Page 2 of 6

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sat May 24, 2014 11:35 pm
by ashley72
Hi Ralph,

Yep, I wrote that post on the 17th Feb 2011... Thanks for the reminder....the day after I joined this forum. Which is more than 4 years ago NOW!

Can you appreciate I've grown & changed in knowledge and attitudes in that time?

When I first came to this forum I was suffering from panic disorder with agoraphobia. At the time I didn't know why this disorder occurs. I'd been reading PON and stumbled across this discussion forum. PON didn't actually cure my mental suffering. Learning about nervous illness (anxiety trick) from Dr Claire Weekes & Dr Dave Carbonell is what led me on the road to recovery. I realized from their websites & books about the illness & how safety behaviors and avoidance maintains the illness due to the anxiety trick. In other words, if you have Panic Disorder or Agoraphobia, you keep getting tricked into believing that you're about to die, go crazy, or lose control of yourself. The Anxiety Trick is this: You experience Discomfort, and get fooled into treating it like Danger. It can lead to more acute forms of anxiety like depersonalization if left untreated.

So in the end I was completely wrong to jump to conclusions that thinking about scientific matters might be causing my nervous illness, which BTW was a product of PON's attitude towards scientific thinking. The irony, was the illness was making it hard to do anything to do with thinking coherently. It's only since I've recovered... that I've been able to return to proactive learning. I've just completed a 10 week cause on Machine Learning... which would have been near impossible when I was suffering acutely from panic disorder with agoraphobia.

But how does bringing up one particularly thought bubble over 4 years ago justify the writing I've this particular thread about photons & perception?

If you're a proponent of Eckhart Tolle like the others why are you digging up the past?

The people attacking my contribution in this thread don't actually seem to practice Eckhart Tolle's core teaching... But deem themselves fit to lecture me on the matter!

BTW, do you think that Tolle uses his thinking Mind & reads books? You bet... from the man himself http://youtu.be/r2yLX-IJjpg

IMO, PON & his other books are the direct result of Eckhart Tolle having a deep interest in philosophy, psychology, and literature all his life. All those ideas, concepts, pointers zipping around his neocortex, didn't just spontaneously bubble up from the unmanifested because he's aligned with the present moment. The ideas in PON bubbled out of his neocortex because of the spiritual books he'd been reading for the past 30 years. :lol:

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 12:27 am
by Ralph
So, I guess its safe to say that you choose option "remove yourself from the situation ".

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 8:33 am
by Phil2
ashley72 wrote: Yep, I wrote that post on the 17th Feb 2011... Thanks for the reminder....the day after I joined this forum. Which is more than 4 years ago NOW!

Can you appreciate I've grown & changed in knowledge and attitudes in that time?
So what is your motivation NOW to continue posting on a forum dedicated to teachings you do no more agree with ?

:?:

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 9:13 am
by ashley72
Phil2 wrote:
ashley72 wrote: Yep, I wrote that post on the 17th Feb 2011... Thanks for the reminder....the day after I joined this forum. Which is more than 4 years ago NOW!

Can you appreciate I've grown & changed in knowledge and attitudes in that time?
So what is your motivation NOW to continue posting on a forum dedicated to teachings you do no more agree with ?

:?:
Phil,

Are you aware your negative "judgments" about my contributions are what is making you unhappy?
“The primary cause of unhappiness is never the situation but the thoughts about it. Be aware of the thoughts you are thinking. Separate them from the situation, which is always neutral. It is as it is.” - Eckhart Tolle
If you really understood Tolle's core teaching... you would be fully aware it's your own judgments about the situation, not the situation which is causing your angst towards me.

You've still got a lot more inner-work to do on yourself... Before you come preaching to others!

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 9:28 am
by Phil2
ashley72 wrote:
Phil2 wrote:
ashley72 wrote:
Can you appreciate I've grown & changed in knowledge and attitudes in that time?
So what is your motivation NOW to continue posting on a forum dedicated to teachings you do no more agree with ?

:?:

Are you aware your negative "judgments" about my contributions are what is making you unhappy?
There is no 'judgement', I ask you what are your motivations and you don't answer ... and I am not at all unhappy, this is a mere assumption on your part (you are breaking the 'Third Agreement' here :lol: )

So I will ask you now (no assumption, I ask :) ): In posting in this forum, is there something like a will to prove that you are right and 'we' are wrong ?

:?:

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 9:33 am
by ashley72
Ralph wrote:So, I guess its safe to say that you choose option "remove yourself from the situation ".
Ralph,

I started a thread about photons and their effect on visual perception.

Several forum members questioned my motives and started judging the situation as either right or wrong. The ones who have judged it as wrong are now making it known how unhappy they are about the situation.

