[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 56 KB, 300x301, buddha-moi.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2892591 No.2892591[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Since we had a rather good thread on meditation yesterday, I thought we could expand it a bit.

Let's post our experiences with it, our struggles, our achievements, etc.
OK?

>> No.2892595

I wanted to try yoga out today. So I downloaded a DVD and looked two minutes at it. I don't recall laughing out loud in such a hysterical way since a long time. This shit is hilarious. I will, anyway, try this shit out this evening.

>> No.2892598

This shit is so hard to do. I could only do it for 7 minutes and then gave up. The thing is I really like Buddhism and would even go as far to say I am a follower

>> No.2892599

>>2892598
Yoga or meditation?

>> No.2892604

>>2892599
Meditation

>> No.2892608

>>2892598
yeah that is pretty normal. I an barely do it for 5 minutes. Also when i plant to do it every day for a few minutes at a certain time I just never do it. too boring.

any suggestions?

>> No.2892621

I was not diagnosed by a psychiatrist, but I'm pretty sure I have panic disorder and this makes meditation a bit harder I assume. Sometimes my thoughts scare me a lot and it's not always easy to let them go. They are usually sad memories, thoughts that I might commit suicide and depressive stuff like that.

I don't always feel more relaxed after meditation and I fear I'm doing something wrong or that I'm going crazy and I'm never getting out of this state of mind. I know it's not the point of meditation to become relaxed, but I can't help it.

I've only just started doing meditation though. I started practicing less than a month ago, but after a week I got mega panic attack and stopped for more than a week. I picked it up again few days ago and now I try to do it three times a day, 20 minutes each sitting.
I'm doing breathing meditation, on a chair, with my back against it. I focus on my breathing more easily that way, I believe.
I had an insanely successful sitting two days ago, felt really at peace afterwards, but the problem is, I've been trying to get back into that state of mind too hard, which is just making me tense...

>> No.2892624

>>2892608
You don't have to like it, you just have to do it, said Jon Kabat-Zinn

>> No.2892699

>>2892591
i used to meditate every day for 15 minutes and there after awhile i would start seeing something always the same

it kind of reminded me of a fetus it was surrounded by light and was itself kind of golden (also fat i think).

it was very strange and relaxing and

>> No.2892713

"…When meditation works as it should, it will be a natural part of your being. There will no longer be anything apart from you to have faith in." ~Ram Dass

ram my man posted this on facebook the other day. makes sense to me. I meditate whenever I close my eyes, not on a regular basis. I "believe" in meditation, karma, yoga and all that eastern shit, meaning I believe its usefulness, but as soon as you start "practicing" it it's like it turns to bullshit on its own. goes from magic to religion I'd say.

>> No.2892740

So far its only been struggles. I can't breath correct or deeply when sitting with a erect spine. Its just not physical possible for me to breath correctly when in the proper posture. I think it has something to do with bad posture as a result of endless hours hunched up in front a screen. Anyone with similar experience that overcame it?

>> No.2892762
File: 37 KB, 374x421, 1341427266414.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2892762

I do meditate and I don't mind sharing experiences, but when you say it like that I feel I'm in a silly support group

>Good, c'mon now guys... Breathe in... and oooouuut. Yes, that's very good Jamal, you're more relaxed than yesterday. Can you feel peace filling up your mind as you make it empty? Yes. Don't forget to buy my book "Anonymous Meditation - Shared experiences on zazen and other meditation techniques", the best seller from 4chan

>> No.2892769

>>2892740
take a step back. "proper posture"? do you need a top performance car just to go and get some groceries? meditation is possible in any posture, so why do you need the proper one? bonus follow up question: are you really interested in meditation at all or are you just emulating mystics? because if you don't succeed in true meditation, eventually you're going to end up like this guy >>2892699 and ritually hypnotize yourself into believing you succeeded.

>> No.2892772

>>2892762
lololol

>> No.2892777

My math teacher introduced me to meditation. He majored in mathematics and philosophy. But he read a shit tons and loved playing his instruments. Ever since he has introduced me to meditation, it has become a great way of clearing my mind and having some 'alone' time. >>tfw your mind goes blank and you get a mental high

>> No.2892783

>>2892621
First of all, go to a psychiatrist or a psychologist. Don't attach yourself to names coming from self-diagnosis.

A few years ago I was living in a very neurotic way and I was already interested in buddhism. It made a lot of sense, but it was hard to include the thoughts in my life (not only meditation, but anything). I was irritated, anxious, scaried, a bunch of shit.

I went to a psychologist to solve it, I was honest, I talked about all the things that bothered me, I figured out the reasons for my irritation, for my ignorance and so on. In one of the first times, I mentioned I meditated. She said that it was good, but that it must have been hard for me. How did she know? Well, I was thinking too much, my mind was a complete mass. At that point I said "and how can I think less and be calm?" and she said something on the lines of "wait, there is a reason for you to think that much and that might be of great use for you today. When the time comes, you'll be able to relax and think less".

How did that work? Well, I was neurotic and self-conscious, I was desperate in trying to solve all my problems. So desperate that I was in a hurry to calm my mind, look at how absurd that is! This self-conscious helped me solving the problems that itself has created and I learned to live with it. Now it's much easier to meditate, to deal with problems (that inevitably arise) without desperation.

Go see someone. Be willing to change. I cannot stress this more.

>> No.2892798
File: 55 KB, 400x400, 1340942162115.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2892798

What do you mean by meditation OP? Clearing one's head?

There are many way to meditate. Practicing martial arts, working, praying rosaries or Sutras or whatever. All can be forms of mental discipline. I've heard that some religious strive to make everything they do a form of meditation.

>> No.2892937

>>2892783
Thanks for an in depth response and all the advices :)

>I was desperate in trying to solve all my problems. So desperate that I was in a hurry to calm my mind, look at how absurd that is!
I can really relate to this. I get discourged to do anything at all, when I think of all the stuff I have to. But, the biggest worry that prevents me from doing stuff is definitely my mental well-being.

