Man hypnotises himself before op [Archive]

karnivore

24-04-2008, 08:25 PM

There is more to than meets the eye. This is something that should be taken with a little pinch of salt. Dr. Steven Novella (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Novella), has already explored the case. Below is the extract from his blog (http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php?p=277)

..........
What should an open-minded skeptic make of such a tale?
.........
Hypothesis #1 - The story is true as reported.
.......
If we assume that the news reports, however, were accurate in saying the Mr. Lenkei has no anesthesia at all - not local or general - is it feasible that he could feel no pain from such a procedure through self-hypnosis alone? I don’t think so........

Also of note the news stories report that Mr. Lenkei put himself into a hypnotic “trance” and yet during the procedure he was chatting with the surgeon - asking him how the procedure was going. He was also aware of conversations in the room and various sensations of the surgery - like pulling, and noted that his arm was in an uncomfortable position and he felt like he wanted to move it. This does not sound like much of a trance.

Hypothesis #2 - Local Anesthesia
...............
I find this hypothesis to be far and away the most plausible and likely.

Hypothesis #3 - His hand was already numb
............
It is possible that he also had nerve damage in his hand. Perhaps he has severe carpal tunnel syndrome and ulnar neuropathy -meaning that two of the main nerves that supply sensation to the hand are damaged. Therefore he may not have needed anesthesia because his hand was already profoundly numb.............

Hypothesis #4 - Mr. Lenkei cheated.

Mr. Lenkei is a practicing hypnotist, and he may have seen his surgery as an opportunity to demonstrate the power of his craft and garner some free press............

Hypothesis #5 - Multi-factorial

Finally, we may be dealing with a combination of factors. Perhaps Mr. Lenkei naturally has a very high pain threshold, and he has some nerve damage in that hand and therefore has reduced sensation. He may also have taken some pain medications prior to the surgery, or perhaps had some local anesthesia that is not being reported.

Conclusion

To be clear - I am not accusing Mr. Lenkei or his surgeons of anything. I am simply laying out various hypotheses given the information available on this story. I would love to have the opportunity to test these hypotheses, by questioning Mr. Lenkei and/or his surgeon. The question of local anesthesia should be the easiest to resolve.

If only the mainstream media utilized more dedicated science journalists - and in a health-related case ones with medical training. A skeptical and knowledgeable journalist should have asked the penetrating questions to ascertain whether or not this story is actually true. Instead the public was treated to a superficial and sensationalized account that is likely highly misleading.

mediator

24-04-2008, 11:00 PM

There is more to than meets the eye. This is something that should be taken with a little pinch of salt. Dr. Steven Novella, has already explored the case. Below is the extract from his blog

.........
What should an open-minded skeptic make of such a tale?
.........
Hypothesis #1 - The story is true as reported.
.......
If we assume that the news reports, however, were accurate in saying the Mr. Lenkei has no anesthesia at all - not local or general - is it feasible that he could feel no pain from such a procedure through self-hypnosis alone? I don’t think so........

Also of note the news stories report that Mr. Lenkei put himself into a hypnotic “trance” and yet during the procedure he was chatting with the surgeon - asking him how the procedure was going. He was also aware of conversations in the room and various sensations of the surgery - like pulling, and noted that his arm was in an uncomfortable position and he felt like he wanted to move it. This does not sound like much of a trance.

Hypothesis #2 - Local Anesthesia
...............
I find this hypothesis to be far and away the most plausible and likely.

Hypothesis #3 - His hand was already numb
............
It is possible that he also had nerve damage in his hand. Perhaps he has severe carpal tunnel syndrome and ulnar neuropathy -meaning that two of the main nerves that supply sensation to the hand are damaged. Therefore he may not have needed anesthesia because his hand was already profoundly numb.............

Hypothesis #4 - Mr. Lenkei cheated.

Mr. Lenkei is a practicing hypnotist, and he may have seen his surgery as an opportunity to demonstrate the power of his craft and garner some free press............

Hypothesis #5 - Multi-factorial

Finally, we may be dealing with a combination of factors. Perhaps Mr. Lenkei naturally has a very high pain threshold, and he has some nerve damage in that hand and therefore has reduced sensation. He may also have taken some pain medications prior to the surgery, or perhaps had some local anesthesia that is not being reported.

Conclusion

To be clear - I am not accusing Mr. Lenkei or his surgeons of anything. I am simply laying out various hypotheses given the information available on this story. I would love to have the opportunity to test these hypotheses, by questioning Mr. Lenkei and/or his surgeon. The question of local anesthesia should be the easiest to resolve.

If only the mainstream media utilized more dedicated science journalists - and in a health-related case ones with medical training. A skeptical and knowledgeable journalist should have asked the penetrating questions to ascertain whether or not this story is actually true. Instead the public was treated to a superficial and sensationalized account that is likely highly misleading.

Already explored the case? Guess we shud take ur posts in the forums with "a little pinch of salt."

Besides, if u are linking something then u shud post the complete stuff or the relevant excerpts too. Don't u think so?

I have e-mailed the hospital and I am trying to get contact information for Dr. Llewellyn-Clark so that I can fill in the missing details. If I do I will add an addendum to the post with the new information. Meanwhile, here are several possible hypotheses to explain this story.
..
.
.
It is true that pain is a subjective experience and is highly modified by our mood and attention. If we focus on the pain, even a minor pain can become very bothersome. Likewise, if we are distracted from our pain it can diminish significantly. Fear and anxiety will also tend to exacerbate the perception of pain. So it is plausible that using meditation to focus one’s attention elsewhere and keep oneself calm and free from fear and anxiety will significantly reduce the perception of pain. This can also reduce the need for sedation and pain killing surrounding a surgical procedure.

Neways since u like to quote wiki for reports and definitions, u can read this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnosis#Surgery) or may be this one (http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com/pdf%2F8004%2F8004r2%2Epdf).

So let the doc clear out what he wants. Keep ur mind at rest for the time being before uttering "he has already explored the case"! I hope u do understand in all ur conscious and unconscious state of mind what "hypothesis" is. :)

BTW, were u trying to ridicule hypnotism in general or just this case?

karnivore

25-04-2008, 12:00 AM

And so it begins.......

Guess we shud take ur posts in the forums with "a little pinch of salt."Be my guest. But i would like to know, why the term "already explored" irked you. Wait a min...no i don't.

..if u are linking something then u shud post the complete stuff or the relevant excerpts too. Don't u think so?Because i am linking something, it makes more sense to not copy/paste the "complete stuff". I guess everybody can point and click on a link. And "relevant" is a subjective word. What is relevant to you, may not be the same to me.

Neways....u like to quote wiki for reports and definitions...No i don't. The only way Dr Novella could be introduced was by referring to the wiki. And, the pdf, that you linked was actually provided by one of those who replied, by one who claims to be a hypno-anesthetist and who is not a doctor. Should have shown some courtesy to mention that. Also, the document is an internal finding of Mayo Clinic. It has never been published in any peer reviewed science/ neuroscience journal. The findings are fantastic, but not yet vetted by the peers. So....

I hope u do understand in all ur conscious and unconscious state of mind what "hypothesis" is.
And i hope, "in all ur conscious and unconscious state of mind" you know everything starts with a hypothesis. At least, science starts that way. It seems, you are clear about how things start on your side, but a little fuzzy about the other side. Anyway.......

BTW, were u trying to ridicule hypnotism in general or just this case?What exactly is hypnosis "in general". I am not aware it. But, yes "spiritual" hypnosis is a great source of amusement for me. "Hypnosis" is something of a misnomer, when used in medical sense. It is use to denote "power of suggestion" i.e. the willingness of a person to accept, believe, do and feel, what she is told to and it is highly dependent on the susceptibility of that person, to suggestions. It has nothing "spiritual" in it. It is important to make this distinction, otherwise we might just get lost in interpretation.

mediator

25-04-2008, 01:24 PM

Be my guest. But i would like to know, why the term "already explored" irked you. Wait a min...no i don't.

Well if u don't, then please don't troll around. A case is known to be "already explored" when necessary facts, detailed study and complete interaction is done with the subject...i.e "EXPLORED". I thought u were mature enough to have understood this.

Because i am linking something, it makes more sense to not copy/paste the "complete stuff". I guess everybody can point and click on a link. And "relevant" is a subjective word. What is relevant to you, may not be the same to me.

Guess u shud join media then, which recently entitled "Doctor ya fir Jallaad" for a simple case where X-RAYS showed a needle inside the stomach of a patient where in reality, in actual case, the needles were kept "besides" the patient. Thus, just frivolously insulting the doctor for a cheap news/masala and not giving the "complete" stuff. Well, I agree hypothesis seems more important to you then the ground reality of what remains to be seen and what is actual.

And i hope, "in all ur conscious and unconscious state of mind" you know everything starts with a hypothesis. At least, science starts that way. It seems, you are clear about how things start on your side, but a little fuzzy about the other side. Anyway.......

U seem to be fuzzy on the whole news it seems.

What exactly is hypnosis "in general". I am not aware it. But, yes "spiritual" hypnosis is a great source of amusement for me. "Hypnosis" is something of a misnomer, when used in medical sense. It is use to denote "power of suggestion" i.e. the willingness of a person to accept, believe, do and feel, what she is told to and it is highly dependent on the susceptibility of that person, to suggestions. It has nothing "spiritual" in it. It is important to make this distinction, otherwise we might just get lost in interpretation.

If u r not "aware" of what hypnosis is "in general", then why even ponce around? Since, u r not aware of it, then u must read this (http://seedmagazine.com/news/2006/10/science_finally_tackles_hypnos.php) also and may be this (http://ezinearticles.com/?Is-Hypnosis-a-Science-or-an-Art?---Its-All-in-the-Mind&id=255109http://ezinearticles.com/?Is-Hypnosis-a-Science-or-an-Art?---Its-All-in-the-Mind&id=255109) too.

And finally...

And, the pdf, that you linked was actually provided by one of those who replied, by one who claims to be a hypno-anesthetist and who is not a doctor.

Yes, it wud have saved me from linking it, if u have read the replies and understood what Dr. Steven is doing. So, it doesn't matter if the chap, who gave the link, is a doctor or not. More important is what is inside the link. So Read (http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com/pdf%2F8004%2F8004r2%2Epdf) it. By now u must have understood that scientists are still discussing about hypnotism. So take a rest and add "hypnotism" also to ur list of fake "amusements". :oops:

Besides, u don't know what hypnotism is, u don't understand what spirituality is.....wht r u doing here? 'Amusing' me?

Again an excerpt from the blog.

If the story is accurate and correct as reported, then Mr. Lenkei had no anesthesia and his only form of pain control was his self-hypnosis. I find this to be highly implausible. As a matter of definition - we must first distinguish stage-hypnotism from the kind used by Mr. Lenkei, which is probably better described as deep meditation.

