[QUOTE=Siro;80134]Well actually you are both right and wrong.
Yoga did come from a primitive, mystical, and superstitious culture. But at the same time this culture was also pretty technologically advanced, scientific, and highly sophisticated for its day and age, and they did employ forms of science.
The point I have been making is that the science from this tradition, in some ways, is still more advanced than anything we have today. I pointed out for example how the Indian logical systems, particularly used in Indian linguistics and grammar is considered by experts to be more advanced than its equivalents post mid-20th century. In fact they are so advanced we are studying them today in AI science in order to solve problems in AI.
While, technologically Indian culture is not more advanced than today(Let's not get into the stories of ancient nuclear weapons and aeroplanes , Conceptually, it is still more advanced than today. This is true in every positive Indian science: Yoga, Sanskrit, Logic, Ayurveda. There are still many things ancient Indians achieved we are either only starting to achieve today or still have not achieved: such as developing alloys of iron that do not rust(see Iron Pillar of Delhi) or steel reinforced with carbon nanotubes - or nanomedicine in order to treat fatal diseases(ancient nanotechnology!)
What we need to understand is that the culture within which Yoga developed was not superstitious, primitive or mystical, but scientific. That is, it was based on observation and theory; they had peer-review process and universities etc. Very much like modern scientific culture. Although the beginnings of Yoga begin in a mystical climate of the Upanishads, the actual science of Yoga which emerges later is purely grounded in scientific practice. This fact is not known to a lot of Yoga enthusiasts because they have not studied the historical context.
I am talking about the Sumerians, because as far as I know they have the earliest forms of recorded practice that is similar, if not, Yoga.
Fascinating, can you please provide me a reference?
I do think it is a bit absurd to accept the existence of theoretical particles while disregarding something like Chi. But what can I say.
Yes, and it is fact a formal fallacy of inconsistency. If you say A is B, but C is not D, then you are committing a fallacy. Peejay accepts metaphysical entities like atoms, quarks, parallel universes etc, but is skeptical of metaphysical entities like prana, chi etc. Therefore, Peejay is not being consistently skeptical. He obvious accepts metaphysical things predicted in the Western tradition, just not metaphysical things predicted in the Eastern tradition
I know PSI is real, but I do not have any hard scientific evidence in order to logically prove it to anyone so I usually don't mention it. To this date the only explanation I have for it are spiritual/energy/quantum ones and usually only spiritual people will accept such explanations. While to the more scientific/materialistic person, such explanations are unacceptable.
There IS hard scientific evidence, that's the irony of the whole thing. We have had hard scientific evidence for PSI, OBE, NDE, past life memories etc for several decades now. The evidence has simply been piling up. Unfortunately, as I pointed out it undermines the modern religion of materialism which more than a billion people follow today. That is what is holding it back from being declared scientific fact.