>Go see someone. Be willing to change. I cannot stress this more.
I will. A friend (of a friend) is seeing a psychiatrist, that is supposed to be really good and helped her a lot with her panic attacks. She told the psychiatrist about my problems and asked if I could see her, but it has to be done through my doctor. I'll visit him after the weekend.

Thanks again!

>> No.2893034

>>2892713
>"…When meditation works as it should, it will be a natural part of your being. There will no longer be anything apart from you to have faith in." ~Ram Dass

Someone posted this vid in a thread yesterday
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL2XUTeoUsM&feature=related
The guy says something similar. He emphasizes that you must put your body in order and when it is in order, the mind gets in order too. And when you finish meditation, your mind will follow you like a shadow. Seems all natural and not at all forced.

>> No.2893061

I recommend you all read "Mindfulness in Plain English"

>> No.2893077

I don't know if what I do can be considered meditation, I just sit cross-legged, close my eyes, and try not to think about anything, at much perhaps think about breathing in and out. Sometimes I just lose conscience of time and suddenly I gain it again and I realized there has been a period of time in which I was not aware of myself. Kind of like being asleep, but for short periods of time.

Usually to distract myself from other thoughts I just focus on the idea that when I inhale I become a small sun, and there is light coming out from my chest, and when I exhale the light slowly fades away and I become black again.
That or the idea of being in a room without any doors, and slowly the room moves upwards and everything gets smaller and smaller and i try to visualize how i start seeing the edge of the planet and I move further and further away and I can see the whole planet, and then i move away from it and slowly disappear into a black abyss with no stars.

It is hard though, every few seconds a thought interrupts me, even thoughts about thinking, the usual "I should not think about anything...oh shit I am thinking about not thinking"

>> No.2893093

>>2892740
I have similar troubles. I couldn't find a position that would allow me to follow my breath from start to finish. As it turns out (I assume), it was the position of my mind that wasn't correct. I don't know what was wrong, I couldn't properly concentrate or something. Just keep working on it and once you find your breath it becomes much easier, I believe. Somebody should tell me if I'm wrong.

>> No.2893097

>>2893077
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nwwKbM_vJc

>> No.2893361

Does anyone know anything about mediation techniques aimed towards "energetic- goals", for example
>cultivating qi/chi
>kundalini awakening
>"raising your vibrations"

Sounds like far out hippy stuff but i am interested to hear your experiences related to this.

>> No.2893463

>meditation

There are easier ways to roll that pre-recorded movie about existence that we all share in your head guys. ("achieve enlightenment")

Hint: its not worth it. If you meditate for years to achieve it you'll probably convince yourself that it was totally worth it, but the experience itself is sort of shallow, albeit very unique. It's not very hard to disregard it and return to your normal life. Basically its "we are all one consciousness, philosophical idealists were correct all along, material world doesn't really exist, time is an illusion." I know a number of people that experienced this through both synthetic and natural means and some of them just moved along with their lives, while others turned into hardcore new age social rejects. Imo, its still just a chemical reaction in your brain, a side product of evolution.

Now meditation itself is good for your mental health and it's not a bad idea to practice it regularly (i do it few times a week). Just don't do it because you are "seeking enlightenment" or anything that involves religion. Think of it as an exercise for your brain.

>> No.2893479
File: 34 KB, 278x522, tV4YF.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2893479

>>2893463

>> No.2893490

I'd rather just relax, it's much better and "enlightening."

>> No.2893491

Is there a good guide for how to get started anywhere?

>> No.2893492

>>2893479
I'm willing to listen to your arguments and if they are good enough perhaps even change my mind. But you are too busy posting clever pictures to present any.

>> No.2893497

>>2893463
What the hell is wrong with you, dude...? Enlightenment is not a plateau or a finishing line. You're creating things that don't exist around the subject. You're really not "getting it" and I mean this in the least offensive way you can think of. I'm saying that you haven't read enough about it or are not willing to practice it for practicing it, so it's only natural that it doesn't make sense to you.

>> No.2893504

>>2893463
>pre-recorded
>Imo, its still just a chemical reaction in your brain, a side product of evolution.

>IMPLYING

>also implying side products of evolution
>implying you even know how evolution works
>implying you aren't depressing dirty materialist scum

>> No.2893517

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramana_Maharshi#The_Awakening

didn't get it by mediating though

>> No.2893522

>>2893492
You didn't make any good arguments to begin with.

>>2893491
I'd suggest reading Full Catastrophe Living by Jon Kabat-Zinn

>> No.2893530

>>2893497

Who said it doesn't make sense? It makes perfect sense, new ageists are going bonkers for a brain exercise because it's non-invasive, spiritually associated, person-oriented health stuff, nothing new here. Just typical people who are bored to death with life that need something to do that makes them look like they're transcending normal day to day stuff. But boring people nonetheless.

>> No.2893541

>>2893497
>>2893504

Did my post piss you off so much you now have to sage the whole thread?

>Enlightenment is not a plateau or a finishing line. You're creating things that don't exist around the subject.
Herp derp, the journey matters. Typical response by a butthurt "spiritualist". Just realize that just because you "saw" something doesn't make it true. It's no more real than an ufo kidnapping a psychotic person experiences. Anything that's not based on hard evidence is debatable.

>>2893504
>implying it's not just one same experience that everyone gets and is the basis of all major non-abrahamic religions since the dawn of man
Sure there is more than one interpretation of it (based on cultural background of the person experiencing it), but the core elements are always present. This is hardly a claim. I can't 100% prove it due to the subjective nature of experience, but the evidence is overwhelming.

>implying you even know how evolution works
>implying you aren't depressing dirty materialist scum

>insults in online debates


Just accept that you are basically pulling your mind back and forth until you reach some barrier, and when you do, there's a short clip that plays in your head with many names (a religious experience, enlightenment, ego-death, ...), that obviously had some evolutionary significance and granted a higher chance of survival at some point (there are genes directly related with ability to experience it, look it up).

>> No.2893542

>>2893530
That's that preconception that shows you don't know much about it. It's alright though, just don't assume too much the next time and say stuff about it, because you kind of look like a fool...

