O.B.E.'s

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 11 months ago - 6 years 11 months ago #281600 by
Replied by on topic O.B.E.'s
I agree, I really think science and religion or spirituality can and need to get along and work together. Hermeticism is a really good linking point between the two, and Jediism as well.
Last edit: 6 years 11 months ago by .

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 11 months ago - 6 years 11 months ago #281614 by Adder
Replied by Adder on topic O.B.E.'s

Gisteron wrote:

Adder wrote: It is simply a case of the mechanism's behind the event not being accessible enough to properly apply that scientific method.

I cannot speak on behalf of those arguing that some sensations they had were OBEs, but I can say for myself that I for one would beg to differ if I was in their camp. To me, anything that can be sensed, even by so few as one person is subject to scientific examination for that reason.


If you have the tools available, sure. Though the brain is obviously very complex but also each one unique in many ways which might make things like reading and writing to it in anyway approaching how we experience consciousness borderline impossible - but good luck Elon Musk, fingers xed #Neuralink

Gisteron wrote: The statement that something is outside the reach of science is functionally equivalent with the statement that it didn't or couldn't really happen.


Science is not omniscient, not yet.

Gisteron wrote:

Adder wrote: If someone has en experience which to them is justified enough to warrant a strong measure of truth for them, then an interest in exploring that is scientific in spirit! It's just the extent they are able to apply science might vary. Skepticism has a good place there though.

That really is the crux of the issue, isn't it? Why would anyone feel that their confidence in a belief is justified while simultaneously going out of their way to protect from any critical examination either the belief itself or the events that triggered its formation? Why would anyone be jumping to conclusions, let alone be protective of those conclusions like that, well even before having any interest in exploring any further, often openly wishing to not explore, lest the precious conclusion fall into question?


What is being protected? In my opinion its just a lack of tools, so I think what is being protected is a interest in it, despite the lack of tools. If you have some spare EEG's laying around I'm sure folks would jump to try em on and record data!!

Knight ~ introverted extropian, mechatronic neurothealogizing, technogaian buddhist. Likes integration, visualization, elucidation and transformation.
Jou ~ Deg ~ Vlo ~ Sem ~ Mod ~ Med ~ Dis
TM: Grand Master Mark Anjuu
Last edit: 6 years 11 months ago by Adder.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 11 months ago #281615 by
Replied by on topic O.B.E.'s

Calan wrote: Anyone else here every have Out of Body Experiences? I've had a bunch and would love to chat about them.


I have been clinical dead and later I have also been near dead. If you have an important question only, feel free to send me a PM as I do not like to discuss these kinds of things.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 11 months ago #281620 by
Replied by on topic O.B.E.'s
When someone hypothesizes the OBEtron force carrying particle and then can demonstrate it's existence even mathematically then let me know. Anything less, Including unfounded assertions that "something" might exist "beyond the reach of measure" are just exercises in fantasy.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 11 months ago #281621 by Gisteron
Replied by Gisteron on topic O.B.E.'s

Adder wrote:

Gisteron wrote: To me, anything that can be sensed, even by so few as one person is subject to scientific examination for that reason.

If you have the tools available, sure.

No, no. The fact alone that it is something we can access is enough for it to be subject to science. That is my statement. It doesn't matter if the tools for it are available right now or ever were in the past. I am here explaining what I identify as the scope of science. If we can experience it, we can do science to it, science being a way to examine things, a method to think about them. It is not limited to labs and instruments.

Gisteron wrote: The statement that something is outside the reach of science is functionally equivalent with the statement that it didn't or couldn't really happen.

Science is not omniscient, not yet.

Of course it isn't. Nothing is. I never claimed anything was. The statement above is just a rephrasing of the one you responded to just prior. If the scope of science is all of nature, then to say that something is outside of that scope is the same as to say that it doesn't occur in nature. I am not stating that science has uncovered and understood everything in its scope or that it ever will. I am only saying that it is the study of nature, all of nature, and as such what ever cannot be studied by it is no part of nature. Only the abstract and the supernatural are beyond science, but every effect in nature, no matter what the cause, is well in its domain.

What is being protected? In my opinion its just a lack of tools, so I think what is being protected is a interest in it, despite the lack of tools.

Fair enough, I appreciate that. It seems like we have a mere misunderstanding, not a disagreement. To me, when someone says that their claims about what happened to them in reality are beyond scientific investigation, I am not hearing that our current instruments are unfit to draw definitive conclusions about them, but rather either a different understanding of what science is or what its domain is, or a plea for the claims to not be examined. Why someone would have any confidence in something they spent no time critically evaluating (as evidenced by the fact that never once do they present a case culminating in their own conclusion beyond "that's been my experience, it is beyond (scientific) questioning") is something I can't understand either way.

Better to leave questions unanswered than answers unquestioned

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 11 months ago #281731 by Rex
Replied by Rex on topic O.B.E.'s
Everything has cause and effect, so by claiming OBEs are natural and literally true in the sense you claim means something normal and quantitative causes them, and in turn having an OBE effects the physical surroundings. Several projects have attempted to measure the possible causes or effects, leading to things like the Stargate Project, discovering visual patterns from the corona effect from kirlian photography, etc. Every time someone presented an academic attempt at some parapsychological feat that supposedly was outside the margin of error, flaws in the experiment proved that cheating was involved.

What you perceive is not necessarily an accurate interpretation of nature. You can measure against the internally consistent experiments that others have made in order to make predictions that can be used as metrics. The scientific method is just a methodology of how you measure phenomena, so instrumentation are an accountable source of error that haven't stopped an entire field from working. The great thing about parapsychological experiments is that most of them don't involve instrumentation, rather just pass/fail tests (i.e. picking a symbol psychically transmitted from a selection).

If you want to claim that OBE/ESP/Psi phenomena are outside of the realm of natural laws, you absolutely can and no one will argue with you. Claiming it to be supernatural though means you leave the aegis of causal relationships, so you can't use materialistic principles to describe the immaterial.

Tl;dr you can't double dip and claim that OBE's are beyond the realm of science but are still understandable in materialistic terms.

Knights Secretary's Secretary
Apprentices: Vandrar
TM: Carlos Martinez
"A serious and good philosophical work could be written consisting entirely of jokes" - Wittgenstein
The following user(s) said Thank You: Gisteron

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: ZerokevlarVerheilenChaotishRabeRiniTavi