dir (01/26/83)
I suppose that many people reading the net are scientists of some sort (programmers, engineers, etc.). My survey question of the day is: How many of you consider yourself inclined toward mystical yearnings and beliefs *in spite* of your "hard" scientific, objective training? In other words, I want to find out how many people are like me: I have training (and degrees) in electrical engineering, computer science, and psychology, and my work involves all of these fields. On my own time, however, my main interest is Eastern philosophy, spiritual development, meditation, and other assorted activities clearly seen as "deviant" by the more vocal responders on the net. Any others like me, or am I truly deviant? (Personal mail please unless you have something of general interest to add.) D. Radin - Bell Labs
charliep (01/27/83)
I took an interest in the subject of mysticism recently; this was a result of long-time exposure to the subject because of liberal, tolerant attitudes in the "new age of aquarius". First, I would be very interested to receive the results of this request to the network. Second, I would like that you read a book called "The Psychology of the Psychic", by David Marks and Richard Kammann. Third, I'd recommend that you look into a group called, Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal. I assure you that you will find it a very interesting pursuit. You probably can guess that I do not place my bets on the paranormal side of the table. I think that there are many good reasons why people believe in mysticism: 1. It is very romantic and fun. 2. We all want to transcend our own limitations. 3. There used to be a certain amount of peer pressure (i.e, it's cool). 4. We are frequently faced with striking "coincidences" in the relationships between our thoughts and dreams, and our "everyday reality". There is only one reason not to believe in mysticism: 1. Up to this point in time, it is absolutely unsupportable by repeatable scientific experiments. Please let me know what you find out from the net... Charles Perkins Tektronix
portegys (01/27/83)
I personally do not like the tremendous distinction made between "science", and "art" or "mysticism", etc. I sometimes think this compulsion to see a black-and-white world without differences of degree is a disease of the human brain. To be a scientist means to hold to the scientific method, which, to be true, involves an assumption on its own part, but is nevertheless a useful tool for probing into the unknown, whatever that unknown may be. This includes physics as well as parapsychology. The scientific method has nothing to say, good or bad, about things which are not within its domain of testability, such as belief in god or whatever. It does not hold analysis higher than synthesis. It is indifferent to these things. Some things are apples and oranges to each other. So it is perfectly consistent to claim to be a scientist and a blind believer in god. Good scientists can be good artists. Those 1950's SF movies, in which the "scientist" refuses to even enter- tain the concept of ghosts, have done considerable damage. Tom Portegys, BTL IH, ...ihuxv!portegys
jdu (01/27/83)
For those of you interested in "arts" and "mysticism" with respect to science, I recommend you read " Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". It is an excellent book on this subject. It will hold your attention, and it should be available at your favorite bookstore or public library. John Unruh BTL - Indian Hill
iy47ab (02/01/83)
I read "Zen and the Art of Motocycle Maintainance" (sp?) while sitting on the second floor of the San Diego State Bookstore waiting for a friend to get off work. I heartily endorse it. It's a beautiful book, even at 7:30 in the #$&%*!*#&$*&^%*!! morning. not afraid to admit I patronize the bookstores of other colleges, Lady Arwen of U.C. San Diego
karn (02/14/83)
I really find it hard to accept that ANYONE who is competent enough to use a computer system really believes in parapsychology. Read about the experiment in front of a college classroom in which a magician was introduced as a "psychic", performed "psychic feats", and then intentionally revealed himself as a magician and explained how he did each trick. The students still believed he had "psychic powers" rather than admit they had been fooled. Absolutely incredible. Phil Karn
mclure (03/09/83)
#R:inuxd:-25500:sri-unix:1300008:000:95 sri-unix!mclure Feb 10 10:54:00 1983 You should take your wife to Randi and try to get his $10,000 if you think her talent is real.