>> No.2893547

>>2893541
give me your address or hint toward your location so I can find you and gut you you fucking new-atheist bullshiting evo psych fuck

>> No.2893549

>>2893541
>have genuine enlightenment
>no longer have interest in making babies or anything

GENES HAVE IMPLICATIONS GUYS MUST BE EVOLUTION

>> No.2893557

Why are hardcore materialists so negative?

>> No.2893565

>>2893547
Sweet new age tearz. Keep 'em coming.

With every insult you make, you lose more credibility.

>>2893549
As i said, "at some point". You have no idea what role it played in context of human evolution. Latest scientific developments are however on my side and support my hypothesis.
There's even a chance its a side product of some other related evolutionary process.

>> No.2893568

>>2893541
You are talking too much about something you don't know. When you say "just accept that..." and then you continue with something that has nothing to do with it, there is nothing to be refuted. That's like saying "science is silly, it's just a bunch of numbers". You can't convince one who says something like this, and n the same way, we can't convince you to change your mind. If you are willing to do it though, you'll start reading about it yourself and practicing it yourself and whatever.

>> No.2893570

>>2893542

Oh yea man, totally a tool. Did I strike a nerve with you? Sorry, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings, I don't want to take away a source of comfort for you. Whatever rationalize to undermine what I said without actually refuting it, to make yourself feel better and in control brah, whatever it takes. I'll be over there doing something productive and useful with my life.

>> No.2893578

>>2893547

> new atheist, evo psyche

All of which is far superior to being an air headed new age woo believing dumbass.

>> No.2893583

>>2893557

because they are only capable of loving inanimate objects because mommy and daddy never spent time with them

>> No.2893585

>>2893361
I am a girl btw, so you should probably answer me.

>> No.2893588

>>2893568
Well then, mr. enlightenment, enlighten me where exactly did I talk about something I know nothing about? What exactly was i wrong about? Did i make some claims I cant support with reputable sources?

Thats like saying: "You are wrong because I say you."

As i said, I'm open minded. Tell me what exactly am i wrong about, back it up with some evidence, and I'll reconsider my positions on this subject.

>> No.2893589

>>2893578
>woo

lol why do new atheists sound like a bunch of grumpy old farts?

randi can go suck dawkin's cock

>> No.2893592

>>2893588
*"You are wrong because I said so."

>> No.2893597

>>2893568

> reading about it and practicing it

Which is worthless as it doesn't remove you from your cultural biases and inclination to believing in it. I swear you kind of people are the dumbest fuckers on earth.

>> No.2893598

OH DANG U NEW AGE QUEERS BELIEVING IN WOO WOO OOARGH I N-NEED UGH ARHGA WHERES MY INHALER AHRGH IM TOO FAT FOR THIS

>> No.2893604

>>2893578
>All of which is far superior

says you

I think I might go burn some books by dawkins and sam harris

I'd rather have a bunch dumb christfags running around than faggots like you

u so mad hurr survival hurr genes HURR EVOLUTION WANTS THIS OR THAT

>> No.2893605

>>2893598

Sorry did you feelings get hurt too? I thought you people were supposed to be all calm and collected and shit.

>> No.2893606
File: 398 KB, 773x904, Solomon's_Wealth_and_Wisdom.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2893606

I used to be a new athirst retard until I summoned a demon and got it to prove its existence to me

stay pleb new atheist scum

>> No.2893608

>>2893605
I hope you enjoy the 11th grade, jimmy.

>> No.2893612

>>2893604

> actually believes in woo stuff
> Doesn't understand that evolution doesn't "want" anything and still talks about evolution

Keep embarrassing yourself, it's always nice to see how dumb the allies of christfags are.

>> No.2893613

>>2893606
>athirst


new atheists are a thirst for the cock

>> No.2893616

>>2893612
>> Doesn't understand that evolution doesn't "want" anything and still talks about evolution

But you're the one implying that, you evo psych tard.
how does it feel you take pseudo-scientific fads seriously?

>> No.2893617

>>2893608

Keep pretending that you aren't an illiterate dumbass by making cryptic remarks about me in the hopes that it's obscurity will somehow make you look impressive.

>> No.2893619

>>2893606

> still uses the word pleb.
> 2012

Oh, yea demon summonings, sounds impressive man, you're totally the kind of person I'd want to be.

>> No.2893624

>>2893616

> thinks I'm implying that evolution wants something by implying that there are natural and likely consequences to the selective process of evolution.

Oh god, are you ever going to stop embarrassing yourself? For chirsts sake just open up a fucking sci text for once in your god damn life.

>> No.2893638

>>2893588
You're not wrong, you just don't know about it. This "enlighten me" attitude doesn't work, you're just being cocky. As I said, if you really want to know, you'll figure your way into it, it's not obscure shit or anything like that, you're just trapped in your own conceptions about it and refuse to make an effort to know it, but you easily talk about it as if you did. As I said, we can't convince you, it's not about having facts on the table or not, but because any word that is outside of it's conventional use for your particular cultural background will appear to be false and will break the spell. This "I demand an explanation!" method is clearly something that doesn't work at all, as you can see when people claim they know God and even provoke scientists but still remain absolutely clueless and create those shitty creationist museums... That's the same thing.

>>2893597
Exactly. In the same way, it is worthless if you don't acknowledge that your cultural biase inclines you not to believe in it. It's a matter of context, of course. That's why I'm saying you shouldn't talk shit about something that is completely distant from the way you think and that you never make an effort to try to understand it.

>> No.2893643

>>2893624
I bet you're smarter and know more than those retarded theist geneticists

high five bro lets have some hot gay sex

>> No.2893645

I love how mad these "enlightened" new age fags that place so much faith in "inner peace" and such get when their nonsense beliefs are in question.
Where is your chi now?
Assume the lotus position, take a deep breath and silence your inner dialogue. Realize that the whole universe is within you and that these nasty comments on an internet website is just your quantum ego sending you a message and testing your faith. Oh and check out these badass new crystals I just got. Just channeled some 6th dimensional beings through my pineal gland by taping a big ass crystal to my forehead, vibrations were so cash.

