|
Viewed 4373 times. 8 people liked this blog. You can rate it below if you haven't already.
-->
well, i get bored and think posting this will be fun so, from the jane roberts wikipedia entry: (and after years of reading i can say the wording on this site is slightly unfavorable but...)
edit: i removed the snippet from the wikipedia artcle cause it's a bit too large at this point, and hard to navigate past.  cheers to cbit, and every1 who's entertained my discussion so far - it's been fun
| |
Comments
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
cbit
Smells like hokum.
Nobody has claimed randi's prize yet:
link
OT: check this pathetic anecdote, ouch:
In 1922, Scientific American offered two $2,500 awards, one for the first person who could produce an authentic spirit photograph under test conditions and the other for the first medium to produce an authentic "visible psychic manifestation" (Christopher 1975: 180). Houdini, the foremost magician of the period, was a member of the investigating committee. Nobody won the prizes. The first to announce she was ready to be tested was Elizabeth Allen Tomson, but after she was caught with twenty yards of gauze taped to her groin, flowers under her breasts, and a snake in her arm pit, she was never formally tested (Christopher 1975: 188).
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
everamzah
how do u encapsulate something nonphysical within something physical? that's like literally taking a physical camera into ur dreams and taking a picture and then literally, physically bringing it to wal-mart for processing.
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
everamzah
mm my wording is funny so leme put it like this: when u physically look at something, u distort it with ur beliefs about reality. therefore, what this test is asking is a farce. well, given the premise of the seth material, it's the fault of the test, the problems of the physical _instrumentation_, not the act of trying to see spirits. they're asking to physically show something nonphysical. well this happens all the time constantly (again given the premise of the seth material), but the test conditions here are too limiting, too rigid. i mean, c;mon, take a picture of a spirit? i'll take a picture of my dick, that i can do. but of my spirit. u would not see. but my dick? if u want, emmail me. for u i do this hahah jk
edited: Apr 06 2007
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
cbit
The seth stuff doesn't seem to make any testable predictions. That's fine, its not obliged to. But it means it can't be verified (like thousands of other paranormal claims), and until it can be there's no compelling reason to take it seriously.
About testing and evidence: The seth stuff does make predictions about the future, but they're very vague. If one of those predictions was very specific, and not the kind of thing that was easily subject to human meddling, and it was shown to be accurate, that would constitute compelling evidence that this is something worth studying in greater detail.
Supposing we agree that the scientific method is inadequate (maybe there are great truths we are missing out on because of it's inherent limitations).. can you think of a better way of comparing and assessing truth claims?
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
everamzah
i prolly could but i dont think that's the direction worth taking. i'm a bit tired now so bare with me... if u have a statement, or *sigh* a philosophy, and u want to "prove" it, but you only rely on a certain set of rules, than you only get results that are in accord with those rules. for example, measuring something with a physical instrument. if u take a statement like, "our souls transend our bodies" and u measure it looking for physical atoms, or light particles, but ur looking for something non-physical (the soul) - well, do u see the problem? now, that's only if u take it for granted that a soul exists. and if u don't believe it exists, u won't find it. the premise behind this material is just that: u get what u concentrate on. if u don't believe that a soul exists, u will only find things that "prove" that. u r convincing urself. and this ends up being limiting. now, do as u please - that's the beauty of free will.
but nonetheless, if u open urself up to nonphysical criteria, if u allow urself to sense things that u normally wouldn't, cbit, than u get different results. i dunno, it's not a big deal - it's a take it or leave it scenerio in a way.
well lemme read ur post here again and see what else i may say...
testable predictions: it may interest u that jane roberts was a skeptic, and a scientist-minded person b4 she was a so-called psychic. there were many tests done. these can be found in the book she wrote "the seth material" which was the first book (well second) published, b4 seth wrote any books. it's all prety interesting, imo.
well, i've been reading this fucking fuck fuck for many years now, and i'm pleased with my results this far. i am not, however, pleased to think that i don't have a soul. that all there is in this world is physical bodies, and that when we die, our consciousness is "extinguished" - actually such statements are humourous to me. (so isn't my spelling)
thanks for always being there for a good conversation tho lol ;)
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
cbit
haha
I absolutely agree that science isn't suited to detecting things that aren't part of the physical world. But i also think there's no reason to suspect that there _is_ anything except the physical world (which includes consciousness).
We are asked to consider the possibility of the paranormal based on feelings, 'senses', and personal testimony. But if you admit that a persons mind can play ticks on them, and that we're only beginning to understand its powerful workings, it seems a big mistake to just take someones word for it that, for example, 'a wise unseen being is communicating with me' without stronger evidence supporting the claim.
