From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is illegitimate to say that things that don't rigorously follow the scientific method are not science. Science, as somebody wrote above, is "what scientists say it is". There's lots of science going on that does not rigorously apply the scientific method, folks. How long did it take for Einstein's theories to be proven experimentally? A long time. There's a lot of work going on in quantum physics that is not experimentally proven, and is far from being so. But nobody doubts whether it is "science". Again, I apologize if someone doesn't like to hear this, but in my opinion the term "pseudoscience" is an example of mainstream scientists banding together to reject and brand the infidel.

---

Yoga is a philosophy in and of itself, and that philosophy is intertwined with the path of practice that leads to experience of the reality behind the philosophy. Jesus hinted at this when he said "I am the way, the truth, and the light," implying that these three are actually one in the self. Since yoga philosophy is esoteric, it may be difficult to explain, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

As for the relationship with religion, the fundamental principles of yoga form a subset that is shared with the esoteric domains of all major religions, including Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, to say nothing of Buddhism. The problem is that each religion comes from a different cultural and linguistic context, and so they use different words/forms of expression to refer to a single underlying concept. For example, a Christian may object to the term "Self-realization" or "God-realization", but not have any problem with the term "entering the Kingdom of God" as used by Jesus. He or she may love the idea of "baptism" but consider "initiation" or the concept that a "dip in the Ganges will wipe away your sins" to be evil or sacriligous. Smithfarm 10:44, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The Judeo/Christian/Muslim (remember, Christianity and Islam both have the same roots) tendency towards "exclusiveness", claiming one's own religion as the only "true" religion and branding all others as infidels or otherwise being intolerant towards them, is an unfortunate result of the development of their respective cultures from ancient history up to the present day. The idea of tolerance toward others is not programmed in. I'm not talking about the religions themselves. The teachings are right on. A Christian, for example, is right to consider his or her chosen path as the only right and best path for him/her. I'm talking about the cultures of violence and coercion that have grown up around religions. --Smithfarm 15:51, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

---

Yoga is sometimes associated with Hinduism and its spiritual dimension is sometimes confused with religion. Actually, yoga in its essence has nothing to do with Hinduism, nor is yoga a religion per se. Yoga is not concerned with any specific manifestations of the Supreme Being, and advanced yoga practitioners are generally instructed (by Patanjali, among others) to meditate on the Supreme (Ishwara) in any form that appeals to them. Thus, the spiritual dimension of yoga is open to all believers regardless of religious affiliation or lack thereof, and the practice of yoga is an aid or path to deepen one's experience and knowledge of the spiritual level of one's own existence, not an affiliation with any particular religion.

Integral to the concept of yoga is the idea that yoga can be practiced on many levels. Practitioners are urged to practice on the level that is natural to them. Thus, if one is a non-believer, this is no obstacle to yoga practice. Yoga is not conditional upon any belief or act of faith. One need not believe anything in order to start practicing yoga. The learning of yoga is experience-based, rather than faith-based. As the practitioner gains experience, the spiritual dimension of yoga unfolds. There is no requirement that the practitioner "believe" in anything without having first experienced it.

That said, Patanjali (considered the classic authority on yoga) does call for the yoga practitioner to develop and foster shraddha, or confidence. In its essence, shraddha is confidence in one's own true Self and one's chosen path to realization of the Self. Various practitioners may place emphasis on different aspects of yoga for their practice of shraddha. They may develop confidence in their chosen deity, their yoga teacher (guru), ancient scriptures on yoga, a particular yoga path or school, etc. and this choice is a matter of personal preference or, for some, religious necessity. Shraddha is considered by Patanjali to be one of the fundamental and necessary pillars upon which progress in yoga is founded, but he does not go into specifics, leaving this to the practitioner's choice and preference.