Stay mad new age scum.

>> No.2893662

>>2893645
you're wrong and that's all there is to it.

go back to /sci/ new atheist faggot

how does it feel you will never convince me or anyone else here other than how stupid you are?

>> No.2893666

>>2893638

No, you don't get it at all, not even close in fact. The scientific method has built in safegaurds against all types of biases like confirmation biases, (although certainly not perfect it's far superior to our intuitions which are necessarily naked to our biases), simply believing in woo based on practice is unreasonable, ( what you've done) but we're basing our beliefs on scientific plausibility or research, that's not unreasonable like your position is because we gone to lengths to try and protect ourselves from simply believing in something because of our cultural biases. Comparing us to you is absurd.

>> No.2893672

>>2893643

Considering how this post is completely irrelevant, and out of nowhere and in no way even indirectly refutes my points, I'd have to venture a guess you're incredibly dumb.

>> No.2893674

>>2893638
>This "I demand an explanation!" method is clearly something that doesn't work at all, as you can see when people claim they know God and even provoke scientists but still remain absolutely clueless and create those shitty creationist museums... That's the same thing.
Yes, i demand an explanation. It doesn't even have to be based on evidence found in objective material world, which you seem to reject, if you can use sheer logic to prove your points. But let me guess, you can't. You'll make claims, you'll claim they are the truth and that everyone else is wrong. How is that different from any other religion? Why should I choose your beliefs over someone else's?

It's typical "hurr, you are being brainwashed". If you reject materialism, that's okay as long as you can defend your position. But if you reject rationalism and rational argumentation, we can't even argue any more. How am I supposed to judge and consider your beliefs in a non-cocky fashion if the best you can do is "I am right, and you just don't know it yet. I have nothing to back this up, but that's the way it is.".

I know plenty of people like you in real life. Although none of them was ever convincing enough to "turn me in", they at least made some effort by talking about evidence that proves their beliefs in quantum science and various philosophical schools. You don't even bother doing this. Just HURR IM RIGHT UR NOT.

>> No.2893681

>>2893662

It feels great knowing that my opponents are simply closed minded and unreasonable, now I know you're wrong and I'm right. Please keep talking it's fantastic to see all the ways in which your reasoning and beliefs are flawed.

>> No.2893686

>>2893645

Oh god yes, just look at the way these people respond whenever you question their beliefs.
>>2893598

I don't think there could possibly be a more insecure group on earth.

>> No.2893693

I had read about it and budhism, but it was only after hearing that it could help my anxiety that i got really into it.

The first sessions were just a mess of thoughts, images, falling sleep and being bored, but it actually helped me to realize about some negative behaviour patters in my life and it taught me how to chill. Then as i did it more frequently i began reach a state of calmness, a bit of euphoria and happynes and i would be in this state almost all the time.

Around this time i could do 1hr to 2hrs easly, i began to have more energy, confidence, had way more fucking fun, swag, etc.... my focus was insane, out of this world, i could fight people that were better than me and just beat them easly(boxer) or i could notice little details and patterns everywere,
had euphoria waves, way more sharp and smarth, more empathic.....

But i've gotten lazier, and i just do it around 1 or 2 times a week...it's still amazing but it's not as good as it was when i was doing it hardcore. I'm no longer anxiousm, it made my life better in everyway and it made me realize amazing things about the world, one of them that focus is almost everything... i advise to try it for a couple of weeks, everyday.

These videos are cool too
Alan watts on meditation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZG-wlwtnDcE

>> No.2893694

>have precognitive dreams and regularly summon spirits
>this thread

>> No.2893699

>>2893694
Delusions of supernatural powers are an early sign of schizophrenia. See your doctor and have a talk with him. It's perfectly treatable if discovered early enough.

>> No.2893703

>>2893699
>hurr if its different its bad

I bet you want aspergers to be treated too.

The real fun thing about your logic is why should I when your beliefs imply a totally meaningless existence?

>> No.2893710

>>2893666
You don't need to explain that to me, I know about scientific method. But people still deny it in spite of rational arguments, because they are not used to rational arguments and they are not used to the processes of science. It goes beyond the facts on the table, because it is also about words. The layman may say "it's just a theory" and a scientist would have to explain how his concept of "theory" is much different from a what a scientist call a theory. In the same way, what you may call mumbo jumbo, religious, "enlightenment" and so on, is completely different from what they actually mean by those things.

>> No.2893711

>summer happens
>suddenly a bunch of atheists arguing with everyone

hmm i wonder

>> No.2893713

>>2893674
>You'll make claims, you'll claim they are the truth and that everyone else is wrong.
>"I am right, and you just don't know it yet. I have nothing to back this up, but that's the way it is."
Except that's not what I did at any point. I am not claiming to be neither right or wrong, I'm claiming that you don't know much about it and that's all.
>How am I supposed to judge
You are not supposed to judge. You don't know about it and a scientist doesn't judge something he doesn't know.

>I know plenty of people like you in real life.
Assuming...
>Although none of them was ever convincing enough to "turn me in"
I'm not trying to convince you of anything other than to make you admit you haven't break a sweat to get to know it. It's superficial knowledge and like with anything, it leads nowhere. If a guy who doesn't know anything about science asks on what quantum mechanics means, any answer you'll give him, regardless if it is right or not, will be too weird for him and he won't understand the context, thus, he will reject it without even getting to know it. To demand an explanation doesn't work.

cont

>> No.2893717

>>2893713 cont

And then you go "but how am I supposed to be convinced if you don't care enough or can explain it?". First, you don't need to be convinced, I don't mind, I'd just like you to stop judging and that would be more coherent coming from you. Second, I bother enough to say this, but I don't gain nothing from traying to explain to someone who rejects it at first sight. I am not here to debate or to prove points. To be open minded is more than just accepting new information, but to be willing to give up on preconceived notions. And you have a strong idea of what this is all about despite not knowing much besides wikipedia-level things. That is, if you don't want to accept it, then don't, that's absolutely alright. If you want to learn about it, go read. But one of the two things, you either talk about it if you know it, or reject it altogether and don't say it. Not because of us, but because you look silly and you gain nothing from it, I mean no harm.

