various verbiage

I’m confused why NYT countenances such illogic, unless it’s their effort to balance their oft-castigaged ‘leftward-leaning’ Op-Ed pages.
I deconstructed a similar article here.

Here we go again. First off, the circular reasoning fallacy is repeatedly evoked. The author presents a scenario of “magical thinking”, then tacitly labels it [ridiculous]. Next they state that there’s ‘brain structures’ which somehow must create MT, but that can’t be evolutionary, can it [ie, denying physical evidence]? Then they show that we can fool ppl into MT-based behavior [a similar test, "can we fool tax experts into giving wrong answers", is done each year by Better Business Bureau; they call IRS & ask 20 Agents the exact same question, & get 20 different, usually wrong answers. Oh wait-- is this MT too??].

Then they move right into the perfect example of circular reasoning: “The question is why do people create this illusion of magical power?””. Sorry, did we accidentally neglect how Tiger, Jordan, Lance, Jenner, & etc top peak performers all swear by visualization? And that there’s been multiple double-blind tests confirming that visualization not only helps, but is *essential* to peak performance?

Funny– we all recognize false choice fallacy when Fox News rigs one of their frequent polls (cf. Colbert’s lampooning): “Question: Are you for Supporting the Troops, God, & Country, or Treasonously Retreating from Iraq?”

So why aren’t suitable options made visible here? Perhaps “Magical Thinking” and/or “Magical Power” do in-fact work, but these psych’s & shrinks aren’t very good at measuring it? Not to mention, that psych’s & shrinks have historically been labeled ‘fuzzy science’, & thus are particularly antagonistic to intuitive paths to knowledge.

But it’s particularly jarring when these same ‘clinical psychologists’ and/or university researchers pretend to be objectively studying the matter. Fer crying out loud, wouldn’t the very topic they’re studying (ie, how belief affects physical world), be potentially undermined if they’re starting-out w/ the assumption it doesn’t work?

By the logic they’re using, it’s not implausible to say they’re actually undermining their own experiments. By ‘believing’ MT doesn’t exist, they affect both their test-cases, as well as their logic itself.

I’m esp. amused that they finish-off the article w/ a list of psychiatric disorders which “MT could lead to”, coupled w/ discounting evidence as “coincidental”. First illogic, then ‘you’re crazy”.

And note they carefully distinguish MT from religion, ie “These habits have little to do with religious faith, which is much more complex because it involves large questions of morality, community and history”. What silliness; the average fervent church-goer isn’t thinking of any of those things when they pray… they just want their prayers to work (& the lectant usually gives praise the next week if/when they did).

Hmmm. Closed thinking, hostility, & church-banner waving. Since when did the neo-cons care about ‘magic’? You’d think they were on shaky ground; “faith” in their not being “left behind” sorta sounds like MT to me.

I’m amused by this NYT article, purporting to be ’science’.

Blanke’s research is interesting, but his conclusion (“[mystical/supernatural experiences] are simply the brain’s attempt to make sense of conflicting information”) is fraught with logical fallacies (see below). And Brugger’s examples actually strengthen the idea that ‘mystical/supernatural’ experiences happen all the time, even “occur[ing] without electrical stimulation to the brain”; he only questions if you should call them ‘mystical’ or not. I suppose ‘mystical’ phenomena are only valid if rare?

If you’re interested in a scientific, very non new-agey exploration of out-of-body experiences, written by an American businessman, try Monroe’s Journey’s Out of the Body.

Anyway, since I’m a software engineer as well ‘interested’ in all things psychic, I figured I’d give a scientific deconstruction of the article, using classical logic:

