"Abracadbra" ..now you are beginning to decend into fantasy and religious beliefs ...if you believe in spirit worlds then simply offer some proof instead of blaming science and atheists for your lack of proof....isn't that like ..er..delusional

That is right. We know nothing about the true nature of the universe.

That is why I get annoyed when someone makes fun of my theories. I say to them... well okay then you tell me scientifically how what I am saying is impossible or how what you declare is a fact. I am willing to listen to any reasonable evidence in layman's terms. I don't speak mathematics and complicated formulas, I speak English.

Also, I want the bottom line. I want the test, the proof etc. I don't want to have to wade through a mountain of crap to get to the nitty gritty.

I don't know why you're getting so upset about a word.

If it's not an ideology then it's just a label that different people use to describe their stance on religion or spirituality.

In that case, there would be a myriad of different kinds of 'athesits' becasue every individual probably uses the label to mean something different.

It was never my intent to pick on a group of people called "atheists". Like you said, it's not an ideology so there should be no such 'group' of people.

My intention was to address the thread specifically to the atheists who believe that science actually denies a spiritual essence to existence.

As far as I'm concerned anyone who doesn't hold that stance is not truly an atheist but merely an agnostic.

If your stance is that you just don't have enough information to say whether or not reality has a spiritual essence then you're agnostic, and not truly an 'atheist'.

Why fight to use the label "atheist" to mean "agnostic" when we already have that word avaiable.

This is the way I see it.

Atheist - believes there is no spiritual essence to reality.

Agnostic - believes we don't have sufficient evidence to prove one way or the other.

Theists - firmly believes that there is a spiritual essence to reality.

I've confessed many times on these forums that I'm an agnostic that leans toward theism.

I haven't been convinced of theism yet. I hope that some day I can be convinced of the spiritual nature of our existence. That will mean that I have actually made contact with a spirit. I'm working toward that goal. If it ever happens I will be thrilled. If it doesn't then perhaps atheism is true.

In the meantime I see no reason to jump to either conclusion.

I can't imagine ever becoming a full-fledged atheist because how could I ever know for sure that there is no spiritual essence to reality?

It would seem to me that the only two options that are truly open are either agonoticism or theism.

Atheism is for people who genuinely aren't interested in the possiblities. There's no way to prove atheism, so why not always at least remain agnostic?

Its funny you say that, these videos illustrates exactly why that is.



Why Young Earth Creationists Must Deny Gravity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bRvt0InhYk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEW1oQBZu-I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAUxQjylzc8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSEBR_6lnT4

_________________________

you know what I changed what I wrote here, becuase it is clear you are not going to understand the weakness of your arguemtns, or even realize where your logic is flawed.

"It was never my intent to pick on a group of people called "atheists". Like you said, it's not an ideology so there should be no such 'group' of people."

When you can tell me why this statement is nonsense then we can pick back up.

Think about it. Really think about ask yourself what groups can comprise of, and cannot comprise of and then come back.

Weak reasoning leads to wrong assumptions which this thread and your understanding of terms within it have come down to.

Excerpt from 'jeannie's post above:

'... Its hard to explain that, but I have had experiences that lead me to believe these things. Experience is my best authority...'

Hey 'jeannie',

Don't turn 'feral' on us now!!! (just kidding!!!)

Actually I partly agree, and partly disagree with statements of your post.

IMO, we probably are no more than this most imperfect (perfectible maybe over billions of years) 'self-aware-meaning-making-thing' which our neo cortex generates. Just saying this based on the current evidence.

However, when you point to the source, well now we're talking. Doesn't change our very limited 'self-aware' exclusive status mind you, but ...

... it opens up a whole other 'connection'!!!

Neuro Thermal Imaging has clearly demonstrated one of the most fascinating distinctions about the whole understanding of the 'brain' thing.