>> No.2893719

>>2893703

Humans are meaning making, regardless of whether there is a grand cosmic purpose to everything or not, meaning still exists. The real question is why are you so bored with life without demons and psychic abilities? I find people who need to inject the world with fairies in order to enjoy it a wasted life, because you'll never actually see the beauty of the world for what it is, it's actually quite sad.

>> No.2893731

>>2893710

Thanks for admitting that you simply believe in woo based on your cultural biases and are therefore far more unreasonable than us, as we don't do that.

Also it's funny that you're attacking "rationality" or reason by using reason itself, stop attacking rationality that way, you're embarrassing yourself because you're implicitly admitting the primacy of rationality by doing it. God, I mean can't you people even "try" to think a little bit more critically, this is just pathetic.

>> No.2893735

>>2893719

I bet you want us to find the Superman too.

Go to bed Zarathustra.

>> No.2893740

>>2893713

> you don't know much about it and that's all

Your entire argument fails because all that you know about "it" is through your own unfiltered biases, there's no reason to believe you know anymore about it in an objective sense than we do.

>> No.2893756

>>2893735

Oh ho, another person with a crude if any understanding at all of Nietzsche's philosophy by appealing to aspects of it that frequently appear in illiterate mainstream discourse referencing it. How cute.

The sad thing is you won't even recognize the world without superman actually being in it.

>> No.2893768

Do any of these people even know what theyre arguing about anymore?

>> No.2893772

>>2893717
I am still waiting for you to point out any of these countless massive knowledge holes I have that prevent me from fully understanding your belief system. Surely it wouldn't be very hard to point out at least one claim I made that in your opinion wasn't informed enough and was drawing conclusions without seeing the full picture?

Every post you make is basically an attempt to avoid real argumentation of your beliefs. First by rejecting rationalism and now by claiming that we simply don't know enough about it, when i could use *exactly* the same argument against you. You don't know enough about modern day science which renders your beliefs not only unnecessary, but interfering with our knowledge about the world around us, thus you are wrong. But I'm not the one that should be defending my beliefs here. It's you that claim something that's can't be proven through empiricism/scientific method/logical reasoning which are the best means we have of finding objective truth, therefore you should be the one trying to defend your position. And if you have no interest in a debate, why do you keep posting?

>> No.2893776

>>2893756

>trolled softly

>> No.2893780

>>2893731
I'm not attacking rationality or reason at all, quite the contrary actually.

I really don't know how you could come to those conclusions in your post. I'm comparing it so you could be more critical about yourself. People reject science and I tried to explain why, this doesn't mean I reject science in any way. You guys are rejecting meditation and I'm saying that it is because you are taking the words out of its original context (because there is a lot of shit about it in self-help books and douche hipster faggots saying stuff around, I don't blame you for it), so they appear to make no sense at all.

>>2893740
There are not unfiltered biases either way, no objective knowledge, just context.

There is a clash between two ideas here, first that one is clueless because that person is too immersed in it, that one was brainwashed by blind faith, that one has no good judgement because one was too guilible and fell for a comfortable lie. Which is what you think of me.

What I think of you is the opposite, that you are too far away, too out of context, not willing to try or to read about it in depth, so that it is only natural that you have misconceptions about it.

But to me, it is possible for one to dive into it without being afraid of losing one's rationality. In the same way that it is possible to stay absolutely out it without falling for misconceptions. That's all I ask from everyone from either side.

>> No.2893782

>>2893776

> says something stupid
> plays it off as trolling

>> No.2893804

>>2893780
Nobody is saying you are wrong. We are saying that every claim ever made is wrong unless proven otherwise. As far as I know, you may be right, but so far you were unable to prove any of your beliefs (and proving stuff through scientific method is the only way truth can be found we have found so far) and that's why I regard them as wrong. If you can't prove it, its wrong.

>> No.2893808

>>2893804
Can you define proof?

>> No.2893810

>>2892762
5 * post, couldn't agree more

>> No.2893816

>>2893780

At the very beginning I admitted that meditation can be a relaxing brain exercise and in that way is healthy for you. But you people continued to argue against us in particular about our rejection of woo-based beliefs,.

If you're not arguing against the main point that, if the subject of your beliefs are beyond the testable grasps of science then you have little ways of reliably demonstrating and differentiating those beliefs as either arising from some kind of subjective revelation or cultural biases, then you aren't making a case against our rejection of woo-based beliefs.

If you're simply saying the process of meditation is somehow healthy then you still aren't making a case against our argument (as there could be many explanations of why the process works that aren't woo-based), and have little reason to continue arguing against our rejection of new age woo.

>> No.2893821

>>2893772
First, I'll say it again that I'm not attacking rationality or science, in fact I fucking love science. Even more than I'm into meditation, I'd say. My father is a biologist, I grew up around it. I've read Darwin, Dawkins, Sagan, Hawking, Jared Diamond, Richard Leakey, Jay Gould, Feyerabend. I have nothing against it, on the contrary! See, it's just one thing that you are assuming without knowing: that for one to defend one thing, one must attack the other. Because in your mind, they are worlds apart, when they don't contradict themselves in any way.

I keep posting because I think highly of you and that you might genuinely want to understand it. There is no "massive knowledge holes that prevents you from understanding", it's not the holes that prevent one from understanding, it's how one fills those holes with assumptions, not leaving space for new concepts to form. I judged you out of thin air as well and said outright that you don't know much about it, I thought you could pull some books you read on it or something and tell me off, but I don't think you did read any(and it's alright). I judged you for the attitude alone. You started out by saying "it's not worth it" and that those who get there simply "convinced themselves that it was worth it". That's my basis for saying you didn't get there or tried to get there for real and thus you have no way to say if it was worth it or not.

I'm not sure what kind of belief you think I have...

>> No.2893822

>>2893804
Also, can you prove causality?
(look closely at that one)

If it can't be proven does that mean it isnt true? Is it still useful?