Addressing Blanke first, his research consists of analyzing behavior resulting from selective electric stimulation to electrodes implanted in brain tissue. The female subjects describe out-of-body (OOB) experiences, and/or extra-sensory (ESP) perception (“shadow man who wanted to interfere with her”), when various electrodes are stimulated. These results are repeatable. All of this research is very scientific, very interesting, & in fact very validating to psychics — b/c there is no inherent contradiction to the assertion that ESP or OOB are actually related to various stimulations of parts of the brain. However, Blanke’s conclusion is that ESP and/or OOB do not exist simply b/c he can induce those behaviors via brain stimulation. This is a FALSE DILEMMA logical fallacy, implying that if stimulation can cause ESP or OOB experiences, these experiences must be a priori false. Similar implanted-electrode stimulation experiments by other researchers have demonstrated subjects smelling non-present scents & unconsciously moving limbs due to similar stimulations… but none of these researchers ever attempted to imply that these behaviors invalidated all similar scent-sensation or limb-movement which occurred when [that brain] was not under electrode stimulation. Instead, they simply concluded that these areas stimulated in the brain would ‘normally’ be stimulated when that scent, or limb-movement, was present. Why does Blanke conclude the ESP or OOB behavior differently?

Next, Blanke then gives an alternate explanation of the event, ignoring the woman’s own, clearly-stated experience (“the shadow man was also sitting and that he was clasping her in his arms”). Blanke instead interprets this as “the patient was experiencing an unusual perception of her own body, as a double. But for reasons that scientists have not been able to explain, he said, she did not recognize that it was her own body she was sensing”. This is ignoring the subject’s own testimony, applying his own analysis, & then willfully ignoring a huge inconsistency in his own analysis– namely the gender of the “shadow” figure. If not quite DENYING DOER fallacy (ie, ignoring contrary evidence to make one’s point), this is definitely a violation of Occam’s Razor– he never gives the option that perhaps she is sensing something actually present, which he cannot measure (& does not report attempting to measure). And by not ever addressing the opposite, ie. “untrue” possibility of his hypothesis (eg. “supernatural/mystical perceptions could be ‘real’”), he is definitely CIRCULARLY REASONING.

Addressing Brugger next, Merriam-Webster defines “mystical” as:

1 a : having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the senses nor obvious to the intelligence

mystical food of the sacrament> b : involving or having the nature of an individual’s direct subjective communion with God or ultimate reality.

Frequency of experience is neither noted here, nor implied. Thus, if, as Brugger states: “The research shows that the self can be detached from the body and can live a phantom existence on its own, as in an out-of-body experience, or it can be felt outside of personal space, as in a sense of a presence”… then “1a” definition of ‘mystical’ is occurring, at the very least. By admitting ESP & OOB experiences exist, but denying these are ‘mystical’, this is TESTIMONIAL FALLACY, if not simple inability to read a dictionary.

So back to why the discussion of “ego” has been ‘programmed-out’, if you will, in many of the western intuitive/meditative disciplines today.

The reduction of Ego is systemic in traditional Eastern training– you shut-up, & practice. The Teacher is Right, so again– shut-up, don’t question, & do the same [basic] training, over&over&over. And in the same way that this kind of ‘basic training’ often helps you break-down bad [physical] habits — such as standing-meditation for hours teaches the body to stop using hard muscular force (by dint of painfully screaming muscles) — a similar mental submersion of one’s will to that of someone else is a very effective technique to diminsh one’s ego’s ‘lock’ on one’s personality.

But we in the West have no patience for that. If only i had a nickel for every Martial Arts Teacher who said, “traditionally you’d have to practice [this technique] for a year before you get the next one, but we teach you all 3 the first day”. IOW, “forget all that ‘mental’ stuff, & let’s get to the ‘good stuff’”. How many of you have gone to Yoga or T’ai Ch’i classes, whose Teacher never even mentions the word ‘meditation’? Well, this is not a ‘win’.

Nevertheless, with all the excesses racked-up by Guru’s in West, the whole idea of the guru-chela relationship is viewed with some suspicion… & for good reason. We would rather to treat our Teachers initially with a bit of deference, a bit of respect over time, but certainly not ‘putting-aside’ our own ego’s, thank you very much. But perhaps we’ve thrown the baby out with the bathwater?

Actually, I think it’s more of the lingering residue of Hubbard & Erhardt, whose mental beliefs still can be found all over what’s left of the Consciousness Movement. Those two did a startlingly good job gleaning some of the more powerful mental practices of various eastern spiritual disciplines, combined it with some military boot-camp confrontational tactics, & invested it with a tremendous load of obfuscatory, pseudo-mystical belief.

