The Field, and Lynn McTaggert

Here is another good two TED talks on consciousness.

http://www.ted.com/talks/john_searle_our_shared_condition_consciousness.html

http://www.ted.com/talks/antonio_damasio_the_quest_to_understand_consciousness.html


I have to get to bed shortly, as I have classes from 9:25am to 10:00pm tomorrow, but I will do more research on a few scientifically based answers to the same types of questions the IP addresses, both in book and video form.

Well young man, I'm off to bed as well...

Thank you for the videos....

The second two made more sense to me than that first one, whew!

:lol:...

While very interesting, the first video showed more along the lines of what McTaggart was trying to say...

But, it was a touch brainy, lol.. Even the host got lost...

I've got some TOTJO projects to work on but hopefully I can also get to looking in a week or two...

Jestor wrote: Yes....

Your point is made Ty, and now there is a semi heated discussion in Council...

For those of us not scientifically minded, or who have never heard of McTaggart, the book makes sense....

It showed that some author (with questionable credentials evidently) said that their are others out there who think along similar lines about the worlds connectivity....

Your other points on her stances on vaccinations and whatever are e cellent points.... Showing her questionable credentials...

Do you have a replacement in mind?

Something scientific, and easy for the guy like me who barely made it through high school...

There's a call on Council to just flat remove it....

I can't get behind that, at this time...

It was also said in that discussion in Council that we all have to do things we disagree with, sometimes, to get through and to implement change...

Its not going to be removed tonight...

Probably not tomorrow night....

This thread isn't going to solve the issue...

It has merely brought it back into the light... At least two of the people discussing this with you, agreed with you, and also held your points, and brought this up before....

You work somewhere, I suppose...

So, tomorrow, you get a new boss, better educated, and well spoken...

After his second or third day, he starts telling you that your current method of procedure is wrong, and you need to fix it...

Now, you know its not quite right, but lack a replacement for parts of it... And he's not offering ideas on it... (maybe you have, and I missed it, this thread blew up, and I've been busy this weekend, sonic slimmed of, lol..)

How you gonna feel?

NO ONE HERE is against change, well, lol, mostly, lolol....

But, change happens slow, and after much thought....

Maybe I missed it in those other discissions, but, I don't recall the evidence against her being presented as well... Meaning including the non-"Field" related....

So, Mr. New Supervisor, do you have a suggestion to replace her/this lesson with something?

Honest question...

I'm kind of a Goofball, so know I'm smiling as I write this...

There is wisdom in not removing it.

Vesha wrote: The exercises are under a TAB called studies so I was lead to believe I was studying Jedi Doctrine in hopes of becoming a Jedi Knight. If it's just a test we should change the name of the TAB to test instead of studies.

There is wisdom in clearly stating purpose.

Jestor wrote: So, Mr. New Supervisor, do you have a suggestion to replace her/this lesson with something?

Sorry to butt in, but...

tzb wrote: how about someone write an essay on different conceptions of and explanations for the Force (a little like the essays in clerical training), giving a breakdown of the more common ideas? Off the back of this brief breakdown, you could provide links to a variety of texts (including The Field, perhaps the Tao Te Ching, perhaps a more general look at prana/qi/reiki and others) for each view, and ask Novices to write a minimum-word-counted essay on both one they feel convincing, and one they feel farthest from their personal conception of the Force.

That way you're still encouraging interaction with the idea, still asking people to look at their own credulity, but not prescribing a single specific definition for critique.

When I say "someone" to write the essay, you could ask people who hold those views at the Temple to write a few paragraphs, then put the best of those together for the lesson. That way you're representing the actual range of beliefs of the Temple, including no doubt some who hold The Field in esteem.

And just as an example of what I mean, you could ask Novices to write a minimum of 500 words on the one they like, and min 250 words on the one they don't... and of course if they feel like it they can write about all of the ideas.

[/2c]

Br. John wrote:

Ty wrote: But isn't it part of the duty of a Jedi to find out the truth, when possible, and act as mediator? To resolve conflict?

If someone is clearly in the wrong, and some people just cannot see it, isn't it the path of the Jedi to work with that?

McTaggert is clearly wrong, and her stances on health and vaccines cause measurable harm. That is not an opinion, that is medical fact, supported by mountains of evidence.

Shouldn't it be a Jedi's calling to be open to such a conclusion, to gain knowledge?

