|Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page.|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Meditation article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8|
|Meditation has been listed as a level-3 vital article in Philosophy. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.|
|Meditation was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.|
Review: March 22, 2014.
|This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details.|
|To-do list for Meditation:|
Please can I suggest "Meditation is a practice in which an individual operates their conscious mind in a way that is different from that used in normal day to day life. " as this includes many other practices widely considered as meditation, e.g. 'no thought' and single point concentration practices.JCJC777 (talk) 18.07, 29 April 2017 (UTC)JCJC777)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Meditation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111103193809/http://www.contemplativeoutreach.org/site/PageServer?pagename=community_chapters_international to http://www.contemplativeoutreach.org/site/PageServer?pagename=community_chapters_international
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Can anyone update the PsychINFO ref?Edit
Number of citations in PsycINFO: 69 for Walsh & Shapiro, 2006 (2 July 2010); 95 for Cahn & Polich, 2006 (2 July 2010); 57 for Jevning et al. (1992) (3 July 2010); 103 for Goleman, 1988 (2 July 2010).
Reference 31 (was 21);
Have updated the citation counts. The Goleman book is not in the PsycInfo database anymore. In the footnote to the table, I noted that it is a classic text. Should I support that assertion? I might be able to find a reference somewhere saying that, or I could just note the huge number of editions issued. Thanks for any guidance! Vale6674 (talk) 22:56, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Follow-up note about footnote; I've removed the phrase "classic text" as I'm still not sure about calling it classic without an generally-accepted way to support that. I've left the Goleman quote in, even though his book is not listed in the PsycINFO database, just because it has been reissued at least 32 times and Goleman is a well-respected and highly cited researcher. Vale6674 (talk) 18:17, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
|This edit request has been answered. Set the |
The individual is attempting to promote his page through wikipedia and this should not be tolerated as he is unverified and unreliable.
"Piyush Kumar Nahata, an ex-Jain Monk created a meditation technique by the name of evo4soul. He worked more than two decades to understand the process of evolution theory in the context of ancient Indian wisdom provided by Rishis, Tirthankaras and Buddhas. After a deep analysis of both systems he designed a genius system to evolve the soul. It’s a complete guide to align the body, mind and soul." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaias92 (talk • contribs) 16:20, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
The lead opens witj the following statement:
Meditation is a practice where an individual uses a technique, such as focusing their mind on a particular object, thought or activity, to achieve a mentally clear and emotionally calm state.
Yet, this is what Merriam-Webster actuualy says:
1 : to engage in contemplation or reflection He meditated long and hard before announcing his decision.
2 : to engage in mental exercise (such as concentration on one's breathing or repetition of a mantra) for the purpose of reaching a heightened level of spiritual awareness<br.
1 : to focus one's thoughts on : reflect on or ponder over He was meditating his past achievements.
2 : to plan or project in the mind : intend, purpose He was meditating revenge.
So, MW actually gives two definitions, only one of which is being used. And it does not say "to achieve a mentally clear and emotionally calm state," but "reaching a heightened level of spiritual awareness." That's not exactly the same. If MW is being used as a source for the lead, then it should reflect this source accurately.
Since the lead summarizes the article, it would be better to move the MW-definition to the definition-section, and expand the three dictionary-statements with this other deifinition: thinking deeply on something. The lead, then, can summarize, the definitions given below the dictionary-definitions. Something like:
While the term "meditation" may refer to prolonged and deep thinking on a subject, in common usage it mostly refers to a family of techniques, such as mindfulness and concentration, to train attention and awareness. These practices bring bodily and mental processes under greater control, fostering subjective well-being, and resulting in a calm and watchful mind.
This is better than a dictionary definition, and a one-sided focus on concentration-meditation, while the scholarly definitions clearly speak about attention-training and heightened awereness. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:34, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
- I agree with all of that, but I do think that a definition may be mentioned in the lead and not in the body, because it is the sort of general information that may be mentioned only in the lead.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:25, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
- That's my intention also. I just think that the lead-definition should be a summary of the extensive scholarly definitions given in the body of the article, and not a dictionary-definition. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:47, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
I think that the Bond-definition would be better of at the end of the table with often-cited definitions. Theirs is based on other definitions, and, in that respect, more like a 'summa' of previous definitions. Also, the explanatory notes ("*Influential reviews encompassing multiple methods of meditation"; "(The first 3 are cited >80 times in PsycINFO."; etc.) would better be treated as such, namely notes, and moved into proper notes.
Also, but that's a personal opinion, the Bond-list contains repetitions: "logic relaxation" spunds to me like "mindfulness" (in it's limited meaning as "bare attention"), which is akin to "the use of a self-focus skill or anchor" and "the presence of a state of suspension of logical thought processes"; and "a self-induced state/mode" is basically the same as "a state of psychophysical relaxation" and "a state of mental silence." So, basically their definitoon comes down to 'techniques for self-observation from a religious/spiritual/philosophical context which induce a state of psychophysical relaxation and mental silence. Which pretty much sums up the Pali canon description of dhyana. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:05, 10 December 2018 (UTC)