On the one hand, many of those techniques are effective, even quite powerful. But on the other hand, the [schools] in which they are taught often turn-out ppl more messed-up than when they started… as much psychosis, if you will… but now with a whole lot more mental decisiveness, “Certainty” if you will, as well as unstoppable belief in their inner ‘Rightness’. Their egos, as Chogyam Trungpa, would say, have been “reinforced by spiritual techniques”.

I’d love to get a similar nickel for each person I’ve met who after year(s) in a meditative community/discipline, comes-out with an (insufferable) conviction of their own Rightness, & a huge interest in sharing it with everyone around them. Perhaps Erhardt’s masterstroke was tying-together his students’ conviction in their own ability to “Get It”, with the number of fellow students they’d recruited.

I always want to say, to those who come to my door hoping to save my Immortal Soul, “I’m so very happy you’ve discovered Truth or Spirituality; I’ve found my own too, let’s share what we’ve learned with each other!” But that, unfortunately, only results in them smoothly switching to another of their well-rehearsed scripts, along the lines of “Your Truth isn’t any good; ours is the Right one”.

Alas. I’ve read a few books, been in a few schools, ‘been meditating for some years… I bet we’d've had a fun conversation… if it only could start.

a school i traversed, some years back
had a funny take on the Golden Rule, namely:
“Be nice to me, & I’ll be nice to you”.

Er, that’s approximately 180 degrees out of whack.
The real Golden Rule says:
“Be nice to everyone as you’d like them to be nice to you”.

iow, be nice first.

instead, this ‘new, improved’ version takes all the personal responsibility out of the equation, & seems to proffer a spiritual challenge, a psychic ‘prove-it’, if you will: “Be nice to me, or else.”

…funny enough, this very same school had a real issue with ego. Or rather, an incredible difficulty ever mentioning the word. Which is really ironic, b/c every single meditation school in the East (including this school’s spiritual ancestors, by way of Egyptian mystery schools, theosophy, & the like), puts primary focus on the ego.

It turns-out, there is an incredibly important reason to address the ego in spiritual practices. And it’s a very simple reason, b/c it cuts right to the heart of the matter: the more you meditate, the more your willpower increases.

That simple.
But that dangerous, if you will.

“Dangerous? Huh?!”
Sure.

Because if your ego isn’t refined, your “I want” and esp. “I want now” not put under leash, and then you gain a strong willpower, some rather not-great things can happen… to other ppl, if not your own spiritual growth.

We’ve all seen this happen to “overnight sensations”, eg. rock-stars, who become “too full of themselves”, charismatic politicians, or cult figures etc. etc…. all who are finally brought-down by an avalanche of excess. And all because they’ve lost their perspective & truly felt they “could do no wrong” or “it was all for the best”. And all that was fine when they were ‘nobodies’, b/c they could do little harm. But when they suddenly become focal points for cheering throngs of adherents, that can test the equanimity of a saint… & most ppl aren’t very saintlike.

So for the (traditional, Eastern) spiritual aspirant, there’s lots of ‘warnings’ built-into the training, alerting them to this pitfall. This is what Trungpa is talking about with his description of “the golden chain” … not only will your over-developed ego hamstring your own spiritual growth, but it will also lead you to ‘messing’ with other people.

There’s a fascinating description of this phenomena in “The Empty Mirror”, by Janwillem Van De Wetering. He’d been practicing in a traditional Japanese Zen monastary for several months, his mind had stilled quite a bit, & he had to ride a train to get his visa fixed. He saw a young cute Japanese girl on the train (the first girl he’d seen in months), & was immediately overwhelmed with lust. Casting about, he found that by focusing his intent on her, [he] got her to come over, sit by him, & even start to rub her leg against his… all w/o him saying a thing! And yet she “kept rubbing”, even though it was clear she was uncomfortable! Finally he came to his senses, relinquished his ‘mental focus’ on her, & she immediately got-up & hurried away.

