The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #121446   Message #2653242
Posted By: Little Hawk
10-Jun-09 - 12:26 PM
Thread Name: BS: Science and Religion
Subject: RE: BS: Science and Religion
You said something quite interesting, Amos, when you said:

"The core nature of awareness is non-local, meaning it has no location in space or time except to the degree it decides to generate one. Life has the ability to decree--to say things will be so, and have them exist."

I think you're probably quite right about that.

****

When I say that a radio signal is not "physical", I mean that it's not a solid, a liquid or a gas. It has no physicality in the normal sense and you can't grab hold of it with your hand....or pour it into a glass...or blow it around with a fan. It will pass seamlessly through the solid wall of a building. But, we can observe it using certain instruments we have invented in fairly recent times, and we can use to to control a machine.

Prior to the invention of those instruments which can detect or generate radio waves, people didn't believe there was anything such as a radio wave. Why? Well, their physical senses could not detect it.

Because their physical senses do not (generally) detect the presense of spirits, souls, and such spiritual phenomena, they tend to not believe those exist either. Some people, however, do detect the presence of spirits, souls, ghosts, whatever.....but it's easy for someone who hasn't done so to just dismiss their reports and say, "Oh, they were having a hallucination." or "They're not telling the truth."

Such is the arrogance of those who are absolutely sure that they already know what is and what isn't real... ;-)

Well, I think that one day science may well invent instruments that DO confirm the presence of spirits and can, for instance, photograph them and measure their energy signature. And then the skeptics will probably change their tune, since they will have what they term "verifiable evidence".

For me, my direct experience IS verifiable evidence...but just for me...not for someone else who wasn't there at the time. I am willing to show a good deal of respect for other people's accounts of their direct experience of the unusual, even if it doesn't fit my expectations. That doesn't mean I will categorically accept their explanations as being true and accurate. Neither does it mean I will categorically deny them. I'm in no position to. I wasn't there.