Contents 1 Wiktionary/sectility 2 Holistic science? 3 Neural Networks (artificial) 4 Hello, do you remeber Awasthi 5 Wishes 6 holism 7 Wellness 8 Thank you 9 Holi greetings 10 Aliexis Carrel edit 11 Ashirwad 12 transdisciplinary 13 Czechia 14 Holism in science 15 M.P. Birla Foundation 16 Biomass edit 17 Panel on Interdisciplinarity 18 WikiProject Hinduism and Hindu Mythology 19 Raja Yoga controversy 19.1 Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

[edit] Wiktionary/sectility

Don't worry about the "wiktionary" tag on sectility, actually I like them, I just took it out because I checked and there wasn't an entry for it at that time, I thought maybe it was in a queue or something. I have a problem with "move to wiktionary" tags if I think they are going to damage wikipedia's coverage of some topics, but that's a different issue. Kappa 17:59, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Holistic science?

Hi. I found you in the history of the Ken Wilber article. I recently picked up the orphaned Holistic science page and I'm floundering around looking for other people who might be interested in the subject. I am extremely lacking in knowledge of the subject, but find myself drawn to it nonetheless. Therefore I would appreciate the opportunity to interact with people who are more knowledgeable. The first question I wanted to ask was: Are you in favor of having an article with the title Holistic science? I have also created "Non-reductionist science" as a redirect to it. --Smithfarm 13:35, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have a couple of responses. One, there is clearly a methodology that Sheldrake and others use, and skeptics cannot tenably argue against accurately describing that methodology. Maybe it should be called something other than holistic science, although I see nothing wrong with that name. The simple fact is that there are several scientists and theorists who call themselves holists. One wonders what possible objection there would be to calling their activities "holistic science." Especially when "holistic science" brings up 10,000 google hits. Hello!

Ken Wilber talks frequently about "narrow science" and "broad science." In his usage, the latter is what he is doing, and includes, for example, the testimony of mystics, which would be ignored or explained away by "narrow science." I havent read Wilber's book on science, but I have read his more philosophical works which do touch on the subject. Here is another good reference. Sheldrake seems to call his scientific methodological paradigm "holism" or "organicism."

Two, I'm not sure whether "Goethean methodology" refers to the method of Goethe's Theory of Colors, or to Rudolf Steiner, or to both. I am familiar with the Theory of Colors, but not with Steiner. Perhaps M Alan Kazlev (who maintains an enormously informative website on New Age ideas) could hep us with the Steiner aspect.

Three, perhaps the article should be re-written (again), in response to the complaints of skeptics. Simply asserting that the methodologies of Goethe, Steiner, Sheldrake and Wilber diverge from that of reductionist science seems like a pretty uncontroversial claim. I'm not sure if we can include Wolfram in that group, however. --Goethean 16:25, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Neural Networks (artificial)

I voted on your proposal to move Neural network to Artificial neural network. I like what you said about this and related topics being underrepresented. If you care to, you might take a look at the Holistic science article, where I have included neural networks as an example of a field where holistic approaches are sometimes used. My knowledge of neural networks, artificial or otherwise, is limited to copyediting journal articles written by foreigners with poor English, and that a long time ago. If you're versed in the field (especially the holistic science part), I'd love to have your input for the article. Also please check out the holistic science talk page and the discussions going on at Category talk:Pseudoscience#Alternative approachs and Talk:Pseudoscience#NPOV tag (if you're interested). --Smithfarm 19:43, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Cool. Seems, now we are getting a majority for the vote. I will check all the articles you posted. But on Monday, I am too tired now, it's Sat. 5:00 am here and I just finished working on a paper and want to get home. It would be great to have some community to work together on some of these topics and I'd love to contribute. I'm not an expert in the field, but I am interested in it. I'll post you later Ben (talk) 20:27, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

I wrote a first sketch of an article on neural networks (brain). It's at User:Male1979/Neural Network. It would be nice if you could check my English, if you're still interested, thanks, Ben (talk) 09:04, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, we had an edit conflict. I stored my version. I will bring your changes back of course, thank you. Ben (talk) 11:31, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