Read (http://www.transcending-consensus.com/articles/spirituality.html), just for ur "awareness".

It is important to make this distinction, otherwise we might just get lost in interpretation.

Understand what u said or may be copied from somewhere, as it will help u.

phreak0ut

25-04-2008, 03:02 PM

Why don't we request the mod to rename all the sections to "Fight Club" on this forum? :mad:

T159

25-04-2008, 04:13 PM

^^lol

karnivore

25-04-2008, 07:03 PM

I thought, taking up an issue in search for answers is in itself an "exploration". I, at the time of hitting reply button, forgot we have a contortionist amongst us. Mea Culpa.

As with the media report, i don't even see a parallel. My quote can be verified, cause i have provided a link to the original, while a media report can't be verified by an ordinary person, because there is no means to do so. Buddy, you got to work more on your analogies.

Let me say this again. I still don't know what hypnosis is "in general". I know of stage/ spiritual (sic)/ clinical ones. The first two links actually talk of clinical one. Not stage, not spiritual. Like some kids who are unnecessarily elated by the mention of the word "candy", some of us get equally elated and start thumping our chests, by the mention of "spirituality", "hypnosis" or "meditation". That, these words may have different connotations as well, is something beyond their grasp.

Yes the pdf is interesting. But only if you had read my post completely you would have known my opinion on the findings.

As with amusing you....NAAAAH, you are not that important and i have better things to do. But, if you are still getting amused, well, good for you.

Regarding spirituality, Daniel Denett had this to say in his BREAKING THE SPELL.

....let me try to put better words in their mouths. What these people have realized is one of the best secrets of life: let your self go. If you can approach the world's complexities, both its glories and its horrors, with an attitude of humble curiosity, acknowledging that however deeply you have seen, you have only just scratched the surface, you will find worlds within worlds, beauties you could not heretofore imagine, and your own mundane preoccupations will shrink to proper size, not all that important in the greater scheme of things. Keeping that awestruck vision of the world ready to hand while dealing with the demands of daily living is no easy exercise, but it is definitely worth the effort, for if you can stay centered, and engaged, you will find the hard choices easier, the right words will come to you when you need them, and you will indeed be a better person. That, I propose, is the secret to spirituality, and it has nothing at all to do with believing in an immortal soul, or in anything supernatural.

mediator

25-04-2008, 11:42 PM

I thought, taking up an issue in search for answers is in itself an "exploration". I, at the time of hitting reply button, forgot we have a contortionist amongst us. Mea Culpa.

I agree. I wonder why people make expert comments which do not conform to facts and reality. What a philosophy.

Neways yes its an 'exploration".... an ongoing one (which needs more time before jumping to conclusion) rather than an "already had" one.

As with the media report, i don't even see a parallel. My quote can be verified, cause i have provided a link to the original, while a media report can't be verified by an ordinary person, because there is no means to do so. Buddy, you got to work more on your analogies.

And I don't understand, why those self-proclaimed experts joke that much. "Verified"? :D .
FYI, doctors themselves cleared out the news given by the misleading media. U shud understand that no reputed or high self-esteemed doctor wants to be a subject of mindless and misleading discussion.

Let me say this again. I still don't know what hypnosis is "in general". I know of stage/ spiritual (sic)/ clinical ones. The first two links actually talk of clinical one. Not stage, not spiritual. Like some kids who are unnecessarily elated by the mention of the word "candy", some of us get equally elated and start thumping our chests, by the mention of "spirituality", "hypnosis" or "meditation". That, these words may have different connotations as well, is something beyond their grasp.

Yes the pdf is interesting. But only if you had read my post completely you would have known my opinion on the findings.

As with amusing you....NAAAAH, you are not that important and i have better things to do. But, if you are still getting amused, well, good for you.

Regarding spirituality, Daniel Denett had this to say in his BREAKING THE SPELL.

....let me try to put better words in their mouths. What these people have realized is one of the best secrets of life: let your self go. If you can approach the world's complexities, both its glories and its horrors, with an attitude of humble curiosity, acknowledging that however deeply you have seen, you have only just scratched the surface, you will find worlds within worlds, beauties you could not heretofore imagine, and your own mundane preoccupations will shrink to proper size, not all that important in the greater scheme of things. Keeping that awestruck vision of the world ready to hand while dealing with the demands of daily living is no easy exercise, but it is definitely worth the effort, for if you can stay centered, and engaged, you will find the hard choices easier, the right words will come to you when you need them, and you will indeed be a better person. That, I propose, is the secret to spirituality, and it has nothing at all to do with believing in an immortal soul, or in anything supernatural.

Ur opinion is nuthing but a misleading joke. BTW, I don't understand what makes u base ur opinions on that of others......loss of independent outlook? Oh wait, I will follow those who are known to be scientific as the only thing I have done is......."follow". (http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/newidea1.html):D

So thats what I asked u before and thats what I ask u now. Let the facts prevail. Until then please don't troll with statements like "this case has already been explored" and few childish philosphies...

P.S : Lets not make it into a FIGHT CLUB or else, the mods can move it into that prestigious section. :)

karnivore

26-04-2008, 12:57 AM

..(which needs more time before jumping to conclusion) rather than an "already had" one.Who is denying that. And who is saying that the conclusion is final. Thats why Dr. Novella called those, "hypothesis" and provided 5 (not 1) of those. I mentioned "already explored", because, he has already looked into the matter "on the basis of the news article". Is English such a difficult language for one to understand ?

And I don't understand, why those self-proclaimed experts joke that much. "Verified"?Sorry. You have dipped your statement, so much into the sarcastic jelly, it has ended up being inscrutable. But it seems you can't make a distinction between something that can be verified for authenticity and something which can't be so done.

However, couldn't help but notice an irony. You can see through the shenanigans of media making false claim about the needle inside a patient, you can understand their attempt to sensationalize something mundane or false but, at the same time, fail to see the attempt of the same media to sensationalize "hypno-anesthesia". Is it because, hypnotism "in general" is one of your sacred pets.

Ur opinion is nuthing but a misleading jokeThe "joke" part i understand. That is your opinion and you are entitled to make plenty of it. But, the "misleading" part i don't. Which part of my which opinion is misleading ?

BTW, I don't understand what makes u base ur opinions on that of others......loss of independent outlook? Oh wait, I will follow those who are known to be scientific as the only thing I have done is......."follow". (http://www.eskimo.com/%7Ebillb/freenrg/newidea1.html)Let me make a wild guess. No, 2 guesses. OK.

Guess #1: Immediately when you were conceived you acquired, by some magical, or "spiritual" means, all the knowledge of the world. History, geography, physics, chemistry, maths, spirituality, hypnosis, meditation, neuroscience and everything else were hardwired into your brain. So when you were born you did not have to go to school, college, University and did not have to turn any page of any book and became an automatic leader.

Guess #2: Immediately when you were born, you went out on voyage of quest and in the process acquired first hand knowledge of the world. History, geography, physics, chemistry, maths, spirituality, hypnosis, meditation, neuroscience and everything else were discovered/ invented/ experienced by you. So when you returned back you did not have go to school, college, University and did not have to turn any page of any book and became an automatic leader.

Now, you tell me which of my guesses is correct. I am more inclined to go with #2.

HAIL MY LEADER.
(Hmmm...in all your post you give one or more links to some sites, that you feel will substantiate your point of view. I guess, thats NOT basing one's "opinions on that of others" and IS a perfect example of "independent outlook".)

Let the facts prevail..... few childish philosphies...Thats what i say too. Let the facts prevail. Not the tailor made, cut to convenience, fact. And all philosophies appear childish, if one is a child. Thanks of acknowledging that eventually.

mediator

26-04-2008, 02:25 AM

Who is denying that. And who is saying that the conclusion is final. Thats why Dr. Novella called those, "hypothesis" and provided 5 (not 1) of those. I mentioned "already explored", because, he has already looked into the matter "on the basis of the news article". Is English such a difficult language for one to understand ?

U are surely amusing me after each n every post of urs. :D

Do u even understand the meaning of the following excerpt from the blog u linked? And then u talk about English.... :D
I have e-mailed the hospital and I am trying to get contact information for Dr. Llewellyn-Clark so that I can fill in the missing details. If I do I will add an addendum to the post with the new information. Meanwhile, here are several possible hypotheses to explain this story.
.
.
.
To be clear - I am not accusing Mr. Lenkei or his surgeons of anything. I am simply laying out various hypotheses given the information available on this story. I would love to have the opportunity to test these hypotheses, by questioning Mr. Lenkei and/or his surgeon

Beating the drums of ur intellect and aptitude? "already explored"?:D Good one for rejuvenating my mood today...and may be for a few days to come if u still want to beat the drums!

Is it because, hypnotism "in general" is one of your sacred pets.

Interesting. U shud really read the pdf. Even the folks u blindly follow and plagiarize 24*7 are "trying' to come to a conclusion "in favour" of it. So its not my 'sacred pet', but something that works! It seems u r having trouble to follow the herd (http://www.eskimo.com/%7Ebillb/freenrg/newidea1.html) u r part of.

The "joke" part i understand. That is your opinion and you are entitled to make plenty of it. But, the "misleading" part i don't. Which part of my which opinion is misleading ?

The disorder u r suffering from is called "Dysphasia/Aphasia".

Let me make a wild guess. No, 2 guesses. OK.

Guess #1: Immediately when you were conceived you acquired, by some magical, or "spiritual" means, all the knowledge of the world. History, geography, physics, chemistry, maths, spirituality, hypnosis, meditation, neuroscience and everything else were hardwired into your brain. So when you were born you did not have to go to school, college, University and did not have to turn any page of any book and became an automatic leader.

Guess #2: Immediately when you were born, you went out on voyage of quest and in the process acquired first hand knowledge of the world. History, geography, physics, chemistry, maths, spirituality, hypnosis, meditation, neuroscience and everything else were discovered/ invented/ experienced by you. So when you returned back you did not have go to school, college, University and did not have to turn any page of any book and became an automatic leader.

Now, you tell me which of my guesses is correct. I am more inclined to go with #2.

Well there can be a guess 3 which is in addition to 2 => u question everything that is taught and when u find confusions/limitations and contradictions to the definitions and explanations u were taught, u start ur "own" thinking process of what could be correct and what could be done!! BTW, leaders are not the ones who have just read what has already been there, but the ones who also "lead" the way for others through the dark passage using their own brains when everything else they have studied simply "fails"!!

(Hmmm...in all your post you give one or more links to some sites, that you feel will substantiate your point of view. I guess, thats NOT basing one's "opinions on that of others" and IS a perfect example of "independent outlook".)

If something seems correct to me, then ofcors I link the site instead of blandly quoting that author/Doctor/scientist A/B/C has to "opine" this and that without any "rational" elements in the victinity of that quote.

And all philosophies appear childish, if one is a child.

