by Sirona 131 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
I think it is closed minded to base our whole concept of reality on things which are recorded and tested - because not all things can be recorded and tested.
i would have to agree strongly with this statement. life cannot always be quantified, intellectualized.............to death, in some cases.........that applies to physical and non physical reality/life.
But many studies conducted in this manner do not show the same type of result. Many parapsychology studies have been thrown out because this effect didn't appear.
I really don't understand those two sentences. Could you be more specific? Which studies conducted in which manner? And what do you mean by "parapsychology studies... thrown out"?
Hi Narkisssos - I believe that the expression "thrown out" means rejected or dismissed as invalid. These studies have been "discarded" from the domain of serious consideration or inquiry. I think that this is what was meant.
Rapunzel, I did understand "thrown out" as "discarded," but I can't possibly believe Sirona means "we've had to discard many studies that didn't show 'satisfying' (i.e., 'better' than 'random') results, until we could finally get one that did..."
Terry
I tend to think of mystical as being more an experiential change in one's reality than a schema or category. I think you'd find a book I once read to be along your line of thinking. It was written by a biologist who was positing (no surprise) a neurological basis for religion / belief in the supernatural. It also stressed schemas or categories which our minds grouped things into. But he also proposed how some events would be shunted into combinations of schemas i.e. where "invisible & person" seemed to be a good "fit". I can't for the life of me remember the book title.
Repeatability is a very good indicator of something being real. So that weak effect is enough to make you wonder whats behind it. Is the mind able to detect some subtle correlation or cue in the setup and use that as part of its anticipating what may come? I think there would be reasonably good selective pressure to keep and refine such a skill.
Narkissos,
What I meant is that studies have been conducted which involve testing similar phenomena and these studies have shown results no greater than chance.
So what I'm trying to say is, if you are correct that human beings have a tendency to influence results with their collective minds, we wouldn't find numerous studies where no positive result was found. Surely all studies would show the effect you mentioned.
Instead, we see some studies of particular phenomena showing significant results - indicating that it is the phenomena tested which is occuring (not simply the fact that human minds are involved).
Sirona
OK, I suppose if you had meant (or been able) to be specific (which studies, how "similar" the phenomena, etc.) you would have been, so I won't insist.
As I have already said, I am not particularly interested in parapsychology (vs. mysticism) and am just making what I perceive as "common sense" observations.
When you ask people (at least in France) to name a colour at random the rate of "red" answers is simply amazing. When you ask them their favourite colour the result is entirely different.
Our "unconscious" is highly structured (by both "nature" and "culture"), whether we suspect it or not. That's about all I have to say.
Narkissos - It is a fascinating subject. I never believed in such things and thought they were 'due to demons' because of WT teachings.
However, when I felt my Aunt pass away and told my husband, he was equally shocked to discover that she had passed away at that exact time.
When, a few months ago, I felt that a relative, another aunt had passed away, I didn't know who it was just that someone I knew well had just died. I told my husband and children and we were all equally astonished to discover that and aunt, thousands of miles away had passed away, at roughly the time I had said I had felt it.
When I told my husband he must get in touch with his grandmother as something bad had happened to her, he did, and she had had a stroke. I could go on.
These things cannot be explained by people liking the colour red.
I like to be sceptical about everything, but when you experience things repeatedly, you know there is something else and something more and it doesn't matter whether other people doubt or not, you know what happened and there are no easy answers.
However, I still strong recommend scepticism in all things.
I looked up the term "Mysticism" last night in my old Encylopedia Britannica dictionary.
It makes a strong linkage to "deliberate obfuscation"...in other words - a deliberate attempt to create a dark, mysterious, feeling of something incapapble of being understood - thus placing the "teacher" of such mystery at some kind of intellectual or religious advantage over others.
Used in this way - "Mysticism" would be no better, (or any more real), than the cheap magical tricks performed by the Greek or Egyptian priesthoods to keep the populace in check. I think that a lot of the new age jargon falls into that category - and thus, it is as dishonest as a faith healer reading off people's names from a radio transmitter in his ear.
There are plenty of things that are in reality mysterious (even perhaps unknowable) such that we do not have to rely on BS psychobabble to achieve our goals.
I sometimes eavesdrop on conversations around the bookstore where I work. I'm close to the Metaphysics (i.e. crackpot) Section over in Religion. The conversations that go on around there are endlessly entertaining.
You don't find the same kinds of conversations in the Science Department (just on the opposite side).
I've formed a "general rule" of overheard conversations:.
1.If there is actual data about a subject, then, people talk facts. They exchange knowledge.
2.If there is no actual data about a subject, then, everybody has a wild story or opinion they are eager to tell you.
Interesting....no?
If I had to choose which section to film a documentary about-----without hesitation---the more entertaining of the two would be Metaphysics.
There is a real character who comes in every week. He has his own cable TV show on Conspiracy Theories. He wears a cowboy hat and a red neckerchief and his greeting never changes.
He strolls by with his shopping basket and says to me: "I told you I'd be back."
I don't know what that means. But, you can take that to the bank.
Sometimes this character is recognized as a local tv personality. People come up to him and earnestly plead with him to tell them the answer to a question they've been wondering about. Recently, I heard this exchange...
"Can you tell me why George Bush is building his Presidential Library at (fill in name of location--I can't remember) rather than any other place? What's going on with that?"
Conspiracy guy didn't blink. "What do you think? What have you heard? What are people saying?"
In other words---Tell me something exciting for my TV show and I'll believe it!
This guy always shows me some book he just bought about some wild topic or other. These books are very expensive.
My favorite author he has shown me is DAVID ICKE. All I can say is "WOW!!"
This author/lecturer is the Einstein of wild assed conspiracy theories! The world is run by lizard men disguised as fleshly humans!
That's just one teeny part of how it all fits together!
Sigh!