I just copied your changes back into the article. It reads much nicer! Thanks a lot! Ben (talk) 11:40, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

Do you have an idea how to rename the section "earlier models", or maybe a more general idea about how to structure the article? Ben (talk) 11:45, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about the edit conflict; I'm glad you were able to salvage my edits. As to your question about structuring, yes I think we will have to think of a way to divide the article into sections and subsections. Also the intro may need some fleshing out before confronting the reader with technical terms like dendrite and axon. I will look at it. --Smithfarm 08:24, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Very cool. Happy to hear you are still on the article. I will also do some research to extend it. (Ben ^{talk) contr 08:38, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)}

[edit] Hello, do you remeber Awasthi

Hello, I have recently done Ancient Indian science and technology, hope that the article will interest you. Your kind suggestions are invited for further improvements. Thanks.--Bhadani 18:21, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wishes

I wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year. --Bhadani 14:59, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Wow, so I got a reply from you. Let us talk more! --Bhadani 13:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Right now I do not have Skype. But, soon I shall arrange, and we shall talk from time to time. Thanks for wishing me Om-Shanti, it gave me a lot of confidence. --Bhadani 15:10, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I got the e-mail, and replied immediately. In case, you have yahoo messenger, we can chat sometimes. --Bhadani 15:52, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] holism

Thanks for the note; I'll see what I can do. — goethean ॐ 21:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wellness

Yes, I redirected them, since there was nothing of value in the pages. If you can add verifiable content, then they'll be OK. I previously merged them to "Health", see [1], but that was vandalised. There's no reason for two wellness pages. What do you think about the merge to health? --CDN99 14:15, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, wellness refers to mental health, so that's why I changed the redirect in that instance. If anything, there should be only one wellness page (at wellness), not one each for alternative medicine and medicine. --CDN99 14:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

If it can be made clear that wellness is holistic and not reductive, then I'd support the two pages. I did jump the gun a bit redirecting the pages...I just noticed that they were written to have no information other than that in the mental health article plus one user's (John Gohde's) views thrown into the mix. --CDN99 14:48, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

What if "wellness (medicine)" redirects to "mental health", and the contents of "wellness (alternative medicine)" are moved to "wellness", and expanded on there? --CDN99 15:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes dear friend, it is regarding your message Wellness (alternative medicine). I will surely see the contents, and try to offer my views. And, nothing like inconvenience - it is my pleasure. --Bhadani 14:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thanks for your kind words re:Carrel. It's easy to believe NO ONE out there is listening and understands that some people are abusing the system. The Nobel Prize line was one of the things that was cut by the one who set out to defame him. And no, it's in no way disputed. [2] Thanks again! Nhprman ^UserLists 17:14, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I can see where over-eager NPOV enforcement could be a problem, but in this particular case, it would be welcomed. Someone who makes over a dozen edits in just a few days that end up changing a small, NPOV article into a biased rant is a big problem. It would be wrong to whitewash some of the subject's views, but it's also wrong to bury him in obscure, heavily disputable "facts" in order to defame him personally, then delete all positive references in the article. That's clear bias and POV. I would revert these, and have, but I can't go it alone, since there's that three-revert rule. Not that this person abides by any rules. (sigh. Frustrating.) Nhprman ^UserLists 00:14, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

You're right. I actually had to step back and stop editing (or even looking at) that article for a week or two because I was so angry with the situation. It's really not worth it. It's just a page on the Internet. On the other hand, ideas matter, and so does the truth, and if distortions are left uncorrected, many others will see the page and believe them to be true. Nhprman ^UserLists 17:11, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Your statements make a good deal of sense, and don't worry about feeling you're imposing. Mentoring each other and supporting each other here is the best way to make it work. I did post something after he responded, because the statements he made were not quite right. But I'm not angry about it anymore. You're totally right - things will work out, and I can surely tolerate a bit of nonsense for a while on that page in the meantime. Nhprman ^UserLists 19:59, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Holi greetings