Is that ur new philosophy or again a "followed" one? :D Neways it contradicts with ur guess #2. But again amusing! Repair urself and the stammered tone of ur intellect before its too late.

Mods : Move to Fight Club?

mediator

26-04-2008, 11:37 AM

Now, what would one say, if one considers the facts, IN HAND, and arrives at a decision. Would it be safe to say that he has "already explored" the GIVEN FACTS, which in this case happens to be just a piece of news article.

No, he is still exploring and hence says he will update his blog soon when he gets the "missing details".

It is irrelevant, if he is waiting for some more information, which was NOT present in the news article. Question is did he CONSIDER the information PRESENT in the news article and subject it to thorough examination. If he has, then, for me, he has "already explored" the "case", the case being the incidence AS reported in the media. There you go. I don't think i can clarify it any better.

U shudn't have clarified ur irresponsible and misleading statements or even tried to from the beginning. U shud have just acknowledged that the action, exploration is still going on . It isn't so hard is it?

You have previously accused me of plagiarism, but i preferred not to respond. I took it as a kid's bla-bla. But now, i am convinced that this kid, either has a short circuit upstairs, or needs some serious help in how to look up a dictionary. Assuming, its the latter, let me help you with this, by quoting from Oxford Genie.
Quote:
plagiarize: (BrE also plagiarise) {speaker} verb (disapproving), to copy another person’s ideas, words or work and pretend that they are your own:
Now, make a wild guess, who is claiming to be "independent", having his "own thinking" while relentlessly parroting the same things/ ideas, which have been around loooong before he was even conceived, and then, to prove his point - hold your breath - linking to sites which "seems correct to" him. I wonder, who can that be?

Running out of ideas and statements for "on-topic" discussion? Don't troll dear, speak "on-topic".

Let me clarify my position on Hypnosis. I believe, and quite sincerely too, that hypnotism is nothing more than the "power of suggestion". There have been numerous experiments in that direction, and no experiment concludes with reasonable evidence, that it is not. There is absolutely nothing "spiritual" about it. And that is my point. That hypnosis does not work because of any "spiritual" driver. Just another trick that brain plays with people who are susceptible to suggestions.

U need not worry about the "spiritual" driver thing. Just follow ur herd and don't question....Best for u!! :D
Meanwhile read or let the people acknowledge what it is from the view point of scientists, practitioners or themselves. We really don't need expert opinions from a lad who himself lives in a narrow world where his soul task is "following" others with 99.99% of his brain going idle, who doesn't know or fickles on what "hynotism is", "spirituality" and can't even comprehend the articles he links!!

And i am still waiting to learn, how i have "mislead".

Still waiting even after reading the link u gave, eased by formatting I did and bringing out the statements in bold? :oops: Toddlers shud learn how to walk first!!

Oh, BTW, thanks for the diagnosis. Errr....Doctor, what medicine shall i take. I suppose it would be, a teaspoon of "meditation" in a cup full of "spirituality", diluted and succussed to one part "knowledge" in 10 million parts "ignorance".

Ur wish. But if u r asking genuinely then may be this site can help u => Aphasia treatment (http://seniorhealth.about.com/library/stroke/blaphasia3.htm)

Now that you have successfully started to crawl on my nerves, (congratulations) am thinking, if it would be apt to say ADIOS. Well, lets just give it one last shot, to clarify myself (and funny thing is,that it has nothing to do with the topic in hand)

I never wanted that. :sad:...but simply an open-minded discussion like a true scientist!! :D But all I got was some stereotypical and mindless set of null arguments from someone who forgot to stay with his herd!! Dunno what annoys u that much. But u can medicate urself (http://www.healthscout.com/ency/322/151/main.html) for that tooo!

Neways since ur disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphasia) is getting worse and u r getting aggravated unnecessarily leading to simple trolls and repeatitions, lets stop here. :)

T159

26-04-2008, 11:58 AM

stop it guys, lol...get something else to do than aching ur fingers and eyes.

karnivore

26-04-2008, 12:10 PM

OOOOPS Sorry i deleted my previous post. I did not know @mediator was answering. Terribly sorry. Maybe you could edit your post so i can reply. It won't take long to fill your post with inanities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now that you have successfully started to pi$$ on my nerves (congratulations) am thinking, if it would be apt to say ADIOS. Well, lets just give it one last shot, to clarify myself (and funny thing is,that it has nothing to do with the topic in hand)

Now, what would one say, if one considers the facts, IN HAND, and arrives at a decision. Would it be safe to say that he has "already explored" the GIVEN FACTS, which in this case happens to be just a piece of news article. It is irrelevant, if he is waiting for some more information, which was NOT present in the news article. Question is did he CONSIDER the information PRESENT in the news article and subject it to thorough examination. If he has, then, for me, he has "already explored" the "case", the case being the incidence AS reported in the media. There you go. I don't think i can clarify it any better.

You have previously accused me of plagiarism, but i preferred not to respond. I took it as a kid's bla-bla. But now, i am convinced that this kid, either has a short circuit upstairs, or needs some serious help in how to look up a dictionary. Assuming, its the latter, let me help you with this, by quoting from Oxford Genie.
plagiarize: (BrE also plagiarise) {speaker} verb (disapproving), to copy another person’s ideas, words or work and pretend that they are your own:Now, make a wild guess, who is claiming to be "independent", having his "own thinking" while relentlessly parroting the same things/ ideas, which have been around loooong before his great great grandfather was even conceived, and then, to prove his point - hold your breath - linking to sites which "seems correct to" him. I wonder, who can that be?

Let me deal with it in another way. You say that when you are confronted with contradictions, "u start ur own thinking process of what could be correct and what could be done". Setting aside the question, as to why this is perfectly valid for you and not so valid for others, lemme try and get a perspective.

You mean, that in contradictory situations, you, like all other rational person, switch one set of ideas for another. Perfectly all right for me. The question is, are the ideas, that you switch to, your own formulated ones. Or you simply subscribe to the ideas, that have been around, say for hundreds of years. If it is the former, then you are correct in saying, that these are results of your "own thinking". But if it is the later, then you are a <insert that word that starts with "H">.

So tell me, did you invent "spirituality" or did you discover "spiritual meditation" or did you theorize "quantum consciousness" or did you prove "homeopathy" (these are some of your sacred pets, as anybody who has had the misfortune of engaging in a debate with you will know). My wild guess is - NO. And in that, you are as much a "follower" and a "plagiarist" as i am, and actually, worse, <insert that word that starts with "H">.

To question commonly held believe systems or knowledge base, is a sign of a healthy brain, but attempting to answer the GAPs by means of "spirituality" or some other sky-fairy, which itself can't be defined without ambiguity, is pure intellectual laziness of the worst type. Why take the trouble to find the answers, when just about everything can be explained by means of a pixie. Now, that is quite an "independent" thought process.

Let me clarify my position on Hypnosis. I believe, and quite sincerely too, that hypnotism is nothing more than the "power of suggestion". There have been numerous experiments in that direction, and no experiment concludes with reasonable evidence, that it is not. There is absolutely nothing "spiritual" about it. And that is my point. That hypnosis does not work because of any "spiritual" driver. Just another trick that brain plays with people who are susceptible to suggestions.

And i am still waiting to learn, how i have "mislead".

Oh, BTW, thanks for the diagnosis. Errr....Doctor, what medicine shall i take. I suppose it would be, a teaspoon of "meditation" in a cup full of "spirituality", diluted and succussed to one part "knowledge" in 10 million parts "ignorance".

Anyway, nice bickering with you.

mediator

26-04-2008, 01:24 PM

So tell me, did you invent "spirituality" or did you discover "spiritual meditation" or did you theorize "quantum consciousness" or did you prove "homeopathy" (these are some of your sacred pets, as anybody who has had the misfortune of engaging in a debate with you will know). My wild guess is - NO. And in that, you are as much a "follower" and a "plagiarist" as i am, and actually, worse, <insert that word that starts with "H">.

They r not to be invented but simply experienced. Like I said before, since simple scientific medicines didn't work they gave me homeopathic ones and indeed it worked marvels. Thats what led me to know more about homeopathy and its principles. Lets not digress.
Even when someone doesn't know what spirituality is by definition ofcors, it is quite possible that he might be experiencing it by his own will to know more about himself. That doesn't makes him a follower. So, get ur concepts straight first before uttering nonsense. Learn what spirituality is before giving us a full fledged show of ur remarkable intelligence and comprehension next time! Meanwhile u may read the following about 'scientists and spirituality'. It might help to clear the smog inside ur hollow upper shell.

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-4592093/Scientists-spirituality-surprises-Only-one.html
http://www.physorg.com/news5785.html
http://www.californiapsychics.com/articles/Features/64/Can_Yoga_Help_Cure_Cancer.aspx
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0108/religion_healing.php3

America's scientists are a surprisingly spiritual group, according to a survey in which almost 70 percent agreed "there are basic truths" in religion, and 68 percent classified themselves as a "spiritual person."

Overall, about a third said "I do not believe in God" in the analysis, which polled 1,646 scientists at 21 research universities across the nation

It seems there many people like me and many of em are scientists. But I still advise u to follow ur herd as it wud be good 4 u! :)

So first understand and experience what spirituality is. :)

hullap

26-04-2008, 01:44 PM

STOP IT :mad:

karnivore

26-04-2008, 07:06 PM

No matter how much i think, that i will not post again, i just get sucked right into it. UUUGGGHHH......here i go again.

They r not to be invented but simply experiencedThere you go again. You are saying things, that are besides the point. The point, that i was making, is, are those ideas, your own. Whatever, "spirituality" is, and whether or not it is invented or experienced, did you think of the term "spirituality" (which BTW, means "of the spirits") to define those experiences. How did you know, what kind of experience/ feeling constitutes "spirituality". Let me tell you how. You know it because you have read it somewhere, or someone has told you that so and so feeling is "spirituality". Is taking a dump "spirituality" ? Is having orgasm "spirituality" ? (Mind you, particularly, in the last case, one looses one's sense of self, feels transcended to another dimension and feels an unworldly pleasure) If not, why ? Because, these feelings don't fall within the paradigm that you have been programmed to believe in. And thats following.

Again, let me ask, are those, which i mentioned in my previous post, the result of faculty of your brain or someone else's. If those ideas, whatever these attempt to explain, are not yours, then, by subscribing to those, you are simply following, much like me.

...since simple scientific medicines didn't work they gave me homeopathic ones and indeed it worked marvels. Thats what led me to know more about homeopathy and its principles.Don't we all do the same thing. Something works for someone, on some level and then one goes out to find more about it. And if it satisfies one's rationale or reason, one holds it sacred to heart. Whats wrong in it. Now that you stick to homeopathy, it definitely makes you its follower, as much as i am a follower of modern medicine.

