Nexey's book

[Good twin]

I finished reading "A Spiritual Model of the Universe". I wasn't really excited about reading it. I am a bit hesitant to delve into philosophy. Funny that the book really addressed what I was / am experiencing.

I kinda thought as I went into it that I was going to be "schooled" on the truth about spirituality. It was so easy to read and so humbly presented, I melted. I loved the book. It validated my understanding, my viewpoint and my choices. It actually validates all viewpoints, understandings and choices.

It's just a lovely and gentle guide to enlightenment with no preachy "know best" crap. I highly recommend it. I truly sincerely and highly recommend it.

Thanks Nexus. :smoochy:

[uniquemand]

Nexus gets all the girls.

[Tiger Lily]

Can somebody post the link to purchase it again?

-TL

[nexus100]

Thank you GT!

The link is my signature, TL. Thanks for the interest.

[AnonOrange]

Parts of it are available online for quick browsing.
http://www.blurb.com/books/726888

Sorry Good Twin, but that book is complete crap.

I'm going to make a bet that this guy doesn't even own a telescope and has no idea what "red shift" is.

And he claims to explain the universe.

OP, you got conned by scientology (I assumed), why get conned again? Take an astronomy course, a physics course if your want to even begin to understand the universe.

This guy claims he's going to give you "truths". It's all BS.

[AnonOrange]

The author says: "This book explains the spiritual structure of the universe, including the one rule you cannot break. Knowing this makes the trip a lot easier. "

Since I don't have the whole book, what is the ONE rule you cannot break. I just want to see if that's BS too.

[nexus100]

Your opinion is noted, AO.

With regard to your question, much of the info in the book is on the "What If" thread, including that "answer". I doubt you'll ike it much, however, and you might be better off skipping that enterprise for a bit. Just an opinion from me.

With regard to this thread, the source is a spontaneous and unsolicited compliment from GT for which I am humbly grateful. I do not intend to bump the thread or use it to promote the book, and am content to let it pass into history. But if I get requests I feel I should address them.

[Tiger Lily]

AO, you have every right to believe that the world ends with your 5 senses, and scientific discoveries about the physical universe. At one time I was there with you -- Carl Sagan was my idol (still love him, actually; though I believe now there's something beyond the physical universe).

But people who are drawn to Scientology in the first place are often people who have a pretty high degree of spiritual awareness. That's one thing I love about this board. Because Scientology isn't what it claims to be doesn't mean that there is no spiritual truth, and I, for one, really value the thoughts of ex-Scientologists; they've been through a sort of "baptism by fire". They know what can go wrong in a spiritual quest, and have highly developed discernment. I have learned a lot by listening to them.

I recognized Nexus right away as someone who had something to say -- was thrilled when he said he had written a book. . .his posts alone have been enlightening to me. (His and many others -- this board is chock-full of wise and grounded people).

I'm not sure what your purpose is in coming to this thread and being so rude about someone's work. I've never seen Nexus do that to you, or anyone for that matter.

-TL

[AnonOrange]

People (in the 50's and 60's) got into scientology because they thought it was SCIENCE. Scientology promoted Hubbard as a SCIENTIST, a doctor, physicist, a nuclear engineer. It was not spirituality back then.

Scientology's marketing got changed because people got less and less interested in science and preferred the easy answers that the Truths (with capital "T") that spirituality claims to provide.

I don't mean to upset, but to wake people up. Sometimes that requires shocking statements, like "this book is crap". Your right to think and publish crap is absolute, just like my opposition to it.

The book makes an incredible claim: To provide a model of the Universe. Such extraordinary claims, like Sagan said, require equally EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. It requires solid theories that are argued back and forth by other scientists until they are disproven. If they stick, they continue to be the truth, but a provisional truth, with a lower case "t".

That's why this book is "not even wrong", it's worse than that.

[AnonOrange]

AO, you have every right to believe that the world ends with your 5 senses, and scientific discoveries about the physical universe. At one time I was there with you -- Carl Sagan was my idol (still love him, actually; though I believe now there's something beyond the physical universe).


Likewise, you have to right to believe that you have an extra sense, but that is also an extraordinary claim. There is thus far ZERO evidence. It's all in your mind.

