 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Matter and Spirit
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Mater and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 10 Aug 04 - 08:05 AM Now the Mudcat mystics would have us believe that the universe consists of two different types of things mater and for want of a definable word "Spirit". Now if these two things interact at all scales then when we experiment on mater what we discover is not just the properties of mater but the properties of the mater-spirit complex and therefore the discoveries of Physics are correct and apply to the universe. If however this spirit stuff only interacts with matter that has a mind buy what mechanism does it effect mind and mind affect spirit. In short would the universe be any different if we discard the concept of spirit entirely. And please give some evidence that is at least in principal testable. PP |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 10 Aug 04 - 09:23 AM In short would the universe be any different if we discard the concept of spirit entirely. Pied Piper, I don't think the universe is in any way subject to human concepts, "spiritual" or otherwise. I don't know of any empirically sound method of testing that hypothesis, though. daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Janie Date: 10 Aug 04 - 09:29 AM I pray to the 'mater spirits every year that my 'maters are sweet and juicy and don't get blossom end rot:>) Janie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: SINSULL Date: 10 Aug 04 - 09:54 AM Mater-spirit complex...is that anything like the Oedipus Complex? When did motherhood become so important on Mudcat? I'm confused. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 10 Aug 04 - 12:41 PM I'm not sure quite what you are asking there, Pied Piper, but some of us don't see "matter" and "spirit" as being separate at all. To us, it's just the perception of matter and spirit that seems to have separateness. And, as we know, perception is relative and not always testable. (In other words, to some of us, matter is also "spirit", just in a different form than the more ethereal aspects of spirit. So for some of us, everythig is "spirit", matter included.) We are the music makers. We are the dreamers of the dreams. --Arthur O'Shaughnessy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 10 Aug 04 - 12:52 PM IF you will command your arm to rise up int he air and observe it to do so, you will see the mechanism you are looking for by which SPirit interacts with Matter. Intention is a spiritual attribute, not a material one. Understanding is another. Appreciation is a capability of Spirit, not of matter. Perception (as distinguished from chain reactions of energy and chemicals) is also ultimately resident as acapability in Spirit, not in Matter. Most important of allt he ability to decide what shall be is an ability inherent in Spirit and not found in matter. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 10 Aug 04 - 12:59 PM The meaning of spirit exactly matches the number of sentient beings in the universe. Minus 42. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST Date: 10 Aug 04 - 01:19 PM who gives a fuck? it just is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 10 Aug 04 - 01:52 PM Matter and spirit are not separate. Matter is an aspect of spirit and exists within spirit. You could say that it is spirit slowed down some. When you lower the vibrational rate, things become denser and more solid. They then become perceivable to the physical senses. The reason you don't have machines that can yield empirical data about spirit is that the machines are not sensitive enough to detect that data...or the people monitoring the machines are not sensitive enough to be aware of what they are actually observing yet...mainly because they're working within a limited set of mental assumptions. They have the potential to tap into spirit, but not the intention of doing so...and they receive exactly what they are ready to receive and no more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 10 Aug 04 - 01:56 PM Guest: What just is may just be, but this question is one of the great unresolved issues in human knowledge; if you had any education in your own intellectual antecedents, you wouldn't need to ask a mindless, barbarian question like the one you posted upthread. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 10 Aug 04 - 02:30 PM Time for Wm Blake again: "We have no Body distinct from Soul, for that called Body is a portion of Soul discern'd by the five Senses." If you discard the concept of spirit, then We have no Soul distinct from Body, for that called soul is a portion of Body undiscern'd by the five Senses. Which comes to the same thing; that they're aspects of each other. It's useful to have two words--body, soul or matter, spirit --for purposes of discussion, but it's a verbal convenience. As some great man said, the world is not formed on the plan of the English language. You can separate a poem into the words & the meaning, or a computer into hardware and software, but it's only a convenience of language. clint |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: mack/misophist Date: 10 Aug 04 - 02:32 PM Pied Piper has been reading the wrong philosophers. The Medieval Scholastic philosophers said that existance was only one of many qualities a thing might have. This line of thought settles all. Spirit is merely a force that lacks the quality of existence! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 10 Aug 04 - 02:43 PM Well, now, there's a different take on the matter. I agree with Blake. Spirit is that which cannot be detected by the five physical senses. There are a whole lot of things those senses cannot detect. Body is, as he said, an aspect of spirit, and it can be detected by the five physical senses. Other physical things are also aspects of spirit that are detectable by the five senses. Spirit is not only the source of physicality, it is the source of intelligence, thought, emotion, desire, energy, and all perceivable existence. It is also the source from which spring ideas...like the idea of "non-existence". It is quite easy for an embodied soul to come up with the idea that there is no soul, for example, but only the body. The five senses of the body will support that notion, because they can look no farther than physical phenomena. A worm can also say to itself with absolute conviction: "There is nothing greater than being a worm. I am the ultimate form of life." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 10 Aug 04 - 03:13 PM For some people, spirit is detectable by one or more of the five senses. But it's more of an inner manifestation of the five senses in many respects. Except for the sensation like a small (but very annoying) feeling of an electrical charge that I experience in the middle of my back when I get overloaded with spiritual energy. Also the dizziness and nausea I can experience when that happens, and the subsequent vomiting if the source of the energy isn't removed. That is definitely something I detect with one or more of my five physical senses. BTW, the physical side effects that I experience when I get energy overload is absolutely replicable. However, if someone who doesn't accept the possibility that I can experience spiritual energy as a physical sense would happen to be the one doing the tests on me, there is a good chance that he or she would interpret a psychological cause for my experience. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 10 Aug 04 - 03:19 PM Ah .... the Power of the Spoken Worm. I just KNEW it would come to this! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 10 Aug 04 - 04:41 PM What is mind? Never matter. What is matter? Never mind. This is one of those moments where I am in complete agreement with what Carol writes: some of us don't see "matter" and "spirit" as being separate at all. To us, it's just the perception of matter and spirit that seems to have separateness. I couldn't have said it better: It is only our perception that makes us think there is a spirit different from the action of matter. 'Spirit' is a good word (as an abbreviation for more complex things) for daily communication but for scientific purposes it has no meaningful role. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 11 Aug 04 - 07:29 AM I would engage you in a battle of wits Amos but my conscience will not allow me to fight an un-armed man. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 10:56 AM You only think you're in agreement with me, Wolfgang. ;-) Actually, Wolfgang, can you name for me even one scientific process that doesn't involve, at some point in the process, the perceptions of the scientist who is engaged in the process? Where I think you and I would disagree would be that even what you would probably consider to be non-living matter, I still would regard as "spirit". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 04 - 02:11 PM The actual meaning of spirit is simple. Spirit is life energy. You can see this by analyzing words like "spirited" or "team spirit" or "fighting spirit". Spirited means enlivened or lively. Team spirit is the energetic motivation that drives the team...gives it life. Fighting spirit is the energy that makes one a good fighter. Spirit, therefore, means the active or the potential energy that drives and sustains life. Although that energy itself may be invisible, its effects are totally obvious. A body containing spirit is a body containing life. That life is the energy which imbues the otherwise inert body with consciousness, emotion, desire, memory, ideals, humour, motivation, drive, and everything else that one needs in order to be alive. So, Wolfgang, for you to deny the existence of spirit is for you to deny your very own conscious existence AS a living being...but that's not why you're denying it. You're denying it simply because your understanding of the word itself is inadequate...and, in your case, mythical. When you hear the word "spirit", you imagine a childish myth of some kind which you label as "spirit". If you were to enlarge your definition of "spirit" you would have no trouble finding evidence of its existence in every living thing and every atomic structure. It's like the electricity that powers a machine...or the energy that binds atoms together. Just because you don't have a clear idea of where it's coming from, you pretend it isn't there at all. It's effects are everywhere visible...unless you choose to be blind to them. You're like a radio that says..."There is no electricity in me, and there is no station sending a broadcast through me, there is just me...a collection of wires and circuits in a cabinet. What you see is what you get. If you can't touch it, it's not real." Well, my friend, that radio is totally inert and useless without the electricity and the broadcast to give it life. And so would you be without the spirit of life moving in and through you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 11 Aug 04 - 02:59 PM Nah. What you're giving us is YOUR take on what spirit is. Team spirit is motivation. People are motivated by, for instance, reminding them that they belong to a tribe and that winning is glorious. Hearing that kind of pep talk starts a physical response--the body produces adrenaline to cope with the imminent physical challenge. Better the pep-talk, more pumped the athlete. Etc. If spirit existed in a physical sense (no pun intended) you could buy it in a jar and rub it on like ointment. Actually, Wolfgang, can you name for me even one scientific process that doesn't involve, at some point in the process, the perceptions of the scientist who is engaged in the process? This is simply wrong. The whole point of scientific process is to examine without prejudice. Sure. tons of people have twisted results to meet perceptions, but they fool only themselves as science will always find them out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 11 Aug 04 - 03:27 PM would engage you in a battle of wits Amos but my conscience will not allow me to fight an un-armed man. IT would be the unarmed versus the half-armed at best. I think I remember using this quip in some equally juvenile context back in grade school, P.P. It reveals, perhaps, why you pose the question the way you did. It seems clear that you are not really raising the questions, or interested in appreciating the possible answers. BPL, you are referring to an entriely different definition than the one usually used in "Spirit versus Matter." A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 11 Aug 04 - 03:34 PM I'm referring to the one Little Hawk posted just above my response. I bypassed the one suggested by CarolC because, well, it has a built in not-allowed-to-question-it clause. How many definitions are there ;o) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 04 - 03:59 PM I said myself that spirit is (among other things) motivation, BPL. Motivation is non-physical. Yet it exists. You know it does. You are motivated to debate this matter with me. Do you know why? And can you explain where that motivation came from or exactly what it is? I'll tell you what it is: it's your unique consciousness (which is an organized form of intelligent energy) aiming itself at a particular objective, which is to enhance its own sense of identity and rightness. All of that is the work of unseen energy, temporarily housed in and expressing in and through your physical body. I call that unseen energy "spirit". And, yes, of course it is my own take on what spirit is. Naturally. Would you rather I took someone else's word for it (like the Pope or the bishop)? Many physical responses in the body are triggered by mental and emotional stimulation. The release of the adrenalin, etc, is an aftereffect of that, and assists the body in formulating an appropriate response. The non-physical moves first as energy, and the physical responds...which is exactly what happens with the radio, by the way or with any electrically operated device. Your body is a huge circuit board, and its actions are orchestrated by non-physical sources which then express in physical actions and results. To imagine that the body is responsible for it all is as foolish as to imagine that the radio is the source of the program. Without your consciousness your body is an inert hunk of meat. Your consciousness is not physical and it IS spirit. And it's very, very real and powerful. Without it you would not exist as a living being. Your consciousness is deeply loyal to what it already believes, and if it wants to believe that there is no spirit, well then, it will believe so and will argue strenuously using all the powers at its command. And they are considerable. "The whole point of scientific process is to examine without prejudice." Uh-huh. But find me a human being without prejudice... :-) The culture you grew up in passed its prejudices on to you automatically, and if you are like most people you don't even know you have them. What is plainly obvious to a person from one culture may be completely unseen or denied by a person from another culture. How do you KNOW that your culture has it all right? You don't. Most human cultures in the history of the World have believed in spirit. Most great philosophers have believed in spirit. Many great scientists have believed in spirit. Every North American Indian believed in spirit (before the whites came). Maybe they knew something you don't. I know what most people who object to the word "spirit" think of when they hear the word. They think of a Sunday School level religious idea, a completely childish notion gotten from some rote religious teaching in some Christian church. That's not it. That's a primitive reference to it. That's barely scratching the surface. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:04 PM If spirit existed in a physical sense (no pun intended) you could buy it in a jar and rub it on like ointment. This makes no sense to me. Why should one have to buy something in a jar that is freely available, everywhere, all the time? This is simply wrong. The whole point of scientific process is to examine without prejudice. Sure. tons of people have twisted results to meet perceptions, but they fool only themselves as science will always find them out. Science is constantly correcting itself to accomodate new ways of understanding and percieving sense stimuli. Science is not static. As perceptions change, so does science. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:11 PM And there has never lived a scientist without prejudice! Read about the disagreements between Edison, Tesla, and Westinghouse for some fascinating examples of disputes in science due to preconceived prejudice of one type or another. Scientists are subjective and fallible, despite their conscious desire to be objective. They are creatures of time and place and culture, just like other people, and they serve hidden agendas just like other people. As Carol says, spirit is freely available everywhere at every time. This may be why materialists are completely uninterested in it! It can't be hoarded or controlled for marketing purposes. Mind you, certain unscrupulous religions have tried to do that from time to time... :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:20 PM Do you know why? And can you explain where that motivation came from or exactly what it is? I thought that's what I just did. However ... I'll tell you what it is: Thank goodness you're looking after me. As perceptions change, so does science. Only if the point of perception is validated. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:22 PM Only if the point of perception is validated. Quite right. But points of perception that have been validated one day are quite often discarded as invalid at some latter date, as more and/or new information is acquired. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:25 PM I agree, CarolC. (poetry thrown in free of charge) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:29 PM Very cool, TBPL. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:40 PM You're accusing me of being pompous, aren't you, BPL? :-) Well, they called Harry Lee Wigley pompous too, you know. They called William Shatner pompous. I figure I'm in good company. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:47 PM Not at all, LH. You do give me whiplash sometimes when I follow you from one thread to another: cranial callisthenics to National Nude Goat Week ... ouch! ;o) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:54 PM Yeah. I figure life is more enjoyable if one can bounce back and forth between the deeply serious and the downright silly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:57 PM " It is quite easy for an embodied soul to come up with the idea that there is no soul, for example, but only the body." and contriwise, it is easy for a complex body like a brain with billions of synapses, to come up with the idea of soul...and many other ideas for which there is no referent in reality! Remember Phogiston? And Ether? and "universal mind"? and "dragons, unicorns, a benevolent dictator, and pixies!" We (whatever you think we are) can imagine things, and manipulate a very rich language. And when we create a complex enough concept, we (many of 'us')soon begin to assume that anything that clear (even if it ISN'T clear) must be 'real'.....and then they equivocate on the meaning of 'real'. I'm sorry, but although I recognize pictures of dragons, and can list a bunch of generalized characteristics of dragons, the 'reality' is limited to imagination. Without going to the trouble of typing all the details...which you can see coming anyway....it is similar with 'spirit','soul' and such notions....yes, we sorta mean something by the words, but we have manipulated the concept and the words until we think we are talking about something.........and when certain experiences occur, we patch the concepts we have stored onto the experiences and PRESTO! Read some Ludwig Wittegenstein (or if you are really daring..*grin*, some C.S. Peirce), to see what can be done with language and the notions that arise from it. The word 'soul' or even 'spirit' has uses, as Wolfgang notes...but it is well to be careful how you declaim that they refer to actual mechanisms that operate independently of 'us'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST Date: 11 Aug 04 - 05:07 PM Have you people ever hear of a funny thing called evolution? There is no soul, no spirit, no good, and no evil. There is only nature. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 11 Aug 04 - 05:15 PM You forgot November. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 06:20 PM The word 'soul' or even 'spirit' has uses, as Wolfgang notes...but it is well to be careful how you declaim that they refer to actual mechanisms that operate independently of 'us'. Or we independently of it Just because you don't experience these things in a tangible sort of way doesn't mean that no one does. If one experiences something and another does not, does this mean that the experience is only imaginary? Does the existance of colors as a tangible physical phenomenon become questionable because a blind person can't percieve color? If you don't experience a thing, does this mean it doesn't exist in reality? Going back to TBPL's comment about buying a jar of "spirit" and rubbing it on like an ointment... It would be possible to buy a jar of air. Obviously you wouldn't be able to rub it on like an ointment. In fact, you wouldn't be able to determine whether or not the jar actually contained "air" just by looking. The only way to know if the jar contained air would be to observe effects that air has on other things, or to have an instrument or other means of detecting the presence of air. It's no different with spiritual energy. The way you know it's there is to either observe its effects on things, or to have a sensory means of detecting its presence. If you don't have a means of detecting the presence of air, would you automatically determine that it doesn't exist? Perhaps you would. Conversely, if you lack the means of detecting the presence of spiritual energy, you might very well determine that it doesn't exist. But that wouldn't prove that it doesn't exist. It would only prove that you do not have the means to detect it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 11 Aug 04 - 06:21 PM Guest, Th'art lost, lassie.... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 11 Aug 04 - 06:27 PM You only think you're in agreement with me, Wolfgang. (Carol) I never thought I was, What I posted was : I am in complete agreement with what Carol writes which is sometimes very different from being in agreement with you. I was only pointing to the fact that we are both, and LH too, monists and not dualists. It becomes extremely clear in LH's words: Matter and spirit are not separate. Matter is an aspect of spirit and exists within spirit. You could say that it is spirit slowed down some. Amos for instance, I'd say, is a dualist, but I may be wrong. What amuses me is the fervour with which Little Hawk attacks a monism similar to his own in many respects except that I hold that spirit is an aspect of matter and exists within matter and not vice versa. Your many examples are very close to the Aristotelian conception of Psyche, the vital energy that distinguishes life matter from dead matter. Yes, I agree, that's how we experience it and that's why we prefer to talk in these terms about it in normal life talks. But we should not mix up how we talk about something with how it is. After more than 2000 years talking about Psyche (life spirit or whatever) the time has come to think about it differently. To think about 'spirit' as a state of matter is in my eyes the more fruitful research approach. And as for your examples. Little Hawk, with our use of the language, it is so easy to come up with other examples: When you'd see me crying you'd come up to me saying 'what's the matter?' One example as silly as the other. Don't confound your own experiences and how you explain it to yourself or others with what really is (or may be). There are alternative possible explanations. As mostly in these discussion, I find you close your mind/brain very early against all other explanations. Your use of 'deny' when arguing with me is a prime example. 'Deny' means I say 'no' to something which I know to be true. That's completely wrong. Do me the favour and accept that I have a truly different point of view (and am not in denial) from your own for which I can argue like you for your own. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 06:29 PM It was a joke, Wolfgang. Hence the winking smiley face just below. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 11 Aug 04 - 06:32 PM If one experiences something and another does not, does this mean that the experience is only imaginary? /Carol) Carol, you are completely on the wrong track as far as I am concerned. I have these experiences more or less as you have. The difference is that I give other interpretations to my experiences. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 04 - 06:43 PM Yes, I understand your form of monism, Wolfgang, and you have explained it very well. You're looking from the opposite end at the same phenomenon I am looking at. Well, I guess one of us is looking through the wrong end of the telescope! :-) You think that spirit (life) arises out of matter, and I think it's exactly the other way around. It's a bit like the old humorous question: Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Guest - Are you aware that all of the great Eastern spiritual and religious philosophies include the concept of evolution in a completely integral fashion in their ideas of spirituality? So do the more enlightened forms of Western spiritual philosophy. Physical evolution is driven and accompanied BY spiritual evolution. The one is a very good reflection or counterpart of the other. If you want to confound people by bringing up evolution vs. spirit/God, you will have to argue with some Christian fundamentalists about it, because they're almost the only people around here who will disagree with you on that one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 06:52 PM Wolfgang, you have also vomited when placed in too close proximity to a Genesa crystal for too long? Small world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 11 Aug 04 - 06:58 PM Conversely, if you lack the means of detecting the presence of spiritual energy, you might very well determine that it doesn't exist. But that wouldn't prove that it doesn't exist. It would only prove that you do not have the means to detect it. Of course one cannot prove something does not exist ... that chestnut is trolled out every time we visit these claims. I'm not sure how it advances an argument that spirit is somehow physically tangible. I think we'll all agree there is such a thing as spirit. But some are saying it exists physically, as though you could accidentally sit in it or spill it on your pants or walk around a corner and get hit by a waft of it. I'm saying I believe it's a feeling that results from the brain's reaction to external stimulii. What I find curious is why some people feel a scientific explanation is less acceptable than a magic one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 04 - 07:01 PM It's just a question of which scientific explanation, that's all. I don't regard the better explanations of spirit I've seen as being magic ones. They make perfect sense to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 11 Aug 04 - 07:02 PM Carol, do you think my experiences of for instance love must exactly match yours so I know what you are talking about? Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 07:04 PM TBPL, I'm not trying to prove that my experience is more valid, or necessarily more real than yours. Just that it is different, and that you are not in any better position to invalidate mine than I am yours. I actually have no problem with the idea that you don't experience things or understand things the same way as me. But I also don't accept the idea that someone else's idea of reality is in any way more valid than mine. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 04 - 07:06 PM Except for Shatner, Carol! You must admit, upon serious reflection, that William Shatner's take on reality has something new to teach all of us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 07:07 PM I would be willing to bet, Wolfgang, that your experience of energy is not in any way similar to mine if you are using "love" as your for instance. Because I certainly wouldn't use that one myself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 07:07 PM Absolutely, LH! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 11 Aug 04 - 07:19 PM You and I are both humans with the same faculties. You claim to experience things in a way most people cannot. How can we non-experiencers accept our deficiency as real if you dismiss attempts to verify validity of your powers? I say this to Little Hawk, Two Bears et al too. You brush off pleas for proof with the same expression of not caring if we believe you or not. But I share the journey of life with you and I have been led down so many garden paths, distracted at so many snake-oil stalls and exhausted by so many wild goose chases I cannot afford to waste any more time. And why would you not want a scientific explanation of such phenomena? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 08:16 PM I don't know if your et al too includes me, TBPL, but the truth is that even amongst the people I know whose understanding of spiritual energy is similar to mine (everybody's different, so I won't say "the same"), no one experiences it even a little bit the way I do. This is not because I have any special "powers", but only because I have certain deficiencies that cause this kind of energy to get a bit blocked and I get easily overloaded. I've never met anyone else who throws up when they are exposed to high concentrations of spiritual energy. And I wish it didn't happen to me either, because it's quite unpleasant. As far as other people's ability to percieve spiritual energy, again it's not a power. It's simply an ability. I think everyone has this ability but, for reasons of their own, many people are just not prepared to use it. From my own perspective, as far as proof is concerned, I would not seek to prove anything of a spiritual nature to anyone. I see that sort of thing as a violation of the free will of another and, to my way of thinking, intrusive and counterproductive. But by the same token, I don't think it would be particularly productive for me to pretend that I experience or understand things any differently than I do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 11 Aug 04 - 08:37 PM I am more of a pan-multi-polyist than a monist or a dualist, Wolfgang, but in general I would say that consciousness and aware will are attributes of a force which is not contain by material particles or space and in my opinion (what more could it be at this stage?) gives rise to space and particles as a result of exercising a fundamental ability to deploy aware will, rather than existing as some by product of more complex interactions of space and energy. It is my opinion that space is the result of viewpoints, not the other way around. But it is also very easy for life force, aware will, consciousness or whatever else you call it to fall into the patterns of space and energy and become identified with it to the point where differentiating from spacetime seems impossible. I THINK THIS IS A PROBLEM. BUT I THINK IT IS A PROBLEM IN THE DYNAMICS OF THOUGHT, RATHER THAN A PROBLEM IN PHYSICS. Sorry -- CAPSLOCK key got stuck. My experience is that life can bacvk out of its identification with matter, but matter cannot demonstrate any increase in determinism or activity no matter what you say to it. From that point of view I suppose I think of the two as opposite ends of a very wide spectrum. Regards, Amos |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 11 Aug 04 - 08:54 PM "Just because you don't experience these things in a tangible sort of way doesn't mean that no one does." (I see Wolfgang already picked that startement out to comment on..*grin*) my comment: The burden of proof is on the assertor. If someone wants to CLAIM that they experience these things 'in a tangible way', they must show how this could happen. If they wish merely to experience them, there is nothing to prove. Those who do NOT have these experiences and are told "Oh, you just have to 'open yourself'!" may perhaps be excused for wondering how this is done. There are SO many physical ways that strange psychic/paranormal experiences can be induced that simply assuming NON-physical ones seems to me to be a bit of wishful thinking. Some of us just have a need to believe certain things. Those of you who read Mudcat regularly know that there are almost every combination of beliefs and non-beliefs represented among our members. Some believe in a Christian God, but not in psychic phenomena--some accept paranormal events, but are not 'religious'--some accept religion in other forms, whether 'pantheistic' or monotheistic---some hotly deny most of this, while others only hotly deny SOME of it..*grin*....others just shrug and make no committment. So?....well, they CANNOT all be right, in an absolute sense of the word 'right'. There is an old joke about "what is too much sex?"...and the answer is "anyone who does it more than I do." ...the same idea can be applied to belief systems....What is 'extreme' and absurd? Why, anything which *I* don't understand or experience! Oh, it's a can of worms, my friends! All I can do is recall Alice talking to the Red Queen: "I can't believe that!" said Alice. "Can't you?" the queen said in a pitying tone. "Try again, draw a long breath, and shut your eyes." Alice laughed. "There's no use trying," she said. "One can't believe impossible things." "I dare say you haven't had much practice," said the queen. "When I was your age, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." I guess it's just that I'm too lazy to practice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 09:07 PM Since you quoted me, Bill, I guess I should reply. Here's my response to what you said about burden of proof. It's what I've already said in an earlier post: "From my own perspective, as far as proof is concerned, I would not seek to prove anything of a spiritual nature to anyone. I see that sort of thing as a violation of the free will of another and, to my way of thinking, intrusive and counterproductive. But by the same token, I don't think it would be particularly productive for me to pretend that I experience or understand things any differently than I do." You don't have to accept that I experience what I say I do, but I don't see why you would feel a need to try to convince me that I don't experience what I say I do, for the reasons that I state. So?....well, they CANNOT all be right, in an absolute sense of the word 'right'. I disagree with this premise. They can all be "right" in the way that several different people can all be right about the different things they see in a microscope if they're all looking at the same thing under different magnifications. They're all looking at essentially the same thing, but what each of them sees is entirely different than what the others see. I think that's a pretty good metaphor for how people see spiritual/physical realities differently. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST Date: 11 Aug 04 - 09:11 PM I've never met anyone else who throws up when they are exposed to high concentrations of spiritual energy. I'm not being facetious here, CarolC, but you should consult a physician about that. Just in case you're wrong as to its cause. We'd hate to lose you ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 04 - 09:12 PM TBPL - I am delighted if a scientific explanation is provided for any phenomenon. I have always liked and appreciated the scientific approach. Regarding spiritual perceptions, I don't know how I could verify them for you, because they are an inner experience, not an outer phenomenon. The only thing I could suggest is that you spend some time around some more spiritually advanced people, but how would you decide which people those were? Danged if I know. I don't expect you to go around searching for something you don't believe in. I became convinced about spiritual things simply by being around various people who demonstrated a pretty profound level of understanding and who were exemplary people...and I read a lot of good material that changed my ideas about life. I don't belong to any specific religion...I see much good in most of them, provided they are understood and applied properly. I see much good in science as well, and do not discount it at all. It is possible to be highly spiritual AND highly scientific, and the best spiritual teachers combine both understandings very harmoniously. The spiritual teacher I have been most inspired by was educated as a professional engineer, and worked in that profession for many years. This did not interfere in the least with his appreciation for spiritual values, but accompanied it most effectively. That's fairly unusual among engineers, I would assume, having known some others. Most of them are anything but spiritually inclined, in my experience. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST, TheBigPinkLad Date: 11 Aug 04 - 09:13 PM Wow -- my cookie got crumbled ... is someone trying to tell me something? ;o) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST Date: 11 Aug 04 - 09:26 PM The only thing I could suggest is that you spend some time around some more spiritually advanced people Diplomacy's not your strong suit, eh? ;o) Man, I have expended more years of my life to this than most sane people would. I am a very spiritual person. I even have an alter in my garden where I burn herbs. The fumes go up my nose and excite memories, one bit of my brain produces chemicals that make another bit release other chemicals that make a third bit happy. It's one thing to be happy in one's own universe, but people who try to indoctrinate others just make me want to beat them up (again, Mr. Brain). And the energy (kinetic) expended in pursuit of woo-woo would be better spent on doing good rather than photographing fairies. Just my opinion, of course. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST, cookieless:TBPL Date: 11 Aug 04 - 09:27 PM that was me again ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 09:39 PM Was that you as the 11 Aug 04 - 09:11 PM Guest, TBPL? I've been thoroughly examined for just about everything over the last decade or so. Nothing life-threatening, and nothing that explains, in medical terms, the phenomenon I described. And I've had a thorough psychological and psychiatric evaluation as well. I have been officially declared sane and not f*cked up in the head. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 11 Aug 04 - 10:31 PM Iknow you, Carol...and I am confident you are not "f*cked up in the head." that being said..."...several different people can all be right about the different things they see in a microscope if they're all looking at the same thing under different magnifications." your metaphor is good..but it IS a metaphor. Presumably, every person could be shown the different views at different magnifications, and thus see exactly what the others saw. This can even be photographed and shown to others who didn't get to look thru the microscope. This is really not possible with paranormal phenomena...whether religious, psychic, or otherwise....these are subjective and not available for any sort of independant verification. It is not a matter of truth...I know you and many other folks who I believe to be totally honest about what they experience....but what causes those experiences is pure conjecture. I simply don't conjecture much, and don't worry about it until someone else does conjecture. Then my sceptical genes take over and off we go! I will admit that the universe others 'see' sure is a lot more interesting than mine, but I seem to be stuck here..*smile*...I wonder if all those years in Kansas caused my receptors to atrophy? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 04 - 10:32 PM You don't have to take everything personally, TBPL. For all I know you may be as spiritually advanced as Gandhi or even more so. What I meant was: you have a choice who to hang out with in life, right? Depending on what you want to know about. If you want to know about hockey, hang out with hockey players. If you want to know about drinking, go to the bars. If you want to know about crocheting, find people who do it. If you want to know about spiritual philosophy, find people who have put quite a bit of time and practice into it and have some understanding of it. I did not mean..."find people who are more spiritually advanced than you are, you poor, primitive, knuckle-dragging soul"... :-) Whenever I run across someone whom I have a strong feeling is more spiritually advanced (or more knowledgable) than me I pay pretty close attention. And I do run across people like that every now and then. I judge their merits by their actions, not their words. It's like learning guitar...you look for someone who is better at it than you. Simple. And I am not advising you to get "saved". No siree. I am advising you to seek out whatever it is that inspires you and get the most out of it that you can. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 11 Aug 04 - 10:45 PM Wolfgang's monism says matter and spirit are the same, LH's says spirit & matter are the same, mine says spirit and matter (or matter and spirit) are parts of the same thing. Are we sure that's three different opinions? I think a lot of the confusion here is semantic. For instance, in English "rainbow" is a noun, but it's "really" a verb. The color stripes are static, but the drops that form them are constantly moving. A person standing beside you will see the rainbow in a slightly different place. You can't say it's in any particular place, just within a range of places, and you can't really say it's a "thing." Still, you can take a photograph of it, so it "exists." But not the same way a rock exists. Spiritual things are more like rainbows than rocks. If you get what I mean. clint It DOES make a difference what your definition of "is" is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 04 - 10:49 PM Very nicely put, Clint. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 11 Aug 04 - 10:55 PM Thank you, Little Hawk. clint |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 11 Aug 04 - 11:08 PM The problem with the material space-time framework is that it is an average of illusion. Not _de_lusion. Illusion in the sense that one's own created reality may seem illusory until enough agreement about it makes it real. This makes it hard to get to the bottom of, hard to disentangle from, and scary to challenge. It kind of explodes in your face if you try to disagree with it too hard, making it a very uncomfortable zone to explore. Little Hawk is right, and Clint's analogy is loverly. "More like rainbows than like rocks". But the truth is, so are rocks. :>) A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 11 Aug 04 - 11:59 PM your metaphor is good..but it IS a metaphor. Presumably, every person could be shown the different views at different magnifications, and thus see exactly what the others saw. This can even be photographed and shown to others who didn't get to look thru the microscope. This is really not possible with paranormal phenomena...whether religious, psychic, or otherwise You actually have no way of knowing this for sure. All you can know at this point is that no-one has yet done this to your satisfaction. A certain amount of belief or faith is required your part to make the above statement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 12 Aug 04 - 12:27 AM well, all I can say is that we are simply not using 'faith' and 'belief' the same way. My 'belief' that my statement is correct as it stands is really not the same sort of thing as belief IN a phenomenon. I believe that I can't grab a handful of moonbeams also...and I guess I shouldn't believe it's impossible until all possible attempts have been made? the obvious truth of the statement "no-one has yet done this to (my) satisfaction" does not INCREASE the probability that it is possible. If we are free to just use logic and the scientific method on the experiences we choose and rely on other criteria when we don't like the implications of science, where are we? I'm sure that if there WAS good scientific basis for paranormal phenomena, science would be touted highly..*wry grin*...it's only when science can't give the desired results that some say, "oh, that falls outside the purview of science. We experience that in ways that, by their nature can't be measured." Well, as I have said about 27 times on such subjects, I'd love to be proved wrong! If someone finds a gene for telepathy, precognition and recognition of auras, I want a transplant! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 12 Aug 04 - 02:30 AM thanks, Amos, for the kind words. There was some wise man who said "Every thing has a spirit." And the student said "Even a rock?" "Even a rock." "What kind of spirit could a rock have?" "It has a rock's spirit." I don't know what that means, but it sounds exactly right. clint |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 12 Aug 04 - 10:15 AM After a rocky start this thread has settled down nicely and is generating more light than heat. Thank you for all your constructive contributions. I always know when were getting down to the nitty gritty when Amos starts to calling me names. Carol C's relativist red herring is very useful when defending belief in ideas for which there is no testable evidence. I am not a gross materialist despite being portrayed as this particular Aunt Sally. There are many things that I believe in that I cannot "prove" such as the existence of other minds, but my belief is not a matter of faith but empirically testable in every interaction with other people I have, besides as Wittgenstein showed use of language is predicated on belief in others. PP |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 12 Aug 04 - 11:24 AM If we are free to just use logic and the scientific method on the experiences we choose and rely on other criteria when we don't like the implications of science, where are we? Pretty much right where we are right now, Bill. *G* I'm sure that if there WAS good scientific basis for paranormal phenomena, science would be touted highly.. Not for me, Bill. Here's my reasoning... the way I see it, each person experiences what is appropriate for him or her, for whatever reason. We're all different, and we all have our own reasons for the different kinds of experiences we seek out and/or recognise. I don't want science to try to define what, to me, is something that defies definition. If what I experience is not valid for you, I don't see any reason at all why it also needs to be invalid for me. This is why I don't see any need to try to make you understand the nature of my experiences. What you experience is obviously valid for you or you would be experiencing something else. For science to "prove" the existance of my experience to you would deny you the opportunity to continue to not recognise its existance. Maybe not recognising the existance of what I experience is exactly what you need to be doing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 12 Aug 04 - 11:42 AM For science to "prove" the existance of my experience to you would deny you the opportunity to continue to not recognise its existance. Maybe not recognising the existance of what I experience is exactly what you need to be doing. No one is saying your experience does not exist, CarolC. Science looks into the nature of such experience and ask how it may have come about. I hear no one dispute its occurance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 12 Aug 04 - 11:50 AM There will always be matters that are not empirically testable, as well as matters that are empirically testable. That doesn't worry me. You can only empirically test something if you have the necessary equipment (artificial or biological) with which to test it...and only if you know how to handle that equipment in an effective matter. If I only believed in stuff that was empirically testable, I would have to become willfully blind to a great deal of what's out there...and my life would lose a large portion of what makes it most interesting for me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 12 Aug 04 - 11:51 AM I don't know what that means, but it sounds exactly right. yep, clint...so perfect...so succinct...so universal. Carol, I can't really disagree with your stance--it is not an uncommon one. It is, as Pied Piper says, a sort of red herring; but it makes little difference in most human interaction......however, there are times when people act on some "inner" feeling in ways that is not socially/ethically comfortable. If G W Bush had a 'personal' experience with the Almighty, and we discovered that the policies of the USA were being conducted accordingly.....well, you see why *I* would like to tout some clear distinctions and definitions, so that as many people as possible understood what the relation to 'proof' and 'belief' is...........a forlorn, idealistic hope, hmmm? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 12 Aug 04 - 11:59 AM You simply cannot expect to control all of life, Bill. Life will always contain unknowns and imponderables. I think it's because of a fear of that that certain people are very attracted to specific organized disciplines (or religions) which try to propose a rule for everything and do not give credence to things they can't come up with a rule for. It's a reaction to fear of the unknown. I like the unknown, because it is the companion of Life. It's a friend, not an enemy. There is a tremendous something behind life that is frankly, unknowable. It's a mystery. And that is fine with me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 12 Aug 04 - 12:02 PM You and Pied Piper may see it as a "red herring", Bill, but that is an opinion. You are certainly entitled to your opinions. But like beliefs, opinions are not scientifically testable. (*grin*) As for your example of GWB and his religious motivations, I agree with you completely. Our politicians should be completely up front with us about the reasons for what they do. Unfortunately, this will not happen any time soon. GWB may be motivated by his fundamentalist Christian religion. On the other hand, he may be motivated by his materialist religion (Money - which is most certainly quantifiable). Doesn't really matter which it is though, since all politicians know better than to admit they're doing anything other than what is "for the good of the country". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: catspaw49 Date: 12 Aug 04 - 12:08 PM Both rely on the other. Farting shows the spirit of digestion and a good healthy crap is tangible matter from it. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 12 Aug 04 - 12:10 PM There is a tremendous something behind life that is frankly, unknowable. Why then ascribe quantitive value to the unknown? This is what grates my cheddar. If something makes you sick and you can't figure out what it is, doctors can't help, xray machines can't see, etc. why then deem it supernatural? I think recognizing something as currently unknown is preferable to assigning it fantastic origins. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 12 Aug 04 - 12:22 PM Why then ascribe quantitive value to the unknown? This is what grates my cheddar. If something makes you sick and you can't figure out what it is, doctors can't help, xray machines can't see, etc. why then deem it supernatural? I think recognizing something as currently unknown is preferable to assigning it fantastic origins. I know you're replying to LH, but there are sometimes good reasons to understand how some things effect us even if we can't understand completely why. For instance, I know that I should never, never stand near a 36" Genesa crystal. And I should make every effort to not be within a two mile radius around a 36" Genesa crystal if I can possibly avoid it. If I can't avoid it, I need to have someone or something nearby that can relieve me of excess energy if I start to feel overloaded. These are practical considerations relating to matters that many don't even recognize as existing. But they're very real to me. If I understand how spiritual energy effects me, I can find ways to work with it so that it helps me rather than causing me discomfort. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 12 Aug 04 - 12:31 PM I have no idea what a 36" Genesa crystal is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 12 Aug 04 - 12:57 PM You probably wouldn't find them particularly interesting, TBPL, unless you want to use them for purposes having to do with spiritual energy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 12 Aug 04 - 01:02 PM In my opinion, TBPL, nothing is supernatural. People have the habit of calling things and experiences that don't fit their notion of normality supernatural. That's because they don't understand those things, but those things are all entirely natural. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 12 Aug 04 - 01:16 PM CarolC, whatever the crystal is, I think it wouldn't be too difficult to set up a test to see if it did indeed affect you. If you could detect the presence of the crystal 'double blind' that would require science to examine the properties of the crystal to see what is was emitting. If not, then it would raise the liklihood that the bad effects are brought on in some other way. In my opinion, TBPL, nothing is supernatural. People have the habit of calling things and experiences that don't fit their notion of normality supernatural. That's because they don't understand those things, but those things are all entirely natural. LH, yes, I'll agree. Although I'm still not sure the goat thing is entirely natural ;o) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 12 Aug 04 - 02:30 PM I definitely agree with LH's 12 Aug 04 - 01:02 PM post. TBPL, there are other things (sources of concentrated spiritual energy) that can cause this reaction as well. I know what they are, and most of the time, I know what to do when I encounter them. As far as testing the Genesa crystals specifically, I don't quite see the point, since I know from experience that if I either remove the crystal or move myself away from the crystal, I will feel better. I also know from experience that if I don't do one of these two things, I will suffer terribly until I either remove myself or the crystal. And then I feel better. Testing the Genesa crystal with a double blind experiment might make you feel better, but it doesn't really do anything for me one way or another. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 12 Aug 04 - 02:50 PM I'm a little disappointed you'd dismiss the test as worthless, though not in the least surprised. We'll let it drop there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 12 Aug 04 - 03:13 PM Not worthless. Just not of very much interest to me. If you want to come and administer the test, be my guest. Although you're not the one who would have to experience a lot of discomfort in order to satisfy your curiousity. I'm the one who would have to experience the discomfort in order to satisfy your curiousity. But have at it if you want. I live in Fort Mitchell, Alabama. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 12 Aug 04 - 03:14 PM PP: I think if you look again, PP, you will find the first name-calling was your idea. I don't start pissing matches, as a rule. I find them senseless. I think you are being somewhat scurrilous, for reasons I have no data about, but I am willing to ignore it. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 12 Aug 04 - 07:26 PM "You simply cannot expect to control all of life, Bill." ummmm...I don't think I even suggested I could..or should ...if that's a response to my wish for 'more awareness', then I can only say 10% of something's better than 100% of nothing. ANY increase in education and understanding of how reason, science & logic work can only be beneficial. Some people take the attitude that those principles don't apply if they ignore them...but "it ain't necessarily so". 2+2 don't = 5 just because some don't want to be limited by silly, inflexible rules..... I wish I could explain clearly how important is the rule of logic that says "from false premises, anything follows". This is not a 'matter of opinion'....it is not a personal attitude...it is not tricky bit of rhetoric...it IS the way things work, and its implications are manifold.... One example-various young people in the world are committing suicide with bombs these days, in an effort to harm their 'enemies'...most/many of them do this because they had been led to think that such an act of sacrifice will get them direct admission to paradise....not ALL members of their religion agree with this notion. They cannot both be right. The young people do the things based on several premises...that there IS a 'paradise', that certain kinds of killing qualify you go there, that non-members of their religion are a danger that NEEDS defense...etc...etc...If those premises are wrong, it has grave implications. Yeah, that's an extreme example, but the point is the same even if the premises are not so clear and the implications are not so immediately staggering. I dunno...I can't change much of anything...and changing minds is about the hardest thing of all....but Max says this blather will live for a long time...*sly grin*, so perhaps someone will read it and say.."oh...NOW I get it!"....maybe..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 12 Aug 04 - 07:50 PM There is a tremendous something behind life that is frankly, unknowable. It's a mystery. And that is fine with me. I'm all for enjoying the beauty of mystery, amigo; but the deepest gunkhole in the mystery of life is knowable, one way or another, sooner or later. Every single inch. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 12 Aug 04 - 07:54 PM If I only believed in stuff that was empirically testable, I would have to become willfully blind to a great deal of what's out there...and my life would lose a large portion of what makes it most interesting for me LH: I could not say it better; or agree more. I cannot imagine going back to the life I had before my first OBE (Out of Body Experience). ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST, cookielessTBPL Date: 12 Aug 04 - 07:54 PM I'll drink to that. After work tomorrow, Spinnakers brewpub, Victoria, BC. I'll buy ;o) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 12 Aug 04 - 08:08 PM Well said, Bill. On the whole I agree with you. It's a little hard, though, to decide definitively who is "right" in a lot of cases, because as Bob Dylan said "You're right from your side, I'm right from mine." Everybody thinks what they're doing is right...that's why they do it. It's very subjective. You or I may not think it's right, but they do or they wouldn't do it. This applies to suicide bombers quite spectacularly. I don't think they're right, you don't think they're right, but they think they're right. The Universe has no restrictions upon the use of free will, aside from certain physical laws of reality. That makes it pretty subjective deciding what is right. For me, what is of the greater benefit to life in general is right and what is not is wrong, but that's just my personal view on it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Don Firth Date: 12 Aug 04 - 08:21 PM Methinks the problem comes in when people regard matter and spirit as two separate and distinct things, sort of like—well—two different kinds of matter. There's solid matter (knock on the table top), and we all know what that is: the earth, the sun, fish and chips, the guitar in its case in the other room, the keyboard I'm typing on, the dust bunnies under the bed, etc.; and then there's this other thing that we've heard about called "spirit," and we don't know quite what it is, but it seems to be sort of fuzzy, and we can't see it, but just as we're almost about to grasp a clear idea of it, it slips away again. Like another world (sort of), but there's an obscuring veil that makes it next to impossible to distinguish. My idea (". . . until the times do alter. . . ."): the musical instrument, the hands that play it, the specific vibrations in the air, the ears you hear the vibrations with, that is all matter. The music is spirit. Your body and all those things around you are matter. Your life is spirit. Most people assume that "matter" and "spirit" are both nouns. "Matter" is a noun. And (no matter what the dictionary says) "spirit" is a verb. That's what makes the whole thing elusive, difficult to grasp. Don Firth P. S.: Anybody buy this? I think it works. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bobert Date: 12 Aug 04 - 08:23 PM Well, I ain't gonn agt this 100% right but perhaps close enough for one of the heavy hitters to come along and clean it up... Let's equate spirit with energy. No, no. Not what it takes to creat the energy but the actual product. What does energy weigh? Well, nuthin'... Like will one volt of electricity, if it could be released by itself fall to earth? Well, probably not. Matter, however, has wieght. Yes, the electron is kinda like a firld general in it atomins makeup and allows it hook up with other atoms and become compounds but each atom has wieght. The electron in the atom however does not. Or it is my opnion, learn-ed or not, that the electron is weightless... Well, lets get back to spirit. It, like the tiny electron, like the floating volt that we unleashed has no weight and therefore no particular master since only weighted material is subject to a gravitational forces. (But, Bobert, how would you explain the electrical fields that are very much part of the earth which is a gravitaional master?) Well, lets get back to atoms and weight and look at the way an electron circles its atoms while also allowing it to combine with other atomic matter. If we look at the earth less as a massive complex compound of all the various elements of the atominc chart and think for a moment of just how insiginficant earth is in raletionship to the rest of the uiniverse then it is posssible to think of earth as nothing more than just another atom on the chart with its electrical fields being no more soignificant than the electrons encircling a single atom... That leaves energy as the wild card, so to speak, because it is not confined exclusively to a gravitation master but, unless tied up at the moment holding something together, is free while matter, unless caught up in some type of energy/rebellion, such as an explosion or launching from the gravitational master, is damned to a life with that master... That's the way me and Wes Ginny Slide Rule have it figurated... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 12 Aug 04 - 08:25 PM Bill: There are various ways to detect that kind of illogic. One of them is inconsistency -- a religion in support of human life leading people to destroy human life is inconsistent; and to my way of thinking a religion that is not in support of human life is undesireable, but that's another matter. The idea that the truth can be unethical is pretty illogical to me. But it is clear that blowing up humans innocent of wrongdoing is unethical. A large number of people -- perhaps a majority, I don't know -- experience some moments from the outside of their bodies rather than inside. This means that (1) they are telling the truth about what they experienced or (2) they are wilfully altering what they experienced or (3) they are subject to a mass illusion that is very widespread. For reasons I do not quite understand you gravitate toward the 3rd interpretation, but I would argue with you that this explanation requires the most complex of models to be deemed "true". A very large number of people have NOT experienced any moments that they can report outside of their bodies. This means that (1) anyone who says they have done so is lying or (2) anyone who has NOT done so is lying or (3) such experiences are possible, but there are other variables involved as to when and who might experience them. If I were to choose, given the earlier population mentioned above, I would have to say (3) is the right explanation. I would hazard a guess, further that the variables primarily revolve around the deep and wonderful maze known as "decisions", and further hypothesize that the ingredients that influence individual life-changing and awareness-changing decisions are many, including emotion, pain, confusion, duress, hypnosis, biochemical influences, and more positive components like long-term personal spiritual goals that stretch across lifetimes, the hunger for insight and discovery, compassion, and the ability to perceive. Among other things. If one person has experienced a genuine experience independent of a body, you are faced with a white-crow phenomenon, meaning it disproves the absolute notion that all humans are just their bodies. If one human is demonstrably more than his body, than it opens the possibility that N... are, or even possibly that all are, possibly. To find one case history that seems consistent and acceptable to your standards of logical data should be fairly easy if you try -- the libraries are full of studies on re-incarnation, and related studies. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 12 Aug 04 - 08:26 PM "You're right from your side, I'm right from mine." that applies JUST fine to stuff like whether cherry pie is better than apple pie, or whether Bob Dylan is better than Eric Bogle...but as to whether wine and wafers change to body & blood, or whether souls really enter embryos, and when, it is not so easy. Wars are fought and lives are affected every day over opinions that can't both be true at the same time....No test will answer any of those questions, and people will believe what they wish to....but I do hope they will someday quit killing each other over their disagreements...... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 12 Aug 04 - 08:36 PM That's an easy agreement to make. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bobert Date: 12 Aug 04 - 08:59 PM (Okay, Bobert, think that mighta gone over a few heads. Can you expalin the same thing using Bob Dylan as a denominator?) Nope. Hurt my head bad nuff allready... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 12 Aug 04 - 08:59 PM Don Firth - Beautifully said! "Your body and all those things around you are matter. Your life is spirit." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 12 Aug 04 - 09:00 PM Ha! Too bad, el ted. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 12 Aug 04 - 10:31 PM Spiritual reasons for killing others comprise a portion of all of the reasons people have for killing each other, but hardly all of the reasons. Money, power, and territory are also very common reasons people kill other people. And they employ science to help them do it. So let's not be pointing fingers in only one direction when it comes to that sort of thing. Nuclear weaponry, in my opinion one of the most horrific, and certainly the most potentially destructive of all earthly creations, was not created by people on a religious mission. It was created by scientists for reasons that have nothing whatever to do with spirituality. Sometimes when people don't realize they have a soul, they operate with less concern for any damage they might do to it through the way they behave while in the physical body. These kinds of arguments can cut both ways. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 12 Aug 04 - 11:53 PM No disagreement there, either, Carol. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 13 Aug 04 - 12:42 AM just missed your post, Amos... what I think is, you don't have enough options in either of your lists....like Pascal's wager, there are many more options than he gives. Actually, I do NOT tend towards 3, I tend towards a combination of 1 & 2 1) they are telling the truth about what they experienced AND (2) they are I have MANY times had "flying dreams" and 'seen' the world from above...in views I have never had RT....but I do know what it feels like to look down on things...and I know the concept of flying.....and (you may see where I'm headed)..I know what *I* look like, and have also had dreams where I 'saw' myself, as if in a little movie. This sort of mental activity, I assume, could lead to OBEs. Note...I do NOT claim I have proved it can't happen, only that I have a great respect for Occam's Razor. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 13 Aug 04 - 01:06 AM Carol... "Spiritual reasons for killing others comprise a portion of all of the reasons people have for killing each other, but hardly all of the reasons" of course, that is true!..and sad...but it does not address the point I was making, in which I only used that as an extreme example of what possibly faulty premises can lead to.... I can also make points about premises that assume that money & power are sufficient to justify killing....and there are many who truly believe THAT also! If you & I could get these people into a room, we might try to show them that, in the larger view, their premises are ultimately false, and will do more harm than good....but we can't force them to agree with our logic, we can only hope to convince them to stop by substituting reasons they can comprehend. "stop that crap, or you are dead meat"..etc... the point is: IF your premises happen to be false...(I mean really, ultimately false) THEN your conclusions are suspect. Therefore, it is a good idea to be wary of conclusions whose premises are, by definition, not testable under current knowlege. Unfortunately, too many folks see conclusions that are desirable, feel good, or are otherwise just plain interesting, and consciously or subconciously construct premises to fit. (I call this "throwing the dart, then drawing the bullseye around it"...*grin*) Much of the more 'esoteric' experiences do need to be investigated and compared...who knows-- we might find out stuff that is solid and clear explanations for some of it! (Maybe someone will develop an instrument that can monitor the emanations of a Genesa crystal and SHOW that you are right...*shrug*) Me...I'd rather help TBPL set up the double-blind experiment...*grin*...but you guessed that) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 13 Aug 04 - 05:42 AM Yes Carol Scientists started the Second World War to pursue their highly un-spiritual aim of making an atomic bomb. You seem to have conveniently forgotten about the NAZI /Japanese axes trying to take over the world. The bomb shortened the War and led to less allied troops dying. Was it justified? I don't know. Would I have made the same decision in their place? Probably. It's a wicked world and hindsight is a wonderful thing. PP |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 13 Aug 04 - 09:14 AM Occam's Razor -- to me a single postulate explaining a whole range of phenomena is a lot simpler and therefore preferable than rejecting the postulate and being left with "life is just matter made very complicated, and consciousness doubly so" which requires all sorts of contrivances to explain things. Maybe Occam's Razor is one of those things that reflects the bias of the user, I guess. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 13 Aug 04 - 11:23 AM My God Amos I think you've got somthing there. The Univers is what I want it to be. Dead simple. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 13 Aug 04 - 11:44 AM THere ya go, mate... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 13 Aug 04 - 01:16 PM That's true. It is dead simple. It's founded on a singularity which is immeasurable, and essentially indescribable. That singularity then manifests as duality...which can be expressed in terms of vibratory movement (wave-forms of energy). We then observe the playing out of that duality in uncountable trillions of forms, events, energetic movements, phenonmena, material objects, etc. In all of these observable things we find polarity, expressing duality. Male-female, dark-light, up-down, left-right, within-without, postitive-negative, good-bad, winner-loser, and so on... People then set about giving all kinds of fancy names to these examples of duality they see around them, fighting over whether their interpretation of it all is more valuable than the other guy's interpretation, and so. That's how they formed the religions, and the political systems, and the social customs, and so on. It's all in-out-in-out like the surf, or your breath, or your heartbeat, or the act of sex. That's simple all right. The person who sees meaning and intelligence behind that Universal simplicity sees life as a spiritual circumstance. The person who thinks it all "just happened somehow by natural laws", but for no conscious or purposeful reason, doesn't see it that way. I think that's what divides people like Wolfgang and me, Bill. I see a meaning behind it all, he sees a functioning mechanism without a meaning behind it all. As for people killing people for spiritual reasons...naw...I don't think so. People kill people for religious reasons. There's a difference! And they also kill people for money, power, and a host of other reasons, needless to say...but they very seldom kill people for any reason that I would term "spiritual". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 13 Aug 04 - 01:26 PM Pied Piper, you are putting words in my mouth. Doing what Bill D calls operating from a faulty premise. I said that people start wars for reasons having to do with money, power and territory, and they employ science to help them do it. You are the one who said scientists started the war. However, any time a scientist creates a weapon because of the money, fame, recognition or respect from peers, etc, that come with breaking new ground in the scientific world (I'm not saying all are motivated by this, but some certainly are), he or she is in no way motivated by altruism or anything other than self-interest. the point is: IF your premises happen to be false...(I mean really, ultimately false) THEN your conclusions are suspect. Therefore, it is a good idea to be wary of conclusions whose premises are, by definition, not testable under current knowlege Much of the more 'esoteric' experiences do need to be investigated and compared...who knows-- we might find out stuff that is solid and clear explanations for some of it! (Maybe someone will develop an instrument that can monitor the emanations of a Genesa crystal and SHOW that you are right...*shrug*) No boubt that some of what you call "esoteric" experiences are indeed just flights of fancy. And no doubt some of them cause people to make bad decisions. But in the case of those people, I would suspect that such people would most probably be making bad decisions based on faulty premises even in the absence of the more "esoteric" way of looking at things. I've met many such people. On the other hand. many people who are serious about the way they conduct their lives, from a spiritual standpoint, would tell you that their spirituality doesn't produce a "feel good" kind of convenient pretend world, but rather, it causes them to have to live a lot more responsibly with regard to their fellow humans and also all of nature, and the planet as a whole. And that, while they are at peace with their particular trajectory in life, it is not any easier, and is, in fact, a lot more challenging and even more difficult to maintain than a life without this spiritual focus. And as you can see, many of my experiences can be described as anything but "feel good" experiences. I have no incentives to want to experience energy the way I do. There is nothing about the way I experience energy that would cause me to want to have these experiences. If anything, there are many, many things about my experiences that would motivate me to want to not have them. And I never expected to have these experiences either. I have never seen or heard anyone describe the kinds of experiences I have, so it was not "suggestion" that prompted these experiences. I just note what I experience and when I have enough of the same kind of experience, I try to notice what the circumstances are that surround that experience and learn how to deal with it in the most effective way. It is just as faulty a premise to suggest that a spiritual focus causes bad or inapropriate behavior or decisions in humans as it is to suggest that a scientific focus causes bad or inapropriate behavior or decisions in humans. The reasons for bad behavior and decisions is a result of faulty thought processes within each human, and things like spirituality and science (and many, many other kinds of focus) are simply the vehicles for the expression of these faulty thought processes. (Maybe someone will develop an instrument that can monitor the emanations of a Genesa crystal and SHOW that you are right...*shrug*) Maybe. They don't emanate anything though. They work with the energy that is already present. They draw it in, concentrate it and "condition" it, and then send it back out. Me...I'd rather help TBPL set up the double-blind experiment...*grin*...but you guessed that) I have issued the invitation. It's up to you and TBPL to take me up on it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 13 Aug 04 - 01:58 PM OK. Help me out, I might be looking in the wrong place. My searches are suggesting a Genesa crystal is a shape not a real crystal. Is that correct? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 13 Aug 04 - 03:44 PM I need to amend this part of my last post: I have no incentives to want to experience energy the way I do. There is nothing about the way I experience energy that would cause me to want to have these experiences. I do think that, if I didn't have the particular problem that I have with getting easily overloaded, I would most definitely prefer to be as sensitive and open to energy as I am. I have found, on the occasions when I have been not open to spiritual energy, that I feel much more "flat" and one dimensional than when I am open to spiritual energy. And while I don't think I would seek out the kinds of unpleasant experiences that I have, there are many good things that also accompany my being as sensitive and open to energy as I am (including waaaayyy better sex, if my partner is also open able to work with spritual energy... and no, you can not come here and test that ;-) So given the benefit of hindsight, I know I would still choose to be as sensitive and open to spiritual energy as I am, even if it means experiencing the discomfort that comes along with it. But I know that I would not deliberately set out to have the unpleasant kinds of experiences I have with spiritual energy. P.S. I think I know a way to test and even measure the effect that spiritual energy has on plants based on the scientific model we used when I worked in the herbicide research dept. at the University of Maryland many years ago. I'll work something up and maybe get back to you guys with what I get. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 13 Aug 04 - 03:45 PM OK. Help me out, I might be looking in the wrong place. My searches are suggesting a Genesa crystal is a shape not a real crystal. Is that correct? That's correct. They're not too difficult to make. I've made several myself using copper refrigerator tubing and silver solder. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 13 Aug 04 - 04:28 PM So, copper tubing, silver solder ... what else? Where's the energy source? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 13 Aug 04 - 05:27 PM There is a universal energy source available everywhere, but you need to know how to tap it, that's all. It seems that this form of crystal Carol is speaking of may be one useful device for doing that. Nikola Tesla was working on accessing a universal field of energy. It's out there, and it ultimately powers everything, including all living beings. I have the impression that the space vehicles that visit us from time to time make direct use of it, but I am only theorizing when I say that. It's not something you burn, and it's not something you need to connect to with wires, but it can provide an unlimited suppy of energy which can then be converted into heat, light, electricity, gravitational force, etc. What you need is a receiver/transmitter to make use of it, regulate the amount, and control it. The human body itself can be used as such a receiver/transmitter. And, no, I can't prove any of that to those of you who are skeptical about the matter! :-) Sorry, I truly wish I could... If I could prove it to a large enough number of people, though, and the oil industry found out, then they would either bribe me to shut up about it or kill me. They've got money to make, an oligarchy to maintain, and a captive populace to milk. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST Date: 13 Aug 04 - 05:28 PM Oh great more delusional new age shit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Ooh-Aah Date: 13 Aug 04 - 05:29 PM The best test would be to have CarolC around for tea while one has one of these crystal thingies hidden in a cupboard. If she suddenly gets sick then there maybe something in what she says (or there may not be - other variables - coincidences in diet, climatic conditions, state of mind when these attacks occured - could well be taken into account). I would point out that CarolC having my fellow sceptics visit her with a crystal would not be a 'fair test', because as soon as she saw them she would be aware that a test was imminent. If her symptoms are a psychosomatic phenomenon as I suspect as a sceptic, this could trigger them off. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 13 Aug 04 - 05:31 PM And, no, I can't prove any of that to those of you who are skeptical about the matter! :-) It's not the matter that we're sceptical about LH ... ;o) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 13 Aug 04 - 05:52 PM Now the Mudcat mystics would have us believe that the universe consists of two different types of things mater and for want of a definable word "Spirit". Now if these two things interact at all scales then when we experiment on mater what we discover is not just the properties of mater but the properties of the mater-spirit complex and therefore the discoveries of Physics are correct and apply to the universe. If however this spirit stuff only interacts with matter that has a mind buy what mechanism does it effect mind and mind affect spirit. In short would the universe be any different if we discard the concept of spirit entirely. And please give some evidence that is at least in principal testable. Piper: I am one of those mystics, and I will take a stab at it. Everything is made of atoms right? There is a minimum of 1 and usually a lot more electron, protron or Neutron orbiting the nucleus. What happens when one of these sub atomic particle moves to a closer orbit? some amount of of energy is released. Do you remember that in tests on these subatomic particles that they often behaved in the way the scientists expected. As a mystic; I think I can explain it. Because of the scientists expectation; they were unconsciously direct lifeforce energy that has been called by many names ch'i, itaki, ki, mana, manitou, nuwati, Reiki, etc) this energy follows thought, and their thoughts or expectations; directed the energy that affected the outcome. Kirlian photography shown the increases size of the field around the hands of healers, and others that consciously direct this energy. I'm not sure quite what you are asking there, Pied Piper, but some of us don't see "matter" and "spirit" as being separate at all. To us, it's just the perception of matter and spirit that seems to have separateness. And, as we know, perception is relative and not always testable. (In other words, to some of us, matter is also "spirit", just in a different form than the more ethereal aspects of spirit. So for some of us, everythig is "spirit", matter included.) I agree Carol: Everything is a manifestation of the Great Spirit. If spirit existed in a physical sense (no pun intended) you could buy it in a jar and rub it on like ointment. BPL: Actually you can. It is pouring out of my hands almost all of the time. ;-) That is what I use when I do healings. Remember Phogiston? And Ether? and "universal mind"? and "dragons, unicorns, a benevolent dictator, and pixies!" Bill D: You mean they don't!? I would be willing to submit to a polygraph that I once met a dragon almost nose to nose once. Have you people ever hear of a funny thing called evolution? There is no soul, no spirit, no good, and no evil. There is only nature. Guest: Yes I have heard of evolution, and I believe in micro evolution. People ARE becoming taller and more intelegent; but I do NOT believe in macro evolution where one species mutates into another. If we evolved from monkeys; why are there still monkeys? If you choose to not believe in good and evil; be my guest; but your belief does not make it so. I KNOW evil exists because I have done more than my share of exorcisms. Last April; I exorcized a house of very negative entities. The family dog would go to the top of the stairs and growl; but could not be forced to go down stairs. After a friend of a friend and I went down there abd cleansed the basement; the dog happily came down the stairs and went through the basement with us. Guest; If you do not believe me; PM me, and I will give you the name and address, and E-Mail address of the family and YOU can ask them if I am lying to you. I have also gone into places so negative that a Catholic priest was picked up in the air and thrown about 10 feet, and he quickly left the home instead of completing the house blessing. Another friend, and her family in New York was being terrified by dark shadows with glowing red eyes. I told her how to do a house blessing via the Native American nethod (smudging the house with sage) she bought some white sage and burned it and fanned the smoke into the corners, closets, under the beds, in drawers, etc, and the dark shadows, nightmaresm and bad luck ended. I have several letters like this in my filing cabinet. If you are near Nashville, Tn. you are welcome to come by and read the folder. You and I are both humans with the same faculties. You claim to experience things in a way most people cannot. How can we non-experiencers accept our deficiency as real if you dismiss attempts to verify validity of your powers? I say this to Little Hawk, Two Bears et al too. You brush off pleas for proof with the same expression of not caring if we believe you or not. But I share the journey of life with you and I have been led down so many garden paths, distracted at so many snake-oil stalls and exhausted by so many wild goose chases I cannot afford to waste any more time. BPL: you are missing something important, Some people are near sighted, others are far sighted, others are color blind, others are hard of hearing, etc. Everyone does NOT have the same faculties. Tell me what part of the country you are in, and when I am going to be in your area; I will invite you along as my guest when I go to do a healing, an exorcism, or teach a HUNA workshop. It will only take a little time, and you can talk to the others people there, and find out if I am a snake oil salesman or gasp (what I claim to be). of spiritual energy is similar to mine (everybody's different, so I won't say "the same"), no one experiences it even a little bit the way I do. This is not because I have any special "powers", Carol: You are EXACTLY correct. The reason is that everyone's sub conscious mind (unihipili in HUNA vernacular) has expactation of how energy is supposed to feel, and the Unihipili modulates the energy to feel the wy they are expecting it to feel. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: TheBigPinkLad Date: 13 Aug 04 - 06:18 PM 2B - there is little doubt others at your workshops will agree with you. You're unlikely to attract people who would not do so. I've been to such workshops (OK, I have to retract that as I really have no idea what yours entails) and have remained completely unnaffected. Hypnotists, psychics, clairvoyants, fortune tellers, homeopaths, healers, polychromatic priests and certain pidgeon fanciers. Apparently, it's my own fault the tricks never seem to come off: I give off 'negative energy' and diminish the power of the guru. Well. It's obvious you guys are never going to give an inch on this. Those 's(k)eptics' on this and other threads like it have stopped short of denouncement (I exclude some rudish guests) because we're actually interested in what it is you ARE doing. Have you ever thought what the ramifications of finding out what's truly going on would be? We're not (I'm not anyway) trying to trash anyone's belief systems, just looking for testable answers, or even clues ... throw us a bone here. I'm off to drink beer soon. It's made with water, malt, hops ... and yeast, which used to be called 'godisgood' ;o) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 13 Aug 04 - 06:39 PM Man, I think about the ramifications every day of my life! I look forward to people advancing to greater awareness and accomplishments and I believe they will. Evolution is an ongoing process. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 13 Aug 04 - 06:49 PM I was reading thru recent posts, trying to decide whether to reply to some points, knowing that time was short right now......when I saw this: "...I do NOT believe in macro evolution where one species mutates into another. If we evolved from monkeys; why are there still monkeys?" This hits me harder than any of the 'energy' ideas, as I can at least understand why one could accept/believe in them, even if I don't.....but how one species mutates and evolves into others has been not only explained, but demonstrated......there are still monkeys because not all monkeys/apes mutated!...mutation is something that happens to INDIVIDUALS..and thus, their progeny. 50 apes in a group: ONE has a baby with a mutation for 'bigger brain case' or 'better hip joint', and off we go....49 do NOT, and their line remains apes/monkeys. I must ask what you DO believe is the origin of 'us'.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 13 Aug 04 - 06:58 PM TBPL, the energy is what's already there. As I said, they work with the energy that's in the vicinity of the crystal. I agree that one of the problems with trying to do a test involving my own perceptions of energy would be tricky, although I don't think necessarily impossible. That's why I have proposed an experiment involving plants. There's a woman in Jeffersonton Virginia who does this kind of experimentation. I first discovered the unpleasant reaction I experience around large Genesa crystals while visiting her experimental gardens. I can set up a test using the scientific model we used at the U of MD for herbicides, to measure the effect of spiritual energy on plants. And by "measure" I mean physically measure. I already have a small Genesa crystal and the materials for two identical container gardens with the only variable being the Genesa crystal, possibly in tandem with some other kinds of spiritual energy conductors. This would not be difficult to do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 13 Aug 04 - 06:59 PM *smile*....a musical take on the origins of 'us' (I used to know this by heart...I could brush up on it and sing it in an hour) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST Date: 13 Aug 04 - 07:29 PM Love the song! CarolC ... you would not be the best candidate to set up the test and I'm sure you would not want me to do it! It would have to be done by a third party. Who'd believe either one of us? ;o) Plus we're in two different countries. Perhaps the results of the herbicide testing are available for examination? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 13 Aug 04 - 07:43 PM CarolC ... you would not be the best candidate to set up the test and I'm sure you would not want me to do it! It would have to be done by a third party. Who'd believe either one of us? ;o) Plus we're in two different countries. Is that you TBPL? I don't see any reason why I couldn't be a good candidate for conducting a test that uses a rigid scientific model with detailed records and exact measurements. I can describe the model for you if you want. Perhaps the results of the herbicide testing are available for examination? I have no idea. It was the College Park campus. I worked there during the summer of 1979, I believe. The department head was Dr. Ron Ritter. I believe Roundup was one of the herbicides we were testing, but I'm not sure. Here's a Google search with "university of maryland" herbicide "dr. ron ritter" as the search parameters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 13 Aug 04 - 09:49 PM 2B - there is little doubt others at your workshops will agree with you. You're unlikely to attract people who would not do so. I've been to such workshops (OK, I have to retract that as I really have no idea what yours entails) and have remained completely unnaffected. Hypnotists, psychics, clairvoyants, fortune tellers, homeopaths, healers, polychromatic priests and certain pidgeon fanciers. Apparently, it's my own fault the tricks never seem to come off: I give off 'negative energy' and diminish the power of the guru. Well. Our workshops teach people who and what they really are, and give them the tools to bring the three selves into harmony; so THEY can manifest real miracles in their life; IF they are willing to do the inner work to change the way they think consciously and sub consciouslly. Spiritual technology that does not work for people (who are willing to put it into practise) is pointless. It is a waste of time and effort. It's obvious you guys are never going to give an inch on this. Those 's(k)eptics' on this and other threads like it have stopped short of denouncement (I exclude some rudish guests) because we're actually interested in what it is you ARE doing. Have you ever thought what the ramifications of finding out what's truly going on would be? I did give an inch. I invited you to come as my guest so you can see and experience for yourself. Oh; I know the ramifications of what I am doing in teaching this spiritual technology. People will change the way they think consciously and subconsciously, and people can claim their true potential we were given by the higher powers. By people directing this energy in constructive ways instead of the habitual negative thinking; we can repair the earth's environment and save the planet before humanity destroys itself. By the force of will directing lifeforce energy for the highest good; 1. I have seen a person suffering from whiplash start throwing their extremities via spasms as the injured nerves, tendons and muscles in the neck were repaired. 2. I have seen misplaced bones shift back into position to give INSTANT and complete relief. 3. One of my students worked with an AIDS patient in the hospital (who was not supposed to survive the night; recover and leave the hospital three days later. 4. I have seen a person COMPLETELY recover from a terminal disease. He had Muscular Dystrophy, and NO ONE is supposed to recover from that with the best of science and medication. This kid did it himself just by directing this lifeforce energy with the will (that kid was ME 24 years ago). 5. By directing this energy a person received a healing of a habitual bad back for the last 20 years. 6. A young lady was complaining about an ear ache and sinus infection, and she asked me to see if I could help her, I gave her a short healing session lasting no more than 3 minutes, and the heat coming from my hands blew her away. about two minutes after I removed my handsl her blood stream started moving that energy around, and she flushed beet red from the top of her head to her waist. 7. My neighbor Dean was hit by a train when the car he was in started to cross the tracks (the other passengers were killed (if memory serves) He has been in MASSIVE pain ever since. One of the neighbors in the apt complex told him that I was a healer, and was about to go to Canada to do a workshop, and he went to ask the manager, and she confirmed it, and told him about the incident with the healing of her daughter, and the maintenance man from another complex who had a headache, and the headache was GONE in 60 seconds; so my neighbor asked me to do a healing for him. I did, and after 3-4 minutes healing; the pain was gone, and stayed gone for 7-8 hours when he was popping very potent pain medication every 4-6 hours. I could go on and on with anecdotal evidence. We're not (I'm not anyway) trying to trash anyone's belief systems, just looking for testable answers, or even clues ... throw us a bone here. I have thown everyone a bone. I wrote a website explaining this spiritual technology, and people only have to apply it, and use the attitude "this MIGHT work" I am NOT asking for any more faith than that. After you begin moving lifeforce energy; and see this works; you can do the work to bring the subconscious mind into harmony with the conscious mind; then the higher powers can work through you and create miracles like those described above. When I cured my muscular Dystrophy; I was an athiest, but just using basic lifeforce energy (mana), and mental lifeforce energy (mana mana) but it took 8 weeks to walk away from the wheelchair. If I had; had this technology 24 years ago and could have used spiritual lifeforce energy then; it would not have takesn so many months to re-build my weakened body. Test the technology for yourselfl and YOU be the judge jury and prosecutor whether this spiritual technology works or not. I'm off to drink beer soon. It's made with water, malt, hops ... and yeast, which used to be called 'godisgood' ;o) Enjoy it. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 13 Aug 04 - 10:13 PM This hits me harder than any of the 'energy' ideas, as I can at least understand why one could accept/believe in them, even if I don't.....but how one species mutates and evolves into others has been not only explained, but demonstrated......there are still monkeys because not all monkeys/apes mutated!...mutation is something that happens to INDIVIDUALS..and thus, their progeny. 50 apes in a group: ONE has a baby with a mutation for 'bigger brain case' or 'better hip joint', and off we go....49 do NOT, and their line remains apes/monkeys. What species has changed to another species. The incident of the moths doesn't wash because the darker moths had always been present. With the soot from the burning coal in europsl the darker moths had camaflauge on the soot covered branches and the lighter colored moths who previously had camoflauge on the trees (sans the soot) (micro evolution) Charles Darwin worked primarily with finches, and he developed the THEORY of evolution based on the way the bills of the finches changed. They changed because the food they ate changed (again micro evolution) The birds were still able to breed between the different sub types. If you believe that one monkey was born with a better skull, hip joint; you have my condolences. Did you ever hear of the 100th monkey theory? Look it up. After a critical mass is reached; ALL of the members of the species "gets it" and they ALL have the new tools when previously they did not know it. Let;s just say that I believe human beings were created (by a Creator, or by aliens messing with our ancestors DNA. No matter what is said here is conjecture that I can not say for certain; so I do not waste time or lifeforce working on problems that can not be solved until someone invents a time machine and goes back in time to observe. Let's just say when I see a tornado go through a junk yard with parts of a 747; and the tornado assembles the 747 bolt by bolt; I will believe in evolution creating something just as complex as the 747 in the junk yard. It is called the mythical lighning strike creating DNA from the primordial ooze. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 13 Aug 04 - 10:17 PM I agree that one of the problems with trying to do a test involving my own perceptions of energy would be tricky, although I don't think necessarily impossible. That's why I have proposed an experiment involving plants. There's a woman in Jeffersonton Virginia who does this kind of experimentation. I first discovered the unpleasant reaction I experience around large Genesa crystals while visiting her experimental gardens. Carol: It has already been done. Christopher Bird and a co-Author used scientific methods to work with plants. the book was called "The Secret Life Of Plants". There is another book you should read "The Holographic Universe". ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 13 Aug 04 - 10:27 PM Carol; I just thought of another test that had been done. In this double blind test, a hospital in California that did a lot of heart surgeries was approached to have a test on the power of intention or prayer. the test was that half of the heart patients names were given to the people who would pray for them, and the recepients were NOT aware that they were being prayed for. During the test the people that were prayed for had a lot less complications, and needs less medication. I read of this in one of Larry Dossey's books (an academic, and medical doctor). If memory serves it was in the book "The Power Of Prayer" if memory serves. In the book; he released the data from the test including the name of the hospital, and other details. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 13 Aug 04 - 10:30 PM Yes, Bill, I can also recommend "The Holographic Universe". It's a great book to read for both scientifically-minded people and mystics. Evolution? It seems clear to me that there is evidence for physical evolution. Most of the spiritual studies I have done suggest to me that there is both spiritual evolution and physical evolution in the world of nature. The two processes accompany one another, as they must, because it's all one continuum anyway. Did humans evolve from an ape-like ancestor? Possibly. Did they evolve with the help of extraterrestrials who did some genetic tinkering or cross-breeding? Possibly. Was it a combination of both? Possibly. Was it something else? Possibly. I have no final opinion on the matter, but I don't find Darwinian evolution incompatible with having spiritual beliefs, and neither did Darwin! :-) It was minds smaller than his on either side of the fence that chose to wage a battle over the matter (scientific reductionists vs Christian fundamentalists). I think those 2 lots of people deserve each other, frankly, because they think in the same exclusive, narrow-minded fashion. Buddhist and Vedantic teachings recognize that physical evolution occurs in nature, and regard it as part of the spiritual process working its way in the physical world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 13 Aug 04 - 10:48 PM Yes, Bill, I can also recommend "The Holographic Universe". It's a great book to read for both scientifically-minded people and mystics. I am glad you agree with me on "The Holographic Universe". Evolution? It seems clear to me that there is evidence for physical evolution. Most of the spiritual studies I have done suggest to me that there is both spiritual evolution and physical evolution in the world of nature. The two processes accompany one another, LH; I guess you missed it, I stated that *I* believe in micro evolution. It is fact that human beings are getting taller, and more intelegent. I just do not believe in macro ecolution (jumping from one species to another. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 13 Aug 04 - 10:55 PM Jumping? No, I don't really believe in that either, I believe in a gradual series of evolutionary changes in a given species. I mean, it seems more probable. When you've got millions and millions of years to work with you don't have to be in a big hurry, after all. Darwin didn't say people evolved from monkeys. He theorized that they evolved from an ape-like ancestor. Apes are not monkeys. Darwinian evolution is the latest popular scientific theory about the development of species to achieve widespread acceptance. I'm sure it won't be the last. There has never been a human culture that didn't think it had the answers, has there? :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 14 Aug 04 - 01:05 AM The 100th monkey theory is about social change...learning new skills, not physical change to the DNA. You are leaning dangerously close to the discredited theories of Lamarck there, Two Bears.....It's an easy mistake to make, but it just doesn't work like that. I studied Lamarck and the explanations in 1957-58, and more evidence has been accumulating for almost 50 years since. I'm too sleepy to type more or link to the details tonight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 14 Aug 04 - 08:28 AM The 100th monkey theory is about social change...learning new skills, not physical change to the DNA. You are leaning dangerously close to the discredited theories of Lamarck there, Two Bears.....It's an easy mistake to make, but it just doesn't work like that. I studied Lamarck and the explanations in 1957-58, and more evidence has been accumulating for almost 50 years since. The 100th monkey theory is about a critical mass being reached and when that critical mass is reached; the other monkeys knowing things that they did not learn directly. You still have not gives ONE example of macro evolution. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 14 Aug 04 - 01:06 PM Macro evolution will occur when Martin Gibson wakes up one morning consumed with a new desire to avoid offending other Mudcatters at all cost. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 14 Aug 04 - 02:26 PM Secret Life of Plants by Peter Tompkins and Christopher Bird, Copyright 1973 Published by HarperCollins Publishers Inc. 10 East 53rd Street New York NY USA 10022 ISBN 0-06-091587-0 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Don Firth Date: 14 Aug 04 - 04:05 PM There is a case of a species of arctic birds, (arctic frigate birds as I recall), that separated, one group migrating to the east, the other group migrating to the west. Many decades—and generations—later, the two groups met more or less on the other side of the earth (still in the arctic, but approximately 180° of longitude from where they parted company), and there had been sufficient changes (mutations) in the DNA of each group that they could mate, but could produce no offspring. They had become, by definition, different species. Nature experiments all the time. It doesn't take much. It's pretty random, but the mutations that increase an individual's (it always happens in an individual, not in a whole group) chances of surviving to reproduce and pass on the newly modified gene may eventually lead to the emergence of a new species. That's the way it works. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST Date: 14 Aug 04 - 08:59 PM They are still birds, Donny. When they "evovle" into something else, please let us know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 14 Aug 04 - 09:55 PM There are birds in the Pacific which have been discovered to adapt (as in evolve within a few generations to use different food sources as El Ninó comes and goes and changes the ocean temperatures..(can't remember the details right now)...These birds are not 'teaching' their young, they are physically altering their DNA in small areas. You must understand, Two Bears, that most macro-evolution, as you call it, takes many thousand and even millions of years to make significant changes. We don't just send National Geographic out to take pictures of it. ....and I beg to differ..'critical mass' is just not the correct concept to describe what species like the Japanese Macaques do in learing new behavior. These monkeys are simply learning, like children......but their preceeding evolution equipped them with the more advanded brains necessary to learn this way. Chimps and Bonobos and Orangs..etc. do similar things, because their DNA is over 90% identical to humans!. Several million years ago, there was ONE common ancestor, and anthropologists are honing in on it as fast as they can dig! *grin* DNA lines are being traced and amazing discoveries are being made every day...some DNA lines in the Neanderthals from the Caucasus Mts. are proving that Neanderthals are NOT direct ancestors of humans, but represent a branch of primates that didn't make it......and at the same time, some human DNA has been traced back 20-30 thousand years..