Have these studies been reproduced elsewhere, or is it a singular group of researchers extolling the virtues of meditation?
Here's a good review article to start you off.
https://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleID=1809...
Putting meditation to the test (2011)
41–50 of 52 posts
Re: Putting meditation to the test (2011)
#42I'm curious if these scientists try to make the connection between the flow and the focused attention meditation. It seems to me that by trying to meditate, you are actually trying to get to the state of flow.
I don't think so. Flow makes you blind to everything that is arround you. It's pretty much hyper-focused tunnel vision. "Mindfulness" meditation, on the other hand, gives you a very wide awareness. Of yourself and of your environment. Not just on the task at hand. At least that's how I see it.
There's many types of focus and meditation. Meditation is like swimming. People can study, discuss, and pontificate about swimming, it's all academic until we're in the water sloshing around ourselves.
In the case of mindfulness that is triggering some dismissiveness on your part, there is also abstract, settled, or awareness typed meditation. The latter, focusing on abstract, awareness of awareness (being a witness to your thoughts) without directing them can be just as useful to unlock creativity in day to day life.
Some meditative experiences are very similar to flow and allows the ability to slip into flow that much easier. Some folks can slip into meditation just sitting at their desk by closing their eyes and come out a few minutes later settled and focus in hand for something.
Re: Putting meditation to the test (2011)
#43Re: Putting meditation to the test (2011)
#44Re: Putting meditation to the test (2011)
#45Re: Putting meditation to the test (2011)
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its also how science fails to take root: by discouraging people from trying things, just because it hasn't been rubber-stamped by the authorities yet ..
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation." - William Paley
This is the same William Paley (1743–1805) who proposed the watchmaker analogy arguing that complexity in nature was teleological evidence of a creator or intelligent designer.
Re: Putting meditation to the test (2011)
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Worst case scenario: you spend half an hour day relaxing. Doesn't seem like a terrible waste of time.
Worst case scenario: you persist in a course of treatment that has no evidence of efficacy rather than get treatment with some evidence of efficacy.
Meditation !== Medication
Re: Putting meditation to the test (2011)
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meditation isn't solely or even primarily a method for treating things.
The article is full of examples of meditation being used to treat mental and physical ill-health. >> Putting meditation to the test >> “Training allows us to transform the mind, to overcome destructive emotions and to dispel suffering,” says Buddhist monk Matthieu Ricard. >> and tested the effects of different meditative practices on cognition, behaviour, physical and emotional health and brain plasticity. >> It sugg…
Sure, because they are looking at meditation as a treatment modality, while that's not all that it can be used for.
If you're doing something for fun, relaxation, and/or enjoyment - do you require randomized clinical trials establishing that said activity has provided these types of experiences for other people? Or can you trust your own appetite for fun, relaxation, and enjoyment?
Re: Putting meditation to the test (2011)
#49Re: Putting meditation to the test (2011)
#50Have these studies been reproduced elsewhere, or is it a singular group of researchers extolling the virtues of meditation?
as a 10+ yr practitioner, studies are useless. practice it and test it by yourself, no harm done and a lot to gain ;)
This is how homeopathy has hung on as long as it has.
Thinking like this kills people.
Also, am I the only one who sees a massive conflict of interest in a practitioner saying their field doesn't need to be investigated?