Maybe one day those unhappy members will realize the source of their unhappiness isn't the scientific postings, but their own negative judgments about it. :wink:

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 2:36 pm
by Onceler
Your comments about judgment are good ones, Ashley. I would also ask, in the spirit of peas, what do folks find so threatening about science? Can't non-dualism accommodate scientific thought? Isn't it part and parcel of this brilliant world? Do we fill our heads so full of our own beliefs that there's no room for anything else? If non dualist are true proponents of oneness, then science is part of that oneness.

Is this fundamentalist non-dualism? If you're not like me I'll attack you because you threaten me? Is the non-dualist belief system so fragile that it must be guarded? I think not, quite the opposite, but this theme and pattern does arise on these forums and I've been part of it myself.

What lies behind threat and defense? Fear. Fear that our belief system may be wrong, be it science or Tolle.

I feel somewhat threatened by Ashley's science based posts as I don't understand them. I feel vulnerable and unintelligent. As many advise, I try to be with the fear and vulnerability that arises. This is the raw material of our psyche and the fodder for growth....watch what projecting, attacking and defending do to the fear.

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 3:13 pm
by Phil2
Onceler wrote: I feel somewhat threatened by Ashley's science based posts as I don't understand them.
No, this is not the point, there are two main issues here:

1) Ashley does not make clear what are her motivations to post scientific stuff in a forum dedicated to spirituality, where most people don't even understand what she is talking about. What is her personal interest to do this ? Is she looking for recognition from people who obviously cannot understand what she says ? Why then not post in scientific forums where most posters will have the competence for such a recognition ? (but there she takes the risk to be rejected) ... Ashley seems clearly to be looking for some kind of recognition and attention ... and in some sense she gets it by posting controversial stuff ... she is in some sense a 'center of interest' and it probably reassures her ... as Eckhart Tolle said (restated): there is nothing better than a conflict for feed ego ... (but I would not like to break the Third Agreement by making assumptions, this is why I consistently asked her to make her motivations clear :) )

2) Ashley's posts, which are mainly made of cut&pasted stuff from other web sites (as Clouded proved it), contain gross scientific mistakes like the one when she says that "photons have no mass because they do not accelerate" making a confusion between weight and mass (which is probably her own erroneous contribution among other massively copied stuff).
If this gross mistake was posted in a scientific forum she would be forever discredited.

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 4:18 pm
by Webwanderer
Onceler wrote:Can't non-dualism accommodate scientific thought?
While I don't consider myself a non-dualist, as the label tends to be more limiting and pigeon holing than I'm comfortable with, the issue is not so much about non-physical consciousness accommodating science - science can contribute a lot; but it's more about the enforced blindness of materialist science self-assumed authority in denial of non-physical consciousness. It's not the science that is a problem in consciousness research. It's the religious fundamentalism aspect of materialism in the scientists.

As soon as one steps off the authorized materialist reservation, as did Dr Alexander and many others, they are attacked, lied about, and ostracized as crazies or sell outs. This is not science. It's bigotry.

People who have committed themselves both philosophically and professionally to materialist idealism have shut themselves off from the greater world of possibilities. Now, anyone is welcome to limit their perspective in any way they want, but to attack and deny others legitimacy in their own work and experience simply because it threatens their religious philosophy, goes too far for the integrity of science and needs to be recognized for what it is.

Science and medicine have a high place of trust in those not directly engaged in the work. That trust requires a high standard of integrity. Materialist philosophy, degrading into religion, is failing that standard.

WW

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 4:48 pm
by Onceler
Phil2 wrote:
Onceler wrote: I feel somewhat threatened by Ashley's science based posts as I don't understand them.
No, this is not the point, there are two main issues here:

1) Ashley does not make clear what are her motivations to post scientific stuff in a forum dedicated to spirituality, where most people don't even understand what she is talking about. What is her personal interest to do this ? Is she looking for recognition from people who obviously cannot understand what she says ? Why then not post in scientific forums where most posters will have the competence for such a recognition ? (but there she takes the risk to be rejected) ... Ashley seems clearly to be looking for some kind of recognition and attention ... and in some sense she gets it by posting controversial stuff ... she is in some sense a 'center of interest' and it probably reassures her ... as Eckhart Tolle said (restated): there is nothing better than a conflict for feed ego ... (but I would not like to break the Third Agreement by making assumptions, this is why I consistently asked her to make her motivations clear :) )

2) Ashley's posts, which are mainly made of cut&pasted stuff from other web sites (as Clouded proved it), contain gross scientific mistakes like the one when she says that "photons have no mass because they do not accelerate" making a confusion between weight and mass (which is probably her own erroneous contribution among other massively copied stuff).
If this gross mistake was posted in a scientific forum she would be forever discredited.
So just ignore it. People put all kinds of crazy stuff on the forum that have no basis in reality or are false. Have you read the keymaster lately? Why not take him on. (BTW, I Love Key). You chose to get in a pissing contest with Ashley and I'm using your technique of questioning your ego motivations. Why does the 'wrongness' of Ashley bother you so much?

