(August 23, 2015 at 9:12 am)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: If my definition is so very and obviously wrong, you should have no trouble explaining how. Support your statements or fuck off.

Oh dear gawd, please do not provoke our yogimeister to explain again about intuitional science.  

The green box awaits.

What green box?

SPOILER ALERT

My green box. The one that intuitional science runs from like Ken Ham from a second grader's question.

(August 23, 2015 at 10:27 am)Stimbo Wrote: My green box. The one that intuitional science runs from like Ken Ham from a second grader's question.

That question is too easy Stim.
No problem with that.
I can see very clearly that inside that box you put your denture when you go to sleep.
Next question please.       

Oh, by the way, what about my question about the meaning of philosophy?
Christmas is getting closer and closer and i am still waiting.      

(August 26, 2015 at 6:22 am)Little Rik Wrote:

(August 23, 2015 at 10:27 am)Stimbo Wrote: My green box. The one that intuitional science runs from like Ken Ham from a second grader's question.

[...]
I can see very clearly that inside that box you put your denture when you go to sleep.[...]

Well, Stimbo - did Gollum guess right?
Holding my breath here...

Right, that's great, now we have something to work on at long last. Now, how do you suggest we test your intuition about the contents of the box? See, science has to be falsifiable in order for it to be tested and corrected. Can you think of a way we might do that?

(August 23, 2015 at 9:12 am)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: Ayurveda is a form of traditional (read: alternative) medicine, Rik. It is not science. When scientists got ahold of traditional medicinal practices, they tested them, and the stuff that worked became medicine, while everything else became horse shit. If Ayurveda is your evidence, nice try. Take another run at it.

Traditional or not traditional what difference would it make?
As far as it works who care.
So yes it works therefore this system of acquiring knowledge can be called SCIENCE.
End of the story.

Quote:Pinky, you haven't got the slightest clue about the meaning of philosophy so please refrain from using this word until you make some progress in this field. 

Quote:Nice claim. Care to support it? When I called you out on not understanding the definition of science, I pretty well explained how you were wrong. Once again, my definition is:
Philosophy: the study (or one particular field of study) of ideas about knowledge, truth, and the nature and meaning of life
Explain how that definition is wrong or GTFO.

You can well throw your definition to the dogs.
Philosophy is all about wisdom but wisdom that help the individual to progress.
The study can help to progress just a little bit.
The real progress is made out of hard work.
And the work has got to be done within because the real knowledge is within not outside in the books.
You may have noticed that when you can not get a solution and an answer to some of your problem you think and think and think again.
Inventors got the ideas after thinking and thinking time and time again.
Why would they think if the knowledge wouldn't be within?
As far as to get this knowledge from within is all an other story.
You need a practical method given to you by those who did the hard work before but don't worry about that Pinky.
All will become clear in your mind at the most appropriate time.
It would help a lot if you stop trying spouting bulls all the time  
and start looking within.  

Quote:http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?scrip...rection=ES

Quote:Ok, now which word are you referring to specifically? I see various words that are sometimes translated as "science," but in general it looks like those are also words for things like "wisdom," "arcane study," etc. This is reflective of the fact that old thought systems tended to conflate religion, philosophy, and science as being more or less the same thing. While some of those words might get translated as "science," a more representative and accurate translation would probably be "magic" in many of those cases.

All i did is to show you that even in the very old time people were involved in acquiring knowledge
and acquiring knowledge is to be engaged in science.

Quote:Once again you haven't got the slightest clue about yoga and Hinduism
so please refrain from making guessing after guessing.
Yoga is pure spirituality while Hinduism is a religion.
Yoga came first and Hinduism follow but after so long pure spirituality changed 
and gave way to ritualism which in practice is worth next to nothing. 

Quote:Nice claim. Care to support it? Again, my (and also Google's) definition of yoga:
Yoga: a Hindu spiritual and ascetic discipline, a part of which, including breath control, simple meditation, and the adoption of specific bodily postures, is widely practiced for health and relaxation.
If my definition is so very and obviously wrong, you should have no trouble explaining how. Support your statements or fuck off.

Wrong all the way Pinky.
Yoga came first so it can not possibly be an Hindu discipline.
Hindus practice a distorted way of the real yoga.
The same can be said for Christianity and Buddhism.
Christ was a spiritual being like Buddha.
They teach spirituality not religions which once again are distorted spirituality.
But you wouldn't know the difference.
Would you Pinky?  

(August 26, 2015 at 6:41 am)Stimbo Wrote: Right, that's great, now we have something to work on at long last. Now, how do you suggest we test your intuition about the contents of the box? See, science has to be falsifiable in order for it to be tested and corrected. Can you think of a way we might do that?

You are a million miles far away from understanding how the system works.
If i could have the intuition to know the correct lotto numbers i could be rich but in this way i most probably would loose track of the purpose of life and fall in the pit of materialism.
Intuitional science is all about real progress which is to find who you really are and become one with God.
By developing intuitional science you get knowledge about the spirit within not about materialistic gains.
A true spiritual teacher would never allow you to make gains in the material world but there are some
people who use this knowledge to do so.
Their short term gains will be turned into long term hell but that doesn't concern me.
But let us be concern about falsifiable evidence.
This intuitional science is not a physical science therefore the evidence can only be found within.
We can not touch, hear or smell the mind.
We know that exist but by using our physical means we have no way to prove that the mind exist.
Further the mind we got the superconscious mind.
If we can not prove that the mind exist by using physical means just imagine how impossible can be
to get evidence of something higher than the outer mind.
So no.
Intuitional science can only be proven within and the method used to prove something material can not possibly work in this case.