Activity, as measured through thermal imaging of different sectors of the brain, catching electro-thermic synapses activty, and the bits of information generated, came out as follows :

reptilian part of the brain, vital functions: breathing, etc., instinct: fight or flight reactions,
.. and lymbic areas of the brain,
would be bombarded with 400 billion bits of information second!!!

The neo cortex, or lower-frontal lobe, only treats 2 000 bits second, an insignificant fraction of that which 'percolates up' from the 'lower brains'.

2 000 bits second of non-stop treatment, while quite a mass of info, is an absurdly small portion of the 400billion generated every second by the 'lower brains', which we unconsciously and subconsciously 'feel', and yet can't grasp, eventhough it is all happening WITHIN.

So, two hypothesis' here:

FIRST HYPOTHESIS:
The 2 000 bits/second (neocortex) self-awareness vs the 400billion bits/second (lower brains) subconcious and unconscious activity, is enough to create within our own 'self-aware-experience' this whole 'self' generated world of intuition, dreams, half sense of 'connectedness'.

SECOND HYPOTHESIS:
the source of the 400billion bits IS NOT our own brain. Eventhough there is a lot of interesting hypothesis' around touching with the Quantum field and particle (energy) flow, no one has an answer for the source as of now. Observed activity within, but no answers on the source.

So, I don't have an aswer for it either, but I agree that the source of that stuff (400 billion bits),
... eventhough WE may be nothing other than JUST the product of our imperfect 'self-aware' brain,
... HAS TO FASCINATE!!!

So, before the fundamentalists claim it for their 'god' - I.D. - BS camp, I'd rather think that 'Abra' could articulate better than I ever could, that this 400billion bits of brain activity, is nothing other than the product of some sort of continuous wave or 'Quantum Flow', what the heck!!! within the infamous unified Q. field that we are wholly, eventhough unconsciously, part of !!!

Hey, I'm back, been reading ancient history

Stepping back a page or so of posts I read your reply Abra and also yours Voil, and then continued till I got to another post by Voil, I'll get to that in a second.

Abra, in reading your reply to my post, I remembered a study done about near death experineces. The scientist involved (female, but at the moment her name escapes me)wanted to know why so many near death experiences seemed to fall in two catagories; the mystic heavenly vision and the horror and fear filled (hell)vision. The results of her testing, indicated that these visions were at least partially chemically induced. There were some other theories regarding the visual cortex, to explain what wasn't a chemical reaction.

Anyway, the point is, near death experiences might well have qualified under YOUR idea of 'letting go'- until this scientist discovered other causes.

My other thought was also touched upon, and that was in regards to chemically induces altered states of mind. But once again, an altered state of mind, if it can be controlled or even worth investigating, must provide something pertinant to our physical reality or it can never be anything more than a subjective value.

Like other here, I've had my own unique experiences, and here is were I want to bring up what Voil last spoke of.



We consider ourselves 'aware' but our actual cognitive state is never 'fully aware' because, as Voil points out, our brain has created short cuts, so we don't have to consider every 'bit' of information in any single moment of awarness. But the information still floods in.

With that in mind, when you speak of 'letting go' how can you be sure that's what you're doing? After all, imagination has multi-billions of bits of information upon which to draw; information we have not truely been cognisent of.

If there is (notice my skepticism, rather than discounting)so, if there is another state of mind in which reality takes a different form, then there must be some link that gets us from here to there. If there is a link then interaction, at some quantifiable level, should be available.

You say that this type of shamanistic interaction has been taking place for 50,000 years, than what quantifiable evidence has been accumulated? If nothing has transpired that provides information that can directly affect something in or on our current state of physical reality,then how can it be validated? Once again, how can you be sure your 'current imagination' is not simply drawing on the multi-billions of uncognicized information in our minds?

I think this distinction is overlooked far to often in these types of conversations.

I think when someone believes something to be true, and another person makes any statement contrary or critical its typically sense on an opposite footing (discounting).

I am skeptical. Convincing me requires solid logic and insightful reasoning, or hard evidence.

