The Science of the First Person

De: Douglas Harding

Narrado por: Richard Lang

This book is about the heart of religious experience, namely Enlightenment (which is finding the truth concerning oneself), and about science (which is finding the truth concerning other things), and about the relationship between them.

It claims that Enlightenment is more truly scientific than science itself; and that, without Enlightenment, science is only half the story and therefore full of contradictions, of insoluble problems both theoretical and practical. It shows how, when at last one turns one's attention round and ceases to overlook the Looker - the First Person at the near-end of one's microscope or telescope or spectacles - these contradictions are resolved. Some 37 examples are given, taken from such diverse fields as physics, mathematics, semantics, epistemology, and psychotherapy, to show how nothing less than Enlightenment makes sense and works out.

The listener will find that Enlightenment is not, after all, an unattainable mystery, but perfectly natural and instantly accessible to anyone who carries out the simple test - the basic experiment of the Science of the First Person - which this audiobook describes.

©1974, 1997, 2001, 2009, 2011 The Shollond Trust (P)2017 The Shollond Trust

mindblowing

When I first started listening to this book, I didn't get it. It seemed too contrived and theoretical. Then about a year and a half later, after re-reading his other book,, 'On having no head', and studying many other books by David r Hawkins and other authors, I tried again to listen to this one. And wow, just wow. See for yourself.

Great book

I think it’s an amazing book that everyone should read. I like the reading too.

Apples and oranges, Hammer and nails

As much as I loved the author’s On Having No Head, this book is really a failed attempt at connecting the subjectivity of pure awareness with science.

Starting from the title, “science of the first person”, the book just bends ideas and definitions until they break, and forcibly draws comparisons with things that really have almost nothing in common.

In essence, Harding outlines a theory that probably could - with enough defining and postulating - be formally defended, but which remains almost completely useless.

The real measure of a theory is its applicability and predictive power, not rigorous formality. All the word play in this book, while mildly interesting at times, adds almost no value to our collective understanding of things.