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 4:52 pm
by Phil2
Webwanderer wrote:
Onceler wrote:Can't non-dualism accommodate scientific thought?
While I don't consider myself a non-dualist, as the label tends to be more limiting and pigeon holing than I'm comfortable with, the issue is not so much about non-physical consciousness accommodating science - science can contribute a lot; but it's more about the enforced blindness of materialist science self-assumed authority in denial of non-physical consciousness. It's not the science that is a problem in consciousness research. It's the religious fundamentalism aspect of materialism in the scientists.
Right WW, the problem is not so much if non-duality can accomodate science (because it can by definition) but if science can accomodate non-duality, because it can NOT ... by definition too ...

Why is it so ?

Because science postulates that phenomena (manifested forms) as observed are independant of the observer ... which is duality ... an observer separate from the observed ...

J. Krishnamurti frequently said "The observer IS the observed" ... there is no separation between the observer and the observed, this separation is purely conceptual, a product of thought ... and this is the basic erroneous assumption of science ... that there is a separate observer ...

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 4:56 pm
by Phil2
Onceler wrote: Why does the 'wrongness' of Ashley bother you so much?
It does not "bother" me at all ... I just SEE it ... and I express what I see ...

And when the false is seen, the false ends ...

:D

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 5:03 pm
by Onceler
Webwanderer wrote:
Onceler wrote:Can't non-dualism accommodate scientific thought?
While I don't consider myself a non-dualist, as the label tends to be more limiting and pigeon holing than I'm comfortable with, the issue is not so much about non-physical consciousness accommodating science - science can contribute a lot; but it's more about the enforced blindness of materialist science self-assumed authority in denial of non-physical consciousness. It's not the science that is a problem in consciousness research. It's the religious fundamentalism aspect of materialism in the scientists.

As soon as one steps off the authorized materialist reservation, as did Dr Alexander and many others, they are attacked, lied about, and ostracized as crazies or sell outs. This is not science. It's bigotry.

People who have committed themselves both philosophically and professionally to materialist idealism have shut themselves off from the greater world of possibilities. Now, anyone is welcome to limit their perspective in any way they want, but to attack and deny others legitimacy in their own work and experience simply because it threatens their religious philosophy, goes too far for the integrity of science and needs to be recognized for what it is.



Science and medicine have a high place of trust in those not directly engaged in the work. That trust requires a high standard of integrity. Materialist philosophy, degrading into religion, is failing that standard.

WW
So why do you care? What are you defending? No one is attacking you......I am getting at a fundamental mechanism here on the forum which I think is false. Folks try to pretend they don't have an ego and are above it all then attack others in a spiritual manner which pretends that any kind of rebuttal is non-spiritual, therefore specious. They are using the perceived culture of the forum and the shared ethos as momentum to attack. It's really no different than the playground.

I think it does a disservice to the spirit of what Tolle is saying and spirituality in general. Let's just get it all out in the open. We are all human. We all have belief identities that we hold dear and we defend, whether it be science or whatever form of spirituality we subscribe to. It's the holier than thou, ego-free nature of the attacks that grates.

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 5:09 pm
by Onceler
Phil2 wrote:
Onceler wrote: Why does the 'wrongness' of Ashley bother you so much?
It does not "bother" me at all ... I just SEE it ... and I express what I see ...

And when the false is seen, the false ends ...

:D
Okay, heres one view point. You're a viscous, spiritually passive aggressive MF who hides behind the benignness of non-duality and smiley emoticons. If it doesn't bother you, why respond to it?

Re: Is a photon the basic unit of information flow?

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 5:18 pm
by Phil2
Onceler wrote:
Phil2 wrote:
Onceler wrote: Why does the 'wrongness' of Ashley bother you so much?
It does not "bother" me at all ... I just SEE it ... and I express what I see ...

And when the false is seen, the false ends ...

:D
Okay, heres one view point. You're a viscous, spiritually passive aggressive MF who hides behind the benignness of non-duality and smiley emoticons. If it doesn't bother you, why respond to it?
Now you are getting emotional here ... why ? Why take all this personally ? Don't take anything personally ...

8)

btw what do you mean by MF ? Mozilla Firefox ? ... or worse ?

:lol: