April 30, 2017

The concept of species is controversial

Saturday, 29 April 2017, Vinod Sehgal
Dear Ram and  Satsangiji,

It is not that only neurons creates  the experiences. Experiences in the normal awakened state  are created from by the joint aggregate of neurons in the physical brain and  astral mind as transcendental to physical brain. In the state  of Samaadhi, experiences  can arise with only astral mind also.

It is not that all the states  of  Samaadhi  are bliss dominant.
Experience of  the  ultimate reality is made in the highest state  of Samadhi by consciousness when mind and brain no longer exist. Therefore. In that state though consciousness  can have experience  of cosmic  consciousness  but no interpretation, analysis, recording  of that experience due to absence of the mind. Afterwards, when consciousness returns to mind and brain , interpretation  of that  experience is made by mind  depending upon Sanskaaras present in the made. Therefore, experience if the ultimate reality  and its interpretation has nothing to do with neural  basis.


Vinod Sehgal

Dear Vinod ji,


In my view, neurons do not create the experiences (materialism) or vice versa (idealism), rather they are the physical and inseparable mental aspects of an ontic/conscious state of a mind-brain system. The dualistic Sāṅkhya’s terms such as astral, causal, and manifested worlds (if really exist!) are NOT real in the physical world where we live. Therefore, there is no point in getting confused with those entities which are not real, rather they are simply illusions (like dreams) in our physical world. None of us live in those worlds; let them to discuss who can travel and live in those worlds; for us, they are not very useful; we cannot take for granted what others say; we have to experience ourselves because NS-state experiences are ineffable. Therefore, we should first try to understand phenomena of our own real physical world.

As we discussed before, if you would like defend Sāṅkhya then you must first address its 8 serious irresolvable problems, until then we should work on the least problematic foundational Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita (eDAM) framework and critically examine if it can explain all phenomena of our physical world including us.  The problems are elaborated in Chapter 2 (Section 2.4 for Sāṅkhya) of (Vimal, 2012c).

Kind regards,
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.

Dear Sarvesh Gyawali Ji


You have asked “How then do u explain human child's inability to perform certain functions which are very well performed by babies of other mammals right from the point of birth? Why are babies or other mammals more equipped with for survival and much less helpless than we human babies are?” 

Unlike animals, human life is meant to inquire about our true constitutional position and that whole process needs some degree of surrender. Thus human life right from the beginning (birth) teaches us that humility which is necessary for proper surrender. On the other hand, nonhuman body is not equipped with this special rational ability and thus they are focused only on immediate biological needs: eating, sleeping, mating and defending. Being ignorant about the true nature of self, animals may only engage toward the goal of (false) survival, but the true survival (eternal life) is only possible when one realizes and establishes himself/herself in the true spiritual nature as insignificant serving unit of the original organic whole (ādi-puruṣa or primeval personal Absolute).

Thanking you. Sincerely,
Bhakti Niskama Shanta, Ph.D.      

Dear Dr. Ádám Kun
 Namaskar. Thank you for your reply.

You have told “Richard Lenski's study of E.coli evolution is not a study of macroevulution. Long-term evolution does not equate to macroevolution... So it does prove that novelty can arise in evolutionary experiments.”

We repeat that there is no empirical evidence that can support the idea that macroevolution is nothing but the repeated rounds of microevolution added up. The notion that in future microevolution will produce macroevolution is a mere dogmatic faith and there is no valid reason for believing that studies founded on such mere belief system have some scientific standing.  

