Paranormal Experiences

by mattnoel 108 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Abaddon

  Sirona... that definition of love could be tested via questionaires.

  Obviously to say we know it all is an incorrect statement.

  But the very changable nature of paranormal experiences according to enculturation is illuminating.

  People see UFOs in the sky . People used to see angels, armies and mythological beasts in the sky.

  Studies of NDEs indicate the nature of the NDE is shaped by a person's feeling of self-worth.

  Christian's have different paranormal experiences to Animists.

  This is clear evidence they happen due to internal factors rather than external entities.

  So, what we have seems to be internal factors. Given that, is it real?

  Well, if you believe we were created in anyway the following isn't of much interest to you.

  Evolution hates waste. If we have something, it has to be efficient, or else it wouldn't be there. Natural selection produces organisms with the features they need to survive. If an animal needs to run, it will have legs; they are not 'inheritable' in the sense of blue eyes, they are basic equipment, albeit that works in differing efficientcies in different people.

  The fact that not everyone has paranormal powers indicates they are not of a survival benefit, or they just don't exist.

  The only exceptions to this explanation are;

  1/ Paranormal powers are selected for by some other process other than natural selection; sexual selction, e.g.

  2/ Paranormal powers have a survival benefit, but are a comparatively new development and thus have not penetrated the genome to the extent other survival benefits have.

  So, in short I advance the theory that unless paranormal powers can be shown to have some non-survival benefit, or are a new thing in human evolution, they just don't exist, as their is no explaination for them coming about, and natural selection can't develop things for fun, it can only develop things due to selection pressure.
• 

  funkyderek

  Feeling affection is a totally subjective experience. There is no proof that other people "feel" an emotion at all.

  If you're defining something as totally subjective, then you've declared it to be outside the realm of measurement. You are mistaken, however. Emotions can be objectively measured.

  Love might not exist at all - emotions are about chemical reactions, right?

  Correct. Measurable chemical reactions, in fact.

  So they're just chemical reactions, they're not us "loving" someone.

  That's like saying a rainbow isn't really a rainbow, it's just a phenomenon of light. Understanding the physical processes behind the feeling of love doesn't make love any less real.

  People might just act so called "lovingly" because of conditioning or guilt or to fit in socially.

  Correct, and the only way we would have of knowing whether they're really acting out of love is to measure the electrochemical processes in their brain.

  Show me love measured. You are so keen on having measurements of things and being able to see things. When someone does something that is seemingly out of love, that is an action, it is not love itself, therefore love may not actually exist. We cannot see it, we cannot measure it, we cannot quantify it. It disappears just at the wrong moment when we're trying to tap into it.

  You raise an intersting point here. In practice, we judge other people's emotions based on external appearances and actions, whereas in reality their actions may not correspond to their true feelings. It seems it's possible (in principle at least) to determine people's emotions by monitoring their brain activity. It seems then, that the only way of knowing whether someone is truly feeling love is to use science. I'm not sure how any of what you've said supports your arguments, but I may have misunderstood.
• 

  Sirona

  What I have said supports my arguments in that it shows that not everything we accept as "real" is actually really measurable by scientific methods.

  You say Love can be measured by looking at brain activity. The brain is too complex to say "this is what the brain looks like when the person is feeling love"....we've just not reached that stage in the research yet. Plus, even if the person is said to be at that moment feeling "love" we just don't know how that differs in each subject. One persons "love" feeling is another persons "confusion". LOL

  Sirona
• 

  Mary

  "...What I have said supports my arguments in that it shows that not everything we accept as "real" is actually really measurable by scientific methods...."

  Bingo! This is my main point about people reporting ghosts. Just because we can't measure it by scientific methods, doesn't mean it's not real.

  And what do you make of Sunspot's experience? Did she just imagine that the fork lifted up and hung in midair? How did a record player turn on and off when it was unplugged? There are some things that can't be blamed on teenagers playing pranks or the family cat and dog.
• 

  funkyderek

  Plus, even if the person is said to be at that moment feeling "love" we just don't know how that differs in each subject. One persons "love" feeling is another persons "confusion".

  OK, I concede that if the terms are not clearly defined, then they cannot be objectively measured. If someone says they feel love, does that mean they really do? If someone thinks they feel love, does that mean they really do? If you won't allow any definition of love other than a subjective immeasurable feeling, then no, it can't be measured objectively.
• 

  funkyderek

  Bingo! This is my main point about people reporting ghosts. Just because we can't measure it by scientific methods, doesn't mean it's not real.

  You should realise there's a huge difference between the subjective feeling of love, which is hard to measure because it's hard to define and is inherently subjective, and the supposedly objective existence of ghosts. If ghosts can be seen, then they can be scientifically measured.

  And what do you make of Sunspot's experience? Did she just imagine that the fork lifted up and hung in midair? How did a record player turn on and off when it was unplugged? There are some things that can't be blamed on teenagers playing pranks or the family cat and dog.

  No, but they can be tested. Why don't these things ever happen when hundreds of people are watching, or when somebody's video camera is running? Why do ghosts always disappear when you shine a light on them?
• 

  Mary

  ".....Why don't these things ever happen when hundreds of people are watching, or when somebody's video camera is running? Why do ghosts always disappear when you shine a light on them?...."

  Dunno.........maybe they don't light "New Light" (grin).........
• 

  Abaddon

  So, in short I advance the theory that unless paranormal powers can be shown to have some non-survival benefit, or are a new thing in human evolution, they just don't exist, as their is no explaination for them coming about, and natural selection can't develop things for fun, it can only develop things due to selection pressure.

  Funkyd; what think ye of this? Can you find a fault in the argument leading up to it, or in the statement itself? Anyone else?
• 

  rem

  It is ridiculous to say "I'm not going to consider that because science can't prove it to me". There are theories regarding the universe that are impossible to test and noone pooh pooh's a great idea just because we don't have the technology to prove it yet.

  Sirona, do you honestly believe that the paranormal has not even been considered by scientists over the past hundred years???? There are many scientists (of varying reputations) who have studied paranormal phenomenon and have come up with theories of the paranormal. After years of study guess what they've come up with:

  NOTHING

  Not one good replicable experiment. Not one good replicable study.

  So there. It's been considered. No value was found. Now let's join the 21'st century.

  rem
• 

  rem

  Bingo! This is my main point about people reporting ghosts. Just because we can't measure it by scientific methods, doesn't mean it's not real.

  If you see a ghost, how do you see it? Photons must reach they retina for humans to see things. Otherwise it's all in their heads. Agreed? If you do not agree with this then there is no sense continuing this discussion with you.

  If a human eye can sense the photons from a ghost then a video camera, which works on the exact same principles, should be able to see the same thing. Bingo - measurable phenomenon. The same is true with sounds. The problem is that when such recording devices are present, the ghosts seem to disappear or some other prosaic explanation becomes apparent. If something is scientifically measurable, and it can never seem to be measured, then it probably does not exist.

  Look up the history of the concept of the Ether and see how it applies here.

  And what do you make of Sunspot's experience? Did she just imagine that the fork lifted up and hung in midair? How did a record player turn on and off when it was unplugged? There are some things that can't be blamed on teenagers playing pranks or the family cat and dog.

  There are many explanations for such things. You take stories at face value. I do not. You probably beleive a whole host of urban legends. I do not. I believe with further investigation a prosaic cause would be found for this story. There are many more possibilities than just "ghosts". When you have a hammer, every problem starts looking like a nail. For believers every unexplainable story is automatically explained as ghosts or paranormal without any further investigation. That is nothing more than an argument from ignorance.

  Learn this tool: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If forks were just able to hang in mid-air without known physical explanations, we would have to completely rethink our science of physics (which has been done many times). The current models have been in place for quite some time and work extremely well. You cannot just provide anecdotes to refute known physics. You must have good, solid evidence. If that can be provided, you might win a nobel prize and a cool $1 million from the James Randi Educational Foundation. I'm not holding my breath, though.

  rem