A hypothesis

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

That's not the point. Even though something exists very commonly all around us, we could still be unaware of it. So, merely saying that 'if the biofield is around us why don't we know or why can't someone measure it?'....is rubbish.   Lots of things could exist all around us that we are unaware of even now and which we might come to know of by and by.

I explained to you in Reply 17 why this is a completely wrong argument. Why have you just ignored that explanation and then repeated exactly the same mistake?
 

No. The biofield  is not just a cosmetic add on. It is the essence of mind itself. In advanced Yogic science, world over,  the biofield and chakras are an important part of understanding mental processes and used for healing and mind control.  That mainstream science does not know of it is neither here nor there. They may get there sometime.....

Except of course is such things "biofield" and "chakras" were in fact "used for healing and mind control" science would be all over them by now. The total absence of evidence for such things though means that there's nothing to investigate.

[Enki]

I think some of you are being a little hard on Sriram. I think that he probably meant the philosophical rather than the scientific definition of 'hypothesis' which allows for a proposition without assuming it to be true as long as it is used as a basis for reasoning. Unfortunately his reasoning seems to fall apart very easily(e.g. his insistence that his ideas are equivalent to gravity, before Newton) which serves to undermine his position, although obviously not in his eyes as he is completely at ease with his own assertions.

[bluehillside Retd.]

enki,

I think some of you are being a little hard on Sriram. I think that he probably meant the philosophical rather than the scientific definition of 'hypothesis' which allows for a proposition without assuming it to be true as long as it is used as a basis for reasoning. Unfortunately his reasoning seems to fall apart very easily(e.g. his insistence that his ideas are equivalent to gravity, before Newton) which serves to undermine his position, although obviously not in his eyes as he is completely at ease with his own assertions.

But as you suggest, even if he means by it "a proposition without assuming it to be true as long as it is used as a basis for reasoning" he never bothers with the reasoning bit that should follow. The initial assertion is the beginning and end of it, and the closest he gets to some means to justify his beliefs falls apart immediately in a flurry of logical fallacies. 

[Enki]

enki,

But as you suggest, even if he means by it "a proposition without assuming it to be true as long as it is used as a basis for reasoning" he never bothers with the reasoning bit that should follow. The initial assertion is the beginning and end of it, and the closest he gets to some means to justify his beliefs falls apart immediately in a flurry of logical fallacies.

Indeed, Blue. I was being a little tongue in cheek!  He fails completely to deliver by dint of reason, completely agreed. However, if he meant a scientific hypothesis, his total lack of producing testable evidence, and ignoring or rejecting pleas for such evidence could only mean that he didn't understand what a scientific hypothesis entails or he is dishonestly trying to distort its meaning. I can't believe that, so I have to come to the assumption that he chooses the philosophical definition, and that he simply fails miserably at the 'reasoning' part.

[ekim]

Another view of life and its origins ..... https://tinyurl.com/y5k3m62v

[jeremyp]

That's not the point.

Wrong. It's exactly the point.

Even though something exists very commonly all around us, we could still be unaware of it.

If we are unaware of something, we can't know it exists.

What made you aware of this so-called bio-field and what tests have you done to show it is not just something you have imagined?

So, merely saying that 'if the biofield is around us why don't we know or why can't someone measure it?'....is rubbish.

No. If something can't be detected, why pretend it is real?

[Sriram]

Dark Matter and Dark Energy cannot be detected though they are presumable all around us. 11 dimensions cannot be detected or even imagined, even though they are supposedly a part of our real universe. And yet all these are accepted as possibilities merely because of some mathematics on pieces of paper.

And here is something that explains the working of the mind and is something that many people can actually feel around them and work with everyday...and its all hocus pocus....!!! 

Its a mindset problem, guys!  Its all in the programming.

[Stranger]

Dark Matter and Dark Energy cannot be detected though they are presumable all around us.

Why do you refuse to ever learn anything at all? Both can and have been detected - the problem is that we don't know what they are.

