Synchronicity



Karbon Karbon tetrakarbon at hotmail.com
Sun Jun 13 12:25:36 CDT 2004


>Are you kidding?  Freud's antiquated theories are mostly laughed at by 
>today's psychologists.

I don't pretend to be an expert on this, but isn't the basis of his 
conclusions - the analysis of dreams, and such - still respected?  I'm not 
saying that his conclusions are necessarily still in vogue, but his premises 
I think still hold some weight.  Not a physchologist, but somewhat 
interested in it.

>Who's done more to explain the universe?
>Spiritual philosophers or scientists?  Give me a break.

They explain different aspects, why even compare them?  Both seem important 
enough.  It's like asking "Who's explained more about the universe, physics 
majors or english majors?"  It's not a contest...  In terms of "The Seeker", 
I feel pretty certain Pete's talking about philosophical (not necessarily 
spiritual) understanding, not the minutia of quantum physics.  The two 
fields answer completely different questions: "How?" and "Why?".

-- Ned Ruggeri

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® 
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963




More information about the TheWho mailing list