GW said: "Actually getting to the higher consciousness takes many years of effort. There aren't any short cuts."

Synchronicity dude! That's exactly what I was going to say to you! In addition to the mystical experiences I've already described, I've spent 1000's of hours hitting the books, being trained by scholars who have spent even more time hitting the books than I have, and just thinking real hard. And then some wanker who does breathing exercises comes along and tells me there aren't any shortcuts. That is truly comical.

Jack36: This is amusing, but its a straw man. Knowledge, even allegedly mystical knowledge, is still subject to peer review.

It's not a straw man. It exactly parallels the nonfalsifiable claims of the mystics. And their claims are not subject to peer review in any meaningful sense of the word. Just because Monty the Mystic, part time editor of Shambhala Magazine reads a Wilber book and says it's profound, that is not peer review. That is sham peer review.

I repeat: Once I had a mystical experience in which I learned that all the mystical experiences, including Ken Wilber's, were simply states of consciousness generated by unusual chemicals. If you haven't had this experience you can't understand it.

Now prove that I am wrong and give me one good reason why my claim to secret knowledge is any less convincing than Wilber's.

Anyone for tennis? We don't need a court or some reductionist net. And only the earhtbound think we need to be in the same place. Here we go.

THWOCK!

Oooooooh. That's an ace if I ever saw one, boys. I win.

I haven't spent much time meditating although I don't doubt that people derive some benefit from it. I just don't think they get any secret knowledge from it other than what epistemologists call knowledge-by-acquaintance with what the experience of meditation is like.

All of of these oceanic feelings of oneness with the universe strike me as variations on Mihály Csíkszentmihályi's concept of flow. I get it from hiking in the wilderness, playing guitar or listening to other people make music, smoking dope, having sex, playing sports, getting deep into a well writen book of philosophy or many other ways that all strike me as more rewarding than sitting around breathing a certain way -- not that there's anything wrong with it.

I've had psychedelic experiences and the value of them was that they gave me a glimpse of what was possible, i.e., they showed me that there were higher realms of consciousness.

But the path to those higher realms wasn't through psychedelic drugs. It was through many hours of meditation, study, self-examination, and a lot of trial and error.

You don't reach the higher consciousness by dropping acid. It takes a lot of effort and being willing to give up your own ego.

Is that something you can agree with?

Not really. I believe the real take away is that brain is capable of producing these experiences when activated by certain chemicals and that there are a number of ways of activating those chemicals.

You can call it "higher" consciousness (I think of it more as "different" consciousness) but where I differ from the mystics is in refusing to grant these experiences the status of, as someone once said, a "separate reality". I believe its part of THIS reality.

I'd really love for there to be some kind of heaven or nirvana or what have you. That would be great. It would also be great if there were a Santa Claus and an Easter Bunny but I don't think they are real either.