| |
Abstract:
A comparison is presented of three approaches to an
understanding of "what is actual": modern science, Husserlian
phenomenology, and Tibetan Buddhist Dzog Chen. In each approach,
experiment is the central touch stone, while the theoretical
"foundations" are dynamically changing. The roles that
consciousness plays in each of the three approaches are
contrasted, in a comparative analysis that provides a fresh look
at the question of the possibility of a scientific study of
consciousness.
Full text of article
|