Your have stated “Please have this argument with those well-versed in the philosophy of science. I admit my limitations. To be honest we do not know if the Sun will rise in the east and set in the west.” If you feel that rising of Sun example belongs to the domain of some sophisticated philosophy of science then let us consider another pure and simple empirical example. We smell by our nose and taste by our tongue. Like evolutionists someone can dogmatically argue that in future it will be reversed: we will smell by our tongue and taste by our nose. When someone challenges that irrational argument then he/she may dogmatically challenge that opposition with the argument similar to yours (Can you prove that macroevolution cannot happen?) “can you prove that in future we cannot smell by our tongue and taste by our nose?” Such naive arguments prove that the supporters of evolution are deviating from the core principles of science and in the process embracing a mere dogmatic attitude to support evolution. Please clarify whether you accept this plain fact or not, because apart from such unscientific arguments you have also repeatedly asserted without any empirical/scientific evidence: “all our knowledge about evolution and the history of Earth tells us that species came from other species.” (you should remember here that the concept of species is controversial in science and what we are arguing here is about the macroevolution and not about a mere reproductive isolation).   

You have further argued “Developmental process can explain some morphological changes. But if that would be the sole difference and it would always be responding to the environment then (1) A chimp raised in a human family would become a human (2) all living organism would share the same genome. None of it is true. Development alone cannot explain the diversification of life.”

Embryological development from zygote to the adult organism empirically proves that it is a miraculous process that can produce not only varieties of cells but also varieties of organs that can perform different function in the body as a whole. After the developmental process is finished, except some special cells, the same cells of an organ produce the same cells to meet different requirements of the body. Similarly the first life (God) can miraculously produce varieties of things that are inconceivable for ordinary processes. Your argument that “A chimp raised in a human family would become a human” is irrelevant because a mere environmental pressure will not force the heart organ to transform into an eye organ. The next argument of yours “all living organism would share the same genome” simply emphasizes the uniformitarian mindset that is commonly practiced in physical sciences but there is no scientific reason to believe that life/nature is enslaved to follow that dictum. You may read about chimera (genetics)  to sense the complex nature of life on our Earth. Thus all empirical evidence confirms that the miraculous developmental process alone can explain the diversification of life. Science must accept miracles because it is empirically observed fact (embryological development) and our scientific methods cannot imitate the same (all the science and all the scientists in the world together cannot make a single blade of grass).   

You have told ““If changes occur in the network as a whole, then the various nodes (species) change accordingly, to maintain the harmony of the network of life." And that is one way to describe evolution. I'm glad that you are on board :)” If you think that evolution and developmental process are one and same then we have no problem to agree with such a concept of evolution.

About the views of scientists under www.thethirdwayofevolution.com you have told “Did they ever question the basics of evolution...?” Please elaborate what are those basics of evolution.

By citing the transient nature of material world (everything has a beginning and an end) you have strangely concluded that “The ape ancestor is our beginning, and an evolved human being is what will come after us. We cannot come from nothing.” What is the scientific basis for this radical conclusion? Moreover, a frog in a well cannot understand the phenomenon of gigantic ocean and thus our tiny brains cannot conceive the realty that is much beyond our observational limits. The transient material world is only a perverted reflection of eternal spiritual world. The word temporary has no meaning if there is nothing permanent.   

You have also told “Survival of the fittest. This is a catchy phrase. It does not equate the "only one one can remain" (as in the Highlander movie). So we also need food, and our being fit includes the survival of other species too. Exploitation has an evil connotation. We are heterotrophs, thus we eat other beings (or parts of other beings). I do not think that it makes us evil.”

On what basis you justify the practice of exploitation attitude! Do you think that there is a way to overcome it? Obviously the concept of evolution does not have any foundation to help us overcome the spirit of exploitation. But the concept of an organic whole does teach us that there is a way by which we can overcome the exploitative spirit. But we leave that to you to understand it by yourself.   

You have asked us “We cannot explain how we became intelligent. We generally cannot, so it is not the problem of evolution or any other branch of knowing, it is our lack of knowledge. Do you know how we become "knowing"?”