Sounds crazy? I’ve seen much more dramatic displays, myself.

There’s a concept in martial arts, that the ‘yellow belt’ (couple of years intense training) has all the power of a black belt (four years plus of intense training)…. but none of the control. Bruce Lee liked to chide strong enemies in his films, pointing-out that no matter how strong they could punch, it didn’t mean much if they didn’t hit their target.

Or in other words, it doesn’t take too long for someone doing meditation to start building-up their willpower. But that doesn’t help their ego at all, esp. if their “Golden Rule” encourages a ‘me-first’ sensibility.

The fundamental pitfall of meditation (other than not doing it at all) is increased mental abilities, including willpower, visions, etc. etc. Many zen masters will say, “ignore the visions, they will go away”, & emphasize clearing the mind. Other practitioners, such as Raja Yogis (or western theosophists), instead work with those ‘visions’ to manipulate the esoteric energies in their bodies. But in the end, both [types] of practitioners focus on ego (or “attachment”, or “desire”, or “being stuck”), & how to unravel & release the ego’s effects, called “karma”.

And that’s kinda hard to do w/ the wrong “Golden Rule”.

in The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, The UnBeliever (Stephen R. Donaldson; terrific, a close second to LOTR imho), there is the concept of the “Test of Truth”.

basically, using knowledge/wisdom/experience (or “lore” for short), the Tester questions the Testee… to determine what is True. not if something specifically is ‘correct’ or not, objectively verifiable or whatever… but rather if the person is True.

there is a correlate in the ‘real world’:
What do you do if you don’t trust your shrink?

this is a fundamental question, which boils-down to–
– is it the shrink who is fucked-up, or
– is it you?

if you break it down into “information” and/or “technique”… then that is separate from personalities, & you can learn that from many different ppl. or in other words, it could be that shrink who’s fucked-up, so “go get a second opinion”.

but if it’s a question of something core… then it’s going to come up again & again.

so even then, you don’t have to ‘worry’ about it…
…unless you keep leaving & leaving.

the 12-Step programs (AA, NA, Al-Anon, OA, SA, etc) have a concept called “pulling a geographic”. iow, you leave, & (hope) that you ‘leave your troubles behind’.

unfortunately, that’s not how it works– the troubles were inside of you, you carry them with you, & thus you’re just gonna ‘find’ them again, in wherever new town you end-up in.

{…to be continued}

so, Buddhism has an incredibly-huge canon of texts, myriads of schools, & a gen-u-wine Enlightened dude wandering around singing its praises.
Despite all that, Buddha found it useful to refine his philosophy into a simple, easily-digested mouthful, a la “Four Noble Truths”:
1) Life is Suffering
2) Suffering is caused by Desire
3) Desire can be controlled
4) Desire can be controlled by the 8-Fold Path.

…but that’s hoary & Eastern & who knows what that ‘8-Fold Path’ is, anyway?

…so w/o further ado, here’s “The Four Practical Truths” for the Practical Mystic: {with apologies to Buddha}

1) Life is Great
2) if Life Sucks, there’s just shit in your Space
3) you can clear (energy/pictures/beings) from your Space, -and-
4) Growth can be managed via the 4-Quadrant Path

…is when you say “my school is better than your school”
or “i know more/better than you”

…but the best is
“i’m oh-so-cool b/c i meditate & stuff”

Chogyam Trungpa calls this the “golden chain”, & is the last (& hardest) egoic barrier to enlightenment.

i call it the “new age curse”, & i see it everywhere, here in the Bay Area.

or as this old drunk told me, as we narrowly missed being mowed-down by a volvo while jaywalking on Telegraph,
“see that bumper-sticker? ‘Visualize World Peace’.
“You gotta watch those new-age bastards, they’ll run you down soon as look at you.
“I’ve had rednecks, school buses, even Hell’s Angels stop & let me [jaywalk] in front of them… but not those volvo-driving bastards…
“they’re ‘me-first’ all the way…”

God Bless you, Mr. Drunk. In vino veritas, or whatever. (“in wine there is disk-management software”?!)