11 dimensions cannot be detected or even imagined, even though they are supposedly a part of our real universe.

They are not supposedly part of our universe, they are part of an untested hypothesis that is attempting to unify the well tested but incompatible theories we currently have.

And yet all these are accepted as possibilities merely because of some mathematics on pieces of paper.

Nonsense - see above.

And here is something that explains the working of the mind...

Explain? Nothing you've posted yet explains anything.

...and is something that many people can actually feel around them and work with everyday...

Untrue. It's just an interpretation of something some people feel - one for which you can provide no evidence or sound reasoning to support.

Its a mindset problem, guys!  Its all in the programming.

Yes, Sriram, it probably is. Perhaps you should try to break out of your programming and actually learn something for a change!

[Gordon]

Dark Matter and Dark Energy cannot be detected though they are presumable all around us.

The effects of these things have been detected though, and work to understand them is ongoing - science is like that, and it takes time and structured effort to progress from early observations to a fuller understanding, and even then knowledge is provisional. For example, back in antiquity people would have recognised the medical condition we call diabetes without them knowing anything about insulin (or hormones in general) but, over time, medical science did progress so that we now understand that condition well enough to have developed treatments.

11 dimensions cannot be detected or even imagined, even though they are supposedly a part of our real universe. And yet all these are accepted as possibilities merely because of some mathematics on pieces of paper.

And here is something that explains the working of the mind and is something that many people can actually feel around them and work with everyday...and its all hocus pocus....!!! 

Its a mindset problem, guys!  Its all in the programming.

You're conflating scientific theories, based on the likes of mathematics or other related theories, that in due course will be investigated once methods are developed, and quite possibly be rejected, with unsubstantiated woo that you say already exists for which there is, as yet, no reasonable basis to accept.

[torridon]

Dark Matter and Dark Energy cannot be detected though they are presumable all around us. 11 dimensions cannot be detected or even imagined, even though they are supposedly a part of our real universe. And yet all these are accepted as possibilities merely because of some mathematics on pieces of paper.

And here is something that explains the working of the mind and is something that many people can actually feel around them and work with everyday...and its all hocus pocus....!!! 

Its a mindset problem, guys!  Its all in the programming.

The nature of dark energy and dark matter might not be known yet, but unlike 'biofields' etc, we have been able to measure them with instrumentation such as the orbiting WMAP Observatory such that we can say that the cosmos consists of 70% dark energy, whatever it is, and the remaining 30% consists of 25% dark matter and 5% visible matter.  If 'biofields' or 'energy flows' claimed by complementary therapists actually existed then it would be very easy to detect them with instruments; also if the therapies derived from them actually worked beyond some placebo effect then this would be established through clinical trials and they would become mainstream.

People believe in all sorts of things that aren't real. Some people believe in ghosts, and claim they've seen them walk though walls.  Some people believe in aliens and believe they've been abducted by them and subjected to medical procedures.

This is why we do science, to separate fact from fiction.

[Sriram]

My goodness! Either something can be measured by instruments or else it is just a belief..??!!    That is ridiculous.

[torridon]

My goodness! Either something can be measured by instruments or else it is just a belief..??!!    That is ridiculous.

Why ridiculous ?  How else can we discern between things that are artefact of mind and those which are real, other than by taking mind out of the loop ?

[Outrider]

My goodness! Either something can be measured by instruments or else it is just a belief..??!!    That is ridiculous.

Or something can be demonstrated by inference from the behaviour of other measurements, or something could conceivably be measured but we don't currently have sufficiently sensitive instruments... or it might not be real.

O.

[Sriram]

Why ridiculous ?  How else can we discern between things that are artefact of mind and those which are real, other than by taking mind out of the loop ?

What do you mean 'taking mind out of the loop'??!!   This is serious!!   

[torridon]

What do you mean 'taking mind out of the loop'??!!   This is serious!!   

