OK to disagree with an IP material?

So, I went back to look at my IP, and it looks as though I never agreed nor disagreed with the source material. hahah.

In fact... my discussion on The Field had little to do with her book at all. Maybe I 'did' fail. hahahahha.

Fantastic.

I haven't read it and I don't think I will. Try this instead:

I do not deny the field concept... What do I know...
Although I believe Whyte Horse this is dealt with on exercise IV lesson II.

I'll just add that I'm tired of hearing people abusing some fancy studies like 'quantum mechanics' to justify their beliefs in magic while having less than a superficial idea of what they're talking about, pretending to have a deeper than superficial idea about it and hoping that their readers have no idea about it at all.
McTaggart is one of those, and I'm not even wasting my time on ranting about her general anti-science and especially anti-medicine motions.
So, yes, my respect for her 'Field' thing only goes so far because even my superficial understanding of quantum mechanics is good enough to see through the beautiful pile of BS that she falsely labels 'research'.
As for the general possiblity to disagree with a piece of IP material... We're lucky TOTJO isn't one of those churches yet, where open disagreement doesn't always lead to excommunication yet and to be honest, I'd have actually to review and go through the IP material again just to check wether there is one piece I would not be having any objections to at all. That is not to say the pre-made materials are all rubbish, but I bet if looking for faults, one can easily find enough in about all of them. Of course McTaggart's 'work' is still rather big on being objectionable and its a good thing only a talk about it is part of the IP, not the entire book.

Like many people here, I was pretty much 50/50 on The Field. McTaggart set out to speak her truth (her interpretation of the data she collected during her interviews), and I think that's respectable. I don't remember her saying "this is what you have to believe," so I understood the book/audio as her attempt to explain her personal take on science and spirituality, not as a doctrine of ultimate truth.

Enthusiastic, I was, about the book when I first encountered it because of my history with remote viewing (some of the physicists she interviewed were heavily involved in RV research), but even as a remote viewer I found her analysis of the material incomplete and her occasional jumps in logic disappointing.

I mentioned to tzb that it seems like due to the very nature of a personal spiritual path or philosophy like Jediism, at certain times all of us are likely to come off a bit mad to at least a few people. I might see a number of McTaggart's beliefs and ideas as out there, but I've also spoken with people at the Temple who have made it clear that they find my own take on reality somewhat skewed.

For me, it comes down to perspective and what works or doesn't work for each individual (whether or not that person's beliefs are in line with scientific truths), and that's a big reason I appreciated this particular assignment. I liked that it gave me a chance to experience someone else's reality, while offering the opportunity to compare and contrast my personal understanding of spirituality and the Force.

We are guides not Gods, you are allowed to disagree with us so long as you can clearly explain why you disagree with us; integrity and honesty are Jedi virtues...

I think 'The Field' is a load of rubbish to be honest... but it is a perspective and so it is Interesting Rubbish...

I love it when people say that a new theory is a load of rubbish. It kinda reminds me of Galileo. :whistle:

In my opinion, all that is really to be gained from The Field, can be seen in the first chapter. After that everything sort of seemed off.

May the Force be with you,
Rai

At the beginning of the book she states that she is not a scientist. Her examples are just that, examples.

I happen to have, what some might call, a “better than average” understanding of quantum mechanics. As long as I keep in mind that she is theorizing her examples I can look to the core of what she was saying without being distracted.

Over all, I liked the book. A bit make-believe at times, but it had some really interesting ideas and concepts. And given her obvious lack of understanding of higher math (The book is a bit old so it could just be she is operating from the premises of dated material) she is at least creative in her thinking.

Agree with or disagree with… I don’t think either one is the point of the exercise.

Getting you to consider other or alternative ideas… probably.

Asking if you can be open to other trains of thought… probably.

Offering precepts that are outside the norm… sounds pretty good.

You guys realize that Star Wars is a fictional story, right?

lol...

She does say she is not a scientist....

Look at like a story told by a friend who, you believe, mostly... lol...

The point, being that things are interconnected...

Read it for the message that it is trying to convey...

We all agree that the Force, however you define it, exists...

She is merely telling a story... I listened to the auido version, which she reads... and with the inflections, and whatnot, makes for a good listen...

Science wise, ok, it has zero value...:lol:

If I looked up this stuff, and talked to these people, this is how it would sound if I tried to relate what I found out...

I do not understand quantum physics, but I am trying...

So, if I was to tell out what I found, my science would also be lacking...