>> No.2893824

>>2893804
>scientific method
>proving truth
Retard.

>> No.2893835

>>2893808
Yes. Proof, or evidence is anything used to find out the truth. There are logical proofs and real world evidence.

>>2893822

Its a basic principle of our universe. It has to be taken for granted or perhaps not. I do not know enough about philosophy to answer this, and i fail to see how its related to our discussion.

>> No.2893836

>>2893822
>>2893824

It's impossible to absolutely prove something, but that's not what we're talking about, we're talking about making reasonable or probable justifications for something. I can't prove the sun will rise tomorrow, but I can make a reasonable argument based on past observations that it probably will rise tomorrow.

Now can you two please stop acting as if you're asking deep and probing questions, we've all already dealt with these issues in our freshman year of college as well. You're aren't bringing up any hard or controversial issues, you're actually making yourselves look like you need to go back and retake a logic or statistics class.

>> No.2893837

>>2893693
>>2893693
Great post dude, thank you.

>> No.2893841

>>2893836
I only made that one post. Attaching the term truth to the process you described is just misleading rhetoric.

>> No.2893857

>>2893804
>We are saying that every claim ever made is wrong unless proven otherwise
Could you prove this claim itself? I don't agree with it.

I know where you are coming from and it's good to be skeptical and not assume it's right without taking could care of it. But to assume it is wrong without being careful about it can be just as dangerous.

The scientific method is a method to get to knowledge, not to get to truth, there is a difference there that makes all the difference here. Claims of what is "true" should be kept within dogmas.

>>2893816
I'm just saying your rejection is uncalled for. Just as calling it woo-based beliefs. As I said it before, I don't believe much in reliable demonstration when the other part is too far away from its context. If even science has that (the example creationist trying to understand evolution and claiming "it's just a theory" or the layman thinking quantum physics is mumbo jumbo), imagine something that is so cultural, based in words which are often mistranslated or known in a different aspect than the usual to us, something that is old as fuck. It takes time to get into it, that's all.

And I really don't know exactly what beliefs you are rejecting, or what you mean about new age woo. I hate new age shit too.

>> No.2893855
File: 1.41 MB, 190x167, MichaelJacksonEatingPopcorn.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2893855

>> No.2893861

>>2893835
You dont need to know philosophy to look at it, just honesty.

You were asking for proof of something (not too sure what) and stating if something cant be proven it isnt true, so I followed the statement.

>>2893836
Maybe not difficult, but fairly fundamental when talking about proofs.

>> No.2893863

>>2893822

Awww how cute, you still think science uses causality. Science talks about correlations between isolated variables in temporal coherence, and guess what that's enough to get us to the moon, in other words it works.

>> No.2893867

>>2893857 here
btw I'm outta here
It's saturday night, baby.

see ya folks

>> No.2893873

>>2893863
So scientists never use the word "because"?

>> No.2893875

>>2893821
I read one new age book. "From Science to God", by someone, and it was very unconvincing. I'm saying that meditation as a form of mental exercise is very much worth it (as this excellent post confirms: >>2893693). I'm just saying that beliefs that are closely related to meditation, especially religious experiences (which i underwent, through drug use however, judge if you want) have very little ground and are in no way different from any other belief system. I'd love to hear about some real, non-self help, non-conspiratard, verifiable books on stuff you are talking about (since you hate new age, I'm unsure what exactly you even believe in.)

>> No.2893895

>>2893857
That statement (or post) wasn't very well thought out to be completely honest. I may have went a bit to far. What I mean't is that I *regard* unverifiable stuff as wrong unless proven otherwise. And yes, scientific method gives us theoretical knowledge which can be verified through various methods. It's not the absolute truth, but it's relatively close to it, at least when compared to completely arbitrary beliefs religious people hold.

>> No.2893896

>>2893875
Are you saying using experience as a ground for a system is unfounded?

>> No.2893903

>>2893896
Not the guy you were replying to, btw.

>> No.2893910

>>2893895
You know, axioms are unverifiable. But theyre still useful.

>> No.2893912

>>2893857

My rejection of woo, or in other words, me not accepting that woo is true, is in no way uncalled for unless you can show that woo is true.

Like I said, if the subject of your belief is beyond the grasps of scientific tests then you have no way of showing whether it works because it could just be your cultural biases towards believing in it.

I'm rejecting that new age practices in the mainstream these days automatically prove some spiritual/supernatural/transcendent kind of mechanism.

>> No.2893927

>>2893873

are you assuming "because" necessarily means causailty rather than "because there's a correlational and temporal relationship between these two isolated variables?" Because that would be absurd.

>> No.2893944

>>2893927
Youre using "because" in your definition.

And yes, the definition of "because" is "caused by".

>> No.2893966

>>2893896
From my viewpoint, yes. That is precisely what I'm saying.
You may now say that consciousness is primary and that everything is derived from experience, but I don't think this is the case. Hard metaphysics aside, consciousness is nothing but a side product of a meaningless universe and everything you ever experience is physical in nature. The satisfaction you feel is dopamine rushing through your brain. Every emotion you feel is a cocktail of chemicals in your brain, and everything you experience has its co-event in a purely material world inside your brain. Despite all its problems, this is by far the simplest explanation of how the universe works.

You may bring up hard problem of consciousness, idealistic reasoning against existence of objective reality, how nothing would exist without an observer and quantum physics and the special role observer plays in some interpretations of them. These are unresolved problems which probably wont be resolved anytime soon, but there is a far smaller number of open questions as there is with alternative worldviews.

So yes. Experiencing something is basically a chemical reaction in your brain. Unless we can all observe and measure that in physical reality, it didn't really happen anywhere except inside your mind and it would be foolish to place faith in it.

>> No.2893969

>>2893910
Wrong. Axioms don't require verification. You don't need to prove them because they are self-evident.

>> No.2893975

>>2893966
>. Hard metaphysics aside

>babby's low iq cant handle it

>meaningless universe
nice "empirical" assertion you got there

>> No.2893983

>>2893912
I dont think they do either, I just strongly suspect there is truth to the underlining logic of mysticism.