Hi, I am wishing you a happy Holi, the unique Hindu celebration of color and brotherhood among all members of the humanity. The festival falls on 15th March 2006. I have collected A Gift Pack of Quotations for you contained in the sections Do things Differently & Something More , which are part of the on-going discussion pertaining to my nomination of Idleguy for adminship. You are aware of the tradition that if you throw colored water on flames of burning Holika, you enable a Prahlad to emerge from the flames!!! I again convey Holi greetings to you and your family!!! --Bhadani 16:13, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aliexis Carrel edit

Hello. I've reverted the edit of the Islamism section pending our conversation on the subject. I've done a bit of reading on this subject as you should also. The Berman and Tariq Ali books are readily available. Reviews of their work, and interviews with them, all mentioning Carrel's influence are searchable via Google. If you want more sources, I contributed quite a bit on this to the Islamofascism article, although this may have been moved to Religion and Fascism. Carrel's writing is offered for sale on quite a few Islamist websites. (Considering the influence of Qutb on that movement, this isn't surprising.) Read the literature that I've cited and give me your feedback.

Adam Holland 18:33, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ashirwad

Ashirwad, blessings of Gurujee to you. I shall try to expand the stub named Vyas Samman. I think that it has potentila for expansion. You also try to collect more information. --Bhadani 13:19, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] transdisciplinary

could you provide a citation to your edit of transdisciplinary? I looked on the professors page, but don't read German, so i couldn't find the citation. --Buridan 20:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC) thank you, that was most helpful--Buridan 12:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Czechia

User:Juro says that's the official short-term, let's wait until he produces some documents before any controversial edits. I'm starting to doubt it's verifiability, and we still don't know if it's a recommendation or an official thingamabob. +Hexagon1 _contrib ^talk 11:41, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I used to live there, and I still visit when-ever I can, so I may be slightly out-of-the-loop on this. I'll stop insisting on Czechia though, I mean, honestly, who cares? +Hexagon1 (talk) 10:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Holism in science

Please work with User:ScienceApologist. I can't work with him. — goethean ॐ 18:21, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] M.P. Birla Foundation

Dear Smithfarm, your message of 1st April 2006 in connection with above - I shall shortly try to give my comments. I could not do this earlier due to being indisposed - a message in this regard is appended below:

"Hello, Now I am all right. I am pasting a message below explaining my absence. Best regards".

"My dear friends, I regret that I could not notify you about my absence. Actually, I fell sick suddenly on the morning of 3rd April 2006, and was confined to bed and was not allowed Internet access. Now, I am more or less in "shape". The problem was very serious infection. I missed wikipedia and wikipedians for three long weeks, and I feel really sad… for first few days, I even dreamt of wikipedia! I think that in next few days, my wiki-life shall become normal. I thank you for the concern and care, I know wikipedians are the most active virtual community, and Wikipedia is Better than the Best." --Bhadani 10:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biomass edit

I think you may have removed the following from the biomass entry.

Systems ecologists also call stored energy, "embodied energy", and in some instances "emergy". From this perspective, biomass, or stored solar energy, is an equivalent expression for "solar emergy".

Why so? Sholto Maud 07:04, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't remember. Did I provide an explanation? --Smithfarm 10:52, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Panel on Interdisciplinarity

I'm working on organizing a panel on interdiscipliniarity for the NCIIA [3] -- Since you've done some really interesting work on the interdiscipliniarity article, I'm wondering if you'd be interested in talking with us about the panel.

Contact me at brian at ballsun dot com or 585-475-6651. Denubis 20:12, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Hinduism and Hindu Mythology

You may consider joining these projects, thanks Gizza^{Chat ©} 09:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Raja Yoga controversy

Dear Hinduism Project editors,

There is a controversy on the Hinduism regarding Raja Yoga. Please read the debate on the Hinduism discussion page. Your comments are requested on the Hinduism discussion page to help resolve the controversy. Thank you. HeBhagawan 15:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can