At least we know from empirical observation that every intelligent being comes from a preexisting intelligent being and an intelligent being does not appear from the mechanical or chemical aggregation of dull matter. Thus, an intelligent sentient life is primitive and reproductive of itself – omne vivum ex vivo – life comes from life. Moreover, in the miraculous developmental process a heart organ is endowed with the intelligence to perform the function of heart, an eye organ is endowed with the intelligence to perform the function of eye and so on. So the varieties of intelligent cells and organs appear from the developmental process and not by evolution. Similarly, different living organisms are part of an organic whole and are endowed with the appropriate intelligence to serve the purpose of that whole. Therefore, it is not the lack of knowledge but the practice of stubborn support for evolution that forces us to embrace the ignorance by simply denying the evidence.  

You have also not provided any scientific basis for your final conclusion “Evolutionary psychology has a scientific basis. As it involves humans, it is not very easy to do experiments. If any kind of study of the human mind is unscientific, then what is this mailing list about? If inquiry about the mind is a valid scientific pursuit then evolutionary psychology is fine.” Study of human mind is not unscientific but, to dogmatically insist that it came from nonhuman mind is unscientific. One cannot simply inquire and know things, otherwise why we have schooling system. To have proper knowledge one also needs some significant practical help from someone who has the higher knowledge.

Thanking you. Sincerely,
Bhakti Niskama Shanta, Ph.D.          

Dear Whit, Avtar and Priyedarshi,

All laws  exist in   and  emerge out from consciousness. This we observe  in our daily life in the areas of technology, IT and  social life. At the localized level, laws emrrgre  from the conscious  mind. Once emerged out of the conscious mind, laws get  transposed in the entity to which such laws pertain to. For example. , laws pertaining to the working of an aeroplane take birth from  a conscious mind and transposed to the design and structure of the plane.

At  the macro/ cosmological level, design, creation of the universe is much much more complex than  any man  made product.. Therefore.creation of the universe can't proceed ahead blindly as some  accident  or randomly  as some hit and trial. Initiation  for the creation of universe, chartering  across during the  course of creation  of the universe and working of the nature in present course of action in nature must be governed by some pre-existing Laws. Since before  the creation of the universe, there is no space/time/matter/energy, therefore, laws of creation pertaining to these entities can't reside  in such  entities. Laws pertaining to programming  of a computer  can't exist  in a computer  before the hardware  of a computer is ready. Similarly, laws of creation of the universe pertaining  to. space/time/matter/energy  can't reside in such entities before such entities take  birth. In view of this, all such laws pertaining to the creation of universe  take birth from the womb of the cosmic  consciousness  which is absolute  in nature  having no parallel with any thing in the universe. In different spiritual traditions, the aggregate if all such laws  has been indicated by different names. In Upanishadjc tradition, the aggregate  of all such laws of creation has been termed as " Shabada". In modern physics, aggregate if all laws  of the creation has been termed as "Information"
One more interesting aspect. Propagator  of any Laws  also retains the power to alter  the laws as per His will and requirement. This  we observe in our daily  worldly life also. Therefore, cosmic  consciousness, which is the propagator  of all laws of the universe, can also  alter  any one of such Laws  as per His Will and requirement.. When some great fully realized Saints/Yogis, who have identified with cosmic consciousness, take any "Sankalapa" (Resolution) to accomplish something special in nature which is treated as supernatural, nature alters  its Laws temporarily  and locally in order to Sankalapa of the Saint/Yogi to fulfil. But people who dub such  supernatural powers of  some  true and fully  realised  Saints /Yogis as frauds or illusions  or dreams forget the principle that propagator  of Laws can also  alter Laws at any time as per His will and  requirements in nature.

Vinod Sehgal 

priyedarshi jetli Apr 30, 2017
Awareness as a type abstracted from token awarenesses may not exist. I don't know what is this pure awareness. There are token (or particular awarenesses) such as awareness of typing on the key board now. Each of these awarenesses can be dealt with at the nominal level and explained within the physical world without going beyond to a transcendental world.