Yes, minds are complex.  Machines are simpler, they don't come with an agenda, or with preconceived notions or moods or prejudices or cultural conditioning or faith positions or cognitive dissonance.  Minds are somewhat untrustworthy; machines tell it like it is, they can do no other.

[Sriram]

Yes, minds are complex.  Machines are simpler, they don't come with an agenda, or with preconceived notions or moods or prejudices or cultural conditioning or faith positions or cognitive dissonance.  Minds are somewhat untrustworthy; machines tell it like it is, they can do no other.

torridon,

Don't you realize that its minds that have made machines?! 

[torridon]

torridon,

Don't you realize that its minds that have made machines?!

Yup, complex minds are capable of making (usually less) complex machines.  Termites (complex) make termite mounds (less complex).  Humans (complex) make thermometers (less complex).

That humans lie whereas thermometers do not comes down to the fact that human minds are more complex than thermometers.

[Sriram]

Yup, complex minds are capable of making (usually less) complex machines.  Termites (complex) make termite mounds (less complex).  Humans (complex) make thermometers (less complex).

That humans lie whereas thermometers do not comes down to the fact that human minds are more complex than thermometers.

There are 'infiltrations' into the human mind....that makes it cluttered and unreliable. That is the reason why mind control is such a big deal. The more controlled and disciplined the mind is, the better. That is what Yoga and meditations do.

However, they don't turn us into machines. On the contrary they bring out our human side more strongly even while removing the clutter.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

Dark Matter and Dark Energy cannot be detected though they are presumable all around us. 11 dimensions cannot be detected or even imagined, even though they are supposedly a part of our real universe. And yet all these are accepted as possibilities merely because of some mathematics on pieces of paper.

And here is something that explains the working of the mind and is something that many people can actually feel around them and work with everyday...and its all hocus pocus....!!! 

Its a mindset problem, guys!  Its all in the programming.

Yes, yours. I explained to you in Reply 17 why this is a completely wrong argument. Why have you just ignored that explanation and then repeated exactly the same mistake?

[Outrider]

There are 'infiltrations' into the human mind....that makes it cluttered and unreliable. That is the reason why mind control is such a big deal. The more controlled and disciplined the mind is, the better. That is what Yoga and meditations do.

However, they don't turn us into machines. On the contrary they bring out our human side more strongly even while removing the clutter.

In what way is that multiplicity of threads of thought not part of being human?

O.

[Sriram]

In what way is that multiplicity of threads of thought not part of being human?

O.

Yes...its part of being human but is a limitation if we are unable to discipline it.  Disciplining the mind is one of the most important requirements for focused  work as also peace and happiness.

[Outrider]

Yes...its part of being human but is a limitation if we are unable to discipline it.  Disciplining the mind is one of the most important requirements for focused  work as also peace and happiness.

Perhaps, but elements of that multitude of threads of thought are a contributor to creativity and imagination - sometimes it's the unobtrusive links that only become apparent from divergent thought streams that can unlock a puzzle.  It's not a limitation, per se, it's a facet of humanity; humans have limitations, but we learn and adapt in order to mitigate those limitations, and that diversity of thinking is part of that capacity to adapt.  There's a time for focus, of course, but there's a time and a place for a more meandering assessment.

O.

[Sriram]

Ok...thanks Outrider.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

My goodness! Either something can be measured by instruments or else it is just a belief..??!!    That is ridiculous

No it isn't. Instruments are one way of validating a belief such that it could reasonably be called knowledge, but there are others. Your claim for example that some of your practices are medically effective could be tested by applying them to one sample group and not to another, and then comparing the results with simple observation. If the first group consistently got better more often or more quickly than the latter, then it would be reasonable to conclude that an effect of some kind was occurring. Thus the claim "effect" would be knowledge. If there was no significant difference (ie, nothing more than statistical noise) on the other hand, then it would be reasonable to conclude that the claim was nothing more than a personal belief. 

Your problem here is that, whether by instruments or by an other means, you offer nothing to suggest that your claims of knowledge aren't in fact just your unqualified beliefs.