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
daswesen
As I see it, being a pretty straight physical-world straight science guy, is that even if there is nothing to it, the key in reading about such stuff and such, is the effect it will have on your mind, your feelings, which is something actually pretty *real* to me. So if you start thinking about coincidences, souls, feelings, this will have a direct effect on how you live your life, and most often for the better, you start to become attuned to things which are not really there but which ahve an effect on us humans being emotional creatures. I dunno if I'm clear. So in fact, you can believe that crap while not believing it :] That's the one thing about RAW I like, if you start believing that stuff, and believing it all, you will believe none of it but you will have sharpened your mind, and also be critical to mental construction like science (which can be pretty irrational, even in fields like maths). Let me explain that math thing. Sure you can demonstrate things, and a lot can be got out of that. But the thing is, even if a proof seems perfect, it doesn't say if it's really true, lots of things have been corrected in the feature, refutated, etc... so a lot of math itself is "believing", believing that A holds, etc...
edited: Apr 06 2007
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
cbit
So in fact, you can believe that crap while not believing it
daswesen: I'm interested in this. I think what you're talking about is Daniel Dennet calls 'belief in belief', he uses it in relation to religion but it applies to the paranormal too. It's not first order belief in the proposition, but a belief that belief in the proposition is desirable somehow. This leads to a kind of elaborate make believe because belief in belief requires that you don't express disbelief in the proposition (it ruins the illusion). I think the danger is that most people can't, or don't distinguish between the two.
I'm open to the idea that belief in the paranormal might have some benefits (eg. giving you a more sophisticated sense of what science is). It goes without saying that belief in belief doesn't make the initial belief true. (OT: imo the postmodern myth that any arbitrary viewpoint constitutes a 'truth' is damaging to the project of figuring out how the universe and its systems works).
Imo drawing parallels between scientifically based beliefs and other types of belief is a dead end. Lets accept that we can never know anything with 100% certainty. The scientific method lets us make a model of the world that helps us predict things, and explain what we see in a consistent way (you can say that i've chosen to consider this in terms of 'getting closer to the truth', the truth being a completely accurate model of the universe). On the other hand 'ways of knowing' that don't depend on empirical evidence are scuppered because they incorporate no way to distinguish between truth and fantasy.
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
celibacyclub
i think when you die its totally over.
this is i think too depressing for a lot of ppl.
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
Squeal
Fear of dreamless sleep. Forever.
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
energygiant
wtf....am i to read all this?
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
Squeal
Prophets, bah. They always have these "new" ideologies, but if you study closely you see that it's just a reflection of the thinking of the time they're in. Nothing new, nothing divine. And a few predictions which don't come true.
Done with prophets.
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
cbit
wtf....am i to read all this?
start by reading none of it and work your way up ;)
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
energygiant
haha
i think you got it right celibacyclub, dead means dead! but as frightening as that is, it kind of motivates me to do something useful while im not dead
04/06/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
everamzah
well... i don't believe that when we die our consciousness is extinguished. i dont believe consciousness can ever be extinguished. to me, this just doesn't add up. science isn't really the point here. science is a measurement tool, in its traditional form. it's not a philosophy. "newer" sciences come closer to being able to measure some of these things: extra dimensions, etc. but that's only because the framework is changed. when u change ur set of beliefs, u get different results. SO, this is the major point of why i share this material now. it's not because i want to tell frightened ppl that they live on past their death. though, i find it interesting that that is what we seem to be focusing on.
the point that i really want to share is that u get what u concentrate on. now, for example, taken the seth material, if u die, and u adimately believe that you're consciousness is extinguished after ur physical body dies, then i'm saying this is what u get. for a time, anyway, until u realize that you are still there in a form, now unrecognizable to you. and u must learn to use it again. this is ur own personal lesson, that u must go thru. some ppl have an awful time after they die, from what i read, because of their beliefs. some people find themselves in a boring, cold, perfect heaven where they cannot grow, and some people find themselves tortured in hell.
but only for so long as to change their beliefs. now, i'm _certainly_ not sharing this material to change any1. i make no attempt. i share it because i enjoy sharing it, and discussing these things.
so, energygiant, please - if u wish to read it, please do. otherwise, don't.
squeal: also, these ideas are not new. these ares have been passed along for as long as we've been physical. in various forms. there is nothing in this material that says u must wear a certain undergarment, nothing that says u must breath a certain way. nothing that says the world will end at a certain time. the premise behind this material is that u create ur own reality, based on ur beliefs, expectations, and desires. that u consciously (or, subconsciouslly if u prefer) direct ur energy, creatively, and are like an artist painting his world.
well, and one could worry that he is wasting his time. i certainly could. i could feel like, at the end of my life, "what if i was wrong?" but i could worry about a lot of things. what if i get car jacked today? what if this bitch gives me aids? what if no one on em411 likes me? the results of my concentration will dictate my result. however, given my areas of concentration over the years, i have been able to interpretet _my own_ sense data. and in a way where i've learned many things about myself.
but here's one of my favorite parts: it doesn't matter if u believe that consciousness transcends the body (_not_ a new idea). u are working on challenges in ur lives, and we are as a race of beings. period. these challenges are purposeful, and we are fulfilling our own lives, individually and en masse, simply by being. u don't need to believe in the seth material for that. no one does. but certain ppl may want to, which is why i share.
i am letting every1 know that this is how i believe, and i am not alone. i am not part of a church, i am not part of a religion. i create my own personal reality with my beliefs, expectations, and desires, and so don't you.
Register / login
|
^
EM411 is Copyright 2001-2009 EM411.com
All rights reserved. | Contact | RSS
|