Come up with ANY evidence of another sense and you have an IMMEDIATE Nobel prize and a ticker parade in New York.

Good luck.

Back to debunking e-meters.

[nexus100]

"It is a blessed thing to have an imagination that can always make you satisfied, no matter how you are fixed."

Mark Twain

[EP - Ethics Particle]

The author says: "This book explains the spiritual structure of the universe, including the one rule you cannot break. Knowing this makes the trip a lot easier. "

Since I don't have the whole book, what is the ONE rule you cannot break. I just want to see if that's BS too.

You are really getting rude, AO! :duh:

Why don't you get and read the whole book - then get and read the "Left Behind" series? :confused2:

Keep busy! :p

EP

[FinallyFree]

People (in the 50's and 60's) got into scientology because they thought it was SCIENCE. Scientology promoted Hubbard as a SCIENTIST, a doctor, physicist, a nuclear engineer. It was not spirituality back then.

Scientology's marketing got changed because people got less and less interested in science and preferred the easy answers that the Truths (with capital "T") that spirituality claims to provide.

I don't mean to upset, but to wake people up. Sometimes that requires shocking statements, like "this book is crap". Your right to think and publish crap is absolute, just like my opposition to it.

The book makes an incredible claim: To provide a model of the Universe. Such extraordinary claims, like Sagan said, require equally EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. It requires solid theories that are argued back and forth by other scientists until they are disproven. If they stick, they continue to be the truth, but a provisional truth, with a lower case "t".

That's why this book is "not even wrong", it's worse than that.

AO - this is simply RUDE. It really bother's me that you butt in on this thread that has nothing to do with you so you can throw around your hairbrained theories while insulting and bashing another's ideas. You really piss me off sometimes AO.

[uniquemand]

It's one thing to say that there are accurate statements which are verifiable because we have evidence for them. It's another to say that there are no accurate statements that can be made without evidence, or to assume that a statement is innacurate without supporting evidence.

A statement is not meaningless because there is no evidence to support it. Nor is that meaning necessarily wrong. Things remain in doubt, to me, until I've gathered what I consider to be conclusive evidence, but this doesn't mean I don't act without evidence, or when I have doubts. A pretense at certainty or a refusal to act without it are both absurd.

[Tiger Lily]

AO, I'm pretty sure that Nexus is just presenting his viewpoint. I haven't read it yet (just ordered it) but I'm pretty sure there's no "ex" that believes anyone, including themselves has a monopoly on truth. When I first came to this board I started a thread asking people what spiritual interests they had now. Just about everyone said something like "no more gurus for me, but right now I'm interested in . . . . .(whatever). . ." Exes are not gullible people (we may have been at one time, but we have learned).

A model is just a representation anyway. Dalton's model of the atom has some truth, and was very good until more discoveries were made and it was "updated" by Thomson, Rutherford, then Bohr, then quantum physics provided the cloud/wave model. Someday science will tweak that one too, but for now it's good, and it's another step closer to the truth. People are aware that it's just a model, and not the ultimate truth of atoms.

I have a "model" for child-rearing that's different from my friends. By sharing them, we all learn and help each other, but I've never seen anyone totally abandon their own model completely.

So I have no problem with somebody claiming to provide a model of the spiritual universe.

-TL

[AnonOrange]

AO - this is simply RUDE. It really bother's me that you butt in on this thread that has nothing to do with you so you can throw around your hairbrained theories while insulting and bashing another's ideas. You really piss me off sometimes AO.

There is nothing rude here. The book makes a fantastic claim that is not substantiated and I'm calling the author on it. Does he have the credentials, the education, the publications to make and back up such claims?

Just because it's "spirituality" doesn't mean it deserves more respect. In fact it deserves less respect.

Nonsense needs to be opposed. People are afraid to oppose people's silly beliefs.

I have this bumper sticker from Voltaire:
"Those we who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"

Absurdities have to be nipped in the bud. We would not be stuck with all this Hubbard crap had he been opposed right from the start.

[AnonOrange]

dup, sorry.

I could go on about the book though :)

[Vinaire]

...