Wisdom is in the application of knowledge, so then it would be up to the individual, but as a whole, I should think it is a Jedi's calling to teach, as well as to protect.

You're right. As a Jedi that's what you do.

Some of the IP is mysterious, confounding, contradictory and often infuriating. (Hint: Koan) There's training aspects to it but it's also to see if one can be trained. I agree we need to add some commentary to it including a better introduction.

There is knowledge in science to be respected. . . . but the knowledge in the 16 Teachings is not found in a science book. May we not ever forget the whole includes spiritual.

It greatly concerns me to hear that some "can't be trained" "undesirable" "not teachable" . . . . while i believe no harm is intended and that I know what it means . . it remains a slippery slope demonstration into the constructs that bind, limit, separate and divide.

I respect what is here and all that is here.

tzb wrote:

Jestor wrote: So, Mr. New Supervisor, do you have a suggestion to replace her/this lesson with something?

Sorry to butt in, but...

tzb wrote: how about someone write an essay on different conceptions of and explanations for the Force (a little like the essays in clerical training), giving a breakdown of the more common ideas? Off the back of this brief breakdown, you could provide links to a variety of texts (including The Field, perhaps the Tao Te Ching, perhaps a more general look at prana/qi/reiki and others) for each view, and ask Novices to write a minimum-word-counted essay on both one they feel convincing, and one they feel farthest from their personal conception of the Force.

That way you're still encouraging interaction with the idea, still asking people to look at their own credulity, but not prescribing a single specific definition for critique.

When I say "someone" to write the essay, you could ask people who hold those views at the Temple to write a few paragraphs, then put the best of those together for the lesson. That way you're representing the actual range of beliefs of the Temple, including no doubt some who hold The Field in esteem.

And just as an example of what I mean, you could ask Novices to write a minimum of 500 words on the one they like, and min 250 words on the one they don't... and of course if they feel like it they can write about all of the ideas.

[/2c]

total sense . . the way of the Force is roomy, broad, inclusive, . . .the way of the ego, self centered, and narrow and exclusive

Sure Mr. Quote-y Quote!

I said I skimmed over, :lol:...

Just teasing you tzb...

The problem that arises when having "someone" write something, (or even someones), is none of us are accredited...

We already ask in the essay "what the 'force's means" to the individual...

What McTaggart had was (quasi) science and the fact she was published...

Leaning more credibility than anything I would write to those who never heard of her before the IP..

And, I hear Opie (among others) call for Jedi only material, but who among us is "large" enough to be accredited?

Right now, most of us are nobodies... lol...

Opie, Br. John, Jax, Alethea (there are others, these sprang to mind) are our most well known in the community, but, would some intelligent, new, person just buy into what they wrote? Who the hell does Adam Yaw think he is? (Author of "The Great Jedi Holocron" that floats around the net... Damion tracked him down, he sounds like an OK guy, but who is he to write that? Lol...)

Or would they appear to be internet Jedi, and [strike]pulling on their own lightsabers[/strike], er, I mean, stroking their egos?

Self proclaimed masters?

They are not, I'm just looking at a possibility as to how it could be perceived....

Until someone with "jedi street creds" writes up something, then I'd prefer we stay with "proven" lessons....

:lol:

Who said "can't be trained" "undesirable" "not teachable" ?

Still, someone who does not want to be trained or is unwilling to put in any effort is probably not teachable - by their own choice.

Trying to teach someone how to solve a quadratic equation if they don't know algebra and how to factor is silly.

If I'm going to teach someone I need to know if they can be trained. If they need to know some things first before trying a particular subject. If one way of teaching is not as good for them as another. There's plenty of If, Then, Else to think of. If is a wonderful thing. What a horrible slop we'd have without it.

Jestor wrote: who among us is "large" enough to be accredited?

Well you know, I do have a degree in Philosophy, and... :whistle:

Nah just kidding as if that means anything other than three years' drunken arguments in the Union bar...

I take your point. The problem is... any old hack can get published, and McTaggert is a prime example. How about you take the words from the Temple members and don't name names? I expect the Council could at least pick the best of the most common views from a bunch of definitions, if for example you made a thread asking people to complete the exercise. Whilst I agree it would bring up questions of "who are they to define the Force?", I still think that's preferable to someone who's already well-known for all the wrong reasons.

But maybe not... I'm still new so my view's probably pretty naive.

Yours sincerely,
Mr. Quote-y Quote, BA (Hons)