Even when someone doesn't know what spirituality is by definition ofcors, it is quite possible that he might be experiencing it by his own will to know more about himself. That doesn't makes him a followerI have already discussed this above. I will just make an addendum. Experience is a personal and highly subjective matter. One, snorting psychedelic drugs, may have a "transcending" experience. If we are talking of "experience" itself, and since both result in "transcending" experiences, please, logically, differentiate between "spirituality" and psychedelic drug. Before suggesting others what to do and learn, may be you should do it before hand, preferably not from dime-a-dozen web sites with commercial agenda.

Believing in something, only on the basis of "experience", which is similar to schizophrenic hallucination, with no logical explanation to support that experience, is nothing but faith and faith, again, is nothing but following something blindly.

And don't you think that one's own "will to know more about himself" can be better and more aesthetically satisfied by reading Biology.

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it - even if I have said it - unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." ~Buddha

Rest of the post is just plain bla-bla. So excuse me if i do not respond.

So, there now. Figure out if the dish is made of china or ceramic - never mind the cuisine.

mediator

27-04-2008, 01:16 AM

Whatever, "spirituality" is, and whether or not it is invented or experienced, did you think of the term "spirituality" (which BTW, means "of the spirits") to define those experiences.

I am sure u looked at the definition from wiki again, but did u try to know what that "spirit" is? Its not related to ghosts etc! :D
Lets see if u can still tell what "spirtuality is" in ur next post!

How did you know, what kind of experience/ feeling constitutes "spirituality". Let me tell you how. You know it because you have read it somewhere, or someone has told you that so and so feeling is "spirituality".

U r wrong again! I never started to know about spirituality "after" reading about it! Have it ever occured to u that yoga can also be spiritual? I am simply close to my roots unlike others who like to abuse his own roots all the time. Thats it! :)

In Hindi its called "Dhobi ka kutta na ghar ka na ghaat ka"!! Its a proverb not an abuse like many illiterates think. Please tell if u don't understand it.

And thats how u learn what u r doing, in detail! Just a child who learns to talk and later understands what he is doing is called "talking" and how gets to another place via footstep is called "walking"! Did u learn the definition of walking before walking or the definition of stooling/urinating before stooling/urinating? I hope not! Like me, many learn when they witness something remarkable and find its practical importance to enhance its use in their daily life! So be real, its not always theory first and practical later.

Is taking a dump "spirituality" ? Is having orgasm "spirituality" ? (Mind you, particularly, in the last case, one looses one's sense of self, feels transcended to another dimension and feels an unworldly pleasure) If not, why ? Because, these feelings don't fall within the paradigm that you have been programmed to believe in. And thats following.

No wonder u can talk at ur low level of deteriorated/null intellect. :oops: I feel embrassed now to be even talking to u.

Besides dump,orgasm etc are not unwordly but worldy/materialistic pleasures! Get ur concepts straight first. It seems as if u r rebuking a subject without even knowing about it. How absurd!

Don't we all do the same thing. Something works for someone, on some level and then one goes out to find more about it. And if it satisfies one's rationale or reason, one holds it sacred to heart. Whats wrong in it. Now that you stick to homeopathy, it definitely makes you its follower, as much as i am a follower of modern medicine.

I agree on the bolded part, but u need to ponder over the italiced part. Even though I have vowed to find more about the things that work, it doesn't recedes me from the stuff I already know. I don't rebuke "all" scientific stuff, neither I rebuke "homeopathy","hypnotism" etc just becoz the scientists are still discussing over it! So I don't hold any subject "sacred" to my heart and thats what being scientific is all about i.e open to all cases and ground reality! But u my friend on other hand with ur low level of terminology and statements and open rebukes over the subjects u don't even know about have shown how much "scientific" u r! Even the scientists are not rebuking homeopathy, hypnotism and spirituality. And thats how a member of the herd gets mocked when he doesn't keep up with the pace and space!

If we are talking of "experience" itself, and since both result in "transcending" experiences, please, logically, differentiate between "spirituality" and psychedelic drug. Before suggesting others what to do and learn, may be you should do it before hand, preferably not from dime-a-dozen web sites with commercial agenda.

No offence but u r simply asking like a child now and showing as of how much "well read" u r. Do I even need to talk on the difference? U r making me feel like as if I am teaching u the alphabet in the midst of a discussion! :oops:

Believing in something, only on the basis of "experience", which is similar to schizophrenic hallucination, with no logical explanation to support that experience, is nothing but faith and faith, again, is nothing but following something blindly.

That wud make the leaders of ur herd which obviously u don't know much about, the same i.e schizophrenic? What does that make of u? :D

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it - even if I have said it - unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." ~Buddha

Understand what u quoted as it will help u to reduce plagiarizing the "opinions" of others!

Rest of the post is just plain bla-bla. So excuse me if i do not respond.

So, there now. Figure out if the dish is made of china or ceramic - never mind the cuisine.

Hehe, rest of my post if simply facts and researches...no wonder u can't respond and that it is all "bla bla bla " to u. May be I shud have "plagiarized opinions"! Let me quote em if u dont get em.

America's scientists are a surprisingly spiritual group, according to a survey in which almost 70 percent agreed "there are basic truths" in religion, and 68 percent classified themselves as a "spiritual person."

Overall, about a third said "I do not believe in God" in the analysis, which polled 1,646 scientists at 21 research universities across the nation.

The findings mirror a similar study of physicians released by the University of Chicago last...

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-4592093/Scientists-spirituality-surprises-Only-one.html

merican and Indian scientists may be adding yoga to the list of options currently available to aid in the treatment of breast cancer, according to a recent edition of the Science & Theology News. Yoga as a form of complementary alternative medicine has been used in conjunction with traditional Western medicine for years. However, the recently announced partnership of American and Indian scientists to test its effectiveness with breast cancer is something new.

Read more (http://www.californiapsychics.com/articles/Features/64/Can_Yoga_Help_Cure_Cancer.aspx). Look at u now.

Religion, spirituality impact patients' healing, scientists say

"Our goal is to bring to the conversation that health is more than fixing your body," Duffy said. "Health is a transformative process that involves healing the spirit."
.
.
"He doesn't realize there is so much to the art of medicine that is unknown," he said. "(Doctors) don't know everything because a lot of it isn't in their hands — the unknown, the unpredictable, the unforeseeable.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0108/religion_healing.php3

Spiritual practices are gaining mainstream acceptance as complementary and alternative therapies. And as spiritual well-being is boosted, breast cancer patients become survivors.
.
.
.

“If you look at spirituality and longevity in general, people who identify themselves as religious live, on average, seven years longer than those who don’t. They’re twice less likely to get a heart attack than someone who’s atheist, agnostic, or has no spiritual connection. And if they do get a heart attack, the religious person is four to seven times less likely to get a second heart attack than the non-religious person,” Plante says.

A new study (funded, ironically, by the U.S. Department of Defense) goes one step further: In sharp contrast to the old bromide linking religiosity with submissiveness, it associates spiritual well-being with the fighting spirit.

“That definitely goes against the grain,” says lead scientist Elisabeth Targ, director of the Complementary Medicine Research Institute at California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute in San Francisco. “We found, among other things, that those who had higher degrees of spiritual well-being had greater quality of life, as measured by less depression and lower anxiety.”
.
.
.
And then there are the physiological benefits. Dr. Susan Love’s Breast Book, (Perseus, 2000) the bible of breast-care books since its first publication in 1990, suggests that by lowering the secretion of stress-related hormones, meditation actually may help alter the activity of brain chemicals such as melatonin, endorphins, and enkephalins. Melatonin, for one, is thought to stimulate the immune system; in test tube studies, it also was shown to have an estrogenic effect.

But if breast cancer patients are increasingly drawn to CAM therapies, their doctors may be the last to know. According to a recent survey of 411 women with breast cancer in Ontario, Canada, 67 percent reported having visited a chiropractor, herbalist, acupuncturist, or other CAM practitioner, most often to boost their immune systems.

Yet of those, only half shared that information with their physicians.

Read more (http://www.science-spirit.org/article_detail.php?article_id=240)

Thre are many such facts embedded in some links that I can give. But whats the point? That wud be just showing u the ground reality. The actual definition is to be understood by u alone.

So until now, u have mislead about the work of "Dr. Steven", acknowledged how much u know about hypnotism, homeopathy, spiriutality and deviated the topic and only shown how much u can lowball them with ur excellent English terminology. Grow up and learn what the leader of ur herd is doing! :)

PS : Mods may move it now to FIGHT CLUB :)
@friends : Sorry, but the fog needs to be cleared out! U all may take part though. :)

karnivore

27-04-2008, 11:23 AM

Again, excuse me if i don't participate in your display of lack of culture and taste (Doesn't speak very highly of your background, either). You can merrily pi$$ on your education (whatever little you received) and be proud of it.

Moving on....

You have actually corroborated the point i was trying to make. That we sometimes experience something and then, later on, go on to "learn" about it and it is a perfect process. If that process of learning is valid for you, it is, perhaps, valid for others, including those who hold an opposing view. We all, on some level, simply subscribe to ideas. If your believe in "spirituality" is only normal to you, perhaps my vote for "materialism" is same for me.

"Walking, talking, pissing" etc. are all specific set of physical activities, which all follow a set of specific rules, biological AND otherwise, and are all natural (please NOTE this word, if you can), provided one is not congenitally or otherwise handicapped. However, feelings can't be defined by certain set of rules. Science does that only in terms of neurons and hormones. But thats besides the point (Also, my point wasn't if practice follows theory or if you started to "believe" in "spirituality" after reading it. In fact, it was quite the opposite. That you felt something and then 'learned' that it was "spiritual".). The point is how does one know, what are those feelings, that constitute the "definition". In case of a physical activity it can be clearly defined due to observable and determinable events. But is it the same for "feelings", particularly "spiritual" feelings, which are extremely subjective. If "feeling" is the touchstone, on the basis of which "spirituality" is defined (Please note that, this is what you are saying, not me), then why certain mundane physical activities, triggering the same feelings, can't be categorised as "spirituality". Thats what Denett illustrated in that quote, i had earlier mentioned.

Yoga is a physical activity (the very act of standing, sitting or lying is physical activity, because, body can't be in any of those states if the muscles are not manipulated in certain ways), and hence the act of yoga is just as much "materialistic" as, for example orgasm (show some maturity here) or intake of psychedelic drugs (if you are too immature to consider the word orgasm). If both, being physical activities, can give the same feeling of "elevation of spirit beyond the self", in other words a "transcending experience", why can't both be "spiritual" activities. And that is my point.

Staying close to one's roots, just for the sake of so staying, is another form of chauvinism or excess clanism (and seems strangely similar to the facists' rants of Hitler). Wasn't it the poster-boy for Vedas, we lovingly call, Swami Vivekananda, who wanted us to assimilate in our culture the "best of west". Again, wasn't he the one who wanted us to cleanse our culture of "bad practices and superstitions". Seems you are not aware of the clarion calls of your headmaster.

