practice of which I vehemently abhor.

and yet you go on a verbal attack on​ someone who is truly agenda-free​...

No intention to "attack" brother - but firm words merely to "ground" as there was limited and rather subdued respect in your numerous responses and only one-sided pompous righteousness permeating instead. I think you have an agenda, bro - despite what you may otherwise believe. Prove me wrong.

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.

Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvote this reply.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.04
TRX 0.32
JST 0.079
BTC 60480.78
ETH 1583.43
USDT 1.00
SBD 0.47