Absurdities have to be nipped in the bud. We would not be stuck with all this Hubbard crap had he been opposed right from the start.


Does that mean we should nip you in the bud, AO?

You seem to be crapping all over the place. :yes:

By the way, I am not being rude. I do see you crapping all over the place.

.

[uniquemand]

There is nothing rude here. The book makes a fantastic claim that is not substantiated and I'm calling the author on it. Does he have the credentials, the education, the publications to make and back up such claims?

Just because it's "spirituality" doesn't mean it deserves more respect. In fact it deserves less respect.

Nonsense needs to be opposed. People are afraid to oppose people's silly beliefs.

I have this bumper sticker from Voltaire:
"Those we who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"

Absurdities have to be nipped in the bud. We would not be stuck with all this Hubbard crap had he been opposed right from the start.

Hubbard was opposed right from the start (and before). The problem seems to be that he had correctly estimated how many suckers were born per minute, and fought his battles either luckily or wisely based on how to access these suckers, rather than fighting the authorities based the merit of his ideas. The authorities, on the other hand, seem to have thought that they only had to establish to themselves that his ideas were bullshit, and that he would then go away. They were wrong, and they remain wrong.

Your view that something only has merits if it will meet with laboratory results, while perhaps correct academically, simply is IRRELEVANT, when it comes down to how a meme will effect people or be transmitted. People don't act based on the merits of a meme.

If the only definition of "model" that you accept is one that has a similar scope and feel as the QED model, then perhaps your statement about Nexus' claim could be taken seriously. However, there are others. People can talk about things on multiple different scales and levels, and I don't think Nexus is talking about your physical universe balances and measures.

[Tiger Lily]

Does that mean we should nip you in the bud, AO?



:wink2:


CONGRATS on 8000 posts Vinaire!!!! (Another, like Nexus, whose thoughts I truly value and respect!)

-TL

[MichelleAsWell]

There is nothing rude here. The book makes a fantastic claim that is not substantiated and I'm calling the author on it. Does he have the credentials, the education, the publications to make and back up such claims?

Just because it's "spirituality" doesn't mean it deserves more respect. In fact it deserves less respect.



Dude--

It's a theory, a philosophy...that he is sharing with other people. He's not gathering adherents in a compound.

Theories and philosophies encourage thought / discussion / reflection...they only have the power you give them...

as for education, publications--many "credentialed" people have had their theories debunked--and anyway--it's not like someone's using this as a college textbook.

Not arguing yay or nay as I haven't read it....but I think you're overreacting.

[AnonOrange]

Hubbard was opposed right from the start (and before). The problem seems to be that he had correctly estimated how many suckers were born per minute, and fought his battles either luckily or wisely based on how to access these suckers, rather than fighting the authorities based the merit of his ideas. The authorities, on the other hand, seem to have thought that they only had to establish to themselves that his ideas were bullshit, and that he would then go away. They were wrong, and they remain wrong.

Your view that something only has merits if it will meet with laboratory results, while perhaps correct academically, simply is IRRELEVANT, when it comes down to how a meme will effect people or be transmitted. People don't act based on the merits of a meme.

If the only definition of "model" that you accept is one that has a similar scope and feel as the QED model, then perhaps your statement about Nexus' claim could be taken seriously. However, there are others. People can talk about things on multiple different scales and levels, and I don't think Nexus is talking about your physical universe balances and measures.

I've been liking your posts, really.

The govt was and still is useless at opposing Hubbard. Grass roots is better at this stuff, but you need lots of grass blades to make a lawn. The media need to be reassured and they'll run with it. I've been fascinated with these stories for 1.5 years, I totally addicted to this uprising and I'm sure it should make for good TV. The medias are scared and only the grass roots movement can help correct that.

"only has merits if it will meet with laboratory results". No I don't think that. The most beautiful science is done in the mind or an a piece of paper. It's the ability of a good scientist to PREDICT stuff and that later gets confirmed experimentally that is beautiful.

The ability to correctly predict comes from deep knowledge of a subject, creativity, IQ, and the ability to connect disparate facts and erect a new theory.

