No evidence?

I have seen much evidence. But it by its nature is not replicable laboratory evidence. How could it be?

IF we were primitive superstitious people about the primacy of matter, and based on that concluded that harming the brain would snuff out the psyche, why would that be any different? I think th eparallel is actually quite apt. It is true that thinking people, generally, do not cut themselves off from enquiry, but in both these examples they appear to be doing so.

It is one thing to adhere to a well-reasoned viewpoint and defend it against unreason.

But it is another thing to understand where and how viewpoints are produced, made, bought and sold, and enquire as to the nature of that process. Any paradigm is all-embracing in its bloom, when tons of new data flood in to support it; but any paradigm also eliminates the anomalous. Measuring with the units of space-time, all existence is spatial and temporal.
IF we could learn to measure with the units of thought itself -- rather than using thought to bound itself into space-time -- I am sure it would paint a different picture altogether.

A


A