(Q)...continuing..i tried to get up the latter part of your post in quote but it didn't turn up...?
it is very revealing in that it emphasizes what i see is the main impasse between some science-orinted people and those that claim deep experience as being authentic
where you say that UNTIL what Chalmers implies or theorizes about it is NOt proven. th scientific method huh?
right. returning to faith again. i gave a definition have always liked which i first read by Alan Watts, where he says that faith is a letting go, as like when surfing on the surf.....the sea is all wobbly as is board and the 'faith' is t let your bodymind accomadate to this less steady way of movement
so, likewise with the innder feeling of reality. you cant apporach it from a more stiff logical mode no matter how anlytical...it is different...Chaotic SOURCe of creativity
but you wouldn't maybe want to let go, but analyze it. all very ell, but them you are missing the ACTION
remember i am talking about Direct experience here. not necessarily nelieving in a 'God' as explained in abook full of words
what Chalmers is basically saying is that subectivity has not been part of scientific criteria for knowing reality. this is cause it was left out right at its emergence. Quality was left to the church...and when they dripped church and 'god' is when it went hard core mechanistic
it is very revealing in that it emphasizes what i see is the main impasse between some science-orinted people and those that claim deep experience as being authentic
where you say that UNTIL what Chalmers implies or theorizes about it is NOt proven. th scientific method huh?
right. returning to faith again. i gave a definition have always liked which i first read by Alan Watts, where he says that faith is a letting go, as like when surfing on the surf.....the sea is all wobbly as is board and the 'faith' is t let your bodymind accomadate to this less steady way of movement
so, likewise with the innder feeling of reality. you cant apporach it from a more stiff logical mode no matter how anlytical...it is different...Chaotic SOURCe of creativity
but you wouldn't maybe want to let go, but analyze it. all very ell, but them you are missing the ACTION
remember i am talking about Direct experience here. not necessarily nelieving in a 'God' as explained in abook full of words
what Chalmers is basically saying is that subectivity has not been part of scientific criteria for knowing reality. this is cause it was left out right at its emergence. Quality was left to the church...and when they dripped church and 'god' is when it went hard core mechanistic