(I believe the Basques, in Spain, have some very ancient lines) This stuff IS 'macro-evolution', on a very long scale...we are discovering where we came from, and sadly, it upsets some folks. It is interesting and useful, but what we ARE now is what is really important. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 42 Date: 14 Aug 04 - 11:09 PM "Oh great more delusional new age shit." From: GUEST Date: 13 Aug 04 - 05:28 PM although I don't have the inclination to comment on the thoughts expressed on this thread, I have read each post with interest. I find the enclosed c&p offensive and hope that this 'guest' will soon evolve into an intelligent life form. j |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 14 Aug 04 - 11:15 PM I think what Bill D is saying, Two Bears, is this: Micro Evolution + Micro Evolution + Micro Evolution + Micro Evolution + Micro Evolution + (etc. etc. etc. etc... ) = Macro Evolution (Sorry, Bill, for interpreting your words. But this seemed like a good way to visualize it.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Don Firth Date: 15 Aug 04 - 02:05 AM But GUEST, whether you like it or not, we are still apes (and when I say "we," that includes you). Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 15 Aug 04 - 11:58 AM Carol...that IS approximately what I am saying...*smile*..(I'll never master the art of succinct exposition) ....but I don't think Two Bears idea of 'micro-evolution' is the same as what I suggest. He seems to state that species were created at sometime in the past in essentially a finished form, and then change in small ways (growing taller...etc.) This is essentially what Lamarck proposed "The inheritance of acquired characteristics". ("critical mass").... It is this interpretation that has been in disrepute for quite awhile now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 15 Aug 04 - 03:39 PM The original use of the "100th Monkey" term described the fact that in a population of monkeys or sheep, in various examples, a learned trait (washing food before eating it) would be taught by individuals to other individuals, but at a certain point (when enough individuals had acquired that knowledge) it would leap to new individuals without being individually taught -=- they would acquire the behavior as though by wireless transmission, just by subscribing to the species consciousness. In the examples of monkeys, it was reported that when the practice of washing fruit before eating it (to avoid sand in teeth, I suppose) was started up on an island chain, and taught to more and mpre individuals, the behaviour suddenly showed up in the same species on a nearby but separate island without normal transmission between individuals . In the case of sheep it was the learned behavior of rolling across a cattle-grate designed to prevent them from escaping from a pasture. Reportedly this behaviour started in southern England and suddenly began to appear hundreds of miles to the north without any contact between the two sheep populations. I don't recall any assertions in the literature I have read that discusses the impact of such transmissions on inherited traits. As far as I recall, the point being made had to de with the mechanisms of communicating awareness. The concept was popularized (but not originated) by Ken Keyes. Here's an interesting article by Elaine Myers on the topic. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 15 Aug 04 - 03:44 PM I think the miracle of the brain is grossly overestimated compared to the miracle of thought generated by the spirit. But that's just me, and I have learned not to get too fussy about people who use the word "brain" when they mean mind. Given that remearkable forebearance on my part, :>)....here's a fine quote from the author who first coined the Hundredth Monkey expression: "If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't." - Lyall Watson, In Philosophy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 15 Aug 04 - 04:36 PM The man who first coined the insight that tose ignorant of history will be forced to relive it was George Santayana. A few telling excerpts from his writings: "My atheism, like that of Spinoza, is true piety toward the universe and denies only gods fashioned by men in their own image, to be servants of their human interests." On My Friendly Critics," Soliloquies in England, 1922 "Faith in the supernatural is a desparate wager made by man at the lowest ebb of his fortunes." "Supernaturalism," Little Essays, No. 108 "Each religion...necessarily contradicts every other religion, and probably contradicts itself...Religions, like languages, are necessary rivals. What religion a man shall have is a historical accident, quite as much as what language he shall speak. "Supernaturalism," Little Essays, No. 23 "Civilization is perhaps approaching one of those long winters that overtake it from time to time. Romantic Christendom - picturesque, passionate, unhappy episode - may be coming to an end. Such a catastrophe would be no reason for despair." Character and Opinion in the United States. 1920 "Religion is the natural reaction of the imagination when confronted by the difficulties in a truculent world." Atlantic Monthly, 1953 "The Bible is literature, not dogma." Introduction to the Ethics of Spinoza, 1910 "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 15 Aug 04 - 08:24 PM "Remembering the past does not preclude you from repeating it anyway." Bill D (I just invented that one) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 15 Aug 04 - 08:42 PM " I think the miracle of the brain is grossly overestimated compared to the miracle of thought generated by the spirit." I'm not sure I understand the significance of that, Amos.... that is, I don't know what is meant for 'spirit' to generate thought. If your forebearance up there means that you prefer 'brain' to refer to a mass of grey matter, and "spirit" to its processes, that is a reasonable, but not profound distinction. If you mean 'spirit' to refer to some intangible essence that overlays and 'moves' brain processes, it is a more meaningful, but debatable, distinction. (I retyped that about 4 times, trying to word it clearly.) It's a funny thing about language....sometimes, when we **name** something, we seem to think it is automatically endowed with existence. I have met folks who treated Kant's TUPA (the Transcendental Unity of Pure Apperception) as some sort of entity...and a couple who thought one could perform Husserl's "Eidetic Reduction" as though singing a song. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 15 Aug 04 - 09:47 PM Bill: A series of switches, no matter how convoluted, cannot be a true source of an impulse, a communication, a thought; all it can do is act out a reaction or a programmatic predetermined series of steps. The argument that places the brain as the source of human thought likes to believe that the reason we haven't figured out how this happens is just that the switching system is too complex to understand just yet. The notion that ability, intention and the source of thought are possibly of a different order of qualitym not just more complex in quantity, is heretical to the materialist or the mechanist. Nevertheless I believe it is the path of explanation which MOST clarifies the situation. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 15 Aug 04 - 10:03 PM 42 - Don't hold your breath on that one! :-) Nothing is so adamant and offensive as sheer ignorance confronted by a new idea. Bill - You'll find I agree with Amos on pretty well all of what he said. Your brain would avail you nothing without the active intelligence of your spirit coursing through it, just as a radio would avail you nothing without a broadcast program to play through it and a purposeful intention to tune in the station, and electricity to power the device. Your spirit is the intelligence, energy, and purpose analagous to those. Your brain is the receiving/transmitting device, and nothing more than that. Wolfgang, however, would probably say it's the other way around, and that the physical brain has given rise TO all those other things I mentioned. Like I said before, one of us is clearly looking through the wrong end of the telescope. Either that, or we're both half right. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 15 Aug 04 - 10:03 PM "...ability, intention and the source of thought are possibly of a different order " the crucial word there being "possibly"....it remains to be seen if we can postulate such a 'different order' with no other basis than not liking its opposite....*smile*. There is, of course, the theory that a series of bio-chemical switches of enough complexity DO comprise all there is of human behavior. I do not 'like' that idea any more than you do, and I MUST act as though I have 'free will' or 'spirit'...(or whatever)...but IF there is something acting independantly of complex brain function, we don't know what that might be yet. (My 1/3 finished Masters thesis was supposed to be on the possibility of resolving this dilema thru something like A.N. Whitehead's metaphysics.) It may be just that 'spirit' is too loaded a word to use comfortably, and that we are debating will-o-the-wisps of language....it has happened before. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 15 Aug 04 - 10:40 PM LH...we posted at the same time, or I would have tossed in comments about your metaphors..*grin* "...active intelligence of your spirit coursing.." is a concept...I know what you mean, I just don't know that it MEANS anything ....beyond the metaphor. The radio metaphor is easy...the bio-chemical switches might just be the 'broadcast' and the brain the transmitter, with the mouth..etc..the speakers. The major difference between us is that I am satisfied not having a statement that there IS some universal force/spirit/power enervating the process, while you state it as though it is a given....*shrug*.... Is that YOUR eyes I see at the other end of that telescope?...wow, it's tiny! *grin* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 15 Aug 04 - 10:44 PM Okay...so what's the reason for it all? Or is it meaningless? If so, where does that leave us? I derive strength from the fact that it's not meaningless. Life, I mean. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 15 Aug 04 - 11:20 PM Bill: I believe I have other evidence which if it is okay with you I won't go into here, but which extends considerably further than "not liking" the merchaistic version. I only said "possibly"; to be polite and allow the idea to be approached by the open-minded. The problem with the word spirit is that it gets contaminated by various practices who load it up with their own semantics. I find substantive evidence that regardless of all the semantics, an individual is more than and different from his body, and to decide thebody is the source of thought is parallel to assuming that the intelligence in driving comes from the car (just because the driver occasionally is found inside). A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: JennyO Date: 15 Aug 04 - 11:26 PM "Remembering the past does not preclude you from repeating it anyway." Bill D, your quote reminds me of one I heard - "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting the same result." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 15 Aug 04 - 11:28 PM Isn't it, "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result." ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: JennyO Date: 15 Aug 04 - 11:46 PM OOPS! I think my brain needs airing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 16 Aug 04 - 12:24 AM "Okay...so what's the reason for it all? Or is it meaningless? If so, where does that leave us?" well... why is it necessary to have meaning beyond our own subjective interpretation? It we GIVE it meaning, it HAS meaning. I believe in the values of truth, beauty, sharing, loving, caring, learning, ..and a few more...but I have no notion that these are anything but relative values which I/we superimpose on experience. I believe that the opposites of those values are in the LONG view self-defeating. Of course, some derive different opinions from short-term views...stealing, lying..etc.. I believe that it is possible, alá Kant, to demonstrate the logic of 'good' as an end-in-itself...but I see no 'meaning' in the universe as a whole. The universe doesn't care what we do, think or create....(I have about 3 hours of long-winded RT explanation of all this over a beer or three sometime..*grin*)(I had a philosophy prof in college who couldn't adapt to rigid limits on class time...he had this web of connections in his head, and purely resented having them interrupted by bells and schedules--I finally appreciate what he went thru!) Amos-...ok, I get the general drift...I'm open to PMs if you wanna elaborate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Ooh-Aah Date: 16 Aug 04 - 03:56 AM If any of you new-age/mystical crystal-gazing types are interested, the Australian Sceptics Society is offering A$100,000 for anyone who can prove their claims under test conditions. After all the miracle cures (ha! ha! ha!) we were told about earlier in this thread, this should be a piece of cake. For the Americans out there I'm sure YOUR sceptics have a similar reward in real money. Let's see you back up your words with actions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 16 Aug 04 - 06:13 AM Yes Mr Randi that consummate wielder of Occam's chainsaw has 1 million Dollars up for the takingEasy money?. Scrape some plack of your teeth and say hallo you and the Bacteria that form it have a common ancestor, some 2 billion yearsish ago. PP |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 16 Aug 04 - 07:12 AM Isn't it, "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result." ? You're correct LH. If any of you new-age/mystical crystal-gazing types are interested, the Australian Sceptics Society is offering A$100,000 for anyone who can prove their claims under test conditions. After all the miracle cures (ha! ha! ha!) we were told about earlier in this thread, this should be a piece of cake. For the Americans out there I'm sure YOUR sceptics have a similar reward in real money. Let's see you back up your words with actions. Ooh Aah: You obviously do not understand metaphysics and healers. I have explained this many times. We "healers" are NOT the healers. The "Healer" only supplies the energy surcharge to get the healing process started. The healing is done by the higher powers, and the healee's sub conscious mind (willing to be be healed). ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 16 Aug 04 - 11:27 AM To see the brain, as a series of convoluted binary switches is incorrect the Brain (or more correctly a large parts of it) consists of a vast number of coupled Relaxation Oscillators with continuous properties that lead to emergent temporal behaviour. Even simple systems of 2 coupled relaxation oscillators can produce complex chaotic behaviour. I think the Brain starts to build these systems under the guidance of the consciousness into models of the behaviour of external systems as soon as we are born, and probably before. You only have to watch toddlers to see how unstoppably they pursue knowledge of the world through empirical observation hypothesis formation and experimental testing. Of cause this brings us to the subject of consciousness, but I think that should have it's own thread. PP |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Aug 04 - 12:48 PM You raise a very useful point there, Bill, when you say: "well... why is it necessary to have meaning beyond our own subjective interpretation? If we GIVE it meaning, it HAS meaning. I believe in the values of truth, beauty, sharing, loving, caring, learning, ..and a few more...but I have no notion that these are anything but relative values which I/we superimpose on experience. I believe that the opposites of those values are in the LONG view self-defeating. Of course, some derive different opinions from short-term views...stealing, lying..etc.." Exactly! That is the wonder of free will, and the ability to impart meaning to what would otherwise be meaningless...and that is an ability derived from consciousness, and consciousness is an aspect of spirit. The relative values which we superimpose on experience are created and used BY us in a beautifully intelligent and meaningful manner....or in same cases, NOT so intelligent...as in the case of the thief, liar, etc...but still intelligent on a certain level...a level of thinking which says, "Only my needs matter". Do you see that we are using God-like abilities to give meaning to the World around us? We are God, Bill, all of us. We are God embodied in an apparently separate and limited being. If that limited being fails to see the commonality of spirit in the other limited beings around it, and thinks that ITS survival is all that matters, then it becomes what we term "immoral" or "amoral" in its actions. In so doing, it is demonstrating the limits of its own understanding. People who see themselves in others, and thereby respect and care for others are far more helpful and responsible. These are the spiritual challenges of masquerading as a limited being in an enormous field of opportunity/threat...which we call the World or the Universe. You are God embodied, Bill. So am I. So is the skeptical Guest, and so is everyone else. Only question is, how do we go about expressing it? Are we conscious of higher purpose, partially conscious of it, or wholly ignorant of it? I would rather deal with a morally responsible atheist than a morally irresponsible religious nut any time...because the morally responsible atheist is far better tuned into higher purpose, whether he identifies it as that or not. Most of all, I enjoy dealing with a morally responsible person who IS keenly aware of spiritual purpose. As for these skeptics who offer prizes, like the Unamazing Randi, they are just laughable in their desperate need for attention and ego justification. They remind me of J. Jonah Jamieson. :-) Their perfect mental counterparts are people who think Eve was made out of Adam's rib...and those are the people they ought to spend their time debating with uselessly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 16 Aug 04 - 01:24 PM "....because the morally responsible atheist is far better tuned into higher purpose, whether he identifies it as that or not." well, I guess I get a 7.046 out of 10 in your ranking, LH...that ain't bad! *grin* we seem to agree on certain premises, but diverge on the interpretaion & implications. "... how do we go about expressing it?"....I see no need to even USE words like God and "higher purpose" when I have no idea what they might refer to except circular linguistic references. I see amazing things in the universe, and I am in total awe at the complexity of it all and wish I could live a million years to see what we might learn..(and meet 'others' from "out there"=no fair you having all the fun!)...but I have this deep reluctance to assume much about any ultimate meaning or causality. de gustibus non disputandem est |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 16 Aug 04 - 03:33 PM Pied Piper, You raise a very interesting point about "relaxation oscillators" about which I unfortunately know very little. However, the fundamental which I still see as an error is the attribution to that network -- analog or binary -- of certain capabilities which (imho) can't really come from wetware, no matter how coupled, including awareness itself, intent, understanding, and the ability to consciously be. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Aug 04 - 03:41 PM I think of you as being pretty highly developed spiritually, Bill. You just don't express it necessarily in the same words that I would. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 16 Aug 04 - 04:29 PM Well having at least refreshed my clarity on the definition of a relaxation oscillator I am moved to repeat my earlier objection, PP, but to save storage just consider it done! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 16 Aug 04 - 10:49 PM well, I'm gonna take that as a compliment *grin*, even if it does |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Ooh-Aah Date: 17 Aug 04 - 05:20 AM Sooo... no takers for this ready cash then. If Mr Randi is such an egotistical person, wipe the smile off his face by taking the money off him! His ego is beside the point of course - a classic case of attacking the man not the ball. Go in there and do the tests. OK, if you're not the healer and something else is, this other thing is not going to desert you simply because you're in a test situation - don't forget that you agree on the form the test will take. No-one will do the test because you know perfectly well, in some well-repressed cupboard of your mind, that this paranormal stuff is baloney. If not, why not? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 17 Aug 04 - 06:08 AM The Unijunction transister circuit is a good example. Here are some more electronic versions. There are chemical, mechanical, and even genetic relaxation oscillators as well. I'm playing around with RO circuits made with DIAC as there cheap and require less components. PP |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 17 Aug 04 - 11:28 AM I'm not asserting that consciousness is an emergent property of large arrays relaxation oscillators, just that this is the way the brain does a lot of it's stuff. I think consciousness arises through some quantum mechanical process, possibly sequential Bose-Einstein condensates, produced in the microtubules of the Brains cells. PP |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Aug 04 - 11:59 AM What specific test(s) are you suggesting, Ooh-Ahh? Can you describe it? And have you considered a lucrative career doing the narration for porno movies? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 17 Aug 04 - 12:11 PM I looked into the conditions Mr. Randi places on anyone who wants to try to claim the money he is offering. This is the one that stops me from ever wanting to get myself involved with his little scam: Applicant agrees that all data (photographic, recorded, written, etc.) gathered as a result of the testing may be used freely by JREF in any way that Mr. Randi may choose. He's nothing more than a rip-off artist, and anyone with any sense of self-preservation will go running in the opposite direction from him and his little enterprise... and fast. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Aug 04 - 12:13 PM Precisely. Like I said, he reminds me of J.Jonah Jamieson. He is either obsessed, or he's a scoundrel, or both of those at the same time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 17 Aug 04 - 12:16 PM well, Pied Piper...whether it is that, or something slightly different...or even something completely different--I am glad to see research and ideas going into some positive STUDY of the possibilities, rather than vague attribution to some "higher power", just because it's easier to toss out abstract opinions instead of doing hard work. (I don't BEGIN to comprehend the details of those links, but I see the principle being explored) Sadly, if the ultimate mechanism were discovered and demonstrated tomorrow, with detailed maps of brain circuits, most of the 'spiritual' crowd would either flatly deny it, or assert that THEIR model was what drove and and 'enervated' the process, simply, I suspect, because some people's ego/personality/emotions/background require the poetic and mysterious component. (I don't consider that to be an insult to them, and really, not even much of a criticism, since, if I AM right, they can't help feeling what they feel. I do happen to think there's enough poetry and awe and mystery in the physical reality of it all to satisfy anyone, if they'd could just see it.) Obviously, I would like to see a bit more rigor in the language involved in the debates..*grin*...so that we are not all tossing out words & phrases which mean very different things to different people. Just look at the various uses of God, Mind, Spirit, Belief, Truth, Proof, etc...that we find just here at Mudcat! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 17 Aug 04 - 12:21 PM ...however, I don't think any of the posters on this thread who have said they want scientific proof really want proof that what people like LH, Amos, and I are saying is true. I think that they only want proof that it isn't true. I notice that when I offered to do a test using plants, not one of the people who has said they would like proof took me up on my offer. Not even my offer to describe the scientific model I would be using. The silence in response to my offers was deafening (figuratively speaking). Of cause this brings us to the subject of consciousness, but I think that should have it's own thread. For some of us, "consciousness" is not a separate subject, but, as with matter and spirit, it is all a part of the same thing. de gustibus non disputandem est Precisely, Bill. Couldn't have put it better myself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 17 Aug 04 - 05:42 PM Carole...I, for one, would LOVE to have those things proved true...not just to those who experience them, but to all. I can't read minds, see the future, see auras, influence plants, remember past lives, 'feel' crystals, perform out-of-body visualizations, talk to spirits, heal illness, levitate, bend spoons, read tea leaves, see fairies in my garden...or ANY of the things often discussed here. If you TRULY can, I am envious, and would love to either learn how, or find out before I die why not....if you can't, and it is all only subjective, wishful thinking...I'd like to know that too....Simply telling me "Oh, **I** know it's real, but it is by definition untestable!" won't do for someone like me who like answers, not claims. I try to always have an open mind and not state categorically that ALL that is totally impossible, but the ONLY alternative for someone who studied 'thinking' seriously is to be a careful skeptic and distrust answers that seem too pat, vague and 'fuzzy'. What else can I do, poor thing who had his receptors damaged due to too much Country Music in Kansas? *grin* There are several issues...who is 'right'? How can we KNOW? and Does it make any practical difference? At different times, one of these issues is more relevant than the others. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 17 Aug 04 - 06:06 PM I didn't see you indicate any interest in knowing what I have in mind for a scientific model to test the effect of spiritual energy on plants, Bill. Why is that, if as you say, you are seriously interested in exploring these possibilities with an open mind? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 17 Aug 04 - 06:10 PM Here's the post again in case anyone missed it. I posted it four days ago: Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC - PM Date: 13 Aug 04 - 06:58 PM TBPL, the energy is what's already there. As I said, they work with the energy that's in the vicinity of the crystal. I agree that one of the problems with trying to do a test involving my own perceptions of energy would be tricky, although I don't think necessarily impossible. That's why I have proposed an experiment involving plants. There's a woman in Jeffersonton Virginia who does this kind of experimentation. I first discovered the unpleasant reaction I experience around large Genesa crystals while visiting her experimental gardens. I can set up a test using the scientific model we used at the U of MD for herbicides, to measure the effect of spiritual energy on plants. And by "measure" I mean physically measure. I already have a small Genesa crystal and the materials for two identical container gardens with the only variable being the Genesa crystal, possibly in tandem with some other kinds of spiritual energy conductors. This would not be difficult to do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 17 Aug 04 - 06:11 PM protron or Neutron orbiting the nucleus (Two Bears) Please, Two Bears, take your analogies from birds and bees or any other field in which you have some knowledge, but not from physics. Your lack of basic knowledge is embarassing. As for that one study claiming to have found an effect of prayer upon well being, that's just one among many with negative results, and not a very good one, methodologically speaking. But this one study is cited all over again in the one-sided literature and all critical commentaries are of course omitted. Another study that was not only double-blind but triple-blind has found no effect. So what? If you want to learn a bit more about such studies and the methodological pitfalls this old post from me is a good start and gives some hints where to find the original sources. The small print in the sections about methods is what you have to read when you want to give an informed opinion about these studies. Secondary sources as the ones you recommend are a bad start. In the old ages, people all over the world have been puzzled by things moving and not moving in their environments. That's how most of them explained it to themselves: The things moving had to have some 'life energy' (psyche, anima, or whatever) in them, to make them different from things not moving by themselves. Therefore the old Greek, for instance had a god moving the sun, a god moving the ocean waters when he was in a bad mood, a god for the winds. The Germans had all kinds of gods for each well, each waterfall. That was one way of coming to grips with the observations that some things move by themselves and others don't. Nothing of any real value (in the sense of prediction and manipulation) has come out of these assumptions. They appeal to the intuitive mind, but as an explanation with predictive power they fall completely flat. The well stops giving water because a god (spirit) is angry? Cul de sac. Since long, the postulate of spirits as movers of wells, waterfalls, trees has been given up in science (not in fables, tales, but that is a different story). The increaes in knowledge about what moves the water, what makes the clouds move, what makes the trees grow has been tremendous. No wonder then that recent attempts to explain what makes the animals move (and later, perhaps, what make man move) look not at a failed program of explanation of which never anything worthwhile has come out, but at a successful set of ideas. The group who has studied all 1000 neurons of a normal fly has done more to our understanding of autoception of the fly and of how a fly moves (in a way that to an observer may even look full of purpose) has done more than centuries of philosophers. Humans tend to see intentions where nothing but a complicated neural circuitry is in action. Look for instance at how chess games between a human and a machine are commented. I have yet to see a comment avoiding concepts like 'intention' for moves of the machine. 'Fritz 8 is trying to block the line for the rook and at the same time bring his bishop into the game to put more pressure upon the knight defending the king'. Complex machine action looks to us like founded upon intentions. That's how we perceive it and how we describe it. I've no problem with that language at all. It is my own language when I speak about these things in daily life. But as a start for a research programm it is worthless. And that is the reason why the people doing actual research do not follow any other programm and not that they only want proof that it isn't true.. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 17 Aug 04 - 06:17 PM ...and here's the post where I offered to describe the scientific model that I have in mind. Not one person took me up on my offer to even just to describe it to see if it is a legitimate scientific model: Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC - PM Date: 13 Aug 04 - 07:43 PM "CarolC ... you would not be the best candidate to set up the test and I'm sure you would not want me to do it! It would have to be done by a third party. Who'd believe either one of us? ;o) Plus we're in two different countries." Is that you TBPL? I don't see any reason why I couldn't be a good candidate for conducting a test that uses a rigid scientific model with detailed records and exact measurements. I can describe the model for you if you want. Perhaps the results of the herbicide testing are available for examination? I have no idea. It was the College Park campus. I worked there during the summer of 1979, I believe. The department head was Dr. Ron Ritter. I believe Roundup was one of the herbicides we were testing, but I'm not sure. Here's a Google search with "university of maryland" herbicide "dr. ron ritter" as the search parameters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 17 Aug 04 - 06:19 PM Perhaps the results of the herbicide testing are available for examination? This part of my last post should have been in quotes because I was quoting someone else's post. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Aug 04 - 06:26 PM Everyone's lack of basic knowledge about something can be seen as embarrassing if you want to find it embarrassing. Just depends on what the subject might be. Most people's lack of knowledge of Bob Dylan's lyrics is really embarrassing, for example. At least, I think so. :-) In your case, Wolfgang, I think you are demonstrating a certain lack of knowledge (or awareness) regarding spiritual matters. In this respect Two Bears and you could both choose to be embarrassed by the other...or not. Depends on the degree of mutual respect, I suppose. Is Two Bears supposed to know more about practical science than you do about spiritual things...or is there room for comparing notes? If I want a science question answered, Wolfgang, you are one of the first people I would ask, because you know your science. If it's a question about healing techniques, I'd ask Two Bears. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 17 Aug 04 - 06:53 PM Woah... LH and Amos! Check it out. I've just discovered a major paranormal phenomenon! All of my posts that mention the words "scientific model" are completely invisible to Pied Piper, TBPL, Bill D, and various other scientifically minded people in this thread! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Aug 04 - 07:02 PM That may be because those posts do not appear to support their chosen argument very well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 17 Aug 04 - 10:45 PM I think I'll test my hypothesis about some of my posts being invisible to some people by describing the process we used in our herbicide experiments at the U of Md. If everyone can see this post, then it will probably be safe to conclude that my invisibility hypothesis was incorrect. We had experimental plots measured out and planted with whatever crop we were testing the herbicide on. The plot was then staked and made into a grid. This comprised several rows of rectangluar areas with a pathway in between each row of rectangles. Each rectangle recieved a different treatment. Some of them had nothing applied to them. These were the controls. The rest of the rectangles had various herbicides applied to them. Some of them had just one herbicide applied to them. Some of them had a combination of herbicides applied to them. We kept careful records of what was applied to each area (and in what quantities), and which areas were the controls. We then allowed the crops to grow and we used the standard methods of caring for the crops while they grew, except that we only cultivated the pathways in between the rows (using a garden hoe). We left the weeds that grew within the experimental areas alone. When the crops were ready to harvest, they were cut and left within their rectangle. We then harvested the contents of each rectangle into big plastic lawn and garbage bags, and labled them according to the rectangle they were harvested from. The crops were stored in a large walk-in refrigerator until they were ready to be sorted. We sorted them bag by bag. First we sorted out the crop and weighed it. Then we sorted the weeds according to category... broad-leafed weeds (dandilions, plantain, etc.), grasses, etc. We weighed each category of weed. We recorded all of the weights of the crops, and different categories of weed. I wasn't involved in tabulating the results, but they took the information from the records of what was applied to which rectangle of crop (and the controls), and the information from the records of what we measured of the weeds and the crops, and they did their statistical magic to arrive at the results of the experiment. We had plots at Poplar Hill and the Wye Plantation on the eastern shore of Maryland (USA), and several plots in various locations around Montgomery, Prince Georges, and Carroll Counties in Maryland (USA). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 17 Aug 04 - 11:05 PM I've just discovered a major paranormal phenomenon! All of my posts that mention the words "scientific model" are completely invisible to Pied Piper, TBPL, Bill D, and various other scientifically minded people in this thread! *grin*...Carol...what you have 'discovered' is time, energy and focus constraints upon denizens of Online Forums. I saw the original post, and sort of remember thinking..."well, if Carol was still near here, maybe...."...then I got lost in other posts and issues. (I even clicked briefly on the link you posted) It would be fascinating to see a serious study such as you suggest, but I could only be a limited observer, not an administrator, of such a study. I understand the basic principles of such studies, but *I* am not trained in the details of setting them up, nor in the analysis of statistics. What do you think could be arranged, given the current situation? Now...you need a new hypothesis about invisibility. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 17 Aug 04 - 11:17 PM That's good, Bill. I didn't really like my invisibility hypothesis anyway. *g* Since you have expressed an interest, I'll come up with a workable model that won't require much in the way of statistical analysis, and I'll post it probably tomorrow (possibly the day after tomorrow). I don't think it should require anyone to oversee it if I make it fairly simple and if I use very detailed measurements and record-keeping. That's the normal way that science is done. They don't have people watching over everyone's shoulder all the time to keep them honest. They just require that the experiment be immaculately set up and documented so that anyone else who wants to will be able to repeat it him or herself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 18 Aug 04 - 12:43 AM "Complex machine action looks to us like founded upon intentions. That's how we perceive it and how we describe it. I've no problem with that language at all. It is my own language when I speak about these things in daily life. But as a start for a research programm it is worthless..." What about your own actions, Wolfgang? Is it your opinion that they are founded upon intentions or do you think that "nothing but a complicated neural circuitry is in action," and your consciousness is just along for the ride and only thinks it's (at least sometimes) steering? I myself feel that I'm on autopilot far too much, but there are times when I get to steer. B F Skinner said it's all cause and effect, but It seems to me he contradicted himself... To quote Sir j0hn: waht you think? clint |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 18 Aug 04 - 01:42 AM Sooo... no takers for this ready cash then. If Mr Randi is such an egotistical person, wipe the smile off his face by taking the money off him! His ego is beside the point of course - a classic case of attacking the man not the ball. Go on the net and read the trvails of Sifu Richard Mooney and the pompous Randi. Mr. Mooney contributed material to the book "The Ultimate Martial Art" by Paul Dong, and Mr. Mooney was one of the several Qigong masters I interviewed about some people being insensitive to detect this subtle lifeforce energy. Mr. Randi is simply a fool. He is fond of making statement (there is no energy field around the body) when kirlian photography has proven there IS an energy field around plants and people. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 18 Aug 04 - 01:50 AM Carole...I, for one, would LOVE to have those things proved true...not just to those who experience them, but to all. I can't read minds, see the future, see auras, influence plants, remember past lives, 'feel' crystals, perform out-of-body visualizations, talk to spirits, heal illness, levitate, bend spoons, read tea leaves, see fairies in my garden...or ANY of the things often discussed here. Ahem: Bill. I teach people how to heal almost every day, and I would bet that I could teach you to see and FEEL auras in 5 minutes or less. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 18 Aug 04 - 05:07 AM What about your own actions, Wolfgang? Is it your opinion that they are founded upon intentions or do you think that "nothing but a complicated neural circuitry is in action Clint, I'd talk about them in our everyday language, but I think that a description in terms of neural circuitry is a better approach for doing research. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 18 Aug 04 - 06:27 AM I am perfectly familiar with the wide range of religious views held by people, these ideas aren't complicated or difficult to understand (unlike some areas Science and Mathematics), and here at mudcat were dealing with a small subset of these beliefs. The mudcat Mystics are like us all a product of their times; the 60's. The baby boom generation's adoption of heterodox attitudes, imported from various eastern "spiritual paradises" has now become orthodox, and American capitalism has taken it to its sweaty bosom. Self appointed "Gurus" like Sai baba now hold many Americans in thrall mentally and financially, and use their power to abuse their followers. Add to this a crop of home grown frauds, coffee-table book writing, charlatans, and the effort involved in understanding Science, it's no wonder these view are popular. Perhaps PT Barnum was right, but I'm optimistic that the truth will out. PP |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 18 Aug 04 - 07:13 AM I am perfectly familiar with the wide range of religious views held by people Aside from sounding pompous, this statement also rings untrue. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 18 Aug 04 - 11:12 AM Ask me a question then. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 18 Aug 04 - 11:29 AM Ask me a question then. --Pied Piper Here's one- what sort of sensation do I experience when I get too close to an energy vortex? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: HRH ted of hull Date: 18 Aug 04 - 11:31 AM 198 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 18 Aug 04 - 11:39 AM PP: How is the relationship between material space-time and individual spirit defined in non-Christian and/or agnostic metaphysics? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: HRH ted of hull Date: 18 Aug 04 - 11:40 AM 200. i thank you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 18 Aug 04 - 02:23 PM I am perfectly familiar with the wide range of religious views held by people Aside from sounding pompous, this statement also rings untrue. I have not had a deep philosophical discussion with anyone on the mudcat about my views. I have labeled my beliefs in general; but not disclosed specifics. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 18 Aug 04 - 05:19 PM ":... I would bet that I could teach you to see and FEEL auras in 5 minutes or less." five minutes? well...I 'may' be in Tennesee next summer. (do you ever HAVE failures in your teaching or healing? And if so, why? And what are the limits?) (do be warned...I have been given up as lost by many others..I once had a lady read my horoscope...I told her I didn't put much faith in that sort of thing...."Yes", she replied. that's just what your stars SAYS you'd say!"...You can't win... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Aug 04 - 05:32 PM Well...it isn't about winning. :-) It's about learning and discovering. Pied Piper - You are oh, so right about the false gurus. However, there are also genuine gurus and spiritual teachers. It's the false ones we must all watch carefully for along the way. You stay around one for awhile, see what he or she is up to, and you can figure it out if you're not the type who wants to give away your personal power to the first charismatic individual who comes along. It's the same deal with politicians by the way...many of them are also snake oil salesmen. In fact, I might say "most of them". They rob far more people than the gurus do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 18 Aug 04 - 06:51 PM five minutes? well...I 'may' be in Tennesee next summer. (do you ever HAVE failures in your teaching or healing? And if so, why? And what are the limits?) (do be warned...I have been given up as lost by many others..I once had a lady read my horoscope...I told her I didn't put much faith in that sort of thing...."Yes", she replied. that's just what your stars SAYS you'd say!"...You can't win I have yet to have a failure in teaching people how to do this spiritual technology, or to see auras0 but anything is possible. I have seen LOTS of failures in healings; but I have stated repeatedly that I am NOT the healer. The higher powers, and the recepient's basic self (sub conscious mind) is responsible for the healings; then I have seen quite a few things that could only be considered miracles (These have happened under my hands, and the hands of a lot of my students.). ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 18 Aug 04 - 07:17 PM I think I've decided on radishes because they're pretty robust, generally, and they are compact and will be easy to measure at the end of the test. I want to grow them in identical circular containers. I haven't decided on what I will be using as containers yet. Here's a basic outline for the test. I'll add more detail as I get everything figured out. -Measure equal amounts of identical potting medium (I'll mix it all up in one batch to ensure that it is all the same). Record amount of potting soil by volume or weight. -Use equal number of seeds from each packet in each container (ie: if I use more than one packet, I'll use, for example, six from one packet in each container, and six from the other packets in each container). Record number of seeds in which container and from which packages. -Measure all water and plant food. Give equal amounts of water and plant food to each container and keep records of amounts and frequency of application. I think I might do this in a series of tests instead of just one test. My control will be placed in the same lighting conditions as the experimental container, but far enough away to not be effected by the energy conductors that I will be using in the experimental container. And it will not have anything near it that I percieve to have properties that will effect the spiritual energy around the control plants. I will be using a small Genesa crystal as the energy conductor. I may use some other things that I percieve to effect energy, but I don't know for sure yet what they will be. I will keep records of everything I use that is for the purpose of effecting spiritual energy. At the end of each test, I will weigh all of the plants in each container, both the root as well as the foliage (not including the very fine, thread-like roots), and record this information. I don't think this test can determine causes of anything, but what it can do is determine whether or not it is possible to get different results with plants using these two different techniques. Personally, I see that as a pretty good start if it proves successful. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Pied Piper Date: 19 Aug 04 - 03:50 PM So am I right a Ganesha crystal is a statue of the Hindu God Ganesh carved out of quarts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Aug 04 - 04:00 PM No, Pied. Check this link... Genesa Crystals |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 19 Aug 04 - 04:07 PM I've never heard of or seen a Ganesha crystal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 19 Aug 04 - 04:35 PM "...and the recepient's basic self (sub conscious mind) is responsible for the healings;..." this part I certainly accept! I know of bio-feedback and the ability of the mind/brain to affect many processes...I presume that this may be involved in the gradual recovery that Christopher Reeves is making from his spinal injury. The mind IS limited...we don't regrow limbs or (as far as I know) kill the flu virus be merely having a positive attitude...but we may well reduce healing time from certain injuries and diseases by controlling blood-pressure or production of certain enzymes...etc. but 'higher' powers'?.....that's a horse of a different color. " I have yet to have a failure in teaching people how to do this spiritual technology"...and could this be because those who tried already accepted that it COULD be done?..As you see, I am a tough case.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 20 Aug 04 - 03:57 AM Everyone's lack of basic knowledge about something can be seen as embarrassing if you want to find it embarrassing (Little Hawk) No, that's not the problem with Two Bears. His problem is that he oversteps the boundaries of his knowledge. Nobody knows everything and not to know something is not embarassing at all, but embarassing is to do as if you would know something on a field on which you don't. Two Bears fights above his weight when he tries talking science. I don't mind at all him talking about personal experiences, what he does and all that. He is the expert in that field. But when I read him talking for instance that "Kirlian photography has proven" it becomes obvious instanteneously that he just repeats second hand literature and lacks any knowledge about the pitfalls of that research, about the many counterarguments and what would constitute a good controlled experiment on that field. He may be good on what he does and impressive to some others, but he lacks any appreciation about his own limitations. Two Bears, you may not like Randi and I agree that his no nonsense language doesn't appeal to everybody (though I find him personally very charming and patient) but the rules which way he offers his money are very clear cut. If you are as goos as you think you are that should be an easy grab for you. For instance, you just could offer him you perceive the energy field (aura) of a person behind a screen when all (usual) sensory means of perception are excluded. That's an easy experiment, basically, when you know how to explude other cues. But I could understand if you are reluctant because there is something to lose for you: an unrealistic self-evaluation. But one could argue that that can be seen as a gain. Carol, I'm here without my books, so I cannot give you the correct/complete reference. In M.D. Dunnete's (editor, probably more editor names) Handbook of industrian and organizational psychology there is a chapter titles something like 'Conduct and design of quasi experiments in field settings' by Cook & Campbell (& one more?). Read the first part about what can go wrong in experiments, in particular what threatens internal validity. The main problem with y There is a lot of work to do before such an experiment would start to be convincing. I know that I'm being a wet blanket here but I have seen it too often that believers in something paranormal do their own quickly thought out experiment. They are initially full of enthousiams for they usually get positive results. Then it is pointed out to them that they have overlooked a lot of counter interpretations. They repeat the experiments with more and more controls and the effect eventually goes down to nil. They are disenchanted and stop experimenting for without positive results their initial enthousiams is lost. Then they blame science for not being able to find out what they know is true instead of considering that the null hypothesis may be true after all. The first badly controlled experiment makes it (without the small print) into the believers' literature as "CC (2005) has proven that energy..." Then unavoidably believers like Two Bears looking for corroboration of what they have no doubt about read it and feed it back into discussions as the one we have here. Doing research is like playing an instrument. It is easy with most instruments to get a sound at once, but it takes long years of practice before you get really good. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 20 Aug 04 - 08:48 AM WG: A very nicely expressed post. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bagpuss Date: 20 Aug 04 - 09:06 AM I havent read all of this thread, so apologies if someone has already mentioned it, but near the start of the thread Amos said this: "IF you will command your arm to rise up int he air and observe it to do so, you will see the mechanism you are looking for by which SPirit interacts with Matter." I just wanted to point out the experiments that show that the nerve activity in the motor areas occurs BEFORE one makes the conscious decision to move. I'll see if I can find the reference if anyone cares. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 20 Aug 04 - 09:07 AM I care, Bagpuss. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 20 Aug 04 - 10:00 AM Carol, I have printed 'Dunnete', but for a search it is easier with the correct spelling: Dunnette. I remember Bagpuss's article too but it isn't convincing (though intriguing!): As so often, it has a very clear unambiguous result (when talking in terms of neural activity) and is open to lots of interpretations when words like 'intention' are pinned to observable results. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bagpuss Date: 20 Aug 04 - 10:30 AM Here you are Amos: free will. Its a fairly clear summary of the experiment, with a bit of discussion below about the limitations in interpretation. It may not be totally conclusive but it certainly makes you think (or it makes some neurons fire anyway... ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 20 Aug 04 - 11:06 AM Wolfgang, do you have any specific problems with my experimental model? I am open to having your input on how it might be improved if you have any. If not, I will certainly be open to your input on the results I get after I get them. I have based my experiment almost entirely on a model that has been used successfully by someone who has been conducting scientific experiments on plants for years, and has a solid reputation for being a good scientist. Please keep in mind the fact that my experiment is not for the purpose of testing perceptions or how the mind works. It's just solid science that tests and measures the effects of things on matter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bagpuss Date: 20 Aug 04 - 11:24 AM CarolC - I'm not Wolfgang, but I have a basic grounding in scientific method - will i do? Whenever an experiment is carried out which examines what is usually thought of as paranormal (and in many "normal" experiments too), an extra protection against fraud or unconscious bias is usually employed, called blinding. In your case, what this would mean would be that the person doing the weighing of the plants has no knowledge of which condition each of the plants has grown in, until after the results are recorded. Also you would need to make sure that you have sufficient numbers of plants to determine if there is a statistically significant effect (a power calculation would be needed here). Anyone else got any methodological problems with Carols experiment? Bagpuss |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Aug 04 - 11:26 AM "His problem is that he oversteps the boundaries of his knowledge." Yes, you may be right about that, Wolfgang. Most people tend to overstep the boundaries of their knowledge a bit when having a lively conversation about anything. :-) I'm not sure you do, though, because you are pretty careful when expressing yourself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 20 Aug 04 - 11:34 AM Thanks Bagpuss. Yes, you will indeed do. Re: your second point. That's why I'm thinking about doing a series of tests instead of just the one. Re: your first point. I think I can fix that one also. Thanks for the input. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bagpuss Date: 20 Aug 04 - 11:36 AM Also. Carol, how will you statistically analyse the results? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 20 Aug 04 - 11:41 AM Thanks, Bagpuss. I am afraid I find it less than impressive -- the discussion asserts that Libet demonstrated certain conclusions, but there is no particular reason to accept thos econclusions in the data presented. Any switching system can produce similar phenomena. A phone network invariably shows signs of electronic activity well before the manifestation of communication in human-recognizable form (voice). One could then argue that all communication is conceived in unconsciousness. His discussion of the manifestation of consciousness preciptating predictors in the brain strikes me as the voicing of a preference, not a rigidly supported conclusion. For example, were Libet's test subjects talking about the construction of their will in terms of words? Surely that would be rather late in the chain of consciousness? I would hazard a guess that an act of conscious will in its most fundamental form is more like a blast of pure will, not stepped down into voiceable steps, images, language, etc. IT is possible we don't even have a good vocabulary for discussing the impulses of pure intent. The remark about wishing we could build a computer that was unconscious in the same way we are is clever and humorous; but it does not propose to say what that way is, and it is distinctly possible that calling it unconscious is a bias of interpretation and erroneous. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 20 Aug 04 - 11:46 AM I thought I would just post the results and let anyone here who is good a statistical analysis interpret the results him or herself. I figure that could be an interesting discussion in and of itself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Aug 04 - 11:57 AM People, following childhood, initially adopt a basic faith. It may be one of the following: 1. There is a spiritual reality and a consciousness behind physical reality. That spiritual reality is the true source of life. 2. There is only physical reality. What we call "consciousness" arises out of it, according to certain quantifiable factors. Physical reality is the true source of life. They then set about looking for evidence (material or experiential) to support their adopted faith, reading books that support their adopted faith, and paying attention to things that support their adopted faith. They argue strenuously with people of a different adopted faith. :-) And so it goes... That is all that's actually happening here. Sometimes adults alter their basic faith! This can be due to: a. A gradual shift in perceptions. (which is what happened to me in my 20's as I shifted from (2) above to (1) above) b. A sudden dramatic experience, like the sighting of a UFO*, a near-death experience, a religious experience, a religious conversion, or a complete loss of faith in a religion or a spiritual leader...to give various examples. *(I had the UFO sighting experience, and it did suddenly alter my basic faith on that particular matter) (Two Bears had a near-death or OBE experience, and that changed him from a materialist to a believer in Spirit) (I have met other people who were once religious, and who became totally disillusioned with religion when their church or leader disappointed them.) It cuts both ways. So...there is always the possibility that you or I will change or modify our present basic faith. This alone should make having a conversation worthwhile. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 20 Aug 04 - 12:56 PM *just reading and following the discussion*...may have more to say later... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 20 Aug 04 - 06:11 PM Carol, the problem I have is intertwined with the correct level of statistical analysis. From what you have written it is obvious that you regard the individual plant's outcome measure as the input for the statistical analysis. Imagine had had a statistically significant result with this analysis. You could generalise to other plants under exactly the same set of conditions. That is not what you want to have. On the qualitative level of discussion you want to generalise to the action of the independent variable. You want to make sure that your manipulation (and not something else) is responsible for the difference in the dependent variable found. The way you have designed your experiment any undetected third variable confounded with the experimental variable could as well be responsible for a difference found. The 'as similar as possible' approach can so easily fail. Drastic examples: Your cat has peed on one plant bed and not on the other (then all plants in one bed suffer from the same interference and therefore the assumption of independence necessary for the analysis you have planned is violated. Or a pregnat worm was in one of the beds and not in the other and so on. The mistake to overlook such a possibility is one of the most common mistakes even in the published literature. The best solution is to have a big selection of plant beds and to assign them randomly to the two experimental conditions (much more work). The correct level of analysis for the statistics would be the average weight per plant bed. To blind the evaluator is one thing. Even more urgent is to blind the caretaker of the plants iof there is any caretaking planned. I'm sure I don't know all articles about the power of prayer (or any other spiritual influence) on plants, but what I have read (I remember the name Backster) is lacking all precautions against alternative interpretations. The reason for that in my eyes is that many of the researchers with such an agenda are coming from the hard sciences (are biologists, physicists) and lack any methodological knowledge on how to do these experiments correctly. That is understandable for they come from a tradition in which experimenting is easy (I mean the experimental design, and not the apparatus which may be extremely tricky). People coming from the natural sciences into these fields are utterly naive when confronted with the problem of controlling confounding factors. The parasciences are full of such articles. Thoroughly honest physicists naively extrapolating their experimental knowledge from how to deal with electrons (or whatever other particles) to a much more fuzzy field. To do what you plan to do correctly is a tremendous amount of work. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Aug 04 - 06:29 PM You're right, Wolfgang. It is definitely a tremendous amount of work, and Carol would be wasting a valuable portion of her life in pursuing it merely to convince some skeptics...who I am quite sure would remain unconvinced in any case. I can live happily enough knowing that there will always be plenty of people out there who don't believe something I happen to believe. It has ever been so and ever shall be. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 20 Aug 04 - 07:22 PM Little Hawk, I am sure your way of thinking is comforting for you. I have always had the impression that you have difficulties dealing with doubts. You seem only to have replaced the authorities/securities of your youth by others. Empirical testing is a way of gathering knowledge and a way of testing whether what you consider correct may turn out to be wrong. This is not the way for the lazy thinkers and for those threatened by finding out they have been wrong. It is not your way and so it is no wonder you have forgotten this as a reason for a change of opinion in your 20 Aug 04 - 11:57 AM post. Completely contrary to what you seem to believe, science is open for a change of opinion or theory given a good reason to do so. Carol's experiment done in a convincing way and found repeatable could of course change all thinking in science. Not necessarily in an individual scientist, for these people are as conservative or stubborn individually as all others, but there are always enough of them grasping at the new findings and trying to get famous with new theories. The individual scientist may be immune against change, science in a broad sense isn't. Look at what has happened after an experiment seemed to show that eihter ether is moving with the earth or the speed of light is independent of the frame of reference. Unthinkable that was to ageing scientists for it warranted such a big change in thinking they were not ready for it. But young scientists did think the unthinkable and came up with new theories for that. Einstein for instance. The old camarilla was strong enough to prevent him getting the Nobel prize for the theory of relativity and so he got it as a compromise for a minor contribution, the explanation of the photoelectriy effect and 'for his other contributions'. But his theory has won. As immune each individual scinetist may be against new facts and theories, the endeavour 'science' is extremely open to changes. That is by the weayy much different from faiths or belief systems which are unchanged since centuries. This vitasl difference you are unable or unwilling to grasp, for if science is 'just another faith' you feel less threatened in your world view. It would take two decades or so, but a repeatable experiment demonstrating spiritual action upon matter would change the thinking of science. But a mere assertion of individual experiences will not change anything. The other side of the medal, of course, is that a well controlled experiment may repeatedly confirm the null hypothesis of no effect of thought upon matter. Doing convincing empirical reasearch has a big prize that may be won: a result necessitating completely new theories may be found. But this is only the way for those strong enough to face that their pet theories may be found wrong and not for those not willing to give up cherished beliefs. For thousands of years, the spiritual way of thinking has never changed. The same concepts have been expressed in different words. Nothing has been added to our knowledge. Compare to that how radically our thinking about the world and our knowledge (and accompanying that, our technology) has changed and you'll see that science is not just another of many faiths but simply a method to empirically test ideas about the world. The endeavour 'science' doesn't make scientists materialists (there are scientists who believe in a supreme being or/and in a soul/spirit) though scientists according to surveys are more likely to be atheists (and the more so the more successful they are). It is a method of knowledge gathering and a very successful one. 50,000 years of belief in spiritual communication haven't been able to provide a reliable mean of communication between people far apart, but science has. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 20 Aug 04 - 07:31 PM Wolfgang, why wouldn't it be as effective to spread the tests out over time rather than space? In other words, instead of having a lot of tests all going at the same time in order to spread out the numbers and guard against undetected third variables, what is wrong with doing a series of tests over time and spread the numbers out that way? We have a very long growing season here where I live. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 20 Aug 04 - 08:50 PM Wolfgang: It needs to be kept in mind, as I have mentioned before, that there is an important difference between material elements and spiritual elements used in a controled situation for experimentation. Some of your descriptions sound like an effort to reduce all possible factors down to just one factor by hammering away at eliminating possible influences and repeating the test or tests with more and more controls until the isolation of cause-and-effect conclusions reaches a certainty. This is excellent if you are dropping balls from a tower, or measuring the delay in electrons responding, or measure a coefficient of friction as influenced by humidity or any other combination of material variables. But life doesn't respond that way; if you reject its performance and add more conditions, submit it to a pronounced skepticism, inform it or imply to it that it isn't good enough, or some similar form of coercion it will respond in unpredictable ways, not uniform ways. Life is sensitive to the degree of communication going on in an environment, as well as to to her kinds of thought. In fact you are trying to take measuring systems from materiaL frames and then apply them to the framework of thought itself. This is a sure recipe for uncertain results. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Aug 04 - 09:02 PM You're beating the drum over nothing, Wolfgang. I have no trouble entertaining doubts about many things, and I agree with your approach to scientific investigation wholeheartedly. But I am not a research scientist by profession. THAT is why I do not spend large amounts of my time investigating things by an empirical laboratory method that you might find totally satisfying! I have too many other things to do already. Don't accuse me of disagreeing with you on things I agree with you on. :-) Maybe I should quote you: I am sure your way of thinking is comforting for you. Everyone's way of thinking is comforting for them, within their own understanding. I have always had the impression that you have difficulties dealing with doubts. You are mistaken. I have doubts about numerous things from time to time, including my own perceptions. You seem only to have replaced the authorities/securities of your youth by others. Now you're really getting snide, aren't you? :-) Empirical testing is a way of gathering knowledge and a way of testing whether what you consider correct may turn out to be wrong. This is not the way for the lazy thinkers and for those threatened by finding out they have been wrong. I could hardly agree more with anything than with that statement! It is not your way... Codswallop. You are mistaken. and so it is no wonder you have forgotten this as a reason for a change of opinion in your 20 Aug 04 - 11:57 AM post. Wolfgang, I have had girfriends petty enough to drag up every single word I said in the last five or ten years and browbeat me with it, but I think it is unbecoming of you to do so. The Pope is not infallible, and neither am I. I have many times in my life changed an opinion, and I'm sure I will again. Completely contrary to what you seem to believe, science is open for a change of opinion or theory given a good reason to do so. That is in no way contrary to what I believe. Carol's experiment done in a convincing way and found repeatable could of course change all thinking in science. Not necessarily in an individual scientist, for these people are as conservative or stubborn individually as all others, but there are always enough of them grasping at the new findings and trying to get famous with new theories. The individual scientist may be immune against change, science in a broad sense isn't. Agreed, but the professional world of science, I think, is not interested at present in what Carol chooses to do with her time. She has no pull in that peer group. I hardly think anything she comes up with will make a particle of difference, except to Carol. Look at what has happened after an experiment seemed to show that eihter ether is moving with the earth or the speed of light is independent of the frame of reference. Unthinkable that was to ageing scientists for it warranted such a big change in thinking they were not ready for it. But young scientists did think the unthinkable and came up with new theories for that. Einstein for instance. The old camarilla was strong enough to prevent him getting the Nobel prize for the theory of relativity and so he got it as a compromise for a minor contribution, the explanation of the photoelectriy effect and 'for his other contributions'. But his theory has won. Absolutely! That is how science advances. You do not need to convince me about that. As immune each individual scinetist may be against new facts and theories, the endeavour 'science' is extremely open to changes. That is by the weayy much different from faiths or belief systems which are unchanged since centuries. If you are speaking of organized religion, you are right. I don't place any reliance upon organized religion whatsoever. I just find it a handy reference to the history of human culture. This vitasl difference you are unable or unwilling to grasp, for if science is 'just another faith' you feel less threatened in your world view. I do not feel even slightly threatened in my world view, I am simply enthusiastic about it and enjoy talking about it. It would take two decades or so, but a repeatable experiment demonstrating spiritual action upon matter would change the thinking of science. But a mere assertion of individual experiences will not change anything. Except this...it will signal a change in the individual who is changed BY the experience! It is myself I try to change, Wolfgang, not others. I repeat, I talk about what I am interested in and enthusiastic about BECAUSE I am interested in it and enthusiastic about it, NOT because I wish or intend to change others. The other side of the medal, of course, is that a well controlled experiment may repeatedly confirm the null hypothesis of no effect of thought upon matter. That has already been disproven so many times that it's hardly worth arguing about. (But not to you... :-)) Doing convincing empirical reasearch has a big prize that may be won: a result necessitating completely new theories may be found. But this is only the way for those strong enough to face that their pet theories may be found wrong and not for those not willing to give up cherished beliefs. I agree entirely. Hear! Hear! Let it be written in gold! For thousands of years, the spiritual way of thinking has never changed. In one sense that is quite untrue. New spiritual ideas are always coming to individuals, quite apart from organized religion and its ancient traditions. In another sense it is quite true what you said...because...if spiritual thinking is based upon something real, then why WOULD it change? Does the truth change? Only the way people perceive the truth changes. The same concepts have been expressed in different words. Nothing has been added to our knowledge. Because you have not actually listened to anything spiritual with anything but skepticism and what really amounts to uninterest in the subject. Your disagreement is with organized religion. I do not belong to organized religion or subscribe to it. Compare to that how radically our thinking about the world and our knowledge (and accompanying that, our technology) has changed and you'll see that science is not just another of many faiths but simply a method to empirically test ideas about the world. The endeavour 'science' doesn't make scientists materialists (there are scientists who believe in a supreme being or/and in a soul/spirit) though scientists according to surveys are more likely to be atheists (and the more so the more successful they are). It is a method of knowledge gathering and a very successful one. Agreed. I approve of that method of gathering knowledge very much. 50,000 years of belief in spiritual communication haven't been able to provide a reliable mean of communication between people far apart, but science has. You are mistaken. There are reliable means of such communication without the advances of science, but they are limited to very, very few individuals because most people are something you alluded to early in your post, Wolfgang... They're lazy thinkers. And they are used to thinking on only one level...one bandwidth, so to speak. But I'm not going to waste more of this bandwidth trying to tell you about something that you have utterly no inclination to give even a hypothetical existence to. It would be like trying to explain nuclear fission or the internal combustion engine to a monk from a 13th century monastery. And it is something you could NEVER find evidence for unless you personally accomplished it yourself...and then your fellow scientists would not believe you. Wolfgang, it is not my sacred mission to change you nor is it my desire to change you. The only reason I talk about this stuff on Mudcat is because I am interested in it. I respect your scientific method. Now let's hope I left all those danged italics in the right places! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Ooh-Aah Date: 21 Aug 04 - 07:58 PM My God you people are wordy! I can really be bothered to follow this thread any further, but I will depart with Carl Sagan's comment that 'extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof'. And we haven't had any, just a bunch of personal anecdotes and the refusal to take part in any tests because the tester is a Nasty Man or Not One of Us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 21 Aug 04 - 08:11 PM Looks like you never read the thread in the first place Guest, Ohh Ahh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 21 Aug 04 - 08:13 PM My post is in reference to this from you: "refusal to take part in any tests" Had you read the thread, you would know that this is most certainly not true. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 21 Aug 04 - 08:19 PM OK, I don't really believe 2Bears can detect auras, but the screen experiment is not proof of much. After all, many kinds of screen will block vision, but eyesight exists. The first thing, it seems to me, would be to see if he can get the results he claims to get from seeing auras, not to argue aura theory to prove that he can or can't. De gustibus & all that. clint |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 21 Aug 04 - 08:40 PM I can't address that one, Clint Keller. And I'm still waiting for Wolfgang to get back to me on my last question to him about the tests I proposed. But I have certainly demonstrated that I'm willing to participate in some kinds of tests. The problem with the conditions that the Amazing Randi sets up is the same kind of thing as what you get if you sign up to appear on the Jerry Springer show. You have no control over how the content of your work gets used. Randi will have ownership of all of the results and he will have the right to use them any way he sees fit. He could make a real circus of your life if he wanted to. And I'm guessing, if he thought it would get him some publicity (and maybe a lot of money), he wouldn't care if the way he used your results hurt you personally in ways that have nothing to do with the results of the tests. It's all about entertainment to people like that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 21 Aug 04 - 09:08 PM Plenty of people can detect auras, not just Two Bears. I have a very limited ability (at present) to see auras...under dim lighting conditions when I'm quite relaxed, and I am usually not expecting it when it happens. I've met any number of people who are way better at it than I am. No, I don't think they were lying about it. Unlike the Unamazing Randi, they are not making money out of this area of inquiry, they are not using it for professional purposes, they are not using it for personal glorification, publicity or fame. Nor are they doing it to attack or discredit other people, as the Unamazing Randi is presently using his no doubt considerable talents and abilities. They just have the ability, that's all...as some people have the ability to accurately identify the pitch of any musical note, while others (most of us) only have relative pitch, and still others are tone deaf. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 22 Aug 04 - 01:21 AM Sorry, CarolC, that was referring to Wolfgang's post of 20 Aug 04 - 03:57 AM. I should have specified. clint. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 22 Aug 04 - 11:47 AM "...as some people have the ability to accurately identify the pitch of any musical note..." I get the point, but the example is not good. We can TEST the pitch of a musical note and measure it directly and repeat it, and record it...etc.... auras are something that we can't photograph, measure, record, repeat under controlled conditions..etc. (Kirilian photography is itself a disputed technique) If only a limited number of people can 'see' them, then the answer might be that that they are mistaken (I don't accuse anyone of lying) and that the phenomenon is subjective, like vivid dreams. It's a funny argument that whenever someone 'sees' something that others don't (like two little girls at Lourdes) that the answer must be "oh, the rest of you just aren't tuned in" or "The Virgin Mary didn't choose to appear to you."..etc... We sceptics hold our stubborn position, not because we know such claims are totally impossible, but because we know that the are other ways and conditions that can cause someone to subjectively have experiences that seem real. It is here that Occam's Razor is applicable. All you have to do is read reports from 10 witnesses to an accident or crime to realize that the car can't be both red AND brown, and the guy with the gun couldn't have both 6'3" and 5'7"..etc... The mind can be fooled, even when the supposed memory is recent and intense!! It is always worth investigating, (indeed investigations go on constantly) and SOME vivid & intense experiences may indeed reflect reality. (Little Hawk may indeed have seen a 'real' phenomenon when that 'alien ship' appeared....but who, and what and how and why?...etc) When we have demonstratable, repeatable, public, recordable instances...preferably with artifacts, THEN we can do more than shrug and say "well, that must have been interesting". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 22 Aug 04 - 12:08 PM I really can't help it if there are things out there you can't test, Bill. :-) Remember, I am not asking you or Wolfgang to PROVE that your view of Life or of the World is correct...I accept that your view is quite correct and useful as far as it goes, it just doesn't necessarily go far enough to cover EVERYTHING I'm interested in. You guys, though, appear to be asking others to PROVE that their view is correct. Why? Why is it so important to you? Is everything provable? I think not. Some things exist...and yet are not provable under material laboratory conditions. That may change, given certain scientific advances...or it may not...but there will always be real things happening in life that nobody can prove in the way that someone else wants it proven. I understand your eagerness to confirm whether or not a given UFO sighting, for instance, really WAS an extraterrestrial craft...or a weather balloon...or a hallucination...or whatever...I understand perfectly. Everyone would like to prove something like that if they could. Now what would you do if you were a professional military officer, you investigated such an incident, you found out beyond any shadow of a doubt that it WAS an intelligently piloted alien craft of some kind, this was confirmed by your superior officers...and you were then told in no uncertain terms to (1) tell the press it was a "weather balloon", (2) publicly deny having found anything unusual and contradict your earlier public statements on the matter, (3) keep your mouth shut about it after that, (4) that this was necessary in order to prevent public panic and protect national security, (5) that your career and your family's well-being would be in great jeopardy if you ever admitted publicly to your actual knowledge about the event. What would you do, Bill? You would have your proof, personally speaking, but what good would it do you? I think you would become a rather troubled man, Bill, possibly quite a bitter man. You would realize that truth is less important to certain people than maintaining their present power-based agenda. Such things have happened. (I use the example of the UFO because it serves to demonstrate something. Certain truths are considered unspeakable by certain people, because they threaten some established hierarchical order. As for auras, nobody will threaten you if you talk about auras...they'll just make fun of you. Auras are not considered a threat to national security.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 23 Aug 04 - 08:50 AM Amos, why have you addressed your last post to me only and not also to Carol?? Or: Why do you never in all these discussions bring up this point about controlled experiments when a believer tells about a purportedly successfuil experiment or proposes how such an experiment could be done? Why do you remember this point always exactly in that moment when a skeptic starts criticising an experiment or questions the interpretation? Carol, there's nothing wrong in principle with doing many tests at different times. It has the advantage of less effort and the disadvantage of less power (for the error variance term is bound to be inflated this way), but that problem could be overcome by increasing the sample size. Maybe I was wrong (it couldn't be told from your description) but I had the impression that you did not know what the correct sampling for the statistical analysis was. Clint, all claims of seeing auras I know of describe the aura as surrounding the body that is to be a bit wider than the body. So if you place a person behind a screen (window frame/open door) blocking vision in such a way that the person is just a tiny bit ot ouf the line of vision then the aura should extend to the line of vision and should be visible under these conditions. That's the idea of a screen experiment. Of course, no aura is detectable in such a condition. I'm sure that Two Bears's teaching seeing the aura in five minutes makes use of well known properties of our visual system: (1) the eyes are never motionless but are even moving a bit when we fixate some stimulus (2) the firing of the neurons will decrease when they are stimulated with the same stimulus over an extended time (30 seconds suffice under good viewing conditions to demonstrate that effect in a lecture hall). These two properties in combination lead inevitably to seeing a lighter surround when we fixate any dark object(living matter or not) in front of a bright background for a short time (1 min should be enough under most viewing conditions) without consciously moving our eyes from the target and vice versa for a bright object in front of a dark background. It's simple and everybody of my students sees it when I make that demonstration. The 'aura' even can be coloured and these colours change over time (different relaxation times for the three colour systems). As for feeling my guess is that Two Bears uses a mixture of feeling the body heat radiation (most times higher than the surrounding air) and perhaps some imagination in his pupils. The only thing I am not sure about is whether he knows how he does it and is a trickster conning some people or whether he truly believes himself. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Grab Date: 23 Aug 04 - 09:05 AM Carol, you say you can "feel" a crystal being there? That surely is incredibly easy to prove. You go out the room by one door. Moderator places a dozen cups on a table and puts a crystal under one (chosen by a random-number generator or dice throw to avoid the human tendency to pick certain places more often). If there's a "range" issue, maybe use separate tables, some distance apart, so you can resolve which cup it is. Moderator leaves the room by another door (to avoid any change of giving the game away by glancing at the cup or talking to you). You come back in and immediately identify cup containing crystal. Video the whole thing so there's no doubt you're picking the right cup straight away. Rinse and repeat as many times as you like, making sure that all cups are picked up and put down each time so that there's no cues from only one having moved. Do that yourself for a confidence test, and then move on to James Randi, or the New York Times, or anyone who'll listen. The Center for Complementary Medicine might be worth contacting. If you can do this 100% every time, you're news! On a similar theme, LH: If there are people who can do the telepathy thing, why are they averse to demonstrations? Unless it's a "religious secret", I don't get it. Contrary to what you say, the majority of people *are* prepared to believe anything, but *only* if you show them it's true. If all you offer is words, they will indeed laugh in your face and stick to the status quo. If you back up your words with evidence though, people *will* believe you. Re James Randi's condition, Carol, what's your beef with it? "Applicant agrees that all data (photographic, recorded, written, etc.) gathered as a result of the testing may be used freely by JREF in any way that Mr. Randi may choose." If you took part in the Pepsi Challenge, I think you'll find that Pepsi have similar rights to record how many people preferred which cola. If he's set up the test and staked his own money on it, why should he not have rights to the evidence? If he didn't have rights to the evidence, how on earth could he present a press release on it? "I've done some tests, but I don't have rights to release the evidence, so you'll just have to trust me"?!?! I think not! :-) Yes, he's certainly an egotistic little git, out for self-promotion. I don't see how he can use the evidence to "make a circus of your life" though. You get it right a dozen times, he hasn't a leg to stand on. Graham. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bagpuss Date: 23 Aug 04 - 09:18 AM Grab - simple enough for a 9 year old to do...? (Reference to the 9 year old Emily Rosa's experiment on Therapeutic Touch. Not the best controlled experiment in the world, but getting published in JAMA is not bad for a 9 year old! ;-) ) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 23 Aug 04 - 10:14 AM 1. why have you addressed your last post to me only and not also to Carol?? 2: Why do you never in all these discussions bring up this point about controlled experiments when a believer tells about a purportedly successfuil experiment or proposes how such an experiment could be done? 3: Why do you remember this point always exactly in that moment when a skeptic starts criticising an experiment or questions the interpretation? 1. Consider her appended! Seriously, you are the resident senior authority on scientific discipline in these halls, Wolfgang! That's why. 2. Hmmm.... careless of me, you are right. I suppose because I know I can count on you and Bill D to play right field, so I focus on playing center field. 3. I am not sure your stement is true, so no "Why" can be provided. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 23 Aug 04 - 01:34 PM "Why is it so important to you?" funny you should ask, Little Hawk...I was just pondering how to explain my tenacity on the subject. Indeed, some items and situation are trivial and unimportant when looked at in isolation. It really doesn't affect me a lot if some lady in Oshkosh is sure she communes with her granmother's ghost, or if Ellenpoly really DID decide she was channeling William Shatner, or if Two Bears really heals folks, or just convinces them they feel better.....but....(you knew there was a 'but')... These beliefs, (and I mean the whole spectrum of meta-scientific beliefs, from ghosts to OoB experiences to influencing plants growth to "manifesting the Universal Spirit") represents an 'attitude' that pervades much of human society. When we see something we don't believe in we call it "silly superstition" or "mass hypnosis"...whatever. But if we DO believe it it, we call it "revealed truth" or "extra-sensory perception"...or...whatever. It is, sadly, easy to point out the problems that arise from mistaken superstitions or gullible belief in charlatans who are reading palms or tea leaves. They extract money, and worse, from people who just don't understand how easy it is to fake phenomena. Currently, horrible carnage is being inflicted by people who are convinced that violence in the name of some 'religious principle' is condoned by some 'spititual entity'. The point is, that people's behavior can be seriously altered and affected by what they believe...(how many gamblers really believe in 'luck' rather than simple mathematical odds, and lose their house?) Now, (trying to shorten this, knowing that you can see my general point), it is my contention that much of the misery in the world is exacerbated, if not caused directly, by confusion, superstition, flawed belief systems, bad 'science', ignorance and general careless thinking. As long as there is no coherent effort to clarify, educate, explicate, elucidate, de-mystify, organize and otherwise 'clean up' the thinking habits of human, we are little better than our ancestors peering fearfully out of caves at the shadows and lightning--except that WE have bigger clubs and better communication in order to deal with the 'evils spirits' we see in those we don't like! In short...I see any belief that MAY be false, and which is accepted, rather than just investigated, as part of an extremely complex sociological tendency towards simplistic answers and gullibility, rather than the hard job of asking IF that can really be true. This in no way diminishes personal experiences that are intense and clear, it merely alters how one presents the experience for discussion. "I had the most vivid dream last night...I wonder what subconcious feelings I was bringing up" rather than "my Mother came to me and told me to quit eating meat".....it's an attitude that could actually help get some answers, rather than the current stubborn "I saw what I saw, therefore it MUST be real"... IF it turns out that some astounding things are really true, great! But you know that all the astounding things people believe in this world cannot simultaneously be true..(some directly contradict others!) And much of the world's ills are related to contradictory beliefs. So, if I seem to be picking on one point, I assure you, it is not personal, but only my attempt to suggest that there are ways to approach experience and debate that can be productive rather than devisive. "Strive for simplicity, but learn to mistrust it." Alfred North Whitehead |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 23 Aug 04 - 01:51 PM I share your concerns, Bill, and always have. That's why I place great emphasis on both a scientific approach and my own personal powers of observation. I don't expect science to answer all my questions, but I certainly expect it to shed much light on areas that would otherwise remain dark and murky. Science has not helped me much with regard to UFO's, but seeing one has been quite instructive. If our science community were more advanced (or more open and candid with the public) or if I had more of it available at my own disposal then I'm sure it could be of tremendous assistance in revealing more information to me about that UFO or others. Most of the misery in the World at present is caused by the ceaseless search for more $$$$profit at the expense of life itself. The phonies in the various esoteric fields are deluding people for that purpose, and so are the arms manufacturers and the major industries in the mainstream which do not deal in esoteric matters at all, but deal in guns and butter. Everyone in the World could have a good material life if not for that. Everyone. And no wars either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 23 Aug 04 - 02:12 PM Bill: I really resonate to your concerns. I would only add that I see a distinction to be made between "bad science" and "bad ways of knowing" -- they are certainly intersecting sets, but perhaps not identical. Science suffers when it is fo4rced to know answers on the basis solely of authority, for example, and so do individuals. Science does well when it uses good, repatable empirical trials to ascertain duplicatable results on which to base its logic. Engineering is another way of knowing that uses approximations, comparison of orders of magnititude, extrapolations from known data, and even hunches based on insight about past experience to come up with solutions that work. Some aspects of life need rigorously scientific approaches to knowing. Others need the flexibility and speed of workable solutions arrived at through faster but less formalized methods. Some areas of discovery have to start with anecdotal information, and sort it out as best as can be done. Other fields -- highly rigorous scientific ones -- consider anecdotal data to be a form of poison because it can be treacherous, including the wild uncertainties of witness reliability and the mysterious, plastic, human mind. I am convinced that in matters of "reality beyond matter, energy, space, time" measurements, we are going to have to start with what we can get, tolerate some of the ambiguity and collect more data. Jumping to hard conclusions, well, we can leave that up to the Baptists or the Dianeticists or the Christian Scientists, all of who are sure they know the answers but do not necessarily have a handle on global variables. There is an awful lot to be said in this area, possiobly more than fits compfortably on a thread. But there's a few thoughts to chew on. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 24 Aug 04 - 02:32 AM "...seeing the aura in five minutes makes use of well known properties of our visual system..." I know what you mean. You can see that kind of aura around anything, so some of your subjects should see a screen-shaped aura, shouldn't they? I'm expressing myself poorly in these posts. I have always assumed that the aura, if it exists, is not an optical phenomenon, but is seen in the mind's eye, perhaps "a mixture of feeling the body heat radiation (most times higher than the surrounding air) and perhaps some imagination in his pupils." or perhaps something else. The question to me is, can the aura-seer do anything useful with his/her aura-sight, whatever the explanation of it is? If so, let him alone. If therapeutic touch only works without a screen, then don't use a screen. Don't say a man cannot light a match because he believes in phlogiston. It will be more useful in the long run for people to know about oxidation, but in the short run he doesn't need to change what he's doing in order to build a fire I read of a man who had a terrible constant headache for days, and was finally cured of it --instantly-- by a chicken-sacrifice ceremony performed by a tribal healer of some kind. He said he told his doctor about it and the doctor wasn't surprised. The doctor said that sometimes pain can feed on itself and keep going through a kind of neurological feedback loop, and anything that breaks the cycle (like the shock of the bloody chicken-killing) will stop the pain. I think the doctor is right; I went through something like that once myself (no chicken, though). So:the doctor knew all about the condition, and why it happened, but he couldn't cure the victim. It took a superstitious medicine man to do that. Art critics often know a good deal about color theory and the principles of composition, but few of them can do an outstanding painting. My old Psych prof told me that Rorshach tests are not scientific at all. When I asked why bother with them he said "Because some people can use them." It took me a while to see he was saying it's an art, or a talent; you can't formulate the rules for it but some people can do it. Maybe all I've been trying to say is that knowledge/science/intellect -only goes so far. There are other things as valid. clint |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 24 Aug 04 - 05:27 AM "Matter and Spirit" But the question may be wrong, as well as the concept. I put my faith in the infinite devine intelligents of God. I am, (as well is every esle on this message board) A complete idiot. Sorry folks if this offends but that's just the way it is. Try listening to the universal mind and a loving god for answers, not to your science books and your preconcieved notions, you'll learn little more than what you do now. You'll be amazed by the results when you trust in the infinite. (The infinite mind of God works through you, it is NOT you becoming part of the God-head, That is not my opinion on the matter but my EXPERIENCE in the revelations I received. The mysteries of the Universe we recieve belong to GOD, The Apostle Paul understood this (1 Corinthians 13:1-2) Sorry, if the Bible offends the educated gathered here, but please remember like most spiritual books it too was written from the creative consciousness) Also, one does not have to be educated to contact the higher-consciousness, sometimes the individual that know the least about the subject discovers the most!!! I learned about God and knowledge beyond my grasp) not through my own doing, but through my own faith in a loving God. Heck, sometimes I din't even know the meanings of words I had written and had to look them up in the dictionary to discovery what the infinite mind had said. but one thing that I always did do was LISTEN and humbly, From there I recognized that the inifinite had my best interest and development at heart, not only for me, but for mankind as well. The mysteries of the Universe (if they come at all) come THROUGH YOU, NOT BY YOU. It is not a me-centered world, it is a God centered world and he know all (Mysteries, your personality, intelligents (or lack of it) etc. He knows also about nature, as he created it. We are complete peons yet he loves us enough to occassionally give us a peep at the insight we seek, the Creative Consciousness (infinite mind) is perfect because it CREATES. If any of you discover it for yourself you'll know just exactly what I am talking about. If you don't you'll either laugh, or foolishly think you can discover God's secret or mysteries on your own. Or worst yet, actually think you can become God. There is one thing I am certain of: There is a God, it isn't me, and it isn't you either. Dewey |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 24 Aug 04 - 08:51 AM That's nice Dewey. But it MIGHT be you. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 24 Aug 04 - 12:43 PM I think maybe he means it isn't his mind/ego/personality. Most people think they are their mind, coupled with their body. Some just think they are their body. It's true that a higher power works through us and that we are an extension of that higher power, but we have a mortal mind that imagines it's the boss. It isn't. It can pretend to be, though, and usually does just that. Its knowledge and its grasp are very limited, though quite complex. It could not even function were it not supported at all times by the divine mind which is coursing through it and giving it power, form, and function. That is why God is spoken of as the Father or the Mother in various religious traditions. Divine mind is the origin of the mortal mind and being. It is beyond time or space, but creates both of them. It creates every atom and waveform. Its purpose can be speculated about, but is unknowable from the perspective of limitation. We are all accustomed with limitation and work within it in order to perceive things as "separate". Things appear separate to us, but are all existing as One Unity. The One Unity manifests as trillions of apparently separate things, energies, events...from atoms to galaxies...casting itself upon a created field of space and time, like a movie on a screen. The Earth Scientist is like a busy little semi-intelligent worm in a garden in a tiny subplot of that movie, climbing slowly up a blade of grass, and describing everything he sees around him with all the detailed observation and measurement he can muster and all the tools at his command. This worm thinks he is alone, but he is not. He has no idea that there might be a gardener who created the garden he inhabits...or an even larger World within which the gardener is as relatively limited as the worm. This little worm may be able to mightily impress other worms in his garden, and not surprisingly, because he knows a bit more about the blades of grass than they do, and he is familiar with professional jargon which leaves them feeling at a bit of a loss. Very impressive. Like Owl in the Winnie-the-Pooh books, the scientist worm knows big words. One day he will realize that he has become more than a worm, and the big words will be seen as a child's game. For many, this does not happen until they die. But they do not really die. They just leave the body behind. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 24 Aug 04 - 12:47 PM there's nothing wrong in principle with doing many tests at different times. It has the advantage of less effort and the disadvantage of less power (for the error variance term is bound to be inflated this way), but that problem could be overcome by increasing the sample size. Maybe I was wrong (it couldn't be told from your description) but I had the impression that you did not know what the correct sampling for the statistical analysis was. I don't know what the correct sampling is for the statistical analysis. Would you care to help me out with that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 24 Aug 04 - 01:25 PM Carol, sorry, I thought I was merely repeating a previous point. You should not take the weight/length (or whatever you measure) of the individual plant as the datum to start with but the average value of the plants in each condition. That means one experimental run only gives you these two data to start with. Amos, you're right with your point (3). But please tell me what the opposite to 'right field' would be. Wrong field? Little Hawk might not agree. Clint, If something would work consistently (or well above chance) not knowing why it works wouldn't be a good reason not to use it. Though to know why something works is always better, for it gives us more control about the situation. The problem scientists have with many alternative healing methods is not that they do work but we don't know why (that would be great adn a good start for research), but that they do not seem to work better than any placebo cure (and sometimes even worse). Your example shows beautifully why alternative cures are believed to be valid: and was finally cured of it --instantly-- by a chicken-sacrifice ceremony (my emphasis). That is the post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking leading to a feeling of validity. The correct word would be after (in the eyes of a scientist) because we can never be sure (from one case alone) that the cure was in any way responsible for the healing. The doctor you cite tries his best to give an explanation in terms of placebo effect (and he does it well). I think that evidence based medicine is working with the placebo effect as well, up to 90% of all times. That's why I seldom go to a doctor when I think a tea and a bit of bedrest will do enough for me (and cost less), but in the 10% or more cases I go to a doctor doing evidence based medicine. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 24 Aug 04 - 01:29 PM sorry, I thought I was merely repeating a previous point. You should not take the weight/length (or whatever you measure) of the individual plant as the datum to start with but the average value of the plants in each condition. That means one experimental run only gives you these two data to start with. Ok. This I knew. I guess I didn't understand the point you were making that I responded to in my last post. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 24 Aug 04 - 01:47 PM Grab, re: your first point about it being easy to test me for "crystals". It's not quite as easy as you think, but if someone wanted to set it up, I guess it would be possible. Where it becomes complicated is that in order for the Genesa crystal to have a demonstrable physical effect on me (such as making me dizzy, making me vomit, and/or making me feel like I'm going to pass out, the Genesa crystal needs to be at least 24 inches or larger. (And the effect is not always instantaneous.) So there would be some expense involved. The other problem is that the Genesa crystal would have an effective radius of a mile or more, so the experiment would have to be an either/or set-up... either there is a Genesa crystal behind the blind, or there isn't, rather than which blind is the Genesa crystal behind. Do that yourself for a confidence test, and then move on to James Randi, or the New York Times, or anyone who'll listen. The Center for Complementary Medicine might be worth contacting. If you can do this 100% every time, you're news! Here's the part that I think you are having difficulty understanding. I don't want to be news. At least not for that reason. I don't want to be famous or notorious for reasons having to do with the way I experience my spirituality. If I become famous for anything, I would rather it be for my writing or my art. It's not important to me to have my way of experiencing spirit "proved" to anyone. I'm only trying to accomodate the people in this thread because they have asked me to. If I am going to do anything like that, I would only want to do it if I could do it quietly and without a lot of attendant publicity. Spirit is an area of my reality that I believe should be treated with respect and not turned into a spectacle. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 24 Aug 04 - 05:23 PM " It's true that a higher power works through us and that we are an extension of that higher power,..."............... " But they do not really die. They just leave the body behind." I never cease to marvel, Little Hawk, at the certainty with which you throw those statements out in post after post. I argue and discuss, trying to hedge my bets and leave room for possibilites, but you simply state that "this is how it works". How did you BECOME so sure? Is this revelation? Did you figure it out? What are the premises on which you base so many matter-of-fact statements about the universe and our place in it? I can see how a vivid experience with an 'alien ship' might give you confidence in THAT area, but the entire universe and its relation to conciousness?? Some would consider your statements metaphorical poetry, but you seem to be quite serious. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 24 Aug 04 - 05:29 PM Yeah. I am serious, Bill. I really have no way of explaining it that would satisfy you, and I used to be just like you at one time. You would have to BE me as I am now to know why it is that I say these things with such assurance. My statements are metaphorical poetry, but they are also absolutely serious when it comes to this general subject. Every perceivable phenomenon in the Universe is a metaphor. The whole process of Life as we know it is a metaphor. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 24 Aug 04 - 06:13 PM Bill: I think LH is describing as best he can what he sees extremely clearly. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 24 Aug 04 - 06:30 PM ...*nod*...and if a few words were changed, I could accept the description as a personal world-view. It is one thing to explain "this how I see, feel & express it"....it is quite another to be included and told definitively "this is how it is for you, too, if you'd wake up and pay attention"...*wry grin*... Like I said before, 'taint fair that if I'm right, I don't get to say "I told you so"....mebbe that's why I work so hard at saying it now... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 24 Aug 04 - 07:14 PM Well, there are a lot of roles to play in this drama of Life, Bill. I think you and Wolfgang and I are all playing our roles to perfection at this point. So is Amos. It's really a lot of fun when you look at it that way. Consider Martin Gibson. Now there is a role with some meat in it! Not everybody would want that role, but Martin does it with real panache, don't you think? And I've noticed that lately he is doing a somewhat different take on it. That's always an option. When you get fed up with an old role you take on a new one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 24 Aug 04 - 08:48 PM Martin Gibson does a FINE job of being Martin Gibson... I have seldom encountered such a combination of Martin Gibson-like traits in one individual. He is about as Martingibsonesque as I can imagine. I think he should have a place in the Martin Gibson hall of fame...in fact, I think he should STAY in the Martin Gibson hall of fame. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 24 Aug 04 - 08:59 PM I'd like to add, Bill, that there is perhaps a difference between the kind of attained clarity of viewpoint that LH seems to speak from, and the usual collection and comparison of data as mental representations of states of being or not being in the universe. I would offer that perhaps the reason LH says it IS that way is because he isn't drawing on data but on a kind of first hand elevated spiritual experience (and by elevated I mean more intense than the usual spirit+body run of experience). It is not uncommon for people who get close to or reach clinical death to report themselves coming back to the body with a completely renewed sense of vigor and appreciation of the pleasantness of living life on this plane, when it is done with appreciation; a new lease on life in every sense. This is not just new "data", it is a shift in viewpoint. Ther emight be a big difference. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 24 Aug 04 - 10:14 PM I suppose that might be the case Amos..but we (you, I, and others) regularly 'doubt' various reports of " first hand elevated spiritual experience" from others, whether they be religious visions, seances, OoB, etc... If 'attained clarity' is valid for one, why not for all?...even the nuttier ones we both would roll our eyes about?.. LH can, and does, speak for himself (and eloquently) and of course, will not likely be swayed by my kibitzing over form of expression. I just know that I react both emotionally and logically to most statements made in the 'this is how it is' mode. I suppose I am sorta suggesting that, if one cares how others hear and absorb one's message, it 'might' be easier without quite so absolute a tone to it....but on the other hand, many DO respond to confidence and unwavering sincerity. (Little Hawk..I'm not preaching here...just musing. And you may be quite right that we are all playing our roles correctly right now...I know *I* am enjoying the comparison of views...I sure am getting an education on some other ways of thinking, as well as clarifying my own) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 24 Aug 04 - 10:35 PM For sure, Bill. Understood. I am always a bit bemused when people want proof of what is essentially unprovable. :-) Well, gotta get some sleep. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 24 Aug 04 - 11:21 PM For me, Bill there are very telling earmarks of actual clarity of spiritual experinece. The big strange risk in this territory, not suffered by those investigating physics, is the ever-present plasticity of the mind in the hands of the owner. It has been demonstrated over and over again that under duress a being can drum up a convincing replica of any incident, real or imagined, can generate three-D visio of things that never happened and swear they were genuine experiences. But usually when they do this they tend to be dramatic and assertive, so that sort of flavor can be a clue. How do you tell the difference? You weigh what you are given against a general background of lessons learned, similar tales from others, what is consistent (claiming sky-high awareness while being unable to do anything effective is not consistent, for example) and you look for answers which account for phenomena without interjecting arbitraries, calling into play things that don't need to be brought in to play, authoritarian solutions, and similar arbitraries. You examine the intentions behind the communication. You test whether what is claimed is "bizarre" or generally acknowledged in the range of non-physical experiences. You use any sense you may have developed to detect authenticity and genuineness of anecdote. ANd somewhere int here, too, you "know". I know that is risky, because of our high respect for empirical logic-based, data-based conclusions, but somewhere i there, the knowing of the Knower has to come in to play. It does anyway, of course, but is usually painted out. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 25 Aug 04 - 02:05 AM 'If something would work consistently (or well above chance) not knowing why it works wouldn't be a good reason not to use it. Though to know why something works is always better, for it gives us more control about the situation.' Well, I thought that's what I said. What I meant to say, anyhow. "...and was finally cured of it --instantly-- by a chicken-sacrifice ceremony (my emphasis). That is the post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking leading to a feeling of validity. The correct word would be after (in the eyes of a scientist) because we can never be sure (from one case alone) that the cure was in any way responsible for the healing. The doctor you cite tries his best to give an explanation in terms of placebo effect (and he does it well)." The writer, and the doctor are the ones who said the man in the anecdote was cured. The doctor said essentially that the cure was due to the placebo effect and, as I said, I agree with him, and with you thus far. What I want to know is why the doctor, with all his knowledge, was not able to help this man, and the 'superstitious savage' could. I'm not pushing for chicken-blood cures or psychic surgery, I'm pushing for what works. "Placebo effect" is a name, not an explanation. It's like the line that sopoforics put you to sleep because they contain a "dormative quality." My-daughter-the-pharmacist had some literature on Rogaine; it seems Rogaine (at that time) appeared to be restoring hair better than anything but the placebo in the tests. The placebo was second best. I think anything that can make a sugar pill (or whatever) grow hair on the head of someone with male-pattern baldness is rather amazing. I talked to my doctor about it, and he just dismissed it, as though "placebo effect" may exist but it doesn't count. clint |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 25 Aug 04 - 03:15 AM The amazing thing, Clint, IMHO, is that so any wonderful results are attributed to the "placebo effect" that on the whole it is almost miraculous. But usually this effect gets dismissed as though it were some kind of cheap trick (because it is a loose cannon, so to speak) and rarely does anyone dare to suggest the exploration of why it works. It's funny we should have such a dismissive turn of phrase for something more powerful than most drugs!! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bagpuss Date: 25 Aug 04 - 05:02 AM Placebo research Placebos are funny things. Once you convince everyone that something is a placebo, it no longer works as one... Thats why I am conflicted on what to do about a lot of alternative therapies that don't seem to work better than placebo, and hence to my mind actually are placeboes. One part of me thinks that we should find out the truth about everything, so that everyone knows what they are getting and can make informed choices about treatments. But to do that we might be destroying something very valuable - the placebo effect they produce. And then again, it doesnt matter how much science proves something producing a response at placebo level, people will continue to go on believing the theory behind their particular therapy, because it is that theory and belief structure that makes the placebo effect effective. So maybe the main work of science should be to work out what is and isnt placebo just for curiositys sake and for those of us who like our medicine evidence based, and also to check for harmful effects of these therapies. I sometimes wish I wasnt so rational about these things, I would then have a lot more things that might improve my health. I just can't bring myself to suspend my critical side tho, and "just believe" in something that probably isn't true in order to get the benefits. Theres something rather quantum about it isn't there? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 25 Aug 04 - 07:11 AM any wonderful results are attributed to the "placebo effect" (Amos) That's simply not true. If in a test of any healing method (alternative or not) the group that gets nothing (or the opposite of the treatment) but is led to believe it gets the treatment performs as good as the group getting the treatment but both perform better than people getting nothing (and knowing about it) then the effect is called placebo effect. Any wonderful cure doing better in the treatment group would not be attributed to the placebo effect. And that is just a term, as Clint says, far from any explanation yet. But it is a term very useful in grouping things together that display similar characteristics, namely that the result seems to depend only on the patient believing the action has been done and not on doing the action as such. What is dismissive about using the Latin term for 'I shall please' to group these things together I am not able to understand. The term placebo effect is extremely helpful when talking about studies in psychology or medicine. A recent survey about the effectiveness of psychological interventions of all kinds has listed the effect sizes of the intervention. The effect sizes ranged roughly from -.2 to +1.3 standard deviations with a maximum at about .6 standard deviations. It is then very useful to break up these studies into studies using a no-treatment control and those using a placebo control. The effect sizes were .3 on the average with a placebo control, smaller than with a no treatment control but still significant. If anyone at a congress tells she has found an effect size of her intervention of .8, the first question (if she hasn't told) is what was her control group (placebo, wait list, no treatment?). Any person with a bit of responsibility would like to know whether a treatment works even if the patients are told they are not treated, when the effect is larger than placebo alone. As a doctor I'd like to know whether a medication I give has been shown not to work better than a placebo control, especially if that is a medication with side effects. If it doesn't work better than a placebo control but has side effects I'd choose something harmless and cheap instead for that has the same potential effect. Behind the classification 'placebo effect' are lots of potential really causative agents. People are doing a lot of work to find them out. That's very useful in order to know when this effect may be useful. Contrary to popular belief, the placebo effect is very close to nil with life threatening illnesses when there are objective indicators of the state of health. Don't expect any help from placebo effects when you have an appendicitis. It has a much larger effect when the state of health has a strong subjective component, e.g. chronic pain. If it helps in these situations it is preferable to a long-time use of pain killers. A good doctor would give a patient in this situation first pain killers and then say that it would be good to reduce the dosis for the sake of the liver and to learn to cope a bit with the pain. And then he'd reduce the dose to ever smaller levels up to nil, if the patient reports she can cope now. The placebo effect is not only found to be restricted to health. For instance, take an additive for petrol to make it last longer or a very cost consuming apparatus to reduce the lime in the water coming to your house. How do you get a placebo effect here? Easyly, by using a subjective outcome measurement. You ask the person if the water now tastes better or if she feels she lasts longer with on tank filling. With such a dependent variable, you will have a positive effect of the intervention. But wouldn't you like to know before whether the costly action works better than a placebo control? Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bagpuss Date: 25 Aug 04 - 07:19 AM Wolfgang, there is also another name for the effect of any intervention having an effect merely because of it being an intervention. I think it is the Hawthorne Effect, named after the researcher in a group of experiments which showed that workplace productivity increased whenever a new factor was studied, and was ascribed to the fact the workers felt singled out and made to feel important by the study. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bagpuss Date: 25 Aug 04 - 07:27 AM Now that I check, Hawthorne was the name of the factory where the experiments were carried out, not the researcher. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bagpuss Date: 25 Aug 04 - 07:39 AM article about placebo and the mind body link. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 25 Aug 04 - 07:47 AM Bagpuss, yes, and it's not always easy to separate the two. Roughly: If I tell a group you'll get a treatment and we expect that it works for you and it does, we call it Placebo. If I tell a group you'll get a treatment but we don't know yet what it does positively or even negatively and we want to find out and if that group does better than a group which get that same treatment but don't know we watch their performance, it would be called Hawthorne effect. And then there is the Pygmalion effect (experimenter expectation, Rosenthal effect)... Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bagpuss Date: 25 Aug 04 - 07:56 AM (and the John Henry effect, the halo effect and Jastrow's effect... but now I'm just pulling these off the website of a lecturer I had in the past...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Grab Date: 25 Aug 04 - 08:56 AM Sure, Carol, I know you don't want fame for the sake of it. No well-adjusted person would. My point was just that something like that, carried out to correct standards, is not open to media manipulation. As far as this being personal, if you go back a few hundred years then the wise women and apothecaries kept their herbal remedies secret and made rituals out of it. Early doctors were widely regarded as ineffectual, but they had no access to this body of knowledge, so all that they heard about was the rituals and not the contents of the herbal remedies. Today, we know that some of these herbal remedies would have had physical effects on the human body, and doctors (via the pharmaceutical industry) use them to heal people. But the first step was always finding what the herbs were and trying them out in controlled conditions. (And equally, we know that some of the herbal remedies and some of the doctors' techniques would have had no effect or actually been harmful, so not all old knowledge is good knowledge! ;-) Now doctors today get some flak for not being open to the possibility of spiritual healing, especially in cases where "conventional medicine" has no answers yet. It seems there are two possibilities here. Firstly, people who practise "alternative therapies" can stay shtumm. Some of their patients will get better, some won't. The practitioners won't know why because they're not approaching it in the right way to test their therapies, nor will the patients, and no-one else with the same illness will ever be helped. Or secondly, people who practise "alternative therapies" can actively follow this stuff up. If it works, "alternative" will become "mainstream", and everyone with that illness, forever into the future, will be helped. Maybe my mind just isn't set up to work with crystals. I've been into quite a few "mind-body-spirit" shops and felt nothing except occasional nausea from the incense sticks. ;-) But it seems to me that this is a time where "amateurs" rather than big business can really make a difference - it's in the same place that science, medicine and astronomy were 200 years ago. It seems odd to me that the people who could make a difference are prepared to say "we can do this" but then aren't prepared to take the next step towards backing it up which would benefit all humanity. Bagpuss, thanks for that link - I'd forgotten about that one. :-) Graham. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:10 AM Wolfgang: I mis-typed in my last, which should have read "The amazing thing, Clint, IMHO, is that so many wonderful results are attributed to the "placebo effect" that on the whole it is almost miraculous." I would never have implied or said intentionally thast any result deemed wondeArful was also deemed Placebo Effect. And I understand what you;ve said about the placebo effect as an important part of results analysis. The point that too often gets missed is that if positive cures can be induced under certain conditions by belief, it is perhaps very desirable to know how belief works, and under what conditions it can effect such cures, since it cannot do so uniformly, apparently. How does this "non-effect" somehow manage to induce a reversal of symptoms? How many cases has it actually done so in, and what common denominators if any do they have? Are you aware of any such studies? A A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bagpuss Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:29 AM There are all sorts of factors which affect the strength of the placebo effect Amos. I'll see if I can find some literature for you - though there may be some pointers in the last website I mentioned. I may be a while tho as Im busy for the next few days. But off the top of my head, even things like the colour of the pill can have an effect. Something like a red pill being more effective than a blue pill, and larger pills have more of an effect than smaller ones, and injections even more so. And one mustnt forget that conventional medicines that work better than placebo also exhibit the placebo effect. For example it has been shown that pills that have more noticable side effects often have a greater effect than those without. Which in turn raises the question that the placebo used in these studies may not be a good control, as those on the real pills are more likely to suspect they are in the experimental control group real because of the side effects. This in turn can cast doubt on the validity of the results. Completely by the by, but I remember an experiment on conditioned learning in animals in which rats were killed by sugar water! The taste of the water had previously been paired with a poisonous substance, on numerous occasions, but not enough to kill them. Then when they were given larger doses of the sugar water without the poison, the rats reacted as if they had been given the poison in a large dose, and many of them died! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:53 AM Here you can find the reference, Amos. This is a review article and the original studies are referencend in it. The good news is that the placebo effect can make us feel better, and the bad news is that in the worst case that may be all it can. Again with the example of the one selling a petrol additive for more mileage: - We know for sure that a positive effect (of the additive) is there if we don't look at the actual miles done with the car but ask the driver how it feels driving with the additive (and the driver says, yes it feels better, whether the additive is in there or not) - We suspect that there may be no effect upon the mileage at all and that everything the buyer gets for the money is a better feeling. - There could be a (much smaller than placebo) real effect lurking. Perhaps a driver with the additive thinks more about saving gas and therefore drive a little different which would make a difference even with an objective outcome measure. But we would know then that not the additive but the behaviour change is the relevant thing. What always surprises me in these discussions (about nonconventional medical treatments) is the following: The believers say it works and when asked how they know they say it's their experience. When asked what are the constituents of their experience they say it comes down to counting cases where it has worked and compare it with cases where it has not. Basically, they do a (informal, more like estimating, but humans are not bad at estimating numbers) counting procedure and nothing else. Scientists do more or less the same with some minor differences: (1) They replace estimating by actually counting (2) They try to define before counting what constitutes a success (or a failure) (3) They try to control some biases in judgement by proper design (for instance, they do not let someone with a bias do they counting or at least let the one doing the counting not know what she counts, so any bias doesn't interfere with the results) That's basically how these studies are done: Both ask the same question, namely, does it help (on the average) and both let the same procedure, namely (implicit or explicit) counting, decide. The interesting difference comes when the one procedure ('experience') leads to positive results and the other (scientific study) leads to a result of no effect. Then the believers say, your procedure doesn't grasp the realities of life and all that, and forget that the scientists have done more or less the same what they do. The scientists point to the possibility that the differences (better control, no influence of bias,...) may account for the results. The believers often cannot even admit that possibility for they have invested too much (financially and emotially) and perhaps profit a lot (think again of the gas addtitive salesman; would he be interested in a study showing it doesn't help the buyers, only the sellers?). They'll use all kinds of ad hoc explanations to avoid the one they fear most. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 25 Aug 04 - 12:58 PM Maybe my mind just isn't set up to work with crystals. I've been into quite a few "mind-body-spirit" shops and felt nothing except occasional nausea from the incense sticks. ;-) I don't know if you saw the link for Genesa crystals earlier in this thread, and I don't know if you are refering to crystals that are mineral formations or if you know that a Genesa crystal is a shape and not a mineral. At any rate, as I've said before, most people don't experience energy in quite the same way that I do. That's not due to anything special about me, but rather from something a bit defective about my body. But it seems to me that this is a time where "amateurs" rather than big business can really make a difference - it's in the same place that science, medicine and astronomy were 200 years ago. It seems odd to me that the people who could make a difference are prepared to say "we can do this" but then aren't prepared to take the next step towards backing it up which would benefit all humanity. I don't think you need to worry about this, Graham. I think it's happening, but maybe not in a way that you would be able to see just yet. In my own experience, things have come a long way even with the established medical community. I've noticed that a lot of doctors are much more prepared to believe what patients say about their own experiences than they used to be. Eventually, some of them will begin to apply their scientific expertise to the task of making these things understandable and available to humanity at large. On the other hand, if you are qualified, and you want to come test me, be my guest. I don't have the resources to conduct experiments on the effect that large Genesa crystals have on me, but I do have the resources to conduct experiments on the effect that spiritual energy has on plants. As far as allowing myself to be put in the public spotlight for this work... sorry. I don't see that as being of any benefit to mankind. If someone wants to do this quietly, out of the public spotlight, and they are willing to respect my privacy, and if they are willing to come here to do their testing, they will be most welcome. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 25 Aug 04 - 04:06 PM I just had a look around the Center for Complementary Medicine site. It looks like they are doing good work. In my case, I can't just contact them and tell them that I experience a physical reaction to high concentrations of spiritual energy. For one thing, it's not a disorder. Because it's not a disorder, there aren't likely to be people who would benefit from scientific research being done on this phenomenon. Secondly, there would need to be a treatment that is being proposed and studied. In the case of my experience of being easily overloaded with energy, the only treatment that would be likely to produce results would be one that corrects the deformities in the bones of my neck. They don't have any studies like that, and I wouldn't expect them to since this is a problem that may be unique to me. And if not, I think it's pretty easy to figure out what is causing the problem and how to fix it. Personally, I don't want anyone messing around with the bones in my neck. At least not any doctors. I'm still trying to decide if I even want any spiritual healers like Two Bears to mess with it. It's a pretty important part of my body, being the part just below where my spinal cord enters/exits the bottom of my skull. I looked in the list of disorders for which they are doing studies. There are a few that I might be eligible for, but I would have to live close to where the study is being conducted. I didn't see any that are being conducted near where I live. But at least they are doing the research and I'm guessing they aren't having any difficulty finding test subjects for their studies. Here's a link to their site in case anyone's interested: http://nccam.nih.gov/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 27 Aug 04 - 09:54 PM OK, I don't really believe 2Bears can detect auras, but the screen experiment is not proof of much. After all, many kinds of screen will block vision, but eyesight exists. Everyone is entitled to their opinion; even when they're wrong. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 27 Aug 04 - 09:58 PM The problem with the conditions that the Amazing Randi sets up is the same kind of thing as what you get if you sign up to appear on the Jerry Springer show. You have no control over how the content of your work gets used. Randi will have ownership of all of the results and he will have the right to use them any way he sees fit. He could make a real circus of your life if he wanted to. And I'm guessing, if he thought it would get him some publicity (and maybe a lot of money), he wouldn't care if the way he used your results hurt you personally in ways that have nothing to do with the results of the tests. It's all about entertainment to people like that. Carol: You should contact Lin Kong Jing Qigong master Richard Mooney about his experience with the Unamazing Randi. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 27 Aug 04 - 10:10 PM Wolfgang: why don't you come for a visit and find out how I teach people how to see and experience the aura? As far as your comment about my oversteping my knowledge of a subject. Kirlian photography CLEARLY shows an energy field around fingers and hands, and the Unamazing Randi categoricaly states "There is NO energy field around the body". "There are only two opinions that matter to me; and neither of them is yours" Two Bears 1996 ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 27 Aug 04 - 10:24 PM I'm expressing myself poorly in these posts. I have always assumed that the aura, if it exists, is not an optical phenomenon, but is seen in the mind's eye, perhaps "a mixture of feeling the body heat radiation (most times higher than the surrounding air) and perhaps some imagination in his pupils." or perhaps something else. The question to me is, can the aura-seer do anything useful with his/her aura-sight, whatever the explanation of it is? Hello Clint. The aura CAN be seen via normal sight; but it does require the use of a technique or two; in order to train yourself to see them. Yes; someone who can see auras can easily use this knowledge to see when one is lying, check the health of the person. If so, let him alone. If therapeutic touch only works without a screen, then don't use a screen I use Therapeutic Touch on people 2000+ miles away on at least a weekly basis. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 28 Aug 04 - 07:48 PM why don't you come for a visit and find out how I teach people how to see and experience the aura? (Two Bears) I'd love to if I was close enough. Kirlian photography CLEARLY shows an energy field around fingers and hands (Two Bears) As so often in threads about this theme, your main mistake is that you don't differentiate between observation and interpretation. Of course, there is something visible around a body in Kirlian photography, visibility and spread of that phenomenon depending upon pressure and moisture. Nobody denies that. That's an easily replicable and fairly well understood phenomenon. The interpretation of what you see is what really matters. Once you realise that Kirlian photographs of not living matter lead to the same observable phenomena, you quickly drop the interpretation of the effect as an energy field, because it makes no sense any longer. You're fighting above your weight here. "There are only two opinions that matter to me; and neither of them is yours" Two Bears 1996 If you are contented with so little, well, not my problem. I can't recollect any field of knowledge I'm really interested in in which I would be contented with so little. On those fields I'm interested in opinions that really matter to me are rarely less than about a dozen; and not the same dozen on the next field. That's the difference between relying upon authorities/teacher or whoever and the way of critical thinking. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 28 Aug 04 - 09:05 PM I'd love to if I was close enough. Wolfgang: What part of the country do you live in? Maybe we could meet if I happen to be in your area. As so often in threads about this theme, your main mistake is that you don't differentiate between observation and interpretation. Of course, there is something visible around a body in Kirlian photography, visibility and spread of that phenomenon depending upon pressure and moisture. Nobody denies that. That's an easily Right. There IS an observable field which the Unamazing Randi states "does not exist." replicable and fairly well understood phenomenon. The interpretation of what you see is what really matters. Once you realise that Kirlian photographs of not living matter lead to the same observable phenomena, you quickly drop the interpretation of the effect as an energy field, Wolfgang: you are not looking at the world from a metaphysical or mystical point of view. I know for a fact that there is a field emanating from generator quartz crystals, and other things that are inanimate. This universal energy (the Chinese call it ch'i, the Hawai'ians called it mana, the Cherokee called it nuwati, the Pueblo indians called it itaki, etc. The Hawai'ians and others learned how to use mental focus and intent to store mana in a stick, and the stick need not cause any injury; but merely by touching another person with the stick would cause the mana surcharge to be released into the person and knocking them unconscious. It would all depend on what item the kirlian photograph was of, and whether someone stored an energy surcharge in the item previously. because it makes no sense any longer. You're fighting above your weight here. That may be. That's the difference between relying upon authorities/teacher or whoever and the way of critical thinking. Sorry; but first hand experiences trump a second rate opinion. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Ebbie Date: 28 Aug 04 - 09:54 PM Wolfgang Hell lives in Germany. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 29 Aug 04 - 10:41 AM "Sorry; but first hand experiences trump a second rate opinion." that is, IF the experience is cute quotations do not settle arguments. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 29 Aug 04 - 06:46 PM There is no "not living" matter, Wolfgang, and that is the fallacy in your argument. Every single atom in existence is alive. That does not mean that a stone is alive in the same way as an animal or a plant, but the atoms that make up the stone are alive. Therefore Two Bears in fact is not in error as you say he is. Even an atom has a living spirit. It would not exist if it didn't. A group of associated atoms have a group spirit. But, hey, I know you'll never accept that notion! (grin) I wouldn't have accepted it once either. Nor would Two Bears have accepted it before he had an experience that transformed his outlook. Wolfgang, there is absolutely nothing in the manifested Universe that is not alive. Life is the norm. "Death" is a name we give to a dramatic change of outer form and function...and the disappearance of a specific bundle of intelligence from obviously inhabiting an individual outer form that we have grown accustomed to observing...or ourselves inhabiting for a period of time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 29 Aug 04 - 11:05 PM To follow up on what LH and Two Bears have said, in my first post to this thread, I said: some of us don't see "matter" and "spirit" as being separate at all. ...and Wolfgang gave us this: Once you realise that Kirlian photographs of not living matter lead to the same observable phenomena, you quickly drop the interpretation of the effect as an energy field, because it makes no sense any longer. I'd say this point from Wolfgang actually supports the idea of matter and spirit being the same thing, much more than it undermines it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 30 Aug 04 - 06:27 AM I'd say this point from Wolfgang actually supports the idea of matter and spirit being the same thing, much more than it undermines it. (Carol) You're so right, Carol, but do you realise what that means what you have posted? If you read the first posts you can easily see that I'm not a dualist but a monist (like, for instance, Little Hawk too). So neither he nor I expect any proof either way from Kirlian photography, for we both would make the same prediction: Living and not living matter (I use these words as abbreviations for something more complicated) lead to the same photographs. To mention it as anything resembling a proof only makes sense for a dualist. The people usually offering Kirlian photographs as a proof are dualists (so I have to guess that either Two Bears is dualist or doesn't realise that taking Kirlian photography as an empirical argument is completely senseless). They claim that Kirlian photographs from dead matter are different from Kirlian photographs of living matter (like for instance a leaf still at a tree or a fallen leaf). My argument that dead matter leads to the same pictures can only be directed at those claimants (and in this context it was only directed at Two Bears' argumentation). For a dualist, a result contrary to his world view would make a problem. I never would have offered Kirlian photography as an empirical argument to, for instance, Little Hawk (though he seems to think so), for I know we both expect the same result. To quarrel about empirical results (or to look for them in the first place) only makes sense, if it matters one way or the other. Some of you could profit a lot from reading about the methodology of science and what makes a theory testable and what not. first hand experiences trump a second rate opinion (Two Bears) Two Bears, you seem to think and to imply that you see there a big difference between you and me. And I have the impression that you have little knowledge of what an empirically working scientist does besides reading books. (1) Many of your arguments are like many of mine arguments you have read, second hand arguments. (2) A part of my job is doing experiments, empirical experiments. I have first hand experience doing experiments near the absolute threshold of perception and also about human errors. When I talk about the difference between what stimuli humans have actually been subjected to and what they report and what their interpretation of their experiences is, I speak not from books. The notion I read so often that scientific findings can be dismissed out of hand in comparison to personal experience is mostly rubbish. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 30 Aug 04 - 11:24 AM Are you saying, Wolfgang, that Kirlian photography isn't usable as a test to determine whether or not there is spiritual energy in matter for people who are monists because there can be no control? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 30 Aug 04 - 11:53 AM In a remote way, yes, Carol, though I wouldn't have put it that way. For the materialist, under both living matter/nonliving matter conditions Kirlian effects are to be expected. For the spiritualist of Little Hawk type, under both conditions, Kirlian effects are to be expected. So finding Kirlian effects for both states of the matter cannot be used to tell which of them is correct. Technically speaking, there is of course a control condition possible, for Little Hawk as well as I can easily differentiate between say a dead leaf and another. But any general Kirlian effect is neither for him nor for me a test of the theory. We both expect that. For a dualist, the situation is different. He expects differential effects for dead leaves and not yet dead leaves. For him, consistently not finding a difference would be a blow to his using Kirlian effects as argument. Similarly, finding differential effects, that is different effects for dead leaves and fresh leaves, are a difficulty for both monist positions, be they materialist or spiritualist. My point is that you can't have it both ways. If you use Kirlian effects for the spiritualist position then this only makes sense as an argument pro spirit as different from matter. I have argued with that position and nothing else. If Little Hawk calls my Kirlian argument a fallacy it just shows that he has little understanding of scientific argumentation. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: CarolC Date: 30 Aug 04 - 12:11 PM Unless, Wolfgang, the results of Kirlian photography were to show an energy field around a "dead" leaf as well as a "living" leaf, but the kind of energy field was consistantly different for the dead leaf than for the living leaf, and different in the same way each time. But I don't know enough about Kirlian photography to know if this would be possible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Aug 04 - 12:18 PM I had another post back there which vanished for some reason. Let's see if it's in the buffer... Yes it is! It's from yesterday, as follows: Yes, Carol, that's exactly what I was thinking. Matter is simply spirit at a lower rate of vibration. Example: Slowest spirit - solid matter Faster spirit - liquid matter Still faster spirit - gaseous matter Some much faster forms of spirit - radio waves, radiation, magnetic fields, electricity, sound, heat, light And faster than that - astral thought (memory and emotion) And faster than that - causal thought (formative, creative ideas and concepts that give birth to various phenomena and outcomes) And faster than that - something we cannot define because it completely encompasses AND is within every part of our whole field of relativity and we can't get outside it or next to it or away from it because it is not separate from us...so it cannot be measured. (Some have called it "God", and in so doing have usually invested it with all too human characteristics...thus creating God in man's image! This is the kind of old-fashioned religiouse belief that Wolfgang rightly objects to, as it is putting the cart before the horse and creating an unreal God. A myth, in fact.) The above list is only partial, I'm sure, but it gives a general idea of the principle of spirit (which is intelligent consciousness taking form as matter or energy or pure thought). It is not a human phenomenon, it's beyond human. Human beings, like other living and even apparently inert things, are a manifestation of it, that's all. And they are NOT the only manifestation of it by any means. Everything is made in "God's image", not just human beings. And that doesn't mean that God looks exclusively like a man, a bird, or a rock! It means that they all look the way a bundle of highly intelligent energy looks when it slows down and takes purposeful form as a physical item or being...like a cloud, a star, a comet, a rose, an ant, or a human being...or a single atom, seen under a microscope. And no, Wolfgang, I cannot prove any of it, nor would I expect to be able to prove it. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 30 Aug 04 - 04:58 PM Why should I try to prove something which you yourself say (wisely) that it is unprovable. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Aug 04 - 05:09 PM Well, of course you shouldn't, Wolfgang. I don't expect anyone to prove or disprove these matters. I investigate these things not because I am seeking proof but because I'm seeking inspiration. It's spiritual philosophy. One does not prove philosophy, one attempts to understand it, that's all, and hopes to be uplifted by it. I prefer positive philosophies to negative ones, given the choice. That's why I am not fond of negatively based religious ideas such as: original sin, punishment for sins, human unworthiness, hellfire, damnation and that sort of thing. Such ideas strike me as unproductive, fear-based, and entirely false in concept. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 30 Aug 04 - 06:18 PM the point about not being able to prove these matter is even more significant than noted by Little Hawk.... when two physical scientists compare notes and opinions on some test, theory or fact, they usually have a standard of reference and can look at each other's ideas and experiments and perhaps double-check for accuracy. When even two serious Philosophers compare notes, they have logical and linguistic standards for being sure they are speaking the same language and referring to the same ideas, though it can take longer and be trickier. But when two proponents of meta-physical phenomena compare experiences, they are both referring to subjective phenomena and 'personal' experiences, and can never be sure their referents ARE inherently comparable. Since they, by definition, deal with what is untestable, there is no way to easily separate the experience from the linguistic expression of the experience. such statements as "Matter is simply spirit at a lower rate of vibration." and the examples given, become circular and merely linguistic constructions which are essentially about the mind of the proponent, rather than objective reality. (I tried to formulate this in a way that did not sound insulting or condescending...I'm not sure I succeeded. When I re-read it, it sounds like all I am saying is: "Oh, you're just talkin' about air"...*wry smile*...but there is really an attempt to get a handle on the basis of our different approaches.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Aug 04 - 06:49 PM Agreed, Bill. Let's put it this way...if I were trying to solve a crime, I would look for physical evidence, and anecdotal evidence of witnesses, and I would also look for those imponderables (such as motive or motivation of the criminal)...depending on the situation. If I were searching for gold in the ground, I would look almost entirely for physical evidence, I suppose. If I were searching for the meaning of life I would consider physical evidence as part of the picture, all right, but I would mainly be looking for things I cannot touch physically...I would be looking in the realms of allegory, metaphor, emotion, thought, moral tenets, spiritual ideals, parables, and so on. Those are mostly things one can have opinions about, but not prove. One can try them out over a period of time though, and see how they work in practice. If they seem to work well, then that is proof enough for me. The great philosophical questions are what fascinate me. Is everything alive? (I think so.) Is everything conscious in some way? (I think so.) Did all this happen by accident or by intention? (I think the latter.) Is the Universe mostly dead matter or is it manifested consciousness? (I think the latter.) Is life essentially good? (I think so.) Are people essentially sinful? (I think not.) What a person believes about such things is important, because his conduct tends to flow directly from what he thinks. So too for a whole civilization. A civilization which does not see importance in anything but itself and its own creations is a dangerous civilization...headed for a fall. Nature does not tolerate such self-centredness forever...not because Nature gets angry, but merely because it always works to maintain a balance. When things get too far out of balance Nature brings about a re-adjustment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,*daylia* Date: 30 Aug 04 - 07:28 PM It's most promising to see a new generation of young scientists and medical students with the desire and the potential to make big big waves in the practice of health care, no less --- who are not only interested in spiritual healing and energy work but experiencing such success, so easily! - in both giving and receiving it. I'm confident that the next generation will find the required scientific "standards of reference" to qualify and measure subjective "meta-physical" experience, turning debates like this into the stodgy old museum pieces. People like the young medical student who directly experienced the instant healing of an painful month-old athletic injury (which doctor's prescriptions had done little to relieve) as I laid my hands on his shoulder for a minute, using HUNA spiritual/energetic techniques. He was so relieved and impressed he attended the HUNA workshop I gave with Two Bears a couple weeks later, and has since been using his new techniques with great success - from the healing of his girlfriend's sprained ankle a couple weeks ago, to finding exactly the accomodations he wanted at the university campus this fall. It's people like this bright and promising young man, the scientists of the future, who give me hope. And look out .... there's gonna to be a LOT more like him! daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 30 Aug 04 - 10:04 PM "Sorry; but first hand experiences trump a second rate opinion." that is, IF the experience is real clear & unambiguous, and IF the opinion is flawed. cute quotations do not settle arguments. Open your mind and heart and you will have real and unambiguous experiences. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 30 Aug 04 - 10:17 PM Even an atom has a living spirit. It would not exist if it didn't. A group of associated atoms have a group spirit. Aloha nui loa Little Hawk; my brother. Everything is a manifestation of the Great Spirit. But, hey, I know you'll never accept that notion! (grin) I wouldn't have accepted it once either. Nor would Two Bears have accepted it before he had an experience that transformed his outlook. Absolutely correct! For most of my life I was a convinced athiest, and seriously thought religious or spiritual people were crazy. Then one evening in December 1996; I was meditating to direct healing energy into a badly mangled foot; I had been meditating for well over an hour, and I heard a soft pop in my chest, and I found myself near the ceiling looking down on my own body. That OBE gave me confirmation of life after death, and a spiritual awakening. and I found that my former life was the crazy one not the mystics that had experiences. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 30 Aug 04 - 10:25 PM My point is that you can't have it both ways. If you use Kirlian effects for the spiritualist position then this only makes sense as an argument pro spirit as different from matter. I have argued with that position and nothing else. If Little Hawk calls my Kirlian argument a fallacy it just shows that he has little understanding of scientific argumentation. But they aren't different, Just different states of the same thing much the same wah water can go through three states solid, liquid and vapor. Physical matter is just a more dense and solid form that what is perceived as spirit. "Everything is a manifestation of the Great Spirit." ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 30 Aug 04 - 10:36 PM People like the young medical student who directly experienced the instant healing of an painful month-old athletic injury (which doctor's prescriptions had done little to relieve) as I laid my hands on his shoulder for a minute, using HUNA spiritual/energetic techniques. He was so relieved and impressed he attended the HUNA workshop I gave with Two Bears a couple weeks later, and has since been using his new techniques with great success - from the healing of his girlfriend's sprained ankle a couple weeks ago, to finding exactly the accomodations he wanted at the university campus this fall. Daylia IS telling you the truth. I have seen many of these instant healings with my own eyes. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Aug 04 - 10:46 PM And there ya have it! Aloha nui loa, Two Bears! And Mahalo too. (those are greetings in Hawaiian...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 31 Aug 04 - 03:58 AM linguistic constructions which are essentially about the mind of the proponent (Bill) That's what it is and it can be very comforting to those sharing such a view. I have no problem at all with such constructions as explanations of the world. But all too often people fond of such constructions step out of their safe area and make factual claims. Only and exactly from that moment on I have something to say. Daylia, I agree with you that science is bound to find new things, new approaches, new theories. But the standards of evidence and the principles of sound methods will not change. Whatever science finds on the field of health will be in a language you may not appreciate. And the evidence will be based on, basically, counting procedures and not on subjective experience. Open your mind and heart and you will have real and unambiguous experiences. There is no doubt or anything remotely similar to critical thought in the mind of the real believer. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,*daylia* Date: 31 Aug 04 - 08:27 AM There is no doubt or anything remotely similar to critical thought in the mind of the real believer Well, I do think critically, Wolfgang, and "belief" (ie putting blind faith in something) has got nothing to do with it. WHen I eat my lunch, for example, I do not need to "believe" it will relieve my hunger, or scientifically acceptable schematic data-sheets "proving" that it nourishes my body. I just know I'm not hungry anymore after I eat, and that my body stays healthy. Eating my lunch "works", whether or not I "believe" in it or understand it scientifically. It's the same with HUNA. It works - and I'm not going to argue about why or how, because in the end it really doesn't matter. IT's the results that matter! I felt HUNA instantly heal a slipped disc in my back I'd been suffering with for years as TWo Bears passed me mana loa (spiritual life-force energy), all the way from Tennesseee to Ontario. Do you think I care one iota HOW it worked to move that disc and realign those vertebrae? Notta chance! That long-standing debilitating pain is gone, I can move easily and freely again and I am so VERY grateful! And I know that no doctor, chiropractor, surgeon or scientist could possibly duplicate that instant healing! I watched HUNA and acupuncture heal my concrete-working buddy's sciactic nerve in a matter of hours, after he'd been doped up on morphine etc and almost completey immoblized for months. I felt - and watched - HUNA alone heal young Robert's shoulder that day. These are only 3 examples of the many MANY HUNA healings and other workings I've had the pleasure of participating in and witnessing this year. Whatever science finds on the field of health will be in a language you may not appreciate. And the evidence will be based on, basically, counting procedures and not on subjective experience. That's why I'm so excited to have an up-and-coming young medical scientist among my successful HUNA students. He does not have a lifetime of "anti-metaphysical" scientific conditioning blocking his ability or desire to understand how HUNA works! He KNOWS it does, he has the shoulder, the girlfriend and the apartment to prove it. I'm sure he'll keep me abreast of the latest scientific developments over the years. No, HUNA healings do not require either "belief" or scientific / intellectual understanding. All that's required is the emotional readiness, at a deep subconscious level - to let go of whatever ails you and accept healing. For example, Robert had never met me, never even heard of HUNA before that day he walked into the store where I was working in severe pain, looking for herbal remedies to help his shoulder. The 3 doctor's prescriptions he'd been on for weeks were having very little effect. I was moved with compassion when I saw the pain on his face, even though he was a complete stranger - I do know first-hand what athletic injuries to a joint feel like! So I spontaneously offered him HUNA to try to help ease the pain. He was so desperate he was willing to try just about anything at that point. It worked!!! It felt like a flow fire coming through my hands that day, I'd never felt it quite so strong before. IT felt wonderful, to both of us! I watched him move that shoulder in several complete wide circles after a minute or so, where it had been almost completely immobilized moments before. I was pretty amazed myself! But I told him NOT to go back to lifting weights for a while, and to use the liniments he'd just bought. I gave him the information about the up-coming HUNA workshop in case he wanted to learn more about the technique he'd just experienced. Well, he walked out of that store with his eyes glued to that HUNA flyer like it was the Penthouse Pet of the Month or something. And he DID go back to weightlifting that very night - and he told me a couple weeks ago his shoulder has never bothered him again - in fact it's never been better. Now, it doesn't always happen that way, of course. A week later I was at a drumming circle with a very overweight, stressed out, crying, drugged up (on Percodans) woman who was complaining constantly about her arthritic knee. I offered her HUNA, she accepted. I asked her which knee was hurting, and she said "Oh, it's both knees ... and my back ... and my hip .... and I have diabetes ... and high blood pressure ... and fibromyalgia ... and a heart condition ...." ANd with every complaint she listed, her eyes grew brighter and her face lit up. She was just beaming with pleasure when she finished her long list of ailments! Now I knew right then the HUNA would be ineffective, because she was in no way ready for healing. It was so obvious she LIKED being sick! Her illnesses paid off for her -- kept her eligible for disability cheques, gave her lots of pitying attention etc. But I'd promised, so I laid my hands on her knees anyway and started the deep breathing for a HUNA healing, using exactly the same technique I had with Robert. There was barely a twitch of response, and very little effect except that she could move the knee a little tiny bit farther when I stopped. The only difference between her and Robert was that Robert didn't want the pain! That pain was not "serving" him at all in his own mind, while her pain certainly "served" her. He wanted the healing, while deep down inside she didn't. Simple. WHen science is finally able to explain these things, perhaps THAT will be the real miracle! daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,*daylia* Date: 31 Aug 04 - 09:40 AM Just talking about HUNA has got me all fired up with enthusiasm again here, and a thought just occured to me ... when science IS able to explain how HUNA and similiar techniques work, will the "price" of that scientific investigation be losing something intrinsically human, intangible and irreplacable? Look what Mark Twain says about rainbows ... We have not the reverent feeling for the rainbow that the savage has, because we know how it is made. We have lost as much as we gained by prying into that matter. - A Tramp Abroad But then again .... One can enjoy a rainbow without necessarily forgetting the forces that made it. - "Queen Victoria's Jubilee" Thanks for listening to my musings, daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 31 Aug 04 - 09:52 AM Daylia, I agree with you that science is bound to find new things, new approaches, new theories. But the standards of evidence and the principles of sound methods will not change. Whatever science finds on the field of health will be in a language you may not appreciate. And the evidence will be based on, basically, counting procedures and not on subjective experience. The problem is that IF a scientist discovers and reports something not accepted by the other scientists (peer review); the scientists reputation is MUD, and they do not receive research grants, or are asked to submit papers. I wish scientists would explore the edge of known science; but about 95% of them will not. ;-( There is no doubt or anything remotely similar to critical thought in the mind of the real believer. Of course there is. techniques either work or they do not. I opened my mind and heart and began exploring mysticism. If this did not work; I would not be wasting my time or life force. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 31 Aug 04 - 10:08 AM I was pretty amazed myself! But I told him NOT to go back to lifting weights for a while, and to use the liniments he'd just bought. I gave him the information about the up-coming HUNA workshop in case he wanted to learn more about the technique he'd just experienced. Daylia; do you remember what I told you when you when you asked if the shock and awe wears off (after you observed the instant healing of your mothers knee? I don't think the amazement EVER wears off. One of the instant healings I witnessed was Tammy F. The report available on my website is copied below. ----- The healing of Tammy F's hand by Two Bears In June 2001; I was at the laundry mat (doing laundry) when I heard a lady scream outside. I went out to see what was wrong, and she told me she had injured her thumb and hand at work two days earlier, and had been unable to move her thumb since the accident. I picked up her laundry baskets and carried them inside for her. Once inside; I introduced myself and told her that I was an energy healer, and offered to try to help heal her hand. Tammy was not a skeptic; she was a disbeliever in energy healing, She also stated that her doctor had reported the only way to improve the condition of her hand was to have surgery to repair the nerves and tendons. I replied saying "if the energy does not help; it will not do any harm", so she held her hand out for me to work with it, I held her hand between my hands. About 30 seconds into the healing she asked how my hands get so hot. I replied "That is the energy.". 1 minute into the healing we both observed redness running up her arm. After sending energy into her injured thumb and hand for 3 - 4 minutes; I released her hand and asked how her hand felt. At first she moved her thumb tentatively, and opened her mouth in amazement, then she wiggled her thumb almost normally. Then her expression was "Damn! This is cool!" ----- In the space of 5 minutes her world view shifted dramaticaly. She went from a complete debunker "I don;t believe in any of that crap" to a person that accepted the miracle that happened to her own hand. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 31 Aug 04 - 10:26 AM Musical interlude .... Through Your Hands E A You were dreaming on a park bench E A About a broad highway somewhere E A Where the music from the carillon E A Seemed to hurl your heart out there E A Past the scientific darkness E A Past the fireflies that float E A To an angel bending down E A To wrap you in her warmest cloak And you ask What am I not doing G#m She says your voice cannot command F#m She says in time you will move mountains B E A E A And it will come through your hands E A Still your angle for an option E A Still you argue for your case E A Like you wouldn't know a burning bush E A If it blew up in your face E A We dream about the future E A We scheme about the past E A When just a simple reaching out E A Could build a bridge that lasts And you ask what am I not doing G#m She says your voice cannot command F#m She says in time you will move mountains B E A E A And it will come through your hands SOLO E A So whatever your hands find to do E A You must do with all your heart E A There are thoughts enough to blow men's minds E A And tear great worlds apart E A There's a Healing Touch that finds you E A On that broad highway somewhere E A To lift you as high as Music flyin E A Thru the angels hair A So don't worry what you are not doing G#m Cause your voice cannot command F#m In time you will move mountains B E A E A It will come through your hands -David Crosby, John Hiatt Whistling Moon Traveler Music/Careers BMG Music(BMI) From "Thousand Roads" Atlantic Records 1993 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 31 Aug 04 - 10:33 AM Somehow the chord changes didn't line up with the lyrics the way I typed it originally - they're 1-2 words ahead of where they should be, just about all the way through. Wish I could fix it. Sorry bout that. :-( daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 31 Aug 04 - 07:11 PM *daylia*...if you type if you type <sup>E</sup>You were <sup>A</sup>dreaming on a park bench it will put the chord right above where you want it...(I think) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 31 Aug 04 - 07:13 PM like this EYou were Adreaming on a park bench |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 31 Aug 04 - 07:16 PM you put the 'sup' thing where you want the letter to appear ...'sup' is short for 'superscript'...as you might guess, there is also a sub |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 01 Sep 04 - 04:42 AM Can't Prove This, and it is thus largely theological: But it is my opinion that matter and spirit can never entirely interact at their true potential until the coming of a "New Heaven" and "New Earth" that takes place within us and this universe (perfecting mankind's intellectual and spritual capacity) and purging the planet and universe of all evil. We ALREADY have a GUIDANCE SYSTEM for the Spiritual Capacity (As I have discovered) for total equality and world peace on the planet earth IF all of us were tuned into and reacted to the infinite mind and its order and consciousness which is complete enlightnement and perfection(i.e. God) I hear people say that world peace isn't possible, and I used to actually belief that. But Now I know that peace for humanity IS POSSIBLE when and if we, as a race, are to acheive the equality and righteousness of the infinite mind of God which produces this harmonious outcome. i.e. Human Beings will have to be changed into the full likeness of God and Reconciled to Him As An Equal in Both Morals and Intellect, By doing away with the Old, the NEW comes into being, and is reconciled to perfection as God the creator ALREADY IS. The Kingdom of Heaven is, "WITHIN US" (i.e. we have everything necessary that we need to make the word a perfect and intergrated paradise of peace and enquality; (I think George Burns Said this to John Denver is the Movie: "Oh God" The MESSAGE IN THE MOVIE WAS THAT GOD GAVE MAN EVERYTHING HE NEEDED TO MAKE THE WORLD AND UNIVERSE WORK!!) this is what the master intelligentce grants us, but what do we do: nothing of the sort) SINCE THIS KINGDOM OF HEAVEN ISN'T WORKING (the one currently within us on this planet) THROUGH GOD AND HIS RECONCILATION AND JUDGEMENT A NEW ONE WILL COME INTO BEING WHICH IS THE NEW HEAVEN. However, mankind has not evolved to the spritual point of understanding his own significance in relation to God and the Infinite, If there was such an understanding, the destruction of the earth and all of its elements, would not have to occur, And I would respectfully differ with Little Hawk's Comment that People are basically good: If they were there would be no need for a new earth, I would say we as a planet are entirely evil and grossly spritually inmature in the eyes of the infinite mind (or creator who is perfect in all respects and interactions) This is the reconcilation that is discribe in most religions, and the belief in a heavenly state is which humans are evolved to the God-head into a state of perfection, able to communcate and understand directly the laws of the universe, morality and God himself. Without error and without blemish We are spiritual beings first and only human beings second, and because we haven't reversed and understood our primary rolls the mysteries of the universal cannot be manifest and and controlled through us. It will be up to God to distroy the knowledge as in past civilizations. And create the new being with an interconnectedness to the God and the perfected new universe to which we will be a part (i.e. an equal) Just An Opinion, As well as an ethical argument for the judgement that is to come, on this very sinful and spritually immature planet, with which the mind of God laid out perfectly for our use and benefit, but which man cannot comprehend and make work for himself/herself. Dewey |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 01 Sep 04 - 05:42 AM Didn't mean to imply everyone was going to Hell, Just that evil will have to be purged in order to achive equality and Perfection. And, also, if there is to be such perfection things are gonna have to change drastically as well as are the people of the earth. I realize religious views cannot be proven or disproven, and also that I might have strayed a bit from the topic, (AND ALSO BE WRONG IN MY CONCLUSIONS) New matter, and New Spirit through a reconciled God/Man relation was my thought. After all, it really ain't a workin' that good so far. Wars, Violence, Immorality etc. A small cry from perfection that is the God that is within us. Dewey (who hopes his religious expressions will not be mis-interpreted) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,*daylia* Date: 01 Sep 04 - 07:14 AM Through Your Hands You were E dreamin on a A park bench About a E broad highway some Awhere When the Emusic from the A carillon Seemed to E hurl your heart out A there Past the E scientific A darkness Past the E fireflies that A float To an E angel bending A down To wrap you E in her warmest A cloak AAnd you ask What am I not doing She says your G#m voice cannot command She says in F#m time you will move mountains And it will B come through your handsE A E A Still you E angle for an A option Still you Eargue for your Acase Like you E wouldn't know aA burning bush If it E blew up in your A face We E dream about the A future And we E scheme about the A past When E just a simple A reaching out Could E build a bridge that A lasts AAnd you ask what am I not doing She says your G#m voice cannot command She says in F#m time you will move mountains And it will B come through your handsE A E A SOLO So E whatever your hands A find to do You must E do with all your A heart There are E thoughts enough to A blow men's minds And E tear great worlds A apart There's a E Healing Touch that A finds you On that E broad highway A somewhere To E lift you as high as A Music flyin E Thru the angels A hair ASo don't worry what you are not doing Cause your G#m voice cannot command In F#m time you will move mountains It will B come through your handsE A E A E -David Crosby, John Hiatt ********************************************************************* That's better ... thanks Bill! You're wonderful! :-) daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 01 Sep 04 - 07:27 AM If those healings were so quick and convincing it would be easy for someone with the knowledge of research methods to conduct a study that would make it to Science or Nature. Some years later even an invitation to Stockholm might follow. Try to contact someone with the relevant knowledge. If you are right I shall read about it in a journal and not just as case anecdotes. You can win fame. What could you lose except perhaps some illusions and even that shouldn't be considered a loss. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,*daylia* Date: 01 Sep 04 - 07:47 AM Wolfgang, I would just LOVE to do that! I don't care about fame - but it would just be so rewarding to see more and more people using these easy and powerful techniques, taking responsibility for their own health instead of relying on pharmaceutical companies, learning how to heal themselves and others, proving to themselves that they CAN have everything that they need and desire and that to have these things is a birthright, awakening to their true potential as human beings. This planet would become an entirely different place! And people like yourself would finally know that this is no more of an illusion than the earth revolving around the sun. :-) Here's a quote from Clark Wilkerson's Hawaiian Magic I used it as the intro page for my HUNA workshop handouts. This is why I finally came out of my shell this summer and did the workshop, at the risk of public ridicule and defamation ... "One Kahuna (Priest of the Hawaiian Islands) turned to the wind and commanded aloud that it rise, blow and become strong. In minutes the wind actually increased. These men know how to use their hearts and how to use their mental bodies to create emotion, then energy, which in turn brings about manifestation. The power of the Spoken Word stems from speaking from the heart. Not many people pray with their full hearts. This is why very few prayers are answered. People have fallen from the average forms of religion because of lack of proof which gave them doubt. The religion is not at fault. It is the fact they cannot speak and pray with their hearts or with their full mind power. They have not been trained to do so. It is time that this planet and everyone on it be taught of these things, and that it not be held for only a few who can do it, who realize it, but do not have the ability to teach others". Dewey, those are interesting posts. I have a few comments about your use of the words "evil" and "sinful" and the concept of "Judgment", and also about your claim However, mankind has not evolved to the spritual point of understanding his own significance in relation to God and the Infinite, If there was such an understanding, the destruction of the earth and all of its elements, would not have to occur - I'll have to get back to you later though. daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,*daylia* Date: 01 Sep 04 - 08:02 AM One more thought - if the repositioning of that slipped disc and vertabrae in my back was an illusion, then having it slip out of place must have been an illusion too, and so was all that pain I suffered for so long. So pick your illusions ... I know which one I prefer! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 01 Sep 04 - 09:06 AM your welcome, *daylia*...it's nice to have a trick that helps..*smile*. and if Two Bears does also, great....I will never be opposed to feeling better, and if people leave Two Bears 'feeling better', I am glad. If I tend to reserve judgement as to the precise mechanism and causality, .....well, maybe it's just my destiny to be that way... ;>0 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 01 Sep 04 - 09:25 AM Daylia, by now you should know from reading my many posts that I see a possible illusion less likely in what happens but in the interpretation. I have said ad nauseam that my issue is with the interpretation of what is observed. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 01 Sep 04 - 09:36 AM if the repositioning of that slipped disc and vertabrae in my back was an illusion, then having it slip out of place must have been an illusion too, and so was all that pain I suffered for so long. (Daylia) All experimenting and the cleverly thought out (placebo) control groups are usually not for (dis)proving what happens (you don't need a long study for get agreement about that) but for testing (and possibly disproving) different interpretations. If someone says 'It did work for me, so I know spiritual energy...' a critique from a scientist usually does not attack the first part but the so I know... part. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,*daylia* Date: 01 Sep 04 - 10:33 AM The word I use to refer to whatever mysterious force moved that slipped disc back into place - (and I DID feel that flow of wonderful heat down my spine, and I DID feel and hear the bones moving - *click! click!*, and then the pain was GONE!!!:-) - is mana loa or spiritual life-force energy. That's because the technique originated in ancient Hawaii, so the language of Hawaiian mysticism is the language of HUNA. If this healing had been done in a laboratory setting, perhaps a scientist would prefer to coin new terminology from quantum physics for example, to refer to this invisible force. Wonderful! A scientific term would no doubt be more acceptable, inviting far less "attack" than a mystical one. But no matter what term is selected to refer to it, the nature of the energy itself and the "miraculous" effects it can produce would remain unchanged. One problem I can forsee with using HUNA healing techniques as science experiments is that the results of any kind of energetic healing work depend entirely on the subconscious emotional/mental state of the healee (ie their readiness to let go of the problem and allow the healing to take place). For that reason, energetic healing work is never "guaranteed", under any circumstances. THere can be instantly "miraculous" results (ie Robert's shoulder, Tammy F's hand, my back) or none at all (as in the case of the lady at the drumming circle with her long list of ailments that caused her pain, but earned her MANY benefits). I think it would take many years of very patient experimentation, under controlled conditions to document scientifically how and when HUNA healings work -- and probably many MANY more years after that to figure out how and why they work, using scientific terminology and methods. Not impossible, but certainly a time-consuming endevour. daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,*daylia* Date: 01 Sep 04 - 11:08 AM your welcome, *daylia*...it's nice to have a trick that helps..*smile*. Well thanks again for sharing your 'tricks' with me, you cyber-healer you! Who's the greatest cyber-healer? Bill! Yo Bill! Who's the charming disbeliever? Bill! Yo Bill! Wolf may be our analyser, criticizer, synthesizer But HAIL our chord-change synchronizer - Bill! Yo Bill! :-) daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 02 Sep 04 - 12:36 AM If those healings were so quick and convincing it would be easy for someone with the knowledge of research methods to conduct a study that would make it to Science or Nature. Some years later even an invitation to Stockholm might follow.. The healings described happened exactly as described. Try to contact someone with the relevant knowledge. If you are right I shall read about it in a journal and not just as case anecdotes. You can win fame. What could you lose except perhaps some illusions and even that shouldn't be considered a loss. You are forgetting something. "I am not the lealer. The healing is done by the higher powers, and by the recepient's subconscious mind being willing to be healed. Even if we had 100 documented instant healings; they would still be anecdotal. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 02 Sep 04 - 01:05 AM Not impossible, but certainly a time-consuming endevour. Don't forget costly. One would need to have an Xray, MRI, etc then have a person hold the Xray or MRI for the chain of custody recording when the test was taken. Then have the person receive a healing, Then run duplicate tests to demonstrate the change. A week ago monday; I was running around to antique stores, and art galleries with a HUNA student Tiffany H. We went into this art gallery, and met an elderly lady named Peggy (I don't recall if she gave her last name) She asked Tiffany and I where we were from, and what we did, and when I said "I'm an energy healer" she asked me to work on her back because he had hurt her back while hanging a heavy painting and frame. I agreed to do what I could do to help. After a few minutes; I removed my hands from her back, and Tiffany and I continued to walk around looking at the art work. Tiffany found a painting of a japanese woman in a blue and black kimono she wanted; so she asked me to bring Peggy over to buy the painting. I asked Peggy how she was feeling, and she said "I can't believe the pain is gone. Then every person (including the owners of the art gallery) were told about the healing of her back. Last July; I did a healing for my neighbor. He was almost killed when the car he was in was hit by a train. He spent more than a year in a full body cast in Vanderbilt, and he has had back pain for the past 30 years. One of my neighbors told him that I was an energy healer, and he didn't believe it so he went to the property manager and asked "What is this about Two Bears being a healer?" She told him that I was a healer (because I had done healings for her oldest daughter, and a few other people on the property, then she called me and asked me to come over to the office. I went over and Dean asked me about whether I am a healer or not, and I offered to do a healing there on the spot. Later he told me that he had 7 or 8 hours of relief, and the caustic pain killers he usually took only gave him about 3 hours of relief. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 02 Sep 04 - 05:46 AM I am an energy healer......I am not the lealer. (Two Bears) Even if we had 100 documented instant healings; they would still be anecdotal. (Two Bears) Not would, could! Number is not the relevant factor, proper design and reporting is. Even 10,000 reports of the style in this and similar threads would still be anecdotes. 20 to 40 cases (depending upon which power you aim at) with the proper design and reporting could be very convincing. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 02 Sep 04 - 10:04 AM *daylia*...why, thank you for the cheer!....hovever, I cheat! MY secret of 'healing' is to only do tricks that I am sure of, and that I can replicate...*grin* I can also show YOU how to do them. Now if you could show ME how to hear, feel & see the things you & Two Bears do, we'd have something! (Others have tried...I think my antenna was damaged when a copy of Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason" fell on it in 1966....) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 02 Sep 04 - 10:32 AM MY secret of 'healing' is to only do tricks that I am sure of, and that I can replicate...*grin* Bill my dear, I also know without a doubt that my "tricks" work, as long as the person at the receiving end is ready to allow the energy to do it's thing. If you are genuinely interested, you (and anyone else here) are MOST welcome to PM me anytime for a demonstration, healing work or more information. I can also teach you, in about 5-10 minutes, how to practice these simple and enjoyable "tricks" yourself - to benefit not only yourself but your family and friends, your pets, your plants or anyone/thing else you'd care to work with. Unfortunately, unlike html tags life-force energy itself does not lend itself to being "typed out" or otherwise presented via the written word, for you to gaze at and study. But it does lend itself, most excellently and beneficially, to direct physical experience. So, like Nike says - Just Do It! What have you got to lose? I guarantee you that life-force energy IS the Real Thing. The worst it could possibly do for you is nothing ... and that depends totally on you and your subconsious mental/emotional state. So anytime you feel ready to bite the bullet, just let me know. I'd LOVE to work with you! :-) daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Two_bears Date: 02 Sep 04 - 07:07 PM I can also show YOU how to do them. Now if you could show ME how to hear, feel & see the things you & Two Bears do, we'd have something! (Others have tried...I think my antenna was damaged when a copy of Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason" fell on it in 1966....) Bill: When I give a workshop in your area; contact the person who is the scheduling the workshop, and tell them that I have invited you to attend the workshop as my guest. That offer is only for you, and Wolfgang. ANL - 2B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 03 Sep 04 - 02:13 AM Daylia, I was having esoteric brain drain, as well as post happy euphoria. But I did discover that the universe is perfect, and that a perfectly enlighten human being can live in peace with other perfectly enlighten human beings. The infinite mind creates perfect peace and equality of all humans, and also provides interactive discernment in how to make peace possible among all equal likeminded individuals. We are spiritual beings First, and Human Beings Second. unfortunately Our World Does't Work, Because we are not tuned into the "real" world, just our petty egocentric, singular minded dissident world. God is Perfect, as is the universe, and we too could obtain perfection through the intergration of our higher selves, serving the universal purpose of this perfect and higher force. This is why I belive in the New Earth (new people or enlightended people, or judged people) and a New Heaven (people dwelling in peace and perfection in the likeness and wholeness of God himself, the current heaven does not contain mankind, but in the new heaven mankind will be brought into the fold) Again, the above is all theological and I cannot prove it. Just a Wide-eyed Theory, However maybe if we are going to evolve, the would also have to be judgement as not everyone would be willing to evolve, (all theology talk about free choice after all, and not everyone WANTS to be nice) Dewey |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 20 Oct 04 - 12:23 PM Some may like to read this short press release about a neuropsychological theory explaining what makes some people experience something they describe as an aura? Dr Jamie Ward, author of the study, says: "A popular notion is that some people have a magical ability to detect the hidden emotions of others by seeing a colourful 'aura' or energy field that they give off. Our study suggests a different interpretation. These colours do not reflect hidden energies being given off by other people, rather they are created entirely in the brain of the beholder." The reference to the full article is found at the end of the press release. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 20 Oct 04 - 12:51 PM All visual images are "products of the brain of the beholder". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 20 Oct 04 - 02:40 PM That's interesting. I hadn't thought of synaesthesia. However, this statement -- "Rather than assuming that people give off auras or energy fields that can only be detected by rigged cameras or trained seers, we need only assume that the phenomenon of synaesthesia is taking place." -- seems to assume there are a whole lot of synaesthetics around. Synaesthesia doubtless explains some aura sightings, but assuming that it explains all is not exactly scientific. Bogus reductionism turns science into just another belief system. Carl Sagan for one made some pretty fanciful explanations that I think did science no service. clint |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 20 Oct 04 - 02:44 PM I disagree that all visual images are products of the brain of the beholder. I have discussed numerous instances of out-of-body experiences with others in which they were quite capable of drumming up visual recordings while operating independently of the body. Mental images are th stuff of mental mechanism but are not built of brain-stuff. They are generated by beings using brains to anchor themselves with. Vive la difference. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 20 Oct 04 - 03:22 PM But Amos, in order to have physically discussed them with you at all the conscious memories or "visual recordings" of these reported OBE's must have been "processed", stored, accessed etc through the person's physical brain. Memory, including visual memory - is a function or "product" of the brain - whether the image(s) were perceived by the physical eyes in waking life, in a dream or OBE, in a vision or even a hallucination. Hmmm, maybe "all visual images available for physical conscious perusal are a function and product of the brain" would be better? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 20 Oct 04 - 03:47 PM But Amos, in order to have physically discussed them with you at all the conscious memories or "visual recordings" of these reported OBE's must have been "processed", stored, accessed etc through the person's physical brain. Memory, including visual memory - is a function or "product" of the brain - whether the image(s) were perceived by the physical eyes in waking life, in a dream or OBE, in a vision or even a hallucination. Why? IF you assume the body does the viewing and you would be unable to see without it, your argument might make sense. Memory is as much a "product" of the brain as live communication is a "product" of a telephone -- sure, it is a very complex instruemnt and you can't trace all the workings of it, and every time you pick it up someone is ocmmunicating through it -- but that doesn't mean the phone is creating the communications!! People see perfectly well without any brain at all, if they are not too thrashed. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 20 Oct 04 - 05:44 PM Clint, I have posted the explanation how it usually goes (for people without synesthesia) some other place in this thread. My explanation has one weak point, namely that some reports of auras are very different from the usual visual halo effects. I was pleased to read this new explanation for it closes a gap in our understanding of aura reports. The new explanation was never meant to explain aura-like experiences in normal people. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 20 Oct 04 - 07:25 PM Well, the statement "Rather than assuming that people give off auras or energy fields that can only be detected by rigged cameras or trained seers, we need only assume that the phenomenon of synaesthesia is taking place." seems rather absolute; as though it's either auras or synaesthesia, and synaesthesia explains it all. Instead of "need only assume" he could have said "may sometimes assume." clint |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 20 Oct 04 - 07:55 PM the relevance I draw from the report is simply that there ARE often alternate explanations for phenomena. It does not mean the same explanation holds in every case. Synaesthesia does seem to be a working hypothesis for why some people see colors around some other people in some cases. There are various other hypotheses in other situations. What we need is to discover if & how an aura can exist no matter what the subjective state of the observer. (*daylia*...I have been pondering some of your comments and 'offers' back up there ^ for several weeks...I almost took you up on the challenge, but have had no time and have problem with the wording. I'll PM you soon) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Art Thieme Date: 21 Oct 04 - 07:32 PM I doubt that spirit matters. Matter, on the other hand, matters less when one has imbibed spirits. This whole discussion is only of any real practical value if one is here to appreciate it. If one is dead (or hasn't been born yet) it does not matter in the least. It was Descarte who said that pretty much. Thinking about the matter of the fact makes that real. Oyherwise it is not even there. The vagueness of it all is all we are discussing actually. Matter of fact, thanks for a spirited thread. Art Thieme |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 22 Oct 04 - 08:13 AM Matter, on the other hand, matters less when one has imbibed spirits... LOL! Thanks Art! Now, does spirit matter less when one has imbibed flesh?? People see perfectly well without any brain at all, if they are not too thrashed. Yes, I see your point Amos. And in order to have any practical physical value or relevance at all, the memory of those visual experiences / images must be stored somehow, somewhere in the physical brain's neurological "wiring" - no matter what condition that brain was in at the moment of perception; conscious, semi-conscious, super-conscious or even unconscious. I almost took you up on the challenge, but have had no time and have problem with the wording. I'll PM you soon Hey Bill, no probs. You seem to be doing just peachy as it is! And if you'd ever like to try a bit of cream on those peaches .... :-) daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 22 Oct 04 - 04:19 PM And in order to have any practical physical value or relevance at all, the memory of those visual experiences / images must be stored somehow, somewhere in the physical brain's neurological "wiring" - no matter what condition that brain was in at the moment of perception; conscious, semi-conscious, super-conscious or even unconscious. You really love your wetware, doncha? :D. How about this -- visual memories are recreatable potentials of energy created by spiritual beings in seeking certain experiences conveniently labeled as "past". They are non-material potentialities until regenerated by the spiritual viewpoint, at which point htey are re-created in very high-frequency patterns of mental energy witht he postulated dimensionality of the viewpoint and thus viewed. The act of viewing and interacting with memory CAN (but does not necessarily) cause the stimulation of the being's connection to the brain, producing electro-chemical brain responses in some instances. This applies to non-traumatic memories. Images which are highly charged with physical pain or emotional duress operate slightly differently, from the view point of experience. Basic mechanism is same same. The brain is just an external interface to the physical universe, independent of the memory process. There's a perfectly good model for you which not only accounts for memory but also accounts for the occasionally stranmge phenomenon such as remember past lives, out-of-body experience (near-death or otherwise), or being able to see another person's memories without hearing about them first. The brain-as-storage-container model doesn't account for these. IF you ar elocked in to the wetware dependent model, then you are left with the elimination of anomalous data as unreliable data. A facile solution to the cognitive dissonance presented. But not if it keeps coming up over and over. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 23 Oct 04 - 08:32 AM Holy jumpin Amos, I've tried to wrap my neurons around your last post 4 times. I think I'm shorting out my wetware help I'm droooooooowning..... Satisfied?!? ;-) Here's a situation similar to our "problem" here (I think) ... Imagine what might happen between two aliens who've landed on the Earth for the first time. There they are, standing beside the highway watching these odd-shaped, noisy stinky contraptions go by. One says "look look - it's a truck! It's red and it has 18 wheels!!" The other says "no, you're wrong. It's a truck and it runs on gas and oil." The first one is a bit taken aback, thinks it over and says "but, but - it's a truck! It's red and it has 18 wheels!" The other digs his heels (or paws or fins or hooves or whatever) in even deeper and growls "no no NO. You're WRONG. It's a truck and it runs on gas and oil!!". I do understand what you mean. Actually, it was the life-long experience of disconcerting precognitive dreams; accurate precognitive dreams - and needing to know how the h*** "I" (ie the "me" that requires a brain to interact here) could possibly have "known" what I'd seen in those dreams - that motivated me to explore spirituality in the first place. My own head had shown itself to be capable of the physically impossible, at least while sleeping. That felt so freaky and weird, even frightening - back then. And I knew that the answers I needed were beyond the scope of either science or psychology. They still are. daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,angel_baby Date: 30 Nov 04 - 05:55 PM does anyone know where to find any articles on scales? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Nov 04 - 06:34 PM It's hard to keep a good thread down... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 30 Nov 04 - 11:09 PM And I knew that the answers I needed were beyond the scope of either science or psychology. They still are. Daylia: That depends entirely on the school of psychology. Obviously if you stick to old-boy Skinnerian SR chains you won't find the answer to precognition, asleep or not. If you read Maslow, Marilyn Fergusen (Aquarian Conspiracy), Henri Bergson, Richard Bach, Wayne Dyer, Dr. Larry Dossery, and on and on you will see them all pointing at a non-local model of awareness which makes non-local perception through space-time more normal looking. I suspect it takes a LOT more energy to keep knowing local and tied to the place where the wet-ware is, than it does to just know from whatever locale or point in time you choose to focus your attention. Keeping your knowing tied down to the hitching post of the body requires the maintenance of a lot of barriers that only seem to be useful. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Art Thieme Date: 01 Dec 04 - 11:07 PM Angel Baby, Scale -- is what I'm working for !! Art Thieme |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 02 Dec 04 - 09:06 PM eeeek~! It's BACK!.... I have re-read about half of this, and I am amazed. And I guess I am so VERY glad it went away while Getaway & Craft season was upon me...I'd have blown a circuit for sure, trying to keep up with it. And I'm still convinced..... nay, certain, that logical,linguistic equivocations are involved in many of the opinions that I take issue with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 02 Dec 04 - 11:33 PM Bill D: Start with Maslow. Good solid research on the range of human potentiality. You have probably already read and dismissed Bergson, as you preferred Nietzche or maybe even the impenetrable Liebniz or even that whacked-out Austrian Wittgenstein. But Bergson faced unflinchingly certain aspects of truth that none of those were able to address, for whatever reasons. If you want a modern and less erudite cast on the issues, look up the case histories behind the writings of Dr. Larry Dossey. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 03 Dec 04 - 11:31 AM (review of Bergson) " Bergson did, however, emphasize the importance of intuition over intellect, as he promoted the idea of two opposing currents: inert matter in conflict with organic life as the vital urge strives toward free creative action." (from abstract of one of Dossey's lectures) "Historically, illness and health have been viewed as "physical" issues: disease is due to malfunctioning atoms, molecules, cells, and tissues; health is due to their proper functioning. The mind and the body are seen as fundamentally separate. Dr. Dossey explores the flaw in this logic, presenting scientific evidence to show that not even common diseases can be understood without taking into account the manifestations of a patient's mental state, emotions, thoughts, attitudes, and perceived meanings. Consciousness does, in fact, occupy a significant place in the origins of health and illness. This model coheres with good science and substantiates humankind's persistent conviction that there is "something more" than the physical." well...what can I say? Once, a few years ago, two Jehovah's Witnesses came to my door and entreated me to hear them, and I spent 30 minutes in 'lively' debate. As you might guess, I questioned some basic premises they propounded..*grin*...even AFTER they read me relevant Scripture! So...they went away, promising to return! In a couple days, they returned, accompanied by a 'more experienced' elder, who proceeded to address my concerns by reading me MORE, (but in his opinion 'clearer' scripture! He/they simply could not relate to my position that they were **starting** with assumptions and premises that I did not accept, and thus our discussion was largely useless in so far as it could be expected to convince either side. The suggestion that I read more Bergson, or immerse myself in some Dossey, seems to me to be a VERY similar situation! I DO realize that there are many ways to approach the issue of reality and it's possible modes, and MANY well written expositions of the various theories....Bergson and Dossey included. But this simply does not deal with the central point that I have tried to make in dozens of posts for several years: *most aspects of the theories and attitudes that I (semi)-respectfully debate in here require certain premises that are themselves a matter of opinion and speculation* I understand, as Dossey notes, that patient attitude and mental state CAN affect aspects of the healing process....and I understand that certain personal experiences, such as you, Amos, and Little Hawk and Two Bears..etc...occasionally refer to cannot be denied or discounted...you DID experience something. It is even possible that *I*, someday, might have a comparable experience. None of this, however, addresses my concern about making unwarrented assumptions about the ultimate causality of any of all of these experiences. Somewhere, I remarked that I do note, accept and appreciate the phenomena involved in Bio-feedback medical issues. Our mental state can help with certain conditions of our physical state....(even petting a cat or dog can help reduce stress and improve heart function). Where we differ is what we accept as the origin and driving force of such responses. We ALL know we have a 'brain', and that damage to it can alter what 'we' are....and almost all of us (me included) use words like 'mind' and 'soul' and 'spirit' at times. Those words are extremely useful in expressing human emotions, and such like phenomena, that reference to *brain function* can't match! This does not demonstrate, however, that it IS - ultimately - anything beyond extremely complex brain function...It 'might' be, but it still remains a belief, not a 'fact', in the formal use of the term. (Remember..I do consider that "having an experience" is a fact, but this does not necessarily constitute an explanation of its cause). We must sorta accept that we (meaning both 'us' and humans in general) have VERY different deeply set tendencies towards what we accept as 'truth' 'reality' ..etc. And, as I stated and STILL assert, much of the debate often gets bogged down in linguistic confusion and "equivocation" over how to use some of the terms that are tossed about. When I refer to a 'valid' argument, it means something very narrow. When I discuss 'proof', I **mean** the definition used in formal application of the scientific method...etc. In many of the threads where many sides and individuals debate, the terms are often very loosely used and end up no more useful than several cooks debating whether a dish is "TOO salty" or "good"! If you like it that way, eat it that way...but if you're going to open restaurant or package a product commercially, you have to state the ingredients so that I can apply MY standards. (weak metaphor, I guess...but..) once again...final disclaimer: None of this 'proves' that the stuff I don't accept doesn't exist, it merely notes the status of the claim: that is, belief. As long as I can describe possible alternative ultimate causes for a phenomenon that cannot, by definition, be tested objectively, then we are at an impass. But all this sure hones our various thought processes about how to state our opinions, hmmmmmm? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 03 Dec 04 - 07:22 PM Nothing wrong with honing, anyway! :D. Dossey cites clinical studies and case histories in his work, which is why I refer you to him. A model which insists on knowledge being generated and located in the body/brain complex only cannot account for a single instance of non-local knowing. Just as one white crow will offset the theory that all crows are black, in the presence of such an exception the model has to be revisited because the anomaly condemns it as incomplete. This has a lot to do with the mechanisms that underlie the self-created realities we refer to as beliefs, but it is logically valid regardless. However the circularity of the discussion is wearisome, as it appears the case histories and clinical studies do not overcome the predisposition to believe they cannot occur. Unfortunately I do not have the time or resources to hand to dig up citations for you, or I would gladly do so. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 03 Dec 04 - 11:51 PM "A model which insists on knowledge being generated and located in the body/brain complex only cannot account for a single instance of non-local knowing." non-local knowing seems to be a fairly arcane concept of quantum mechanics, and I see no reason that a model that simply doubts (not 'dis-believes'...just formal doubt) that the brain goes beyond bio-chemical complexity NEEDS to account for a concept that is only a theory itself! If I read you correctly, I think I see the same assumptions present here.....that you 'know' that stuff like 'non-local knowing' exists, and that we must therefore account for it... as to "clinical studies and case histories"...*grin*..."The devil may cite scripture for his purpose." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 04 Dec 04 - 01:50 AM Has nuffink to do with devils, Bill D and you know it!! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 04 Dec 04 - 02:51 AM Non-local knowing comes from the higher self (infinite intelligence) it is the first cause, guided by the sub-conscious entity, which guides our intuition and gives us relative thought suggestion in areas previous unfamiliar. The higher self, is a bird's eye view of the lower self and is based upon the emotions of love and sex which leads to brain stimulation, motivation and relative information, based on an individual's ability to determine his will. The universe is based on and grows through the following sources, The first cause, (this is God, the all-seeing eye, the universal intelligents) etc. etc. The higher mind interacts with everything and everyone, including time itself, it is the oneness, the unifying source, infinity, i.e. God! The alpha and the omega, the first and the last. Since everyone and everything on the planet is tapped into it, information as well as all thoughts from the past present and future are stored in it for playback. Playback occurs when experiences in our bodies and or thoughts through intention. The state of one's mind and bodily emotions trigger the informational help the higher mind and provide retrievable data from its source, which is infinite and determined. All thoughts, come from the following sources, you're own mind and its limited experience and store data over your life, The minds of others, and through the faculty of the Mastermind (the conceptual mind i.e God) You can even program this mind (which I have done) to store (i.e upload) information obtained through the cosmic, for future playback, i.e. Have the godhead remind you to remember a fact related to something on thursday, at precisely the right moment needed to explain the information, specific to the goal you are, trying to reach to someone esle. The high-mind knows the timeline and the need of what you are trying to do, better than you do. It is a shorthand storage devise to compensate for a small brains that cannot handle that much data but still need the data available and in the specific detailed quantity that reflectes you wil at the perfect and precise moment the other person you are working with desires such information. There is much on non-local information that I could discuss, but I am still learning more about this. Just remember emotions and goal driven instruction guide the higher mind as it is goal center as well (i.e. a perfecting creator know as God) As being God and all knowing, it is all instructive and unifying as well, and taps the thoughts and emtions of everyone on the planet, but only the positive emotions, stimulate the psychic inclinations thought orgainzed thought suggestion and will, all necvessary to "read the information braod cast by other individuals regaurding the universal intellect itself. Gain complete control over your mind, and eliminate and negative imput as it will kepp your mind from vibrating at level that is necessary to pick up the thoughts of others, You must be inspired to accomplish ONE Specific objective through repition of thought in order to reach the higher mind and communicate with the source of this outside information. Please read Think and Grow Rich, by Napolean Hill if you wish to gain complete control over this higher domain, which is only available to a person who is "ready" to recieve it. Dewey |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: chris nightbird childs Date: 04 Dec 04 - 02:56 AM There is no God, only the illusion of "self". Just a flesh cage, with a name, waiting to move to a higher plain... It's all yin & yang. Everything is nothing is everything is nothing....................... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 04 Dec 04 - 03:09 AM Unity Repetition and Expansion, this is the higher mind that is available 24/7 and is always computing, serving, creating and expanding and always will, forever and ever. It is utterly perfect and perfecting to the up teenth biliionth degree, which is why it is possible to set for yourself practically any goal into the higher mind and get a determined perfect answer that will guide you toward achieving anything. Through utter chaos, comes the higher mind, determined and infinite to give us exactly what we want despite billions of so called "failures" In the end God has his will, and no amount of chaos destruction fear hatred destruction, etc. can defeat the ultimate creative and perfecting purpose, that is the beginning and end ot everything in this world and beyond. Dewey |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 04 Dec 04 - 09:36 AM Thanks for the lucid exposition, Dewey...hmmmmmmmm. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 05 Dec 04 - 04:55 AM Nothing like a good fight among friends is there Amos! I think what your basically trying to do here is call me an idiot, to protect an ego driven agenda of intolerance. I was very interested in you (despite our differences in opinions on many topics Politics, Religion etc.) I even looked up your picture posted here, and was surprised to find that you are an older individual. Somethings are better off left unchallenged, and I am amazed to see a man of your relative years and intelligents still squabbling, belittling and finding fault in every petty issue that comes across this message board. Yes, I made some generalizations and ambiguities here. Yes I cannot defend of prove any of my assumptions. But there is one thing I have here that many do not have but may wish to aquire; and that is direct and sustaining contact with a form or intelligents higher than my own. You see, Amos, Possibly you may even have a higher I.Q. and education than I do. But you cannot match the infinite mind of God itself, nor will you likely ever achieve this domain as long as you choose to criticize and preserve your ego. Any of the negative emotions of Intolarance, Fear, Hatred, Jealousy etc. repel the vibratory forces necessary to stimulate the brain power of the infinite intelligent. Moreover, it you keep fighting and maintain these negative unproductive states of mind you will never advance spritually our mentally beyond the human plane (small mind). An open mind on all subjects towards all people is paramount to success. Unless, albeit one merely wishes to impress one's self for the rest of one's life while boring others and making countless scores of enemies. So You Say, I can't prove everything I say here? So What! The higher mind is my education. And the word education come from the latin meaning to "draw out" and since I am divinely tapped into the source of the infinite intelligents through my faith, I can more than compensate for any amguity or un-supported documentation you may percieve. You folks that are gathered here are discussing a subject, you percieve in a cetain way, but is un-provable too: but please forgive me for voicing my opinion here on something I have actually experienced. I would like to think very much that a person that has the ACTUAL experience would not have to be barred or banned on talking about a subject he is quite physcially fluent in, i.e. cosmis consciousness. Are you folks tapped into the Universal Intelligents? I rather doubt it, or there would be more unity in the discussion and zero argumentation. A true person of education is a person of good will and communication. No one knows everything on a topic, and those that waist their time to squabbling know even less, even if they temporarily win their argument of being "right" through the tactic of rudeness and intolerence. Who will listen or care anyway.... after they have offended all! I would much rather be wrong and working in the right direction, that right and working in the wrong. Dewey (who would still like to be friends with Amos should he actually ever chose to become one, and not continuously find fault in my posts) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 05 Dec 04 - 05:57 AM Sorry to have interupted the "Matter and Spirit" Debating team with my pointless and un-articulate rambling (LOL) I've got this cosmic sense and was merely looking for an outlet to express it. I'm stuck up here in a very small town without a single soul that understands what I am experiencing, real though the experience may be. You People have no idea what it is like to have discovered this power and be totally unable to express it to others. It drives you nuts, because you want to go beyond what you have learned and make it interact with other people in the way that it is intended to do naturally, yet there is no one else around who has the same capability or background. You just get a funny puzzled look or a shake of the head, from everyone you meet. Also,I would like to apologize for my over zealous, and un-documented religious views pressed in this thread. THIS APOLOGY I AM ACTUALLY SINCERE ABOUT AND FEEL LIKE A FOOL, YET I WISH THIS ERROR TO BE RECOGNIZED AND RECONCILED WITH THOSE OFFENDED. I would also like to Apologize to Amos for being Republican. Had I known he couldn't tolorate this I would have never made it know in this forum. (LOL) Dewey (the nut) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 05 Dec 04 - 09:53 AM Dewey: Move on down here to southern California, pal! We're used to your kind, and it's warmer. too! I can tolerate Republicans, no problem. The things I have problems with are stupidity, fascism, cruelty, greed, and lying. I have seen much of those things coming from the current Administration. It is not their Republicanism which bothers me. As for Cosmic Sense, don't misunderestimate us. The problem with those is really how you describe them to others; it can be like talking high-energy physics to a Trobriand Island grandma. So you have to scale your communications and vocabulary to the vocabulary and reality-construct of the person you're talking to or it's just hot air. If you talk quanta and spin and such, it won't hook up. I am delighted you are connected with higher intelligence. Don't let my somewhat rough-edged style of talk discourage you. You're not alone. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST Date: 05 Dec 04 - 10:10 AM "I think what your basically trying to do here is call me an idiot, to protect an ego driven agenda of intolerance." Watch it Dewey! You fell out of character with that remark. I know who you really are! Even if Amos doesn't. Your Lawrence Welk watching, Minnsota woods trailer living, unmarried 34 year old Christian right male charcter that sells pizza...would never say such a thing. But MG would...now wouldn't he? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 06 Dec 04 - 02:48 AM Guest. Can Amos not read my posts, just as much as you! Guest! I have a rough idea of who you are. You are a Guest. Thanks for clarifying yourself. My instinct are, and I could be wrong, they you are a regular and I think a know who, but I would still like to remain a friend to whoever you are so I will call you a guestly friend. I am not shy about who I am. I am not shy about my failings in life. I have been a total and utter loser up to this turning point in my life. I have nothing to hide, and I get upset too. When I come to my senses, I using apologize to those I have offended. I didn't claim that having the cosmis sense makes me a perfect person. I am only perfect through the perfecting of God, its a journey, not a one time makeover. Fools think themselves better than others, in the end we are all equals working toward a common cause... but I digress. Guest! Please let me know when the get yourself a name and free feel to PM me sometime when/if you do. Thank you Guest! Dewey (the registered user, pizza boy and cosmic philospher) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 06 Dec 04 - 03:07 AM Guest, Actually I live in North Dakota, in an open field in a trailer, in town. Also, I am allowed to be out of character from time to time as are you, and being you are posting here as a guest you too are still out of character: Everyone has a name please tell us yours, or will doing so possibly expose your charactor as well? Be humble enough to admit that you can be human too and say things wrong without having to hide your identity under the title: "guest" What does it worry you anyway what others think? I am not ashamed of being a loser, aging pizza boy, trailor dweller. etc. its all part of the journey or lack of it up until this point! but I do not un-necessarily pick fights. Thank you Guest! Plese get register Guest! If you haven't already been registered....... Dewey (the registered one) formerly Guest Dewey (the unregistered but still boldly exposed guest) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 16 Dec 04 - 11:42 AM O.K. People.... I admit it! I am consdecending as well, care too much about what others think of me You now know what buttons to push. There is no one else each of us loves more than ourselves, and no one else we seek harder to defend when that self love is threatened. Human nature in action. It's the old talk radio strategy; but revisited in this post instead: when a caller makes a fool out of his/her self in an openline call, the moderator doesn't attempt to argue with him/her, just gets out of his/her way, and lets that other person self destruct. Well, 3, 2, 1.......... BOOM!!!!! Well EVERYBODY you don't have to worry about my postings anymore, because GENTLEMAN this is my last post. "YOU WON'T HAVE DEWEY TO KICK AROUND ANYMORE" for awhile at least (LOL) Dewey P.S. Sorry, Mr. President for having copied your line; and, used it in this forum... but after all: YOU ARE DEAD, and it should NOT be of any objectionable consequence to you in your current unchallenging position and among your greatest fans and supporters here on the mudcat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 16 Dec 04 - 12:05 PM ..so..now we have to kick Huey & Louie around?...well..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 18 Jun 06 - 08:57 PM A recent article discovered via Google news: Sharing their near-death experiences Saturday 17 June 2006, 19:19 Makka Time, 16:19 GMT Some people claim out of body experiences during operations Doctors, researchers and patients have gathered near Marseille in southern France for the world's first ever conference dedicated to near-death experiences (NDEs). More than 1,500 delegates including people who claim to have had NDEs are attending the one-day conference, which aims to take stock of the disputed phenomenon in the most scientific way possible. Among them is anaesthetist and intensive care doctor Jean-Jacques Charbonnier, who has taken evidence from several people who claim to have had an NDE. "People who were brain-dead could see what was going on in a waiting room, or around them, in precise detail. We are not talking about an hallucination here because it was quite real," he said. Sonia Barkallah, organiser of the conference, being held in Martigues near Marseille, added: "These are people who have come close to death, whether through an accident or during an operation, and who have brought back from their unconscious state accounts that are quite out of the ordinary. "They are floating above their bodies, they can hear what the doctors are saying about them, they feel themselves getting sucked into a dark tunnel with a bright but not blinding light at the end of it. "At the end of the tunnel they often meet 'light beings' or dead relatives who tell them it is not their time." Scepticism "They are floating above their bodies, they can hear what the doctors are saying about them, they feel themselves getting sucked into a dark tunnel with a bright but not blinding light at the end of it" Sonia Barkallah, conference organiser Articles in respected scientific journals such as Nature and The Lancet have provided a better understanding of NDEs, although there remains considerable scepticism about the phenomenon. In a statement released ahead of the conference, delegates including the respected American psychiatrist Raymond Moody said it was "very important that scientists should be able to conduct research in different disciplines, in particular in neurosciences, without prejudice of any kind". A survey released in 1982 in the United States showed eight million Americans claimed to have experienced an NDE. Controversial Nonetheless, Barkallah said, the phenomenon remains "very controversial, especially in France, where it is difficult to conduct serious research". "I noticed that doctors were very interested in the subject, but that they conducted their research in secret, afraid of being considered quacks," she said. "The aim of this international day is not to prove that there is life after death, it is to show what this can teach us on a human and scientific level," she added. Charbonnier said he frequently felt he could read the minds of his unconscious patients. He told how on one occasion he felt he was being asked to look in a patient's wallet. When he did so, he found a letter from the patient asking to be "unplugged" if he was ever in such a condition. Charbonnier said many people found coming close to death to be a positive experience that left them feeling more altruistic and less attached to material things. AFP |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 18 Jun 06 - 10:09 PM oh, Amos...Amos!....why did I know it had to be you? *grin*.... I had (mercifully) almost forgotten this. So...they had a conference and had many reports and nodded wisely to each other. Perhaps those who have been abducted by aliens will have a conference also..... No doubt Astrologers have more than one conference a year. We sceptics seldom have conferences, as we 'doubt' it will do any good, and it's expensive to travel..*grin* Anyway, I read a lot of this again, and WOW, I sure was impressed with my highly refined critiques and analysis of the flaws involved in wishful thinking!!! I didn't know I was so blamed insightful! *giggle* ....you can revive this thread again, Amos....in, oh...I think 6-7 years would be ok... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jun 06 - 10:23 PM You sceptics don't need to have conferences, Bill, because you are armoured by the sheer concrete of a fixed attitude that needs inquire no further.... ;-) It's wonderful already knowing it ALL, after all, isn't it? So neat and orderly, in a mental sense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 19 Jun 06 - 05:33 PM you have it backwards, Little Hawk...we don't know it all- we are just sure YOU don't.. ;>) and you will persist in that silly 'closed mind/fixed attitude' myth. We just don't buy into the Red Queen Conceptual Melangé (believing in 6 impossible things before breakfast) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Jun 06 - 05:44 PM The only things I absolutely BELIEVE, Bill are things like...that I'm touching this keyboard I'm typing on and that I exist. Stuff like that. I think it's very probable that people have souls that survive death...so I may tend to believe in it...but I don't KNOW it. You give me the impression that you KNOW people don't have souls, you KNOW there are no sasquatches, you KNOW there is no God, and you don't know any of those things. You merely suppose so, because it pleases you to see it that way. The stuff you KNOW is very similar to the stuff I and everybody else knows...meaning, that which we can experience directly and with no remaining doubt whatsoever. Is belief knowledge? I think so. The rest is opinion and supposition, based on partial knowledge or an emotional predisposition of some kind. People tend to believe what they want to believe, but they only KNOW what they KNOW, and it's pretty much the same as what most other people know. The only reason we frequently disagree about various esoteric stuff is that our emotional suppositions about it are different, and I know that. Do you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 19 Jun 06 - 06:15 PM I don't know how I gave you 'that impression'. *grin*...I have said dozens of times that all I do is object to seeming claims of people who say THEY know. I have my suspicions about some of those things..(the feeling that I'd risk a dollar bet on it) All the stuff about **knowing** is really hard to pin down, as it is hard to get everyone to agree on a clear, hard, fast, unambiguous definition of precisely what it means to "know". My brand of scepticism simply holds a high standard for wild claims. ....but you begin with "I think it's very probable that people have souls that survive death."...wow...I did read that you say you don't KNOW this, and of course, that's one that is pretty hard to even define a test for...but how do you calculate that it is 'probable'? Even 'very' probable? In my view, all one can DO is 'believe' in something like that. There are no proofs, odds, calculations, or even descriptions of HOW it could possibly work. It seems like 99.9% wishful thinking, based on subjective attitudes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Jun 06 - 06:33 PM It merely seems probable to me, Bill, based on a lifetime of varied experience and association. It did not seem probable when I was a 15-year-old. I was an atheist at 15, and I believed in nothing but conventional science. With the passage of time that changed. For you to understand why, you would have to have lived my life. All of it. Your belief that there is no soul is just as subjective and arbitrary as any other opinion out there about the matter. It is not based on evidence, it's based on an emotional predisposition on your part. You'd rather believe that what you can't see or measure on any manmade instrument (as far as you know) doesn't exist. But you don't know it doesn't. You don't, in fact, know anything about it. Your belief is based on an arbitrary prejudice, and you're happy with your belief. None of us knows everything, but everyone seems to enjoy acting as if they did. That's how emotional insecurity plays itself out in people, and it is the source of much prejudice and strife. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 19 Jun 06 - 07:12 PM "Your belief that there is no soul is just as subjective and arbitrary as any other opinion out there about the matter. It is not based on evidence, it's based on an emotional predisposition on your part." sorry, LH...that simply is not how it works. First, I do ***NOT**** "believe there is no soul"...I doubt! That is, none of the claims and/or reasons FOR the notion feel solid and convincing. It is too important a concept to just nod and say "sure, that sounds nice" And my doubt is not "subjective and arbitrary"....it is based on 50 years of evaluating many, many ideas, claims, definitions, arguments, and supposed 'proofs'. You say I'd have to have lived all of your life to understand why you DO believe. No doubt that is true. At some point you 'had experiences' that led you from doubt to acceptance....but I venture that those experiences required interpretation and contemplation; both of which are subject to ...ummmmmm...subjectivity. It's not like you have pictures and recordings and artifacts to pass around. Stuff happens to us at times...sometimes very intense stuff. I have NO doubt that you have had such experiences....I just can't base my opinions on your experiences. I have had intense, clear dreams that made me wonder about what my 'mind' conjured up....but I know many ways to explain them that does NOT require positing para-normal phenomena which I can't repeat. I am in awe of what the complexity of the brain/mind can do, but I see regularly new 'scientific' explanations of how it can happen, and I seem to see a trend...*smile*....I don't want to detract from the experiences of others, but I can't...so far... see how they affect ME. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: John O'L Date: 19 Jun 06 - 08:21 PM And please give some evidence that is at least in principal testable. - Pied Piper, 10 Aug 04 The problem was summed up in the opening post of this thread. That is an impossible ask, as we see. It all depends on personal experiences, which may or may not be purely the result of provoked or random chemical reactions in the brain. Which way you lean will depend on how the composition of chemicals in your head is balanced. It's all in your glands |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 19 Jun 06 - 08:38 PM I suggest it is the other way around, John O' -- glands have a lot to do with the beliefs in which they are carried. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Jun 06 - 12:00 AM Okay, Bill, you doubt there is a soul. That's fine. But why do you doubt it? Why would you have any opinion on the matter at all????? I bet there are lots of people in the history of the world who didn't bother doubting OR believing in the soul. They had their minds on other stuff instead. Why are you drawn...like a fly to a fresh...um..you know...whenever a discussion comes up about the soul, sasquatches, UFOs, OBE's, telepathy, and other unusual stuff like that? You have a more than normal interest in such matters...from the negative viewpoint. You are immediately drawn in, keen with the desire to make it plain that you DON'T believe in such things...or you DOUBT them pretty strenuously. Why? Another 500 people might give it a momentary glance, think, oh...hmmm...well, that doesn't interest me a lot...and they'd move on. No, Bill, you are attracted with a certain zeal to such subjects, as is Clinton, and a few other individuals here, and the zeal is a negative zeal. It is a desire to debunk and in many cases to ridicule certain things that push your buttons for some reason....and they are things you are not really in a position to debunk, because you honestly don't know whether or not there is a soul, whether or not there are alien vessels visiting the Earth, whether or not Bigfoot exists. You don't have a friggin' clue! You just have a kneejerk reaction, and you can't wait to express it and make it heard. That's what's irritating about it. You guys are as dependable as mosquitos or chiggers. You can always be depended on to show up at the picnic and start biting when certain subjects like this come up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 20 Jun 06 - 12:16 AM The real question is, who or what is watching and participating in those real clear dreams, Bill. There's the little man behind the curatin, right there, watching 'em. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 20 Jun 06 - 10:02 AM I do ***NOT**** "believe there is no soul"...I doubt! Hmmm ... this reminds me of something I found online the other day. Liked it so much I made a poster of it and hung it over my desk for inspiration. Went like this - There are 4 ways to bless something or someone, including yourself -- to Affirm (ie I bless the beauty of this tree); to Appreciate (ie thank you for helping me); to Admire (I like your new car!) and to Anticipate (it's going to be a wonderful day!). People who make a point of blessing the things they like and want in their lives, every day, find themselves happier, healthier, more satisfied, confident, prosperous, loving and successful human beings. In remarkably short order, too! On the other hand, there are 4 ways to curse something or someone, including yourself -- to doubt, to blame, to criticize and to worry. Unfortunately, most people spend their lives doubting, blaming, criticizing and worrying. People are, generally speaking, much more comfortable with and practiced at cursing than blessing. They have no idea just how powerful their own thoughts, expectations, and emotions really are! So their heads are always filled with negativity, which they empower even more by speaking it aloud and spreading it around to anyone who listens. Then they sit back and wonder why they are unhappy, why life always seems so difficult, why nothing seems to go easily, why they never seem to have what they want, why they have so little energy and enthusiasm for life. Just a little food for thought ... Well, a little more "blessing" and a lot less "cursing", and just wait and see what'll happen! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 20 Jun 06 - 10:22 AM Oops I forgot ... And my doubt is not "subjective and arbitrary"....it is based on 50 years of evaluating many, many ideas, claims, definitions, arguments, and supposed 'proofs'. Yes. Even after 50 years of mental gymnastics, you are still full of doubt, still cursing the essence of your existence. Well, that's because you're using the wrong tool, Bill. You're never going to discover the truth about these matters using only your head. THe mind is a wonderful tool, but a very poor master. Most people's minds are like runaway horses -- untrained, unrestrained and galloping full speed ahead. Into disaster. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 20 Jun 06 - 11:42 AM gee, golly, Little Hawk...I seem to pushed one of YOUR buttons. That was pretty harsh. ...you ask me... "But why do you doubt it? Why would you have any opinion on the matter at all?????"...I have answered this for you before, in various ways....but- one more time. Because the world is full of folks pushing opinions on the matter who have no more access to ultimate information on it all than I do!< Because superstition, wishful thinking and careless reasoning are being palmed off as 'insights' and 'truths', and people are being hurt, deluded, cheated, misled, misinformed, tricked, lulled, and otherwise fed concepts, beliefs and dubious information that creates much of the worlds woes. Now, that being said, 'some' of this is relatively harmless and even understandable in view of our history and being only a few decades out of tens of thousands of years into being able to sort it out clearly. It is not easy to substitute research and work for quick "knee-jerk" (to quote a friend) responses to 'interesting' experiences and ideas. I repeat....(but will no doubt be mis-heard again)...I am not in the business of proving that this...or that...claim is absolutely **wrong**, but merely showing that claims need substantiation beyond what is usually presented. I want, when I object, question or complain about certain notions to merely leave the alternative view nearby, in hopes that fence-sitters will think twice. In spite of what you keep pegging me with, I'd LOVE to see certain things shown to be true. I just don't choose to buy into them blindly. oh, daylia...re:" you are still full of doubt, still cursing the essence of your existence" ...piffle! I get along fine with my existence, especially since I detect no 'essence' to contend with one way or another. *grin* Amos...I have seen the wonderful metaphor of the relevance of "the man behind the curtain"....it's a pity there aren't more little dogs available. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Jun 06 - 12:09 PM Right, Bill. So you have an emotional ax to grind on the matter...and that's why it pushes my buttons. I can feel your emotional ax. It's disturbing to my peace of mind. Clinton has an even bigger emotional ax of that sort than you do...far bigger in fact...and it makes him very aggressive, hostile, callous, insulting, and dismissive toward anyone who believes in or expresses interest in something that he doesn't believe in. Behind such an emotional ax is a past pain or fear of some kind, covered over with armour, and that armour expresses itself in an attack upon whatever reminds him of what caused the original pain or fear. You have stated yourself that you are worried that people will be "hurt, deluded, cheated, misled, misinformed, tricked, lulled, and otherwise fed concepts, beliefs and dubious information that creates much of the worlds woes." That worries you bigtime! Well, it worries me too, Bill, but I guess not quite as much as it worries you...or I don't spread it around quite so widely as you do. I worry about religious fundamentalists and false gurus cheating and misleading people, sure! But I don't worry about every person in the world who believes in the soul or life after death or reincarnation cheating people. It would be damn silly to worry about that, in my opinion. Most people who believe in the soul or reincarnation or life after death are not out to mislead or cheat anyone and they are totally harmless...and they may be right. I worry about governments misleading people. I worry about advertisors misleading people. I do not worry about someone who swears he saw a sasquatch in the woods misleading people. LOL! What harm can he possibly do? I do not worry about someone who says he saw an alien vehicle misleading people. (I saw what I believe was probably alien vehicles on 2 occasions.) Even if he is mistaken...or whatever...what harm can it do? Bill, I think your worrying is being aimed in unproductive and rather trivial directions, that's what I think. Worry about stuff that actually matters. Worry about religious cult leaders, governments, business people, lawmakers, people with the power to affect others in large numbers...don't waste your time worrying about every private individual who believes he has a soul or thinks he has seen a sasquatch or an alien vehicle. Get your priorities in order, that's what I say. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Jun 06 - 12:39 PM Oh, dear...somep'n went seriously wrong with my italics code in that last post... [Is that aboutwhat you wanted?] clone |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 20 Jun 06 - 12:47 PM In affairs of the heart or of the spirit, a well-ordered, well-disciplined doubt can be just as harmful as a mad falsehood. But one thing is for sure, I think. The only way to come to terms with the subject is to be true to what you yourself have seen and observed to be true, to take ownership and responsibility for your own integrity, and to seek to grow where you can. Bill is doing that. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Jun 06 - 01:53 PM Yes, he is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Donuel Date: 20 Jun 06 - 02:38 PM What the bleep do we know. There is more energy, dimensions and matter than we can see or yet sense by any current technological means... but we know it is there because gravity "gives it's presence away". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 20 Jun 06 - 03:05 PM Well, according to the 4-part formula for cursing given above, to doubt one's own soul, in effect, curses it. Interesting. :-] |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 20 Jun 06 - 04:58 PM LH..I don't worry over the small stuff, but it often gets mixed with the important stuff. Here in Mudcat, I respond to what I see that 'seems' to be indicative of a pattern....especially a pattern that influences serious aspects of daily life...(astrology, religion, conspiracy theories...etc.) Of course every little belief doesn't overtly harm anyone! *smile* I see on another thread that some folks are going to 'celebrate' the solstice with some traditional ceremonies. They do not announce that they 'believe' that Wiccan-type ceremonies are in fact efficacious, and I am not inclined to worry about whether they do or not.....If they WERE to proclaim that they have real access to supernatural 'powers' and were affecting life and society, I might be concerned. and, you know...*I* don't bring these issues up....I don't go seeking put-downs of various sacred cows and start threads mocking them; I just try to shine a bit of light on stuff that appears. Besides, I don't like the sneering attitude of many of the sites whose basic direction I agree with! but, I did accidently stumble onto one site that has a pretty interesting, non-agressive approach to some of this thinking. It has a LOT of intelligent quotations and thought provoking writing on (mostly) the religious issues. http://www.positiveatheism.org/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 20 Jun 06 - 05:17 PM *mulling over how 'doubting' my soul can curse it if, in fact, it turns out there was none*... I do, as a matter of fact, use the word 'soul' at times...it expresses a feeling and a depth of concern, and metaphorically conveys something....but no one who knows me well assumes I am granting some metaphysical 'reality' to the idea. It is personal, poetic and full of whatever emotion *I* choose to grant it under certain circumstances.....sometimes it is hard to find another word... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Jun 06 - 06:31 PM Many people use "soul" in that sense, Bill. In fact I think we all use it that way sometimes. I think I already know all the positive atheist arguments. I was using them all myself for years and years... ;-) They mostly hinge on a misunderstanding of the nature of "God". That is, they basically attempt to explain away a limitless infinity by treating it as various limited concepts. They all make perfect sense within their own little self-feeding loop of logic, and that's why they are so compelling. Believe me, I know. ;-) As long as you accept various other people's primitive notions of "God" as the only viable definitions of "God", then it's easy to shoot down the idea of God using logic. God knows, I did it all through my feckless youth. When one is 19 years old one assumes one knows everything, after all... (grin) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 20 Jun 06 - 07:07 PM Now, you see, LH...therein lies a major difference between us *grin*...when I was 19, I had just spent a year in college, had gotten married, and was SURE I knew almost nothing! Philosophy was exhilarating, but stupifying...as was a wife. Never got over it....I always have been aware how little I knew, but I was smart, and was also aware of how little everyone else knew. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Jun 06 - 07:15 PM Yeah, Bill, the truth is we all know very little... ;-) But most 19 year olds don't see themselves that way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: freda underhill Date: 21 Jun 06 - 04:36 AM I recommend an interesting book by Craig Mitchell, an Australian ambulance officer. As an ambulance officer his job was assisting in reviving people, and over the years he gathered stories from many survivors, some of who had "near death experiences". His book tells many of the first hand accounts of those people who died, were resuscitated, and had an account of an other world experience. NEAR DEATH STORIES FROM THE OTHER SIDE published by Mandarin 1996 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: freda underhill Date: 21 Jun 06 - 04:57 AM Here is an account of an experience I had some years ago: Twenty five years ago, on a Sunday evening, I got a phone call with some bad news. My close friend Julie, mother of four young children, had just died. She had been driving her car along a country road, and had looked behind her to the two young children in the back seat, we think. She was hit by a moving train, went into a coma and died. The two children were unhurt and were found wandering in a field nearby. Julie was in a coma for three days before dying. Julie and I had previously shared a large house in Burwood in Sydney - three families lived communally. We shared cooking, childcare, and lots of good times. We had mulberry trees out the front and back, and made mulberry pies, crumbles, tarts and jam. She was an incredibly kind and good natured person, and a very good friend. At the time of the accident she had moved further north and was living in Queensland on a farm. I cried for hours that night, in shock at the news, angry thoughts ripping through me about the injustice of her death, how would her husband manage with the kids on his own, and running a business, why someone like her was taken so young (early 30s) and why such a lovely person should die. Finally, in the early hours of the morning, I had cried myself empty of any other thoughts or feelings. I just lay in the darkness, exhausted, just sort of empty of anything. The bedside radio next to me turned on (by itself) and I heard julie's voice and felt her presence as some lovely classical music softly played on the radio. She said "don't worry, I'm fine, I'm fine". I rolled over, turned the radio off, turned it on again and off again, just checking to myself that it responded to being switched on and off, & trying to work out why it turned on. I went and took two herbal sleeping tablets and went to sleep. I found out a year later at a reunion of her friends that two other women had had similar experiences on the same night. One had walked into the backyard at night, and had seen Julie hovering in the air in front of her - Julie didnt say anything but extended comfort. This woman was extremely shocked as this did not fit in with her preconceptions, she didnt believe in ghosts, or angels. The other was a young woman who had been a neighbour of Julie's in Queensland - Julie came to her and asked her to take care of the children. This young woman helped considerably with the childcare until Julie's father remarried a few years later. Anyone not present can analyse these experiences however they want. But that is speculation which may be very logical and commendable. but I say after having an experience like this, it would be illogical for me to believe that Julie's life was over when she was hit by the truck. freda |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Wolfgang Date: 21 Jun 06 - 02:20 PM Conference program If you read the program and scan the list of contributors you see that this is not a conference devoted to an experience and all possible explanations but to just one particular explanation. Period. It is a conference of believers into afterlife. If I read the world's first ever conference dedicated to near-death experiences (NDEs) I wonder how gullible they think we are. The International Association for Near-Death Studies makes yearly conferences since 1993. Conferences like the one posted above are nothing new. Pim van Lommel, one of the more serious of the contributors of the conference has published an article about NDEs in Lancet. You can read it here and see how convincing it sounds to you. This is the serious stuff, most of rest is journalism. The conference organiser is a journalist herself. That's the level of argumentation I'd expect. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 21 Jun 06 - 02:28 PM another viwepoint |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 21 Jun 06 - 02:33 PM Oh, my gracious! *grin* This IS the internet/WWW....lots of viewpoints are out there! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 21 Jun 06 - 02:38 PM The researcher in Wolfgang's link makes an interesting, carefully tentative conclusion: "With lack of evidence for any other theories for NDE, the thus far assumed, but never proven, concept that consciousness and memories are localised in the brain should be discussed. How could a clear consciousness outside one's body be experienced at the moment that the brain no longer functions during a period of clinical death with flat EEG?22 Also, in cardiac arrest the EEG usually becomes flat in most cases within about 10 s from onset of syncope.29,30 Furthermore, blind people have described veridical perception during out-of-body experiences at the time of this experience.31 NDE pushes at the limits of medical ideas about the range of human consciousness and the mind-brain relation. Another theory holds that NDE might be a changing state of consciousness (transcendence), in which identity, cognition, and emotion function independently from the unconscious body, but retain the possibility of non-sensory perception.7,8,22,28,31 Research should be concentrated on the effort to explain scientifically the occurrence and content of NDE. Research should be focused on certain specific elements of NDE, such as out-of-body experiences and other verifiable aspects. Finally, the theory and background of transcendence should be included as a part of an explanatory framework for these experiences. " I have pointed out this gap in models versus phenomena often when the subject comes up in threads. In Wolfgang's link alone there are two explicit (and a dozen implicit) documented cases of specific particulars being perceived and later verified, by a person who was clinically dead or completely comatose, but who reported an out of body capacity for accurate perception (at a time when the body had, apparently, NO capacity for perception as generally understood). I have used the analogy in the past of believing that "all thought and perception is brain-generated" being akin to believing that your blue plastic cordless telephone, with its mysterious circuits and chips, actually contains the ability to generate all kinds of communications and opinions, if only you could figure out how the wiring worked. The analogy gets extended in the present context: when one's phone gets broken and shattered, the owner is still quite capable of generating perceptions, opinions, and communications, if less able to deliver them over a distance because the phone is broken. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 21 Jun 06 - 02:40 PM Nothing beats direct experience, guys. Beside that all else is just a lot of hot air. Remember, because one believes something does not mean that one is out to PROVE it to anyone else. In my experience it's mainly just sceptics who are hung up on proving or disproving things that otherr people believe...mostly because it's a question of proving that they are right and someone else is wrong. That's what the ego loves to spend its petty little time doing. And it makes no difference whatsoever to anyone else but that ego. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 21 Jun 06 - 03:11 PM Now, George, don't be rude. It messes up your hair. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 21 Jun 06 - 04:28 PM Why are you so concerned about my hair lately? ;-) I know it's gorgeous, but.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 282RA Date: 21 Jun 06 - 04:47 PM If everything is spirit then there is no such thing as spirit and the very concept wouldn't exist. We only know what "spirit" means because we have "matter" to differentiate it from. As for Kirlian photography, who knows what the hell that is? One reason I loathe discussion about Kirlian photography is that instantly we have to start wading through every self-professed guru's crap about spirit and matter when nobody knows WHAT Kirlian photography is photographing, if anything. We'll never know what spirit or matter are since they are only our mental constructs to deal with something we do not understand. They are only labels and are utterly useless. The value of proof is that it tells one if something is useless or not. Without proof, I don't believe. To believe without proof is worse than useless--it is dangerous and highly irresponsible behavior for anyone who regards themselves as intelligent. Believing without proof and even disdaining proof is something I expect from George W. Bush and you can see where it has gotten us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 21 Jun 06 - 05:13 PM You want to know more about kirlian photography, AR282? Look it up. Read some books. ;-) How hard can that be? Sounds to me like you'd rather just not know... Yes, Spirit is reputed to be everything...at different frequency levels of vibration. If you lower the frequencies until you reach the rather low frequency spectrum of what we perceive as "matter" then spirit is seen as matter....in the form of gases or liquids or solids. Gases are at a higher vibratory level than liquids, and liquids are at a higher vibratory level than solids. Thought is also an aspect of Spirit, and it's at a way higher level than matter. Radio waves and magnetism are other aspects of Spirit, also at a higher vibratory level than matter. Energy and matter are both Spirit, and all Spirit is a singularity, but it manifests in billions of different ways. The only reason it bothers you to hear any of this is because you don't already believe it. And I couldn't care less whether anyone is capable of proving any of it to you or not. I'm not involved in a police investigation or a scientific research project here, I'm talking on the Internet with opinionated people who are wedded to maintaining their present opinions, come hell or high water, for psychological reasons pertaining to their own sense of ego and security, and most of them don't have a clue why they are so motivated. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 21 Jun 06 - 05:32 PM "If you don't agree with me and my meta-pantheistic generalities, you are obviously stubborn, closed-minded and stuck in narrow, outmoded viewpoints" reputed? RePUTED? *grin*... GW Bush is 'reputed' to have opinions that weren't force-fed to him...but....some may doubt! Mr 282 is very close to the way of it....if everything is sorta defined as 'God' or 'spitit', then you really have diluted all definitions beyond usefulness. golly, Little Hawk....with broad statements like that, you remind me of an old limerick: "There was faith healer of Deal, Who said, "Although pain isn't real, When I sit on a pin, And it punctures my skin, I dislike what I fancy I feel". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 282RA Date: 21 Jun 06 - 06:48 PM >>And I couldn't care less whether anyone is capable of proving any of it to you or not. I'm not involved in a police investigation or a scientific research project here, I'm talking on the Internet with opinionated people who are wedded to maintaining their present opinions, come hell or high water, for psychological reasons pertaining to their own sense of ego and security, and most of them don't have a clue why they are so motivated.<< I can't believe how often you spew this crap and nobody calls you on it. It drips with arrogance and holier-than-thou posturing. And quit tossing out "ego" like it was some kind of insult. We all have one and, as hard as this may be for you to accept, that includes you. I'm opinionated and I have no trouble admitting it. You talk like you're the only one with answers and nobody wants to listen because our evil terrible egos get in your way. Maybe if you had proof of what you are saying, you'd make more headway. But then-pffft!--proof. Proof is for egotistic losers. Everyone should just put their egos aside and let you lead them around by the nose. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: bobad Date: 21 Jun 06 - 06:57 PM "Yes, Spirit is reputed to be everything...at different frequency levels of vibration. If you lower the frequencies until you reach the rather low frequency spectrum of what we perceive as "matter" then spirit is seen as matter....in the form of gases or liquids or solids. Gases are at a higher vibratory level than liquids, and liquids are at a higher vibratory level than solids. Thought is also an aspect of Spirit, and it's at a way higher level than matter. Radio waves and magnetism are other aspects of Spirit, also at a higher vibratory level than matter. Energy and matter are both Spirit, and all Spirit is a singularity, but it manifests in billions of different ways." HEH, HEH, HEH great troll bait LH. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 21 Jun 06 - 07:05 PM No, my friend, proof is not for "egotistical losers", proof is for matters which CAN be proven. I am not interested in trying to prove or disprove anything that you and I simply do not have not the wherewithal to prove or disprove. And we don't. Face it. We (meaning someone who is technically qualified) can prove whether someone's DNA is on a knife blade. We can prove whether a solution contains arsenic. We can prove whose fingerprints are on a doorknob. But we CANNOT prove whether or not Spirit is real...because if it is, the evidence that it is will not be accessible in the physical world...and the physical world is the only available arena of what is normally termed "proof" by people who demand proof. Aside from direct personal experiences, that is... But direct personal experiences are no proof to anyone except the one who does experience them. So they are not the kind of proof a sceptic requires. I never said I had PROOF of the Spirit, 282RA. I never said anyone did. You're the one who appears to think he has proof that there is no Spirit. And you don't. And you never will. Your position is no more defensible that is mine. I say that I think it very probable that Spirit exists. You, I presume, say it doesn't. Where's YOUR proof? ;-) Like me, you don't have any. And you never will. I'm not trying to convert you into a believer in anything. I don't care what you believe. That's your business. I would just like you to have a measure of respect for beliefs that differ from yours, and leave people alone if they have a belief that differs from yours. That's what religious freedom and every kind of freedom is based upon...respect for differing beliefs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 21 Jun 06 - 07:06 PM Yeah, bobad. For sure. ;-) Statements like that just drive conventional minds into meltdown. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 21 Jun 06 - 07:15 PM Regarding ego, 282etc, of COURSE I have an ego too! It's what keeps me coming back incessantly to this forum and having these contentious arguments with people like you and BillD, getting in one last word, knowing perfectly well all the while that it's a completely vain and futile futile exercise...but it's just too irresistible. It's my immature little ego that can't resist getting in one more WHACK at you guys...because my opinion of your attitude is identical to your opinion of mine. We are both in the grip of ego reactions, and I know it. I ever I can silence this chattering ego of mine, you will not find me here arguing about these matters at all anymore, I can assure you. I'll have much better things to do. I laugh at you guys, and I laugh at myself too. We are all victims of the very same weaknesses. Egos playing wargames against egos, seeking verbal victories that are meaningless. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 21 Jun 06 - 08:40 PM I think if one cannot muster one proof of spirit, perhaps 40 proof spirits is in order. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: freda underhill Date: 21 Jun 06 - 09:00 PM A young ventriloquist is touring the clubs and stops to entertain at a bar in a small town. He's going through his usual run of silly athiest jokes when a big man with glasses and a smartass expression in the fourth row stands on his chair and says, "OK jerk, I've heard just about enough of your denigrating athiest jokes. What makes you think you can stereotype skeptics that way? What do a person's philosophical opinions have to do with their worth as a human being? It's guys like you who keep men like me from being respected at the pub and in my community, of reaching my full potential as a person... because you and your kind continue to perpetuate discrimination against not only athiests but skeptics at large... all in the name of humor." Flustered, the ventriloquist begins to apologize, when the man pipes up, "You stay out of this mister, I'm talking to that little f..ker on your knee!" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 21 Jun 06 - 09:22 PM Heh! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 22 Jun 06 - 10:51 AM I saw this in yesterday's paper....I could hardly wait until it came online today...*grin* Today the drycleaners--tomorrow the world! You will ALL eventually understand....(well, there are a couple I worry about..) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 22 Jun 06 - 11:13 AM I have always been a big fan of Zippy's. ;-) He is a sweet and innocent soul, adrift in a chaotic world...and he has a really neat outfit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: freda underhill Date: 22 Jun 06 - 11:30 AM and speaking of neat outfits.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 22 Jun 06 - 11:33 AM Great comic -- LOL! Hey Bill, please don't worry. Worry just 'curses' 'em, remember? ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 22 Jun 06 - 07:32 PM What, me worry? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 22 Jun 06 - 07:35 PM Now there is a face to inspire confidence. Almost presidential. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 22 Jun 06 - 07:48 PM almost? Why, I'd swear.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: John O'L Date: 22 Jun 06 - 08:02 PM They are only labels and are utterly useless. I like the cut of your jib 282RA, but you let yourself down with wild generalisations like that one. They are labels for concepts which are not yet clearly defined, and as such are immeasurably useful. If not for the labels we would not be able to discuss the concepts. ...only our mental constructs to deal with something we do not understand. 'Only'? Aren't you being a little dismissive? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: John O'L Date: 22 Jun 06 - 09:31 PM I am also not entirely at ease with the logic that says: Fundamentalism is evil Faith leads to fundamentalism Faith must therefore be evil. There are may degrees of faith. Hysterical faith lends itself to political manipulation and fundamentalism. Moderate faith should not be thus tarnished. There are many poisons which, taken in small doses, are medicines. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 22 Jun 06 - 10:07 PM Faith in stupid things leads to stupid results, faith in wise things leads to good results. The reason fundamentalism has a bad name is because it's rather common for fundamentalists to believe in stupid things, such as: "Our way is the only true path. Those who don't follow it are doomed." Exclusivity and intolerance are not indicative of spiritual wisdom. Tolerance toward differing faiths is. The spiritually wise do not attempt to convert other people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 22 Jun 06 - 11:00 PM Even Steven Colbert admits, "I believe there are MANY ways to accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior....". :D A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 22 Jun 06 - 11:06 PM For sure. There are many ways to do anything. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: John O'L Date: 22 Jun 06 - 11:20 PM 'There's a lotta good ways to be wicked...' - Hezekiah Jones? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 23 Jun 06 - 08:01 AM Napolean Hill refers to God as Infinite Intelligents, the First Cause, the Collective Subconscious, the Universal Intelligents. Whatever the rest of you wish to call him/she/it is a subjective issue of your own mind, until you call on the spiritual powers of your collective mind, you will be working from your subjective mind only. Mr. Hill refers to the synthetic imagination and the creative imagination. By the way, It is not just a term I made up, it is the most real thing out there and will convince anyone beyond a doubt that there is a SEPERATE higher intelligence being (beings) beyond our being and that we are not alone, either in the thoughts we send or the infomation we channel. the synthetic imagination (man's physical mind for example), weighs things againsty all that it knows only, it deduces some type of conclusion from available facts only, it is grounded in the physical and the known world largely. Things must be "thought out" here, retieved from available ideas mulled over in detail through trial and error only. With this mind, it is mainly a thinking and retrieving mind and a finite world. Facts come from where-ever the brain can find them and nowhere else. This mind makes mistakes and often lacks confidence and the ability for guidance and/or direct. This mind stumbles, makes mistakes, fails to act, acts of erroneous information, because it is not being guided by a higher cause our developed in its/our confidence and/or will. Now, the creative imagination, works entirely different. Rather than mull over dull and available ideas only, and merely sort them for usefullness, using man's small limited brain capacity. the Creative imagination takes the finite mind of man and links it directly to infinite intelligents in the form of an affirmation or prayer. Like the Creator the creative imagination CREATES..... that is after all the prupose of God..... to create. And everything that he creates is benefical and good. the creative imagination has the added ability of making all our thoughts deeds and action right and perfectly correct, in the most integrated and devine way. When we let go of our thoughts, and act in love and faith on our ideas, through faith in a higher invisible idea guiding us, we are asking GOD to execute our will. We are calling on the Creative, rather than the synthetic imagination, and we are finding the correct answers at every turn and acting upon them. We are also drawing ourselves closer to the divine, which in turn is expanding our consicousness, brain power and will unto itself and ourself simultanously throuhg timeless interchange. God the collective, begins growing, the creative imagination, becomes a channel to which interaction becomes benifical. Master the 13 principles in Naploean Hill's Book, Think and Grow Rich. and God will appear to you in you thoughts, deed and and life continously, you will get a since of oneness and of purpose, and you will feel the collective presents of a divine being beyond man's. The "secret" to which Napolena Hill describes in Think and Grow Rich will always be denied, and only avialable to those that are "READY" If you are READY for the infinite intelligents, than the infinite is READY for you. If you aren't than you will be denying it on this message board rather experiencing its exist in you thoughts and intuition. Napolean give a hint of the "secret" a secret to which Thomas Edison used to Create thousand of inventions, on such things like the phongraph, to which there was no previous blueprints or even concepts. All this "stuff" had to come from somewhere. it came from the infintie intellignets and the creative collective subsonscious, whatever you want to call it. I call it GOD!!! The "secret" was used for ever major invention inculding the computer I am type at now. Napaleon HIll's Says reguatrding the secret (infinite intelligents) "the secret cannot be given away because it comes in TWO PARTS." 1. All riches, accomphishment etc. have there beginning in and idea ******IF******you are READY for the secret (infinite intelligents interacting with your state of mind) you already possess i/2 of the secret (infinite intelligents) 2. Therefore you will READILY recognize the other half once IT (INFINITE INTELLIGENTS) enters you mind. The secret is INFINITE INTELLIGENTS. Its not what YOU do in life that gets you down the road of life , it is what INFINITE INTELLIGENTS does for you, because of your STATE OF MIND at all times. Your state of mind and surrendering in postive expectation toward a higher guidance will bring on the infinite intelligents, the 6th sense which is beyond the physical body and is the true body of man and his purpose in the cosmos. And yes, it is real to those that are READY to experience their own higher self and their own creative non-physical/spritual mind, and the creator that is behind that mind always. If you knew who walked beside you at all times you could never doubt anything ever again. Also ponder the following prayer: From God whom cometh all Good and perfect Gifts With greatful hearts we thank thee for thy blessings Teach us to enjoy thy blessings with love and thanksgiving As long as thou giveth us strenght teach us to use it For thy love, honor and Glory. Amen (President and General George Washington) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 23 Jun 06 - 08:06 AM opps!! I meant "grateful hearts" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 23 Jun 06 - 09:11 AM You're absolutely right, Dewey. Pedantic little minds will, of course, leap with joy upon some of your misspellings (as if it mattered!) and use those little shreds of excuses to reject out of hand the value of the whole sum and substance of what you have just said....because that's the way pedantic little minds operate. Nevertheless, you are absolutely right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 23 Jun 06 - 10:18 AM Well, Little Hawk, looks like you and Dewey have sewed this whole thread right up, and the rest of the Cosmos is also in the bag thanks to you two intrepid analysts. Not an inch of ground uncovered. Staked, strung and fenced, on 16-inch centers, purdy as you please, with wall board aligned, screwed, mudded down and painted up as pretty as you please. Thank God for that. Now we can turn our attention to more important stuff, like hair coloring and weight loss. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 23 Jun 06 - 10:31 AM I doubted, most painfully, all my life. Till just a few years ago, when I found myself in deep personal crisis, in big BIG trouble, literally at my wit's end, helpless, hopeless, just twisted in pain and grief and fear with no other option in sight -- and I found myself praying for help just like I did as a little kid. Desperately. As a last resort. "Jesus, if you really exist at all, and if you really love me like they've always told me you do, please PLEASE PLEASE TAKE THIS AWAY FROM ME NOW" And lo and behold, there He was, manifest in perfect Light and Beauty and Power and Joy, in the privacy and sanctity of my own inner vision. Right arm outstretched, commanding, healing, blessing. And so it was. The pain was gone. The fear was gone. And I was just blown away with shock and gratitude. Words cannot even begin to describe how it felt ... 8-D In the wisdom and power of that 30-second healing vision (and a couple more in the months that followed), He taught me more than I could have hoped to learn in an entire lifetime about spirituality, about Him, about myself. What was most astounding to me at the time was how very well he knew me! He knew exactly what I was experiencing and thinking and feeling, what I'd experienced and thought and felt all my life in fact. He knew exactly what I needed, and how to give it in a way that would have the most meaning, the most healing power, the most wide-ranging and lasting and beneficial effects, for me, personally. ANd that experience changed me forever. IN fact, I am still benefitting in new ways, still learning and deriving new inspiritation from that encounter. And others like it in the years that followed -- not just involving Jesus, but the many many other spiritual Beings who guide and bless and protect and benefit and uplift me, every single day of my life. As They do for every single one of you, whether you recognize or believe it or not. Thank you so much to Mudcat for the opportunity to share this, to Freda and to others above ..... your willingness to share your own profound, life-changing yet most illogical, controversial and unscientific experiences was what gave me the courage to post this here at all. K Bill, Wolfgang etc etc -- I'm all done. Lock and load! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: bobad Date: 23 Jun 06 - 10:31 AM Some people are fortunate in that they have their edifices completed whereas others are still digging the holes for their foundation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 23 Jun 06 - 10:37 AM *sitting on my hands* (why yes, I did type this with my nose, why do you ask?) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: freda underhill Date: 23 Jun 06 - 10:41 AM more comfy than your toes? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 23 Jun 06 - 10:43 AM (my toes aren't prehensile) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 23 Jun 06 - 10:49 AM (Uncle Charlie was a good typist...he and a bunch of other distant relatives are busy working on the works of Shakespeare, even as we converse) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: bobad Date: 23 Jun 06 - 10:51 AM Well Bill, I see where you get your good looks from. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 23 Jun 06 - 10:53 AM Ooooo ... maybe only the nose Knows! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 23 Jun 06 - 11:05 AM The whole family can sniff out silliness and nonsense pretty well, that's why we occasionally have to sit on our hands. ;>) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 23 Jun 06 - 05:59 PM If I could only train my dachshund to type that way, Bill...just THINK of the pearls of wisdom that would fall on this forum! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 23 Jun 06 - 06:02 PM oh, my yes! Maybe if Chongo drops by, he could offer advice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 23 Jun 06 - 06:08 PM Chongo is always happy to advise. Just ask him. I think he sort of believes in God in a kind of general and vague way...but at the same time, he's not religious. That is, I've never heard of him belonging to or attending any church. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 24 Jun 06 - 09:47 AM I dunno, Bill, that looks like quite the affliction. If snouts like that ran in my family, I wouldn't be wasting precious time sniffin around other people's personal business -- believe me, I'd be sniffin out the causes and possible cures instead. Rhinoplasty, gene therapy, even amputation might be in order. Or maybe you all have something stuck in there, causing the swelling? A buildup of professional airs putting the pressure on? Or maybe a lifetime's worth of giant boogers? Hmmmm - if the latter's the case, I wouldn't even attempt to pick 'em, myself. Y'all could just have 'em extracted. Professionally. Easy enough! And you might even end up with enough , uh, material to fill up a couple of those infamous potholes! On second thought, what kind of tree does your family like best? Apple, perhaps? ; > ) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 24 Jun 06 - 09:48 AM 444! Ha ha HA! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 24 Jun 06 - 11:09 AM You may think it's usable material, but it'snot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 282RA Date: 25 Jun 06 - 10:06 AM >>People who make a point of blessing the things they like and want in their lives, every day, find themselves happier, healthier, more satisfied, confident, prosperous, loving and successful human beings.<< What do you mean "bless" something? And what is your proof that this mysterious "blessing" produces the results you claim? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 282RA Date: 25 Jun 06 - 10:15 AM >>I like the cut of your jib 282RA, but you let yourself down with wild generalisations like that one. They are labels for concepts which are not yet clearly defined, and as such are immeasurably useful. If not for the labels we would not be able to discuss the concepts.<< But most people do not understand the difference between the concept and the label. They assume one is the other and hence Christianity. You can go into any church on a Sunday and listen to some hotshot throwing out words like "spirit" "matter" "God" as though these are completely understandable and have been proven beyond all doubt when a philosopher would instead ask now that we have these labels what are we labeling? And why couldn't we switch the labels around or do away with them altogether? When you assume you know what the label means, you're already wrong. And too many people assume they know what the label means. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 282RA Date: 25 Jun 06 - 10:25 AM >>Napolean Hill refers to God as Infinite Intelligents, the First Cause<< And there Napolean meets his Waterloo. God cannot be a First Cause because that is nothing but an unknowable assumption. Everything we know about causality shows as that it is an endless chain. Every cause is an effect of a previous cause. Every effect serves as a cause for an effect further down the road, so to speak. So a First Cause is an effect of a previous cause that cannot exist since the effect is the First Cause. Hence, a First Cause violates everything we know about causality. It is, in fact, non-causal. If it is non-causal, then it cannot cause anything to happen. It's the old chicken or egg argument all over again. Which came first? Can't have one without the other so which came first? This simple but profound question points out that the very idea of a First Cause is fundamentally flawed. First Cause is a just a label for something we don't understand and lulls us into a false perception that because we have labeled it we must therefore understand it. So we say "god is the First Cause" without ever understanding that we are saying nothing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 25 Jun 06 - 10:28 AM to 'bless' is to brush away gnats with a feather duster, prior to offering the supplicant a coconut. (The 'blessor' must be nude, to show the he is not the source of the gnats) No, wait... I guess that is a blessing in disguise. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 25 Jun 06 - 11:02 AM What do you mean "bless" something? Uh ... according to Websters, to "bless" is to invoke divine care for (ie "Bless your heart!"), to praise, to glorify, to approve, to confer prosperity or happiness upon, to endow, to favour, to hallow or consecrate via religious rite. I meant all of the above, except the "religious rite" bit. To bless something does not require religion or rites. All it requires is a joyful, loving, appreciative heart and mind. And what is your proof that this mysterious "blessing" produces the results you claim? It's not mysterious at all. But sorry, if you want 'proof' you will have to produce it for yourself, via your own personal efforts and experience. No one else can possibly do all that for you. Doggone it, eh? Oh well, as my son says, that's just the Way o'the Road. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 25 Jun 06 - 11:10 AM Oops, almost forgot ... bless you, 282RA! And a full round of blessings on the whole house, too. Hee hee! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Jun 06 - 02:14 PM I think you're misunderstanding my basic perspective on this kind of subject, 282AR. I'm interested in such subjects as "matter and spirit" from a philosophical point of view. I don't belong to any organized religion and I don't consider myself a member of any particular religion or creed. I am not attached to any particular religion's set of rules or dogma. I'm essentially a philosopher by nature. I'm interested in philosophical ideas. All religions contain a great deal of philosophy about life and about human nature, and that's why religions interest me. You keep asking "where's your proof" to me or Daylia or whomever...and I think, "Why would he even be asking that????" Philosophy is a study of hypothetical ideas which are interesting in their own right. The moment one of those ideas becomes provable it's not philosophy anymore...it's a known fact! My tendency to believe that I have a soul...or that souls reincarnate...is a philosophical hypothesis. I don't know that there is any way of proving it, except to experience it consciously. I don't know it for a fact, but I find it a philosophical premise which makes more sense to me than believing that I'm just a temporary consciousness trapped in a dying physical body which will cease when the heart stops beating. A philosopher does not require proof in order to espouse a philosophical theory, and that's all it amounts to. A philosopher enjoys considering alternative philosophical theories, and he will usually like one better than another. That's natural. I like the theory that we have souls which outlive the body. I never claimed to have proof of it, nor would I demand that anyone else provide proof of it. ;-) Such things usually cannot be proven or disproven...but they are interesting and they are worth talking about...and talking about them should not arouse hostility in people who subscribe to a different philosophy, should it? Isn't it more fun to have many philosophies than to only have one? As you can see, I am in favour of freedom of thought on this matter...accordingly I am little inclined to tie myself rigidly to any one set of religious philosophy. I understand your resistance to what you see as religious dogma...as practiced by some people...but if that's what you're fighting against, then I am not your enemy. **** You asked what it means to "bless" something (or someone). That's strictly a matter of personal opinion. Here's what it means to me: It means to send positive thoughts and intentions and feelings toward that something or someone. It works way better than sending negative thoughts, feelings, and intentions...I can tell you that! Try it and see. Any number of examples could be given, but I should think it's so obvious that it's hardly necessary. A "blessing" is simply a positively directed thought, that's all. And positive thoughts lead to positive actions, don't they? A belief in what I think of as "Spirit" is simply a belief in the power and effectiveness of thought to affect life in a great variety of meaningfull ways. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 282RA Date: 25 Jun 06 - 04:02 PM >>Oops, almost forgot ... bless you, 282RA!<< If it sort of means have a nice day, then, thank you, and you as well! And yes, everybody else also. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 282RA Date: 25 Jun 06 - 04:44 PM >>A philosopher does not require proof in order to espouse a philosophical theory<< Actually, he or she does. That's how the philosopher makes the point. This proof is more often than not self-evident. My criticism of a First Cause doctrine depends on self-evident proof--a priori, I suppose you'd call it. I pointed out why the First Cause doctrine simply cannot work: it violates everything we know about causality to the point where it is simply absurd to even classify it as a form of causality. I don't have to get up and prove it. That causality is an endless chain both forward and backward is self-evident unless you have a real world example of something appearing or occurring that was totally uncaused by anything and, of course, there can be no such thing. Hence the a priori nature of the evidence. As for reincarnation, I agree that it is likely and I do have an argument for it. However, its conclusion is not very specific. It does lead us to conclude that consciousness is somehow reborn or recycled in a physical body and that it appears that mind and body are mutually dependent. That means one cannot really exist separately from the other. The implication of this is that neither has any true reality but are manifestations of something more primal, more fundamental but whatever that is, it is not perceivable by us, not experiential. Therefore, it cannot be labeled because language cannot capture it. Therefore, to give it words is to necessarily misunderstand and mischaracterize it. How do we characterize it then? You can't. It's something you feel inside, something you KNOW. However, that part can never be transmitted to another person, it is necessarily limited to first person experience. You give the appearance of grasping that it is experiential but then try to explain it to others at which point you lose it and become another dogmatic preacher. If you understood that it is only something one can know inside beyond language, you would simply leave off at that point. All I can do is demonstrate why a concept doesn't really work but I can't do more than that. It gives the impression I negate everything nihilistically but I don't. There's something beyond the words but I can't express it and if I try, I'll not only be wrong, I'll be dogmatically expressing my beliefs--saying this is how it is but offering no proof. You can only prove what you can prove. Beyond that, it's just your feelings on the matter, at which point you have to back off. You've done as much as can be done. So I don't try to tell others what to believe at that point, I don't have any pipeline enlightenment myself. But I can show them why a superficial position doesn't work and doesn't even scratch the truth. What people do with that is up to them. I don't really know what to do with it either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 25 Jun 06 - 05:03 PM Well, it does mean have a great day, or all the best, or may you always get your money for nothing and your chicks for free -- or whatever thing one might choose to think it means, I suppose. As long as it's a 'good' (ie desirable and beneficial) thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 25 Jun 06 - 05:12 PM PS - thanks comin right back to you as well, 282RA. By the way, hope you don't mind me asking but what does 282RA stand for? (If you're an android and that's your offical |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Jun 06 - 05:15 PM Are you sure you're not just trying to "win the argument" on technical points. 282AR? ;-) I am trying to find common ground with you here, not perpetuate a disagreement... I realize that many of these matters are in fact inexpressible in human language. Nevertheless, there's no harm in trying to express them as best we can. The effort of trying to can produce some great poetry and literature, and that's worthwhile. It seems to me that the scientific community has proposed the notion of a "first event", namely: the Big Bang. They propose that prior to that event there was no perceivable Universe as we know it, but that the Universe as we know it came into being as a result of the Big Bang. I believe they further propose that time itself did not exist prior to that event...time being the measure of an object's travel across a given distance. When there are no separate objects, and thus no distances in between them, there is in effect no time. It's interesting to me how closely that resembles some of the symbolic religious stories in Genesis and various other ancient holy books. I don't think that either science or religion will ever find final explanations for such things, because each explanation simply leads to further questions. It's like trying to find the smallest obervable particle...there tends to always be another smaller one lurking inside it, like the Russian dolls inside Russian dolls. It just depends how closely you are able to look at it. Despite all the facts we can marshall, life and existence remain mysterious. Religion and philosophy are attempts to unravel the mystery. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 282RA Date: 26 Jun 06 - 12:37 PM >>Are you sure you're not just trying to "win the argument" on technical points. 282AR? ;-) I am trying to find common ground with you here, not perpetuate a disagreement...<< You have a knack for taking little jabs. "You sound like me when I was in my twenties" translates into, "Oh, I once thought like you but I was young and foolish but I grew out of it. Too bad you didn't." It rubs a person the wrong way. >>I realize that many of these matters are in fact inexpressible in human language. Nevertheless, there's no harm in trying to express them as best we can.<< It's a doomed venture. Any attempt to express it will be wrong. Why tell people something you know is wrong when you're trying to convey a truth? >>The effort of trying to can produce some great poetry and literature, and that's worthwhile.<< Poetry is generally metaphoric. Expressing truths in abstract that allow the reader to do his or her own processing. You can't just tell people how it is because it will be wrong and you're wrong if you attempt it. You're causing more harm than good if take you as some kind of authority. If you studied Eastern philosophy then you know Buddha was silent on certain matters. Why? Because no words will work except to worsen the situation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Jun 06 - 01:09 PM I don't take myself as some kind of authority. I just enjoy talking about things that interest me. None of us is an authority on these matters, as far as I can see. Yes, I do deliver little jabs sometimes...but we all do that, I think. It's human nature to do so when caught up in the heat of a debate. I find it genuinely intriguing that I might now disagree totally with someone about a matter which I would have agree with them entirely on at another time in my own life (regardless of what age I was at the time). It shows just how capricious and changeable human beings are. The people that really puzzle me, in fact, are the ones who never change their minds about anything from the time they are children till they time they have one foot in the grave. Is such extraordinary consistency indicative of steadfastness...or just sheer stupidity and lack of imagination? I wonder. ;-) I think the fact that people change their minds as time goes on is good...it shows they are willing to be flexible and adapt. I've met people who went from being religious to being atheists, and I've met people who did the exact opposite. In either case it could indicate either a step forward into a greater understanding...or a step backward into some kind of disillusionment or an attempt to find security and "cover up" against further hurt. It could be good or it could be bad...and that would depend entirely on the specific personality of the person in question. In other words: there are both wise and stupid ways of being "religious", and there are both wise and stupid ways of being atheistic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 282RA Date: 26 Jun 06 - 09:15 PM >>By the way, hope you don't mind me asking but what does 282RA stand for?<< It's a long, unintelligible story. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 26 Jun 06 - 11:34 PM wasn't it RA282 for awhile? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 27 Jun 06 - 01:32 AM I keep getting confused too. I thought it was 282AR for a while... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: John O'L Date: 27 Jun 06 - 01:41 AM No Bill, and no Little Hawk, it was Guest AR282 for a while, bless you both. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: freda underhill Date: 27 Jun 06 - 01:58 AM Gesundheit! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: John O'L Date: 27 Jun 06 - 03:01 AM Bless me father, for I have sneezed... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 27 Jun 06 - 07:54 AM Wow, I can't believe the way this thread is shaping up! So many blessings flying about -- I feel more, uh, sacred every time I come here! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Dewey Date: 30 Jun 06 - 06:29 AM Bill, Typing with your head up your rear-end, kind of limits your having a SERIOUS mystical experience. It's like saying there is no such thing as vanilla ice cream, and having the final say on the subject, just because you've never bother trying vanilla ice cream. Have you seriously tried finding God by practicing the 13 principles described in Napolean Hill's Classic Book, Think and Grow Rich? Whether you have or haven't experienced the 6th sense, does not, in one i-oda, change reality. God will APPEAR TO YOU, if you practice these principles and it will totally flip you out. I'm not asking you to take my word for any of this. You cannot take my word until you find God for yourself in you own state of mind. you will either confirm my truth, or deny it based on your attitude of mind, but be aware it is your attitude, not that of the many thousands if not millions out there that are/ or have experienced this very real phenomonon. Try to discover the face of God, like all ancient sages, philisophers, and wisdom teachers as well, you will find wisdom and intergated direction in the presents of God, and the devine spirit of the creation. The "secert' Napolean HIll talks about is denied to all, except those that are "ready" Aristotle, Socrates, Descarte, Voltaire, Mozart, Einstein, Edison, Burbank, Ford, Carnegie, Rockafeller, Emerson, Whitman, etc. etc. were all "READY" Study history and the above philosphers (for a starter) and you will READ IN THEIR BIOGRAPHIES that they ALL agreed on the presents of a Metaphyscial God guiding their every thought and activity. I'm not just touting or preaching here. This stuff is in your College textbooks, Just try taking a philosphy course from a local university if you doubt this experience exists and/or existed in the mind's of many great men and women. As far as the secret: Thomas Edison used it and asked God for many Good and perfect things which mankind is still benifiting from today. His Definite Major purpose which inspired his 6th sense was a noble one: the advancement of human understanding and happiness. he asked God for Good things, things which benefited everyone, and his consciousness was expanded to recieve these gifts from the universal intelligents which flowed though him.... due to this ONE IDEA. All riches have there BEGINNING IN AN IDEA. It has to be a major purpose that is not self-centered but benefits all that it serves. and from THAT SPIRITUAL force comes the MATERIAL force. Edison's fertile mind linked up with infinite intelligents brought some of the follow INTEGRATED ADVANCEMENTS in the physical world for mankind: Inventions such as concrete, rubber tires, car batteries, headlights. electrical power transformers, telephone lines, movie projectors, recording equipment, typewriters. All seriving his higher goal: "The advancement of human understanding and happiness" From that DEFINITE MAJOR PURPOSE of Thomas Edison's came the ability to move industrial goods, the abilty to light cities for industries, the ability for mass communication, the abilty to tame the landscape etc. etc. To raise crops. to feed people etc. etc. etc. No doubt, we are all still benifiting from this definite major purpose of what was one man and his devine connection to a higher form of inetllgents beyond man's. The infinite intelligents fell upon Faraday in this century, He CHANNELED thosands of formulas for ceramic semi-conductors, formulas from infininte intelligents, which when taken down to the lab were found to be 100 percent workable and correct. Advancements which lead to production of modern computer storage capacity, and low and behold.... we know have the internet (something by the way which could never have happed had Thomas Edison not used infinite intelligent to help him in the creation of the power grid and the advancement of basic phone service in every city, something which infinite intelligents also was responsible for as well if you take the time to study his life you will learn of these facts as I did, just do a google search and you will no doubtedly be amazed. Infinite Intelligents also helped Miscrosoft's Bill Gates come up will the DOS operating system. It is a true story and a FACT that this system, was GIVEN to him in its ENTIRETY in a DREAM while he was asleep, and upon awakening he put it to use. Don't you yet see the purpose of the power of intention? Intention is forced in the universe that allows the act of CREATION to take place, it flows through you and through every other living thing for the good and perfect benefit of the whole, when used and orchestrated with the state of mind that affirms and integrates the perfection. Just look at nature, and you will see the very intention of God himself... the infinite spirit in its very own creation: everything works to together in utter perfection for the good of the whole. Let's see if some of the arrogant scientists could be even 1/1,000th as good as nature ALWAYS is in intergrating and balancing the whole of creation for the good of all and everything within it. INTENTION IS EVERYWHERE, it's also in our mind's pysche and souls as well. i.e. everything!!!! And some of you smirk because, LH, Daylia, and myself cannot fully comprehend and explain it ALL in one small neat little sentence. Of course we cannot, God is not finite, and he is far bigger. So what that we cannot understand it all. We need not to still have to ability to to move with and experience the flow of such creativity and perfect. Then you begin to question where God is? And if he can still be determined, He is in fact and without doubt in EVERY ATOM working his wonders in both the spiritual and the material world constantly, in ways so bizarre and devine we will can NEVER see the full picture, but I say so what? I still know and can feel the force that is behind it all guiding me and guiding everything else as well. It doesn't mean that we cannot find the general collective experiences that the mystics of all ages agree to as being elements of the nature of god, this devine creator. Vanilla ice cream does exist. As does God. But you have to open yourself up to trying vanilla ice cream out, much like you have to open yourself up to God, to know his nature, and/ or favor. Anybody that's tasted vanilla ice cream, knows collectively much of the following and is in total agreement, the ice cream is cold, and it is cream tasting, it melts etc. People who have EXPERIENCED God, in a MYSTICAL way, all agree whole-heartedly about the following: God is in everyone, everything, every place, and everywhere at once, 24/7 and is independant of our small thoughts and own mind yet is able to give us precisely what we need at precisely when we need it once we have developed the pyscho-spiritual relations. Our Father (first cause) Which art in heaven (perfect) Hallowed (Holy, Full of Goodness) Be thy Name (authority, author of creation) Thy (GOD's) Kingdom (rules which define and unfold goodness) Come (Manifested in conscious devine activity) Thy will (orchestrated by infininite intellgents) Be Done (accomplished) In earth (the physical) as it is in heaven. (perfection through intercession with the devine) We are not alone in our thoughts or even in our very biology. As above, So below. (Hermes) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jun 06 - 01:34 PM They smirk, Dewey, with the utter, smug assurance of a tiny, self-worshipping bubble of ego that KNOWS it is the final authority on everything it surveys and has an opinion on. Well, at least...until it dies. Then all the strutting and preening and "being right" is over, and the World goes on regardless, surprising in its graceful and effortless ability to survive and prosper without that little blathering bubble of ego. And then? Oh, the blessed silence! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: beardedbruce Date: 30 Jun 06 - 01:54 PM Dewey, I have a great deal for you, cash and in small unmarked bills. You seem to think that the ONLY path to understanding is your own- THAT is the FIRST indication that you might not be accurate. I can claim to have had many conversations with the Universe, and thus have a far better understanding of it than you- BUT SO WHAT? The statement that "When you experience ( whatever) then you will understand" does not add value to any discussion. To suggest to BillD ( of all people) "Just try taking a philosphy course from a local university if you doubt this experience exists and/or existed in the mind's of many great men and women." indicstes a real disconnect between you and reality. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 30 Jun 06 - 02:31 PM *grin* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jun 06 - 02:52 PM Actually, the only direct path to anyone's understanding IS their own. The usual error they seem to make is that everyone else must necessarily hold the same understanding...or be wrong or worse yet, even evil! ;-) And from there stem the usual lot of misunderstandings, religious wars, cultural wars, race wars, class wars, mercantile wars, etc. A world of many understandings is good. Always has been. Tolerance allows for a world of many understandings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 30 Jun 06 - 02:54 PM you need to do more research, Dewey...let me give you an example start here (why, yes, I DO have a copy) then you can go here and expand your understanding even more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: beardedbruce Date: 30 Jun 06 - 03:10 PM LH- "Actually, the only direct path to anyone's understanding IS their own." Absolute TRUTH! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jun 06 - 03:17 PM Thank you. We obviously agree on that, BB. It's something that's been clear to me ever since I could walk and talk. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 30 Jun 06 - 04:51 PM To suggest to BillD ( of all people) "Just try taking a philosphy course from a local university if you doubt this experience exists and/or existed in the mind's of many great men and women." indicstes a real disconnect between you and reality. All it indicates to me is that Dewey's most likely unaware of Bill's background in philosophy. Or, if that's not the case, it may indicate that Dewey really has it in for Bill. The suggestion's rather like offering someone a good stiff drink - on their way home from the AA meeting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jun 06 - 05:52 PM Going by my own philosophy course back in University, Daylia, I would say that philosophy classes are overloaded with teachers and students who like to impress each other with their immense verbal skills, but who have a hard time actually believing in anything....because it would make them too vulnerable. It's kind of like being so clever that you outsmart yourself, even if you don't outsmart anyone else. At the end of the day it's all just a big, impressive lot of windbag verbiage with nothing inside it, like an empty eggshell that's been painted up fancy. All talk, no substance. I was not impressed. People are what they believe. If they are too sophisticated and clever to believe anything then they are, in effect, precisely what they believe. Nothing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 30 Jun 06 - 05:57 PM "Going by my own philosophy course..." all ONE of it? Did it include the wisdom that all generalizations are suspect? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River Date: 30 Jun 06 - 06:01 PM It ain't just the gnereals that are suspectious! It's all them other ossifers too...like the sarjeants, the captains, the majors, the lottenants. All of 'em. It don't take a flippin' college degree to know that, eh? You can't trust none of the flipheads. Cops are even worse. - BDiBR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 30 Jun 06 - 06:04 PM ummm-hmmmm |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jun 06 - 06:05 PM One was enough, Bill. I love philosophy, but I don't love the atmosphere that simmers around a university philosophy classroom. Accordingly, after that I read philosophy books rather than taking philosophy courses. My feeling is that the average person's natural tendency to become a pontificating, opinionated, self-obsessed prat increases exponentially with every additional philosophy course taken and passed. I'm sure there are individual exceptions to that, though. ;-) Like you, for example. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 30 Jun 06 - 06:11 PM see, that's the trouble with allowing 'average' persons to take Philosophy courses, Little Hawk... ;>) They tend to distort and water down what they hear. There oughta be a weeding out process with a written exam before they get in the door, just to be sure they have the proper attitude. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jun 06 - 06:16 PM I don't doubt that such a weeding out process could be handily accomplished, Bill, if William Shatner were in charge of interviewing all the applicants. Sadly, though, he doesn't have the necessary time for that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jun 06 - 06:19 PM He doesn't even have the time to interview all the coeds, God knows...though I'm sure he would like to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 30 Jun 06 - 06:42 PM I once had a coed interview ME when I was a grad. teaching asst. I had given her onle a "C" on her paper, and she allowed as how she'd do 'anything' to get a better grade. "Oh...even re-write the paper?", I suggested. The interview ended quickly...*grin* One day, sitting with my friend who was actually teaching a logic course, a coed spotted us and stopped by, gushing to him.."Oh, Mr. Wilson, you know how you told us about the two different kinds of logic...inductive and deductive? Well, my girlfriend & I have discovered another kind!" "Oh?", replied my friend, always the scholar..." and what is that?" "We call it SEductive logic" she cooed. "Then, that makes four kinds", he began, "as I had not mentioned in class about ABductive logic, which is distinguished by...." that interview, too, ended quickly, as she discovered she had to be somewhere... Them coeds would bamboozle Shatner...he wouldn't stand a chance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 30 Jun 06 - 06:46 PM Wait a minute -- is this moral philosophy or immoral philosophy? I majored in the latter at thew same time Bill was majoring in the former. I am reminded of the great saying, "There are many ways up the moutain, but the view from on top is always the same...". Steven Colbert, the great American theological theorist, gave a similar opinion when expressing his belief that America exists, and is inclusive of Muslims, Jews, Buddhists and Jaynes..."because I believe there are any number of ways to accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior...". LOL. Anyone who spends any time trying to untangle truth learns that assertions -- especially loud and emotional ones -- are often a dead giveaway of something other. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 30 Jun 06 - 07:11 PM we (the Philosophy dept.)once had a notice from the audio-visual center that they were showing the movie "Plato's Republic"...brows were wrinkled as we tried to imagine how it would be done. No one I knew actually went, but the graffiti on the notice got very funny....the one I remember allowed as how: "Next week, the movie will be "Kant's Critique of Pure Reason" starring Julie Newmar as 'the sensible manifold'..." ...now, Amos, you would have liked that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jun 06 - 07:50 PM You and Indiana Jones, Bill....holding off those seductive coeds together. ;-) Bravely done, sir. You did not yield to temptation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 01 Jul 06 - 10:17 AM Bill, do you ever feel imprisoned by obstructive logic? Or destructive logic? How bout havockive logic? Muckuptive logic? Upchuckive logic? Maybe even Getfuctive logic? (sorry, couldn't resist ....) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 01 Jul 06 - 11:01 AM nope, can't say as I do. How 'bout you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: *daylia* Date: 01 Jul 06 - 11:19 AM Nah. Not since I escaped the "it might be Auschwitz, but it's home!" syndrome, anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: freda underhill Date: 01 Jul 06 - 12:05 PM what a great site, Bill D.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 01 Jul 06 - 12:11 PM oh...the sacred texts site? Yep! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 01 Jul 06 - 02:41 PM Your assertion that first cause is not possible is not at all self evident. If every cause we observe has something prior to it there are two possibilities: the first cause which began the cascade is unobservable OR the first cause does not exist. Either postulate explains the phenomena and neither is proveable, nor is either disprovable. Good thing we are not talking science here. It is also possible that in calling Infinite Intelligence the "first" cause, Napoleon Hill was not speaking chronologically but in order of magnitudes or seniority, philosophically. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: redsnapper Date: 02 Jul 06 - 12:29 PM Either postulate explains the phenomena and neither is proveable, nor is either disprovable. Good thing we are not talking science here. Or plain English... (;>) RS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 02 Jul 06 - 01:24 PM Well, RS, what part didn't you understand? It's plain enough to me. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 282RA Date: 02 Jul 06 - 01:58 PM >>the first cause which began the cascade is unobservable<< Saying it's unobserved is just a veil we throw over it so as not to notice the imperfections. Is it a first cause or not? If it is, then it violates causation as we know it. If it is not, then god is not the beginning of everything since the whole point of postulating a first cause is to avoid that pitfall of an endless chain of causation--of something preceding god. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 02 Jul 06 - 03:02 PM Most humans simply do not like the concept of infinity when it is applied to causation.(we like it fine when considering an afterlife) We have no idea whether the notion of a 'first cause'- God or otherwise- makes sense, but that doesn't stop many from making declarative statements. We have the grammar/language to describe things we don't have the senses to experience or comprehend. It's also a great temptation to construct a logically consistent schema that no one can prove 'wrong', whether it has any basis in reality or not.....sometimes there is money to be made in the enterprise. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: 282RA Date: 02 Jul 06 - 04:19 PM The shameless tearing down of Shatner on this thread will cease immediately! You don't want to get me going. Go ahead and tear down philosophy, tear down religion, tear down mythology, tear down the very fabric of society and all our cherished institutions if you are of the mind. BUT LEAVE SHATNER OUT OF THIS!!!!! What did he ever do to you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 02 Jul 06 - 04:24 PM Shatner? I'm surprised he isn't here getting |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 02 Jul 06 - 04:24 PM the 500th post |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Shatner Date: 02 Jul 06 - 04:25 PM 500! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 02 Jul 06 - 04:26 PM *grin* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 02 Jul 06 - 04:27 PM oh, I DO love broadband speed! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Shatner Date: 02 Jul 06 - 04:27 PM It was .... fun .... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 02 Jul 06 - 04:54 PM still...you only managed 501, my plump friend. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 02 Jul 06 - 04:58 PM What? Someone is dissing Shatner??? We must find this despicable heathen and destroy him or her UTTERLY! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 02 Jul 06 - 05:54 PM SHatner is, himself, a heathen, and VASTLY overrated. However to be prerfectly fair I am told he does an unusually adequate job in his current film, the name of which escapes me. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 02 Jul 06 - 06:53 PM He did an unusually adequate job on his last audio recording too. It's really surprisingly entertaining and quite good. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 02 Jul 06 - 07:20 PM somehow the phrase "damning with faint praise" comes to mind. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 02 Jul 06 - 07:47 PM Humph! No respect. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 02 Jul 06 - 07:56 PM Well, his intimidating adequacy is a large step forward, LH - he has, essentially, received no praise at all since he escaped from the Ferengi and the Enterprise. Present company excepted, of course, but who listens to Canuck folkies these days? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 16 Jul 06 - 01:18 PM On Reincarnation -- Hard Evidence is of interest -- of course when I encountered it I thought immediately of Bill D, our avid skeptic, and ran right over with it. :D A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Jul 06 - 01:34 PM Just a brief return to Shatner, Amos. I would like to point out that he has been praised fulsomely for his acting in the new TV series "Boston Legal". He has, and there's not a darned thing you can do about it. ;-) As for reincarnation, it seems so likely to me now, given the experiences of this life, that I pretty much take it for granted. If people don't believe in it...or don't want to...that's fine with me. What harm can their disbelief do? None that I can see. It won't make any difference anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: bobad Date: 16 Jul 06 - 01:53 PM Another evaluation of the "hard evidence" cited by the author of Amos' link by someone at the other end of the belief spectrum. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 16 Jul 06 - 03:45 PM oh, thank you, Amos...*grin* ummm-hmmmmm...I see. Now it's proof! Wow. "Stevenson's research into birthmarks and congenital defects has such particular importance for the demonstration of reincarnation, since it furnishes objective and graphic proof of reincarnation,...." someone needs to tell him he has discovered genetics! I read the list of 'evidence', and I see data which can usually be explained with hypotheses other than postulating some mystical transference of 'soul' thru some mystical 'realm' in some yet-to-be-explained mystical 'process', resulting in all sorts of muddled metaphysics about how MANY 'souls' are available, since the number of people keeps increasing. Geez...with notions like this: " These problems relating to the 'sex change' can lead to homosexuality later on in their lives. Former girls who were reborn as boys may wish to dress as girls or prefer to play with girls rather than boys." and this: " For example, if they had drowned in a past life then they frequently developed a phobia about going out of their depth in water. If they had been shot, they were often afraid of guns and sometimes loud bangs in general. If they died in a road accident they would sometimes develop a phobia of travelling in cars, buses or lorries." he will no doubt sell LOTS of books.... Copernicus shoulda had it so good! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Jul 06 - 03:56 PM He'll sell a lot of books to people who like the subject of reincarnation, Bill. Just like selling "Popular Mechanics" (which I never buy), but a different subject, that's all. A subject which you will never know much about, because you're just not interested. If I were you, I wouldn't let it bother me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Bill D Date: 16 Jul 06 - 07:20 PM Oh, I'm 'interested', in a matter of speaking..*grin* My interest in the thinking process which allows us to debate these things will always tempt me to look at what is being said, and especially in what is offered as evidence and how that 'evidence' is presented & defended. It's kinda like being being fascinated by politics and its weirdnesses.....you don't have to participate and study every last nuance of the phenomena to be pretty sure there's problems with it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: GUEST,Art Thieme Date: 16 Jul 06 - 11:30 PM ...I guess I must've passed out after too much spirits (for that matter). Revived, now, I must say it's nice to find all of you still here waiting for me!! Thanks for your patience!! Love, Art |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: dianavan Date: 17 Jul 06 - 07:37 PM I understand matter but its defining Spirit that baffles me. The worst topic I ever picked for a university essay was, Spirit and/or Soul. I was trying to find out if there was a cultural difference in the concept. The best I could come up with was that soul was individualistic while spirit was a a collective of souls. I was amazed at how prevalent the concept was in all cultures. What do you think the difference might be? Is it strictly cultural? Do all cultures identify spirit and soul or just one or the other? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Matter and Spirit From: Amos Date: 17 Jul 06 - 07:52 PM Semantically I would say there is too much overlap between the two words to make a strong statement wither way. Conceptually there are four or five different concepts being batted about. 1 -- the individual as a non-material being seperate from the body but operating or occupying it 2--the individual as Infinite spirituality 3--some sense of an infinity which comprises all souls sort of merging into a composite of souls 4--some sense of an Infinite Spirit which is outside the individual self, an external deity 5--a sense of All in which all beings become One without individuality My personal sense it that truly differentiating between these requires a strong spiritual clarity beyond that usually encountered amongst us Terran types today; but inventing arbitrary assertions about such things is easy and well within the capabilities of the most warped of us. A |
