It's been real...it's been interesting just.,,,

Jestor wrote: Hows this:

The official stance is "The Temple doesn't have an official stance on ESP."

Right.

I did not say ESP is a joke. I said I don't view The Field as a scientific book. The point of the lesson is for the reader to say what they think about it and defend their conclusions. It's supposed to be controversial.

The way to know if you belong here is by getting to know the members and reading and participating in a variety of post topics and chats.

So far you look like you fit.

"When we all thinks the same, no one thinks very much."

I'm not "in" on anything....most of the time I'm more on the "outside".....

Totjo itself has no official opinion on mctaggert, however each member has their own view on the subject...this does not negate its validity nor does it promote it...it simply provides an alternative that you as an individual can choose to accept or reject....I've seen a few of the rather enthusiastic debates at the higher levels to remove mctaggert...personally I find some of her claims to have validity based on my own research and experiences, and some of her claims I find to be completely ludicrous...I find none of it to be "scientific" ...

Hundreds of years ago medicine was based around the 4 bodily fluids (black bile,yellow bile,green bile,and red bile...I'm not 100 percent certain on the last one) now we know these to be wrong....imagine what we'll know to be wrong in another 100 years....

You may not view mctagert as science but she does and out of the thousands of books the temple could have provided to new recruits the temple chose hers. There IS a reason for this, what it is I do not know. You showed me a new religion, outlined its basic tenants and then offer me her readings as a supporting text. Why?

Br. John wrote: I did not say ESP is a joke. I said I don't view The Field as a scientific book. The point of the lesson is for the reader to say what they think about it and defend their conclusions. It's supposed to be controversial.

This has already been answered, here is an example of one of these answers...

Ohh ok .. Mctaggert is a cipher then?

Donkey wrote: Ohh ok .. Mctaggert is a cipher then?

Can you elaborate on what you mean? I'm unclear

My take from Br.John is that you use mctagert not as a credible source of information but as a tool to uncover the falsehoods of unscientific reasoning. Kind of like we are going to show you who we are by showing you who we aren't. Is that correct?

Would you agree the force exists?

Or, call itvwhat you will, God, Allah, etc...?