Mostly because of personal experiences, and qualia.

Qualia's a big one, huge.

>> No.2893989

>using the word "woo"

yeah nah you're a cunt

>> No.2893993

>>2893975
It's okay. By insulting me, you just completely degraded yourself. Present some arguments or don't post at all.

>> No.2893996

>>2893719
> because you'll never actually see the beauty of the world for what it is

acceptance is for the weak and sociopathic

>> No.2893997

>>2893966
The only thing I have to ask is is it even possible to show how experience can come from material?

It always seems to boil down to: magic or experience doesn't exist.

>> No.2894010

>>2893944

The word because doesn't have to refer to causation, it can refer to correlational relationships as I pointed out.

"such and such is because of correlational and temporal relationship between isolated variables." That isn't using because in it's own definition, it's simply an example of using it in a sentence.

Not to mention "caused by correlations" doesn't even make sense, nothing is caused by correlations.

>> No.2894027

>>2893983

That's the point, personal experiences can't be seen apart from your cultural biases, you have little means of escaping them and therefore so do your inclinations to believe such and such.

>> No.2894031

>>2893997
Consciousness is just an intelligent survival mechanism in combination with high brain capacity that humans have. If we had computers fast enough to run a universe simulation experience could exist within them, assuming the development of events would take the same path it did in our universe.

>> No.2894041

>>2894031
Holy fuck, do you have a ph.d in pop-science or something?

go back to /sci/ and take your unfalsifiable pseudo-scientific trash with you

>> No.2894046
File: 28 KB, 499x376, super-retard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2894046

>>2894031
> If we had computers fast enough to run a universe simulation experience could exist within them, assuming the development of events would take the same path it did in our universe.

>> No.2894053

>>2894041
>>2894046
Prove me wrong.

It may seem unintuitive, but you can't really argue against it.

>> No.2894063

>>2894031
I suspect computers could generate intelligence, but that doesn't explain where qualia came from.

>> No.2894085

>>2893997

I don't think not being able to show how means that it doesn't. But if you're asking if we could ever describe how experiences arise from the brain with just physical information, then probably not. At best we can only make tautological explanations that appeal to our shared experiences like;
"A: what does an orange smell like?
B: It smells like an orange.
A: I know but what does the smell smell like?"
You can't answer that with purely physical information, at some point you make an appeal to the experience of smelling an orange or something very similar. In any case no one here is going to solve the hard problem today and I don't think it can be used as a reason to believe in new age woo stuff.

>> No.2894093

>>2893989

So you new age faggots are sexist too? Please, keep on talking, it's always great to hear how absurd and ridiculous you people really are.

>> No.2894103

>>2894063
To be completely honest the idea of qualia has always seemed very logical and intuitive to me and I do not know enough about the subject to argue against it. As i said, the hard problem of consciousness (in which the existence qualia plays a central role), is a major unresolved question in my worldview, but i believe that as science progresses things will start to make more sense. There are so many unanswered questions in new age idealism that I could point out that it's not even funny and qualia alone is not a good enough argument for it.

Anyway, its late and im going to sleep. It was nice talking to you.

>> No.2894107

>>2894053
>It may seem unintuitive, but you can't really argue against it.
The same with meditation terms you reject. Yeah, it's counter-intuitive, but you can't argue against it.

No, Occam's razor doesn't work here...

>> No.2894129

>>2894107

What about meditation is counter-intuitive? The breathing and relaxation of it aren't counter-intuitive at all. It's nothing like qualia, unless you're talking about some kind of transcendent/spiritual experience arising from it If that's it then yes you can argue against it as I already have.

>> No.2894133

>>2894085
>>2894103
Youre right, were not going to solve it today, here, now (though I dunno, maybe), but some food for thought:

The only possible explanation Ive been able to think of is that either consciousness is more fundamental than material, or material and consciousness are the same thing. There is no other way of even having a chance of resolving the issue.
Interestingly that is precisely what the mystic religions all around the world say (and many philosophers).

Does that prove anything? No. But its damn interesting.

>> No.2894158

>>2894133

That's unsurprising, that's a very tempting and obvious answer for anyone, but talking about the relationship between experiences and the physical will only be just about that relationship, (which is interesting) but it does little to add any credibility to any religion or spiritual beliefs, that requires a whole new set of discussions and arguments.

>> No.2894175

>>2894158
Thats true, but many religions (especially the mystic ones) talk about the relationship been consciousness and matter.

I dont think any one of them are necessarily 'right', but they have very interesting and (I think) useful perspectives to offer, and it seems to me usefulness is the crux of science.

>> No.2894204

That feel when I can't clear my mind, inane shit flows through my thoughts and it seems like I wasted time having my eyes shut for an extended period.

>> No.2894209

>>2894175

Whether they're useful or not is an entirely different discussion, the point is that talk about the relation between experience and matter isn't necessarily dependent on a mysticism backdrop. i.e. you can talk about the relationship without necessarily talking about mysticism.

>> No.2894217

>>2894093
are you a female? you do know that your evo psych bullshit justifies sexism against women doesn't it? it is used regularly by PUA

>> No.2894231

>>2894217

Yes, I do know about that and how it's abused to make conclusions that go beyond their premises by many laymen and scientists. What's your point? Are you saying all evo psych is necessarily invalid because of that?

>> No.2894245

>>2894209
Honestly I dont know what the discussion was about originally, I came in when it seemed people were just flinging shit at each other around some vague topic of something around "is mysticism true".

Youre definitely right though, even if (maybe even especially if) mysticism is true then we could discuss the same things and relationships without referring to 'Aum' or 'God' or Bodhisattvas or what have you.

Its like if woo is true we can discuss woo without actually using woo.
But in that case woo is just as proper as not-woo. Just depends on the context I guess.

>> No.2894357
File: 189 KB, 360x360, QC-MD49.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2894357

>> No.2894360

>>2894357
Rilke is fucking awesome.

>> No.2894369

>>2894360
Tell me about her, I just really liked the quote and saved it on my phone.