One more thing. Psychic / religious/ pseudo-scientific sites can be your playground, but for me, these are akin to garbage-dump. And just as every person with reasonable sense of repulsion would do, i too pass those sites with my forefinger and thumb tightly pressed against my nose.

Oh, one more thing. Instead of telling me what to do or learn or wondering how lowly my intellect is or what percentage of brain i use, (which actually is strange because you claimed earlier i don't have one), why don't you enlighten us all by what you understand of "spiritualism", if possible, without recourse to any garbage site.

You actually remind me of Russell's "celestial teapot". (OOPs i did it again)

selva1966

27-04-2008, 12:20 PM

FUNNY. His hypnotist skills has not helped him from feeling the the pains of arthritis.

karnivore

27-04-2008, 01:40 PM

^^ Good question, but, there is a plausible explanation for that. Clinical hypnosis involves, primarily to focus on something other than the pain. Very much like a magicians trick. While you are focusing on his right hand, he is manipulating with his left. That focusing can work, for a limited period of time. But to make himself, not feel the pain, through out his life would need him to do the same amount of focusing, 24x7, through out his lifetime. That is virtually impossible.

mediator

27-04-2008, 02:01 PM

You have actually corroborated the point i was trying to make. That we sometimes experience something and then, later on, go on to "learn" about it and it is a perfect process. If that process of learning is valid for you, it is, perhaps, valid for others, including those who hold an opposing view. We all, on some level, simply subscribe to ideas. If your believe in "spirituality" is only normal to you, perhaps my vote for "materialism" is same for me.

It seems u r diverting ur point of view to match mine. So, neways u have never experienced "spirituality", so how can u ever rebuke it? U have already been exposed a lot, but neways its good for u if ur thinking process is enhancing now!

The point is how does one know, what are those feelings, that constitute the "definition".

Again u r only strengthening my point, that its not always theory first and practical later! Are we coming to an agreement?

But is it the same for "feelings", particularly "spiritual" feelings, which are extremely subjective. If "feeling" is the touchstone, on the basis of which "spirituality" is defined (Please note that, this is what you are saying, not me), then why certain mundane physical activities, triggering the same feelings, can't be categorised as "spirituality". Thats what Denett illustrated in that quote, i had earlier mentioned.

Like I said it depends on ur roots. I am close to mine, so whatever is already there is in my blood like many others from birth. Its only ur independent outlook that differentiates and separates wrong from right. So yes it is same for spirituality if u r asking in general! Besides, I am not interested in ur plagiarized opinions whether they r correct or not, as they r simply "opinions". I hope u know what "opinion" means and how different it is from facts, researches, ground reality etc?? Even I can plagiarize "opinions" like that. But thats not me!

Yoga is a physical activity (the very act of standing, sitting or lying is physical activity, because, body can't be in any of those states if the muscles are not manipulated in certain ways), and hence the act of yoga is just as much "materialistic" as, for example orgasm (show some maturity here) or intake of psychedelic drugs (if you are too immature to consider the word orgasm). If both, being physical activities, can give the same feeling of "elevation of spirit beyond the self", in other words a "transcending experience", why can't both be "spiritual" activities. And that is my point.

Are u trying to make a joke of urself? Your ignorance is really getting entertaining now. :D
Yoga is much more than those "physical activities". It also about body and mind control, concentration, your breathing. Please show some mercy on urself!
http://www.yoga.net.au/what_is_yoga

And I think ur mind doesn't work to ponder over what psychedelic drugs are! Wondering, I think ur brains doesn't work at all.

Since from the start u like giving "opinions" as ur backup base and using "wiki" to support ur definitions, so let me give on like u at ur level....may be for ur better understanding as now I can understand that giving researches and facts, ground reality can be of no use for u and may take additional toll on ur little hollow brains!

Psychedelic drugs are psychoactive drugs whose primary action is to alter the thought processes of the brain and perception of the mind. The term is derived from Greek ψυχή (psyche, "mind") and δηλείν (delein, "to manifest"), translating to "mind-manifesting." "The implication is that the psychedelic drugs can develop unused potentials of the human mind." [1] Psychedelic drugs are part of a wider class sometimes known as the hallucinogens, which also includes related substances such as dissociatives and deliriants. Unlike other psychoactive drugs such as stimulants and opioids, the psychedelics do not merely induce familiar states of mind but rather shift the locus of experiences so that they are qualitatively different from those of ordinary consciousness. The psychedelic experience is often compared to non-ordinary forms of consciousness such as trance, meditation, and dreams.

Many psychedelic drugs are thought to disable filters which keep signals unrelated to everyday functions from reaching the conscious mind.[citation needed] These signals are presumed to originate in several other functions of the brain, including but not limited to the senses, emotions, memories, and the unconscious (or subconscious) mind.[citation needed] This effect is sometimes referred to as mind expanding, or consciousness expanding, for the conscious mind becomes aware of things normally inaccessible to it.
"Blotter" LSD, a psychedelic drug
"Blotter" LSD, a psychedelic drug

A definition more clearly sets apart a classic or true psychedelic is offered by Lester Grinspoon: “a psychedelic drug is one which has small likelihood of causing physical addiction, craving, major physiological disturbances, delirium, disorientation, or amnesia, produces thought, mood, and perceptual changes otherwise rarely experienced except perhaps in dreams, contemplative and religious exaltation, flashes of vivid involuntary memory and acute psychoses”.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelic_drug

It seems u most probably don't even understand the difference between meditation and sleep, dreaming and pondering!

What do u mean by "elavation of spirit from self"? On one hand we have psychedelic drugs which cause "induced" hallucinations filled with side effects. Do u even understand the difference? Besides "transcendental meditation" is not the 'only' form of meditation that u r trying to compare!!

Dude, please stop it. I can't take ur ignorance now!

Oh, one more thing. Instead of telling me what to do or learn or wondering how lowly my intellect is or what percentage of brain i use, (which actually is strange because you claimed earlier i don't have one), why don't you enlighten us all by what you understand of "spiritualism", if possible, without recourse to any garbage site.

I thought u followed the leader of ur herd well enough to have understood the definition of "spiritualism". But heck, "u did it again"! Neways I am not a teacher to make u understand spirituality. But I can advise that for understanding it u need to have a broadminded outlook and open mind, open to ideas. But rather u have a mindset to rebuff anything that science can't explain or is still discussing about! :oops: And thats so "scientific" of you!!

Neways I don't understand why u induce terms like "bla bla bla", "garbage" to define the sites that I link which merely show researches and ground reality unlike urs which show "opinions" and "wiki" links. It seems this discussion has taken a huge toll on ur null intellect and brain filled with nuthing but meat as in every reply of yours u have shown remarkable set of terminology like "bla bla bla", "orgasm", linked homeopathy with "ignorance" etc and whateva a frustrated mind backed by constipated body can!! Congratulations, u have deviated a lot. :)

Finally coming back to the topic, the case is still an ongoing one and not "already explored". Learn the alphabet, improve ur vocablury and terminology, meditate a little, learn not to deviate and then comprehend what the article u linked by "Dr. Stevens" says! :)

karnivore

27-04-2008, 07:28 PM

It seems u r diverting ur point of view to match mine.Please show me how i have diverted. You said i only follow and you don't. I just provided my arguments to prove we all follow, only some of us are too "naive" to realise that. So show me, just which part of my argument is incoherent.

Again u r only strengthening my point, that its not always theory first and practical laterYou did not even read that para, let alone understand. Just scroll up and read it again and again and again and try to figure out what i said.

...so whatever is already there is in my blood like many others from birth.And whats that. What exactly are you referring to. (I just want to clarify before making any assumptions)

...differentiates and separates wrong from right.Again, right and wrong are subjective. What you may reject as wrong, may not be so to others, or, in the long run.

So, lets summarize. The concept of "spirituality" that you have is shaped by, subjective modification (right and wrong being subjective) of subjective assimilation of cultural roots (just 10 miles in any direction you go you will have a different culture system), complemented by subjective experiences. I guess, with so many "subjectives", the end result will be subjective as well. Please note this conclusion is on the basis of your remarks and not on the basis of any subjective "assumptions" or "opinions" of any expert.

Yoga is much more than those "physical activities". It also about body and mind control, concentration, your breathing.Just because, somebody or some site claims it to be "more" than physical activity, it does not become so. If i start claiming, that i have magical dragon under my bed, it does not automatically become true. Or does it.

Now, since you have too much brain that spills through your nose and ears, lets discuss this point by point,

1. Even if i assume, that yoga is "much more than those physical activities", the starting point still remains physical.
2. If i consider your/ their definition of yoga to be true, it still means that yoga is a process of achieving "non-physical" ends through "physical" means.
3. Since, the only way one can realise if that "non-physical" end is achieved or not, is only through some sort of experience, again, it is the "experiences" or "feelings" that become the touchstone.
4. Now, it is virtually impossible to narrate those experiences or feelings in exact detail. So the understanding of the experiences or feelings would be highly subjective.
5. If those subjective "experiences" and "feelings", are the key, then any physical process, resulting in the same set of experiences and feelings is valid "spiritualism".

Instead of saying "no it is not", just logically prove why it is not.

It seems u most probably don't even understand the difference between meditation and sleep, dreaming and ponderingI think that wiki link actually proves what i am saying. If you read that in conjunction with the above argument, it will become clear why. If it isn't, then probably, too much brain is spilling out.

On one hand we have psychedelic drugs which cause "induced" hallucinations filled with side effects....and on the other hand ??

Besides "transcendental meditation" is not the 'only' form of meditation that u r trying to compareWhere ? Oho, i get it. Since i mentioned the word 'transcend', i must be talking about "transcendental meditation". so 2 + 2 = 5 (don't have a brain, so i hope i got that right)

I am not a teacher to make u understand spiritualityI did not ask you to define "spirituality" to learn it from you. Believe me, i have far better persons, sitting on the racks my home library, to learn from. I just wanted to see, how much of it you yourself understand. Since you don't hesitate to advise people what to do and learn, i thought may be we should also learn, how far you own learning goes.

..u have never experienced "spirituality", so how can u ever rebuke it?Please share with us, what you have experienced. And lets see how good you are at bluffing.

mediator

28-04-2008, 12:44 AM

Please show me how i have diverted. You said i only follow and you don't. I just provided my arguments to prove we all follow, only some of us are too "naive" to realise that. So show me, just which part of my argument is incoherent.

Kiddo, Do u understand what the topic is about? Read where the diversion started from. And yet u dragged homeopathy/spirituality which was a part of another debate? Grow up.

You did not even read that para, let alone understand. Just scroll up and read it again and again and again and try to figure out what i said.

Funny, a guy who can't even read the link he provides and makes absurd conclusions like "already explored" is telling that others don't read! :D

So, lets summarize. The concept of "spirituality" that you have is shaped by, subjective modification (right and wrong being subjective) of subjective assimilation of cultural roots (just 10 miles in any direction you go you will have a different culture system), complemented by subjective experiences. I guess, with so many "subjectives", the end result will be subjective as well. Please note this conclusion is on the basis of your remarks and not on the basis of any subjective "assumptions" or "opinions" of any expert.

Differentiating "Right from wrong" was linked to awakening of ur independent outlook. Do I need to explain every simple statement just for u? And here u r trying to know the definition of spirituality after rebuking it mindlessly.

Just because, somebody or some site claims it to be "more" than physical activity, it does not become so. If i start claiming, that i have magical dragon under my bed, it does not automatically become true. Or does it.

Are u high on mushrooms? Seems like u r miles behind reality. Thats what anybody can expect from an illiterate ill-informed about yoga!

Ofcors the "magical dragon" doesn't become true unless it is proven/shown. But guess what, we have almost half of america, majority of Europe and other nations practising Yoga and major percentage of it has made it their lifestyle.....a spiritual lifestyle and that includes a major percentage of scientists too! I hope u read the researches and links I gave just for ur enlghtenment! They r not "garbage", believe me, read em n then comment for the sake of making others believe that u still have a little percentage of wisdom still inside u!

A piece of friendly advise : If u really do not know what spirituality and yoga is, then please don't discuss. I am not 'forcing' u to discuss as this is not "ontopic" and I am not laughing either, but just being sympathetic and sad!

So lets discuss this in a much friendly tone, since I feel u really do not know anything over the topic at all.

1. Even if i assume, that yoga is "much more than those physical activities", the starting point still remains physical.
2. If i consider your/ their definition of yoga to be true, it still means that yoga is a process of achieving "non-physical" ends through "physical" means.
3. Since, the only way one can realise if that "non-physical" end is achieved or not, is only through some sort of experience, again, it is the "experiences" or "feelings" that become the touchstone.
4. Now, it is virtually impossible to narrate those experiences or feelings in exact detail. So the understanding of the experiences or feelings would be highly subjective.
5. If those subjective "experiences" and "feelings", are the key, then any physical process, resulting in the same set of experiences and feelings is valid "spiritualism".

Yoga is a physical activity (the very act of standing, sitting or lying is physical activity, because, body can't be in any of those states if the muscles are not manipulated in certain ways), and hence the act of yoga is just as much "materialistic" as, for example orgasm (show some maturity here) or intake of psychedelic drugs (if you are too immature to consider the word orgasm). If both, being physical activities, can give the same feeling of "elevation of spirit beyond the self", in other words a "transcending experience", why can't both be "spiritual" activities. And that is my point.

Read what u quoted earlier and read what u quoted now. It seems u r softening ur stand now! :)

1. Its mutual! Just like for a perfect lifestyle and body, u need to have a healthy mindset and for healthy mindset u also need to workout. From ur point, I can also say that the starting point can be also the very "thought" to initiate yoga.
2. Again the same. we can make ourselves lead to healthy and compassionate lifestyle i.e physical from a "non-physical" process!
3.4. Why is it impossible?
5. The answer rests with u! Ponder. U have every right to form ur own definition of "spiritualism", but atleast try to practise it first!!

Now again for psychedelic drugs......

A few aspects of Psychedelic drugs

* The drugs are known more for their abuse potential
* As a group, the drugs are often referred to as psychedelic (meaning mind-altering) or hallucinogenic because they cause people to have hallucinations; that is, to imagine they see and hear things.
* Street users call these experiences "trips," which can be extremely pleasant or highly unpleasant and frightening.
* The drugs can cause other adverse reactions, too. LSD, for example, can dilate pupils; increase body temperature, heart rate, blood pressure, and sweating; and cause loss of appetite, sleeplessness, dry mouth, and tremors. Also, many LSD users experience flashbacks, spontaneous recurrences of certain aspects of the person's "trip" (without the user having taken the drug again). Long-term LSD users may develop psychoses, such as schizophrenia and severe depression.
* Addiction
http://www.fda.gov/FDAC/features/795_psyche.html

* Psychedelic drugs are not necessary for a spiritual path. I would say that they don't have much connection to the spiritual path, since in its true meaning "spirituality" also means understanding and controlling your body, nature so as to lead a "natural life" filled with intelligence, wisdom etc. But here we have psychedelic drugs which make u "see" and "hear" things, make u hallucinate filled with "side effects" and addictions!
http://www.csp.org/chrestomathy/psychedelic_drugs.html

Read the Details on the drug abuse (http://books.google.co.in/books?id=0cksP9g0Cc4C&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92&dq=difference+psychedelic+drugs%2Bspirituality&source=web&ots=1rfEIbYmxh&sig=hbggOuZ7aaYjaDYphxnYJ8yfb_c&hl=en#PPA93,M1) and its History (http://www.psychedelic-library.org/grinspoo.htm)....which may also lead to death!! A way of life? Can it be? Never!!

I think that wiki link actually proves what i am saying. If you read that in conjunction with the above argument, it will become clear why. If it isn't, then probably, too much brain is spilling out.

Even a child can infer the level of ur comprehension from ur very first post here proved by ur succeeding posts. So read again!

Please share with us, what you have experienced. And lets see how good you are at bluffing.

A healthy lifestyle, a world full of joy, broadminded and independent thinking approach which isn't based on the 'opinions' of others and which doesn't neglects anything just at random unlike urs, may be also to understand my body of what I shud eat and drink so as to minimize the dependence on medicines, understanding the nature, a feeling of compassion and peace that doesn't let go angry easily and knowing the surrounding around me and people I talk to. May be I can infer that in reality u are a good person who has had enough of religion becoz of their negative outcomings everyday and thus u fail to see the difference between propoganda based 'institution like religion', which aim to fulfill themselves, and religions which aim to fulfill others and bring joy, compassion, wisdom and healhty lifestyle in people and that u have a very distorted view of terms like "yoga", "spirituality" etc! May be u too are a spiritual person, but u yet do not know of it becoz as inferred so much from ur posts it seems u really do not know what spirituality is!! Its just a way to enhance ur will, patience, benevolence, concentration, to understand nature and body and mind control.

Try yoga, just for a month. Millions across the world be it US, Europe, INDIA etc aren't trying it for no reason. Majority of Scientists call themselves spiritual and science isn't bringing spirituality in for no reason!

Do read the links I post! :)

karnivore

28-04-2008, 10:51 AM

Sorry guys for the enormous post (not that anyone cares). But it was necessary.

To this...
You have actually corroborated the point i was trying to make. That we sometimes experience something and then, later on, go on to "learn" about it and it is a perfect process. If that process of learning is valid for you, it is, perhaps, valid for others, including those who hold an opposing view. We all, on some level, simply subscribe to ideas. If your believe in "spirituality" is only normal to you, perhaps my vote for "materialism" is same for me.It seems u r diverting ur point of view to match mine
I replied..
It seems u r diverting ur point of view to match minePlease show me how i have diverted. You said i only follow and you don't. I just provided my arguments to prove we all follow, only some of us are too "naive" to realise that. So show me, just which part of my argument is incoherent.
To which you replied...
Kiddo, Do u understand what the topic is about? Read where the diversion started from. And yet u dragged homeopathy/spirituality which was a part of another debate? Grow up.

See, who is incapable of understanding agruments. You, suddenly come up with the diversion of the topic, when i was, in fact, asking you to prove how i have diverted from my line of argument on the "following" and "leading" $hit, which you accused me of. I wanted you to show me the lack of coherence in my arguments. And see what answer you come up with.

And with diversion of thread, you are as much responsible as i am.

..makes absurd conclusions like "already explored"..Since you are the only cry-baby, whining about this, i am guessing, i did alright. You have only yourself to blame for your misinterpretation. So, whine on.

Differentiating "Right from wrong" was linked to awakening of ur independent outlookNow, you are either trying to be funny, or playing "naive". Let's take you back a little.
But is it the same for "feelings", particularly "spiritual" feelings, which are extremely subjective...Like I said it depends on ur roots. I am close to mine, so whatever is already there is in my blood like many others from birth. Its only ur independent outlook that differentiates and separates wrong from right. So yes it is same for spirituality if u r asking in general!
You were replying to the question if "spiritual feelings" can be clearly defined like any physical activity, which can be so done, due to observable and determinable events. Your conclusion was "YES", since we grow with some cultural lineage (i asked u to clarify what you meant by "in blood" and since you did not bother, thats what i would assume) and our independent outlook helps us to "differentiate and separate wrong from right". To this i replied...
So, lets summarize. The concept of "spirituality" that you have is shaped by, subjective modification (right and wrong being subjective) of subjective assimilation of cultural roots (just 10 miles in any direction you go you will have a different culture system), complemented by subjective experiences. I guess, with so many "subjectives", the end result will be subjective as well.
This was how i was giving a counter point to your answer "YES", to prove, that feelings can't be so clearly defined because of so much variables that are involved. Got the point? Still don't? You will, once you can stop the spilling of your brain.

Read what u quoted earlier and read what u quoted now. It seems u r softening ur stand now!Although you have diligently copied the two of my arguments (both of which are,that since certain set of feelings, experienced by means of a physical process called yoga, is called "spirituality", the same set of feelings which can be experienced through some other physical process, can also be called "spirituality". In other words, "spirituality" is nothing but some feelings and how you define it.), you conveniently forgot to tell me why you thought, that i softened my stand. You don't have to agree to my arguments and you have every right not to. But the least i can expect of you is that, you will follow my arguments, before starting your diatribe.

Now about your point wise rebuttal:
1. There is no doubt, that work-out is necessary for a healthy body. But thats not the point. The point is, yoga is just another "work out routine", which has been given a spin of "spirituality", following our tradition of assigning sky-fairies to everything we could lay our hands on. Again the point is not if starting point is physical, the point is, that, the entire routine of yoga involves some "physical process" at some point or other, thereby making it just another physical process.

2. So you mean, unhealthy and uncompassionate lifestyle is non-physical? BTW, how is "lifestyle" a non-physical process. Even if i assume (don't get carried away, here) that life style is non-physical, why is yoga the necessary means. The same can be achieved through, say for example AEROBICS. If you say "NO", you have to explain why not.

3. No answer.
4. You have clubbed 3 & 4 together, although the question, you have asked, is more related to 4. Why, you ask. Tell me how does it feel to be "happy" or "sad". You can only describe how you feel in your body when you are happy or sad. But do you think, that those descriptions would invoke the same feeling of "happiness" or "sadness" in the person who is listening. Got it now.

5. Funny, you can't come up with a convincing answer to rebut my "opinion", except, of course, a suggestion. So "YOU-WILL-KNOW-IT-WHEN-YOU-EXPERIENCE-IT" is your last argument. Not much of an argument there.

