I feel like using the term "emergent phenomena" kinda obscures the point. Many phenomena are technically "emergent", and calling them emergent doesn't help.
This sounds cool, but also like...you can't be afraid of this stuff, and study it safely. Calling out the risks of meditation is like calling out the risks of walking down stairs.
I'm kinda skeptical of scientificizing the spiritual. Sounds like trying to come up with a grand unified theory of art, and deciding that if you are not acting according to that theory, it is not art. I'm not sure if Ingram thinks his maps are the only way, or he recognizes that they are only one path or take on all this stuff, and not at all an absolute truth. Nevertheless, I might be interested in participating in this. I do want to get many people who claim enlightenment on antipsychotics to see if it makes enlightenment go away. I think Ingram in particular will retain his enlightenment, but not so sure about others.
And hell, I do claim enlightenment, so it might be worthwhile to see what shows in an EEG for me. I hope nothing shows up, as I yearn for the end of the scientific worldview (which is not the same as the end of science): give up on trying to pin down enlightenment!
Actually, you have said you don't believe there is enlightenment, so it's interesting you take Ingram seriously, since it seems you believe he's heavily deluded?
Finally! An arena within which I can openly reveal that I like Graham Hancock & value his efforts & contribution to the scene - among others, whom I still probably dare not openly extol!
I feel like using the term "emergent phenomena" kinda obscures the point. Many phenomena are technically "emergent", and calling them emergent doesn't help.
Thank you for this post.
This sounds cool, but also like...you can't be afraid of this stuff, and study it safely. Calling out the risks of meditation is like calling out the risks of walking down stairs.
I'm kinda skeptical of scientificizing the spiritual. Sounds like trying to come up with a grand unified theory of art, and deciding that if you are not acting according to that theory, it is not art. I'm not sure if Ingram thinks his maps are the only way, or he recognizes that they are only one path or take on all this stuff, and not at all an absolute truth. Nevertheless, I might be interested in participating in this. I do want to get many people who claim enlightenment on antipsychotics to see if it makes enlightenment go away. I think Ingram in particular will retain his enlightenment, but not so sure about others.
And hell, I do claim enlightenment, so it might be worthwhile to see what shows in an EEG for me. I hope nothing shows up, as I yearn for the end of the scientific worldview (which is not the same as the end of science): give up on trying to pin down enlightenment!
Actually, you have said you don't believe there is enlightenment, so it's interesting you take Ingram seriously, since it seems you believe he's heavily deluded?
Finally! An arena within which I can openly reveal that I like Graham Hancock & value his efforts & contribution to the scene - among others, whom I still probably dare not openly extol!