Spiritualists talk out of their asses. (OK that was rude). They have NO knowledge of science, the universe, or even reality. There's nothing creative about random rambling, just like I don't think there's much creativity with much of abstract art. It's crap, but because of our innate desire for easy answers, people seek such materials.

Science for the most part is hard. It takes education, training, scratching your head to understand stuff, for years. Astronomy is a lot harder than Astrology. That's why every newspaper has an Astrology column but most have dropped their Science section.

That's what I'm sad about. We can fix this by making science more interesting like Brian is doing here:
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4163

I support him, but I'm not that patient .

Personally, what I do, which I think is quicker, is to directly oppose the crap, something that Skeptics and Scientists don't do enough of.

[AnonOrange]

as for education, publications--many "credentialed" people have had their theories debunked--and anyway--it's not like someone's using this as a college textbook.

Not arguing yay or nay as I haven't read it....but I think you're overreacting.

Here's the problem.

Yes, credentialed people have had their theories debunked because that's exactly how science works. Every single day of the calendar, there is a scientific conference somewhere. The reason for those conferences is for the presenter to be OPPOSED and debunked. I have presented at such conferences and people have tried to debunk. That's the way it's supposed to be.

But the spiritualists get no such flack. We are supposed to respect them, just because it's spirituality, because it's religion. I say, go ahead and try to debunk, to oppose. It MUST be done. If the crap is any good, it will stay, like a good scientific theory continues if nobody manages to oppose it.

It is all our duty to oppose such useless ramblings.

Cults start off nice, always. "The Secret", "Eckhart Toole" are all infant cults. They must be opposed, with the best science, critical thinking and reason we have.

[AnonOrange]

It's a theory, a philosophy...that he is sharing with other people. He's not gathering adherents in a compound.


And philosophy conferences are the worst! I've been told by Daniel Dennet.

They don't let him get away with anything.

[uniquemand]

Well, thank you, but while what you do may be quicker, I would ask you to consider if it is effective. Opposing an idea seems silly, to me, and opposing it's progenitor even sillier. Now, exposing the flaws in the reasoning is quite valuable, and promoting the understanding of those flaws as flaws, and reasoning as an ability, also quite valuable!

I hope the blades continue to proliferate, but instead, I see the same old political nature of our primate species coming out. One chimp makes an interesting vocalization, and the rest mimic it, until they get bored. Then they go off and mimic some other interesting vocalization, never having understood the first, for the most part.

It's turtles all the way down.

[AnonOrange]

It's turtles all the way down.

If I remember well from a few years ago, the Indian guy that said that was ridiculed quite a bit. I haven't heard it since.

Don't underestimate the power of a good insult!

[uniquemand]

I saw that quote in Douglas Hofstadtler's (sp?) book "Godel, Escher, Bach...". It stuck with me. Funny little parable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down

[Good twin]

Every one of your responses are absolutely perfect. They demonstrate what was outlined in the book. There are different points of view and each is absolutely perfect in it's own way.

Thank you AO for your perfect example of your own point of view.

I really don't see any reason for anyone to be offended. But of course you have that right.

[degraded being]

"It is a blessed thing to have an imagination that can always make you satisfied, no matter how you are fixed."

Mark Twain

Yes and the "I believe in something SPIRITUAL" refrain imo is all about SATISFACTION. It is inevitably satisfying, reassuring stimulating inspiring. And if it wasn't people would ditch it fast.

I don't hear many saying "I believe there is SPIRIT or spirituality etc etc, and then say they believe it entails nastiness, evil, or that the universe is ultimately dangerous or unpredictable. NO. It's always a feel-good positive trip.

So I conclude that all the "spirit' stuff, is what our beloved spiritual ex master dictator would have called a "via" a way to comfort and reassure onself that one has control over existence, over goodness, over things being the way you want them.

[uniquemand]

Well, certainly there are people who do things that we qualify as evil. I'd agree that there's a lot of lipservice paid to controlling life, the universe and everything through spiritual mastery (that, or "serenity" about not having that control, which I think is MUCH more honest).

I believe that assertion of control over matter can only be accomplished through the physical sciences, though amplification of the power of our intentions through technology may make this a distinction without a difference. The person who invents the 'intention amplifier' will bring about an existence which will be indistinguishable from magic.