Now again for psychedelic drugs......
Now you have started ranting about psychedelic drugs. I know, by now that you are a literal person. But that can't be an excuse for confusing a "metaphor" with the "literal". So let me clarify. (and now i am getting bored clarifying everything)

I used psychedelic drugs and orgasm as metaphor for physical processes. While orgasm was supposed to represent a bodily act that is internally self generated (now, don't start ranting about orgasm) and psychedelic drugs were supposed to represent the external stimuli effect on body. Since both give the feeling of extreme pleasure, in different ways, which can roughly induce in a person, a state of trance, a feeling of "lost from the present", these processes can be used as counterpoint to yoga.

The point was, if "feeling" is the touchstone, or key to spiritualism, then any physical process, initiated by external means or internal, resulting in similar feeling, is just as valid as yoga.

It has nothing to do with advocation of psychedelic drugs as way of life or with its side effects and all that $hit. Please try to distinguish between a "metaphor" and the "literal". That would save you a lot of trouble.

..in its true meaning "spirituality" also means understanding and controlling your body, nature so as to lead a "natural life" filled with intelligence, wisdom etc.
So practice of materialism, in its true meaning, does not result in "understanding and controlling your body, nature so as to lead a "natural life" filled with intelligence, wisdom etc." Can you please prove this premise, that materialism, without any recourse to "spiritualism", does not allow to lead a "natural life".

A healthy lifestyle, a world full of joy, broadminded and independent thinking approach which isn't based on the 'opinions' of others and which doesn't neglects anything just at random unlike urs, may be also to understand my body of what I shud eat and drink so as to minimize the dependence on medicines, understanding the nature, a feeling of compassion and peace that doesn't let go angry easily and knowing the surrounding around me and people I talk to.You experienced all of these, because of spirituality or because of these experiences you realised you are "spiritual".

And how are these experiences different from those experienced by, say for example, a "materialist". Although i can't give myself all those nice certificates that you have given to yourself, i can say with fair confidence that i am feeling the same as you are (note the ones in bold) without any "spiritual" inclination or activity. How is that so. And guess what - all that you have mentioned can be explained from a "materialist" point of view as well. So tell once again, what has "spirituality" got to do with all of those.

..u have a very distorted view of terms like "yoga", "spirituality" etc!
If you claim someone has distorted view of certain terms, it becomes your responsibility prove that your view is correct and also why you are correct, which i don't think you can in this lifetime, at least. Or can you, now.

Try yoga, just for a month. Millions across the world be it US, Europe, INDIA etc aren't trying it for no reason. Majority of Scientists call themselves spiritual and science isn't bringing spirituality in for no reason!
YUP.....now i am convinced, you don't follow or depend on "others" opinion. Irrefutable proof.

mediator

28-04-2008, 01:22 PM

And with diversion of thread, you are as much responsible as i am.

Hold ur pants dear and read who started talking about homeopathy and spirituality like a full fledged illiterate!

Since you are the only cry-baby, whining about this, i am guessing, i did alright. You have only yourself to blame for your misinterpretation. So, whine on.

I have e-mailed the hospital and I am trying to get contact information for Dr. Llewellyn-Clark so that I can fill in the missing details. If I do I will add an addendum to the post with the new information. Meanwhile, here are several possible hypotheses to explain this story.
.
.
.
To be clear - I am not accusing Mr. Lenkei or his surgeons of anything. I am simply laying out various hypotheses given the information available on this story. I would love to have the opportunity to test these hypotheses, by questioning Mr. Lenkei and/or his surgeon

I will have no problem quoting the article u linked as many times it will take to add to ur shame!
So meanwhile the blanks are being filled by the doc, u can entertain me as much as u want!

You were replying to the question if "spiritual feelings" can be clearly defined like any physical activity, which can be so done, due to observable and determinable events. Your conclusion was "YES", since we grow with some cultural lineage (i asked u to clarify what you meant by "in blood" and since you did not bother, thats what i would assume) and our independent outlook helps us to "differentiate and separate wrong from right". To this i replied...

So, lets summarize. The concept of "spirituality" that you have is shaped by, subjective modification (right and wrong being subjective) of subjective assimilation of cultural roots (just 10 miles in any direction you go you will have a different culture system), complemented by subjective experiences. I guess, with so many "subjectives", the end result will be subjective as well.

This was how i was giving a counter point to your answer "YES", to prove, that feelings can't be so clearly defined because of so much variables that are involved. Got the point? Still don't? You will, once you can stop the spilling of your brain.

I don't understand why ur peanut brains is getting so jumbled now and so confused. Well, u r so predictable. "In blood", "in roots" mean the same thing if u were asking genuinely to improve ur English. It seems your concepts on the whole topic of science and spirituality are not clear either thinking of which it seems its only ur ego and arrogance that is taking toll on ur thinking process.

"Learning" a skill is not called "following"! U r treating as if learning is a synonynm of following. Do I ned to teach u English also now in the midst of an already deviated discussion? But walking behind someone without questioning and plagiarising his opinions 24*7 like he is a god or something is definitely called "following". May be u learnt somewhere that hypntoism, spirituality, homeopathy etc are "garbage" without any glance on the reality, facts and researches and since that time u have been beating the drums of ur ignorance.

If u r asking on the previous question of physical activites in "spirituality", that was quite clearly given by me i.e "mutual"! Ur notions of orgasm/dump as 'unworldy' quite clearly proved that u r here to talk rubbish like a stereotype who watches B-Grade Hindi erotic movies! So grow up, first understand what u r talking of and get ur concepts cleared. Repeatitions will not help u in anyway!

In other words, "spirituality" is nothing but some feelings and how you define it.), you conveniently forgot to tell me why you thought, that i softened my stand. You don't have to agree to my arguments and you have every right not to. But the least i can expect of you is that, you will follow my arguments, before starting your diatribe.

U need to understand what those feelings and experiences are! Howling without understanding will only take a toll on ur little brain here.

1. Even if i assume, that yoga is "much more than those physical activities", the starting point still remains physical.

1. There is no doubt, that work-out is necessary for a healthy body. But thats not the point. The point is, yoga is just another "work out routine", which has been given a spin of "spirituality", following our tradition of assigning sky-fairies to everything we could lay our hands on. Again the point is not if starting point is physical, the point is, that, the entire routine of yoga involves some "physical process" at some point or other, thereby making it just another physical process.

Please make up ur mind what u wanna say. 'Guessing' about what yoga is, isn't gonna help u.

2. So you mean, unhealthy and uncompassionate lifestyle is non-physical? BTW, how is "lifestyle" a non-physical process. Even if i assume (don't get carried away, here) that life style is non-physical, why is yoga the necessary means. The same can be achieved through, say for example AEROBICS. If you say "NO", you have to explain why not.

Again a lapse in ur comprehension. If u cared to read carefully, I was replying to the mutuality which was 'just below' the 'previous line'.
Where did I say "lifestyle" is a non-physical process? U surely are addicted to the psychedelic drugs that is making u see things!! :D

3. No answer.
4. You have clubbed 3 & 4 together, although the question, you have asked, is more related to 4. Why, you ask. Tell me how does it feel to be "happy" or "sad". You can only describe how you feel in your body when you are happy or sad. But do you think, that those descriptions would invoke the same feeling of "happiness" or "sadness" in the person who is listening. Got it now.

I asked u "why it is impossible". I am listening!

5. Funny, you can't come up with a convincing answer to rebut my "opinion", except, of course, a suggestion. So "YOU-WILL-KNOW-IT-WHEN-YOU-EXPERIENCE-IT" is your last argument. Not much of an argument there.

U can't even understand what "mutual is", how can I explain u any further? Its get entertaining further, when u r trying to prove something even when u don't understand the difference between worldy and unworldy and calls dump/orgasm as unworldy! Smell the path to ur herd. :D

Its like explaining to a child who can't differentiate between oranges and apples and says they taste the same.

Now you have started ranting about psychedelic drugs. I know, by now that you are a literal person. But that can't be an excuse for confusing a "metaphor" with the "literal". So let me clarify. (and now i am getting bored clarifying everything)

I used psychedelic drugs and orgasm as metaphor for physical processes. While orgasm was supposed to represent a bodily act that is internally self generated (now, don't start ranting about orgasm) and psychedelic drugs were supposed to represent the external stimuli effect on body. Since both give the feeling of extreme pleasure, in different ways, which can roughly induce in a person, a state of trance, a feeling of "lost from the present", these processes can be used as counterpoint to yoga.

I see, u don't like fruit juice, so u r telling to have something like "Coke/Mirinda" as an alternative, as some counter to fruit juice? But dear, u can't have those toilet cleaners daily!! I wont rant bt orgasm, coz it wud be silly to even discuss bt it and I hope u don't either. :oops:

Besides the inclusion of psychedelic-drugs and wateva rubbish u cud think of was really pathetic. Besides ur "clarification" is much more amusing. Yoga is a way of life, psychedelic drugs is not! The details have already been stated in the previous post!! Grow up.

So practice of materialism, in its true meaning, does not result in "understanding and controlling your body, nature so as to lead a "natural life" filled with intelligence, wisdom etc." Can you please prove this premise, that materialism, without any recourse to "spiritualism", does not allow to lead a "natural life".

Do u even understand what materialism is? U have shown remarkable example of (un)worldy already!!

And how are these experiences different from those experienced by, say for example, a "materialist". Although i can't give myself all those nice certificates that you have given to yourself, i can say with fair confidence that i am feeling the same as you are (note the ones in bold) without any "spiritual" inclination or activity. How is that so. And guess what - all that you have mentioned can be explained from a "materialist" point of view as well. So tell once again, what has "spirituality" got to do with all of those.

Again understand what materialism is before I start!

If you claim someone has distorted view of certain terms, it becomes your responsibility prove that your view is correct and also why you are correct, which i don't think you can in this lifetime, at least. Or can you, now.

Thats what I am trying to do. But I cannot succeed if the subject itself is reluctant can I? How can I acknowledge a child that apple tastes different than an orange, if he himself is not willing to eat it? But instead the child is only trying hard on his insane guesses. :oops:

YUP.....now i am convinced, you don't follow or depend on "others" opinion. Irrefutable proof.

Again a case of "aphasia". Its not "opinion" dear :D. But a simple proof, ground reality, researched and found correct by 'modern scientists' who are 'spiritual' in majority!!

AGAIN do u still like to be corrected? If yes, then atleast try to taste the apple and the fruit juice. If not, then why even bother and create a joke of urself? Talk "on topic", the case is not "already explored". Please qquote me lie by line from next time and also the quotes from the links so as to acknowledge that u really read the full thing!!

I have e-mailed the hospital and I am trying to get contact information for Dr. Llewellyn-Clark so that I can fill in the missing details. If I do I will add an addendum to the post with the new information. Meanwhile, here are several possible hypotheses to explain this story.
.
.
.
To be clear - I am not accusing Mr. Lenkei or his surgeons of anything. I am simply laying out various hypotheses given the information available on this story. I would love to have the opportunity to test these hypotheses, by questioning Mr. Lenkei and/or his surgeon

:D

Mods : PLease move to Fight Club??

karnivore

28-04-2008, 02:22 PM

IMPOSSIBLE.......:D:D:D

Its been quite a comic relief for me.:D:D:D

Thanks for the entertainment, hope to see you around. One question though, did you actually pass your school or ..........:D :D

Take care

mediator

28-04-2008, 02:45 PM

WTH :oops: . I was hoping for some 3-4 pages more atleast.

But neways, its quite clear that u will still be reluctant on spirituality matters and wont believe and learn from the scientists also u praise so much about how majority of em can be spiritual!!

So, take ur psychedelic drugs, have ur toilet cleaners and lead ur "natural" way of life as me and many others lead a spiritual life!

Hope u understand now, that its not "already explored"!! :)

karnivore

28-04-2008, 02:49 PM

^^ Tee hee hee.
Right you are. Live and let live.:D

sen_sunetra

29-04-2008, 10:04 AM

I was passing by and this discussion caught my attention. I have read the entire discussion, but, I am still not clear on number of issues. I registered, so I could clear those things out.

Although, this discussion started with hypnotism - of which I have nothing worthwhile to contribute - and veered off to spiritualism, I hope I won’t be breaking any forum rules, if I ask a few questions on spirituality. However, if I am breaking any rule, I sincerely apologize.

I have 4 questions for all who feels like answering, and particularly for mediator and karnivore, since you two are the only ones engaged in a heated debate.

#1. What do YOU understand by spirituality ?

#2. Have YOU ever experienced spirituality as explained in #1 ? If yes, what were those experiences ?

#3. Do YOU think that the experiences YOU had, as described in #2, can also be experienced by a person, who is not spiritual, per se ? If NOT, then why ?

#4. If the answer to #3 is “YES”, then, how is a spiritual person different from a non-spiritual person ?

Regards

mediator

29-04-2008, 01:20 PM

#5 What do u understand by non-spirituality and define it? Lets first distinguish clearly!
#6 What do u call a person and classify him in which category, the one who can't distinguish the right from wrong, who jumps to conclusions without even practicing or experiencing?
#7 Define "materialism"!
#8 Can 'materialistic' person ( ponder over or see the definition if u don't know ) still be thoughtful over the ethics, needs of others, benevolent and have some meaningful purpose of life?
#9 What r we, a mere piece of flesh that shud eat and sleep?
#10 Why is it that even though I can earn sufficient amount of money and buy all the materialistic things, I get happiness only in spending time with relatives, friends, understanding nature, mind and body?
#11 Do we really need to adapt ourselves to a lifestyle concerning beer, toilet cleaners like pepsi etc and all synthetic things we eat and drink and then constantly whine over health related problems and seeking medications afterwards?? Do we really need ACs contributing to CFCs, loss of ozone, global warming etc and then cry for the crisis that has arisen? We seek pleasant atmosphere in our "home", for that we heat up the "neighbourhood". In winters we use 'heaters'. Heat generated both to produce electricity and to heat the atmosphere!!

Lets see spirituality leads to a stability factor in all i.e mind, body and nature. What I discussed, is that stabilty??

Neways, there are many more questions yet to be asked and some that will present themselves over the passage of time.

@sen_sunetra: You are new here. I hope u will try to discuss in a civilized manner. But neways still I feel this shud be moved to "Fight Club". Learn what "Fight Club" is. :)
Meanwhile, I request u to take ur time and read my previous posts and links here, so as to minimize "repetitions" as it makes me lose my interest in the topic. And when I say read, then it means read it all. You may then resume!

Welcome to the forum!! :)

T159

29-04-2008, 02:08 PM

yeah the stability of mind, body and nature.

karnivore

29-04-2008, 07:51 PM

AAAHHH.....its like kicking a dog poop. No matter how much you shower, the stink keeps following.

@sen_sunetra

1. Spirituality is a word that starts with "S" and ends with "Y".
2. If leading a moral, ethical life, filled with compassion, love for humanity, a taste for quality, etc. is spirituality, then, yes i have experienced. But as far as i am concerned, i experience all of those not because of any pie-in-the-sky, but because, i chose to.
3. I guess, i am my own example.
4. There is basically no difference between a spiritual person and a non-spiritual person. They differ only in the manner they view life and its mysteries.

I would have loved to elaborate my points, but i am running short of time here. (Thats the main reason, why i ended this debate so abruptly. I would be traveling a lot in the next couple of weeks.)

Anyway, be forewarned, some people have successfully inoculated themselves against all sort of logic and rationale and have started breeding butterflies inside their skull cavity.

Would have really loved to discuss with you. But i gotta run.

Cheers.

T159

29-04-2008, 08:39 PM

The above post shows that you are a chauvinist and follow science religiously :D

remember with only one word you can change the ending to a tragedy.

sen_sunetra

29-04-2008, 10:06 PM

Lest one gets a wrong idea, let me make it clear at the very outset, that my purpose is not to convert anybody from his/her belief.

mediator,

Let me first thank you for your welcome note. I also, appreciate, that you responded to my request, although, not exactly to my queries. I would also like you to know, that I have indeed read all of your posts in connection with this discussion, and still did not get a clear idea of your, or karnivore’s, view on spirituality.

I will most definitely go through all the links that you have provided, as and when I get time. However, I was expecting to hear about YOUR OWN views. I would have really been glad, if you took your time out and answered those specific questions. In the meantime let me try and answer to your queries, which seems, more to be directed at someone else than me.

#5. What do u understand by non-spirituality and define it? Lets first distinguish clearly!

A: Non-spirituality is something that is not spiritual. As you can see, non-spirituality is a negative word derived from the original word spirituality. Hence it is impossible to define non-spirituality, without first defining spirituality. That’s why my first question was for the definition of spirituality, so that we can actually understand where we stand on the issue of spirituality.

#6. What do u call a person and classify him in which category, the one who can't distinguish the right from wrong, who jumps to conclusions without even practicing or experiencing?

A: I don’t know, if a category for this exists. So I won’t be able to answer this question. Our understanding of right or/and wrong, depends entirely on individual point of view. An orthodox Brahmin, will feel, that getting touched by a so called un-touchable, is a “wrong”. But an enlightened Brahmin will not see any “wrong” in it. A person who is hungry for number of days will find it “right” to steal a loaf of bread. But the shopkeeper will not see the “right” in it. However, there are also, rights and wrongs, that are absolute. Killing a person, for whatever reason, if it is not intentional, is always wrong, whoever you are and however you are.

Is it always necessary to experience or practice everything before concluding ? I have never climbed mount Everest, and I never will. But it is not difficult for me, or you, to conclude that climbing is a laborious, extremely strenuous job. I don’t have asthma, but it is not difficult for me, or you, to conclude that a patient suffering from this disease will be at great disadvantage, should she decide to climb that mountain. The key is keen observation of the person who is experiencing it, thorough examination of the person, if possible, and finally analyzing the evidences. All of which are processes of gathering knowledge. A doctor makes a successful diagnosis of a disease, not because he was himself previously infected by it, but because, he has the knowledge of its symptoms. He gains this knowledge, through training and observing (and treating) a patient with similar disease. It is not always necessary to experience or practice everything before concluding. Of course, experience helps, but what is necessary, is the knowledge of the matter.

#7. Define "materialism"!

A: In common parlance, it means one’s attachment to material possessions, say for example, wealth, and the free lunches that come with it. However, when philosophers or scientists talk of materialism, they actually refer to the attempt of explaining every single phenomena without recourse to anything immaterial. Material in such a case refers to “physical” and immaterial refers to “non-physical”. For example, Cartesian dualists try to differentiate between the body (physical) and the mind (non-physical), implying that mind has a separate non-spaceal existence. A materialist try to define mind as a function of brain (physical).

#8. Can 'materialistic' person ( ponder over or see the definition if u don't know ) still be thoughtful over the ethics, needs of others, benevolent and have some meaningful purpose of life?

A: True. If a person attaches too much value to materialistic pleasures, as understood in common parlance, that all his priorities, his attention, his energy, his focus, will tend to revolve around, how to acquire and enjoy those materialistic pleasures. His life will indeed revolve around himself only.

But “materialism”, is not about “materialistic pleasures”. As I have defined above, it is the manner of defining everything without recourse to anything immaterial. Worldly pleasures, can be pursued with equal intensity, by a strictly spiritual person as well. Half the atrocities against humanity are carried on in the name of religion, which also, claim to be the road to spirituality. There is no evidence, statistically speaking, that spiritual persons are less likely to kill, rape, rob, defraud, evade tax or commit any other crimes. A cross section of prison population in any country would show, that there are more religious (hence spiritual) persons doing their term, than non-religious persons.

#9. What r we, a mere piece of flesh that shud eat and sleep?

A: Speaking in terms of evolutionary science, that’s what we are supposed be. Human beings are animals, just as much any four legged, or two legged one, the only difference being the complexity of the brain. While a four legged one is incapable of thinking on its own, human beings can. Because we can think, we have appreciation, a sense of quality, logic, rationale etc. That’s why we can appreciate a Mozart, or a Picasso, or a Shakespeare. And that’s why we don’t find it fulfilling just to eat, drink, sleep and propagate. Because we can think we try to give a moral acceptability to life, by means of religion or spirituality or some other belief system.

#10. Why is it that even though I can earn sufficient amount of money and buy all the materialistic things, I get happiness only in spending time with relatives, friends, understanding nature, mind and body?

A: Because your priorities are different than the one, who finds happiness in pursuit of “materialistic” (speaking in common parlance) things. I have covered this in #8 and #9. You can call this “spirituality”, but remember, it is a matter of one’s choice.

#11. Do we really need to adapt ourselves to a lifestyle concerning beer, toilet cleaners like pepsi etc and all synthetic things we eat and drink and then constantly whine over health related problems and seeking medications afterwards?? Do we really need ACs contributing to CFCs, loss of ozone, global warming etc and then cry for the crisis that has arisen? We seek pleasant atmosphere in our "home", for that we heat up the "neighbourhood". In winters we use 'heaters'. Heat generated both to produce electricity and to heat the atmosphere!!

A: I agree, with you, that we don’t need most of the indulgences. But again, it is a matter of choice. Just as it is one’s choice to drink beer or coke to satisfy himself, it is yours not to. If you are saying, that “spirituality” helps in making choices, then, the question is, does that mean, that spiritual persons do not drink beer or coke ? The sales figure and the ever increasing profit margin of the beer or coke companies, however, tend to speak otherwise. Since majority of the population, some way or the other, believe in “spirituality”, one can safely assume, that a large section of their consume