Respected Priyedarshi Ji
You are right Sir that Indian Philosophy is rich with diverse schools of thoughts, for further reference we can read the details given by (H.H.) Dr B.M. Puri Maharaja in the article “SIDDHANTA” [Advaita, Dvaita, Visisadvaita, Acintya Bheda-Abheda Tattva, Matter, Ego, Maya, Consciousness, Spirit] so that we can understand these subjects more precisely. http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/?download=SIDDHANTA.pdf

There is no conflict between these Schools of thoughts because according to one’s understanding and developing stages of consciousness one adopt a different kind of philosophy. When he/she cross that developmental stages then only one can enter and could understand the next higher kind of stages. In Indian Philosophy there is possibility for everyone to elevate their consciousness by following the different kind of process which is most suitable and soothing according to our present stage. 
Thanks with regards

Dr Shilpi Saxena, MRSC, Ph.D, FICCE 

Savitri Era Learning Forum: Survival of the fittest doesn't mean that it has to be cruel or destructive https://t.co/1ynCCdrOZ6
I don't think anyone living having any "spiritual experience" and so apprehending the world from one's limited perspective is rather honest. If you can inform names of spiritual people with modality of selecting them and their respective levels, it'd be a great service to seekers. Subjective impulses, feelings, or experiences can't be put before others for verification. So scientific/philosophical investigation valid. You can go on expanding on the idea to weave a distinct ontology. I simply objected to your labelling certain human experiences as spiritual.

[Our brains are tricking us all the time, seeing what we have been preconditioned to perceive and leaving out much]
You confine to yourself; disseminating Sri Aurobindo's ideas doesn't bother you, perhaps. Else, others have to be approached at their level. Fine, you may like - Surviving in the Corporate Jungle: A Backpacker's Guide by Ashok Kumar Bhatia https://t.co/eDW8ELYsUd
Fictions as a genre. You can have a separate rubric for spiritual. Btw, all writings, including philosophy, are fiction, says Postmodernism! DF may have been important at a particular stage of your intellectual growth but it's one sided. Just give a reading https://t.co/u4iYW6yps4

A recent book, "Hegel's India" brings into focus his tryst with Indian philosophy and how his notions were inspired by it. https://t.co/ihmiKO8aRG
History of Western Philosophy can no longer be understood as neatly as before as genealogy of Hegel's ideas seem to be imbricated with India https://t.co/NTXCPHFzke
Hegel's India can explain Modi, perhaps. https://t.co/5yXaDslCmB

Savitri Era: Savitri Era Party pleads guilty of simplifying Sri Aurobindo https://t.co/q29a3HQbpg #Hindutva #BJP #RSS #Modi #Evolution

Reimagining and Refashioning Integral Management - Tusar Nath Mohapatra, Savitri Era Learning Forum (SELF) Ghaziabad https://t.co/YGoEhdLyp7

James Marion - 2011 - ‎Preview - ‎More editions
30 There is at least one meditation technique, the integral yoga of the late Indian Hindu spiritual master Aurobindo Ghose, that reportedly is able to take a person through this level (and other levels) without the intense psychic pain. If so, it is ... 376. in the course of her healing work, see Shakuntala Modi,. 96 The Seven Levels ...

Brainerd Prince - 2017 - ‎No preview - ‎More editions
Sri Aurobindo was an Indian nationalist, philosopher, yogi, guru, and poet. This book is an enquiry into the integral philosophy of Aurobindo and its contemporary relevance.

C. Morrison - 2016 - ‎No preview
The argument of this book is so compelling that anyone who wants to know the most justifiable view of reality, what part they play in the workings of a brain, or what's likely to happen to them after they die, is strongly encouraged to ...

Aakash Singh Rathore, ‎Rimina Mohapatra - 2017 - ‎No preview - ‎More editions
Shedding new light on Indological and Hegelian studies, this book systematically presents all of Hegel's writings on and about India for the first time, including translations of his lesser-known essays on the Bhagavad-Gita and the Oriental ...

No comments:

Post a comment