>> No.2894370

I did not see yesterday's thread.
Can anyone recommend me books on meditation?

>> No.2894388

>>2894370
This isn't on meditation per se, but related, if you haven't read Principia Discordia I highly recommend it. Its like mysticism without the mystery...kinda.

Really funny and insightful though.
Free copy here: principiadiscordia.com

>> No.2894392

>>2894231
ill rape ur anus u new atheist bitch

are you scandinavian

>> No.2894410

>>2894392

You're acting as if someone should be offended by getting called a new atheist? That's ridiculous.

>> No.2894412

>>2894410

Not that guy, and an atheist, but it's not ridiculous. New Atheism is pretty damn retarded

>> No.2894413

>New Atheism

What differentiates this from 'old' Atheism?

>> No.2894418

>>2894413

vitriol and immaturity

>> No.2894425

>>2894412

If by new atheism you mean richard dawkins and the like, it is. If by new atheist you mean contemporary atheist (which it's pretty much been conflated to) then no.

>> No.2894428

I propose a name change: nu athiesm.

I think it fits better.

sage because off topic

>> No.2894431

>>2894418

So it's gotten better? I don't want to join your movement if it's no fun, sorry if your feelings get hurt.

>> No.2894434

>Let's post our experiences with it, our struggles, our achievements, etc.

It didn't work for me. There was a euphoric feeling for the first few days, but afterwards it became a chore.

>> No.2894464
File: 198 KB, 500x503, 1344740895409.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2894464

What do you guys say about Lynch's take on meditation?

I know he even did a campaing in schools for it, but I'm not sure of his methods or what exactly he says about it.

>> No.2894472

>>2894464
I dont know much about what he says about meditation, but I know hes a member of "Transcendental Meditation", which charges people.

Charging people for religion/spiritual practice doesn't really sit well with me.

>> No.2894474

>>2894472
Not to mention TM fries your brain.

http://www.suggestibility.org/

>> No.2894478

>>2894464

his method is shit
he advocates 3000 dollar classes because they are "worth it"

he's an idiot in that sense and any spiritual guru from india will con him because hes a superficial hollywood sell out despite making terrible independent-style movies

>> No.2894502

>>2894472
oh wow. charging people for meditation?

>> No.2894508

>>2894502
Bottled water

Oxygen bars

>> No.2894509

>>2894502
Yeah, supposedly they give people individual mantras, but theres accusations that they just recycle them.

Maybe people have gotten something out of it, but it seems sketchy to me.

>> No.2894526
File: 10 KB, 200x341, holy-science-yukteswar-hardcover-cover-art.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2894526

Have any of you read this book? The Holy Science of GOd Realization by Swami Sri Yukteswar?

>> No.2894531

How I meditate:

I start out by thinking on what I was thinking in the far and closer past.
>Hm. Interesting stuff, a bunch of ignorance out of nowhere, unnecessary things here that I could live without. Ok.

Then I think on what I am thinking now.
>Now there is this and there is that. Here is this again. Another thing. What a strange movement.

Then I think on what I will be thinking next
>?????
>ENLIGHTENED

>> No.2894577

Does anyone have any experience meditating while high?

>> No.2894581

>>2894464
He's a weirdo. I really enjoyed Twin Peaks and Blue Velvet, but I wouldn't really rely on his personal advice

>> No.2894636
File: 41 KB, 500x375, 1330070290253.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2894636

>> No.2894639

>>2894577
That misses the point of doing it. If you need external help to meditate, then that means you are not really doing anything by yourself.

Don't think I'm a drug hater for it, I do smoke. But in order to meditate you have to be sober and clean. How could one possibly be clean about one's own inner self, if things like that are necessary?

>> No.2894819

Guys, when a disturbing thought comes, what do you do? Do you ignore/acknowledge it and focus back on your breathing or do you try to make sense of it? The former should be done, right?

>> No.2894848

Meditation and mindfulness has slowly but surely consumed my entire department, cognitive/psychological science.

A lot of people practice/interested in Buddhism and mindfulness meditation, and everyone sees the uses for it.

With that said, I've meditated for close to eight months. It cleared much mental baggage (I mean, I was a pretty unstable person, addicted to prescriptions/alcohol, mood swings) and during mindfulness one gets a very comfortable feel.

After a typical "mindful" mindset, the effects last a while, since the mind recreates itself towards being more concentrated, emotionally-distanced yet stable, and other general mental health benefits.

If I were to guess what is enlightenment, I doubt some actual "point" or "truth" is achieved. I'd guess that one would rather just be in a different/better mindset constantly through meditation and accepting some basic facts of life.

>> No.2895029

the whole absolute truth and extreme enlightenment thing doesn't necessarily come from mediation and is usually limited to select few people throughout the ages

>> No.2895064

/a/non here. About a year ago, I flew over to Malaysia/Thailand/HongKong for vacation. On the plane, I was reading a manga called Vagabond. Anyway innthis manga the main character is told to meditate under a waterfall. When I get to Malaysia, my host takes me to this waterfall in the mountains.

Meditated under that shit for two hours.
HOLY SHIT.

It was a completely different experience. The water gushes onto your head and you can't hear anything. Your mind becomes completely clear. The water is literally so loud that you can't think loud enough to process any thoughts. You end up literally thinking about nothing. It's beautiful. I wanted to do it again, but I feel like I have to experience that for the first time again. I sort of promised myself that I would wait a long time before doing it again. I'm probably going to save it for if my life suddenly comes crashing down on me.

Moral of the story: FUCKING WATERFALLS. FUCK.

>> No.2895074

>>2895064
Were you near the waterfall, or directly under it ? If the latter how did you not die of hypothermia ?!

>> No.2895271

bump

>> No.2895310

>hurrr durrr you will never reach enlightenment so why mediate?

>heeerpderpp you will never become a famous and respected author so why write

>slurppupr you will never know all there is to know so why read

plebs......

>> No.2895312

>>2895074
Towards the side of the waterfall there is less pressure but the water still comes down hard enough to block out sound. Malaysia is really hot so you don't get as cold as you might expect.