05-23-2014, 01:12 AM
(05-23-2014, 12:56 AM)Parsons Wrote:(05-22-2014, 10:29 PM)Fang Wrote:Quote:By the that I mean he is discounting data for the sheer reason he finds it 'patently absurd', which is simply his own personal bias
This is the relativism he is talking about "well that's just like your opinion [bias] maaaan".
Well, it is "like, his opinion, man". Are you claiming what he is saying is objectively true; that the phenomenon he discounts (such as channeling) do not exist at all?
You provide no description of the video in the first post. How would relate this to the Law of One?
What something actually is and how the majority of people see it are two very different things.
He addresses how we use the information for work in consciousness rather then the information itself. I.e when a misinformed notion is used to rank something like "spiritual awareness" into do/do not or have/dont have.
When he talks about science he is talking about the scientific method which is what science is. You don't need constitutionally branded "scientists" to use or learn from science. At the moment the brand is needed because majority don't use science efficiently yet.