________

I will see you all in a few hours heading to the bar to play some sax!!!!

Very nice response! I lean towards the second hypothesis.

(As for turning 'feral' on you, that thought actually did cross my mind when I wrote that. )

But I have thought about my experiences over a few years and as I piece together my 'world view' or philosophy I am at the point where I attribute them to my (or the) subconscious mind which would be the 400billion bits/second (lower brains) subconcious and/or unconscious activity.

I believe it is an energy field that operates both as a personal 'higher mind' and is within (or connected to) a massive network or collective mind.

It's the closest thing to 'God' I can imagine, but it is not actually 'God' but more of the mind of 'God' or a massive collective network of energy and information. I am thinking that it is a flat two dimensional surface that projects a holographic multi-dimensional world.

That's my current wild idea.

'Jeannie', you opened with:



Actually the two hypothesises are profoundly linked, complimentary, non-exclusive.

Your abilility to be aware of anything is generated by the 'neo cortex frontal lobe' part of the brain. The 2 000 bits/seconds 'machine'.

Yet, the whole 400billion bits percolates up, if you will, as though it was knocking at the door of the neo cortex without being allowed in.
If you were at the door of the 'full house' neo cortex 'cafe', and the owner asked you
'... what's out there?...',
you would answer:
'... I don't know exactly, but it's something BIG!!!...'

The '... NOT KNOWING...' combined with '...BIG...' creates all of its own a 'FEAR OF NOT KNOWING' (fight-flight), that we compulsively seek to understand and '...KNOW...' the unknowable, thus the human creation of te concept 'god(s), theist, etc.'

And thus it is with the coexistence between 'unconcsious/subconscious' and 'conscious' (rationaly treated bits) of info.

It is all WITHIN.

The disproportionately inferior 'treating capability' of the neocortex, to the massive amount of information bombarded from 'lower brains', gives us the vivid impression that it is OUTSIDE OF US!!! (a phenomenon very similar to the visual cortex, giving us the impression that what we see IS out there!!!

... AND YET, ALL POINTS TO IT ALL BEING WITHIN!!! including, paradoxically, or quantum physically viewed, the source itself!!!

Ponder that for a while!!!

Voil Wrote:


I think this elaboration is a good addition to my last post. It qualifies the types of experience that I envision in Abra's ideas. There may be a state of mind which enables us to touch upon all that we hold within, but as Voil points out, what we touch from that altered state of mind is still the remnants of all we've perceived from our physical state.

In another post Voil stated that Abra and I may have more in agreement than we first thought. With his current elaboration, I would have to agree. But Abra assumes the position that one state of mind comprehends a different reality, I posit that both are the same reality, viewed from an altered state of mind.

And this is one of the greatest fallacies of the scientific method!

Science CANNOT say that her visions were 'Chemically Induced". That's a total ASSUMPTION that cannot be proven.

All that science can truly say about the situation is that particular chemicals are released during her experiences. Whether the chemicals induce the experience or the experience induces the release of the chemicals is anyone's guess!

In fact, the shamans have it just the other way around! They claim that these states of consciousness are indeed what cause the release of chemicals and hormones that often serve to have a healing affect on the body, but can also serve to have a negative affect on the body depending on the nature of the experience.

To claim that because science has detected chemicals being released during these times implies that the chemicals are the cause of the event is absurd. What they caused the released of those particular chemicals at that particular time?

If I claim that they have it backwards, they cannot come up with the slightest evidence otherwise!

So this is where science is often sued to JUMP to conclusions that truly haven't yet been PROVEN.

The shamans would just roll their eyes and say to the scientitsts, "Well of course there are chemicals being released during these psychic experiences you doofuses!"

We're right back at square one on that one.



It seems to me that it's being validated almost daily. It's well-known that modern medical doctors have tones of stories to tell of patients who have come to them with advanced stages of diseased, only to return the next visit showing now signs of ill-health whatsoever. This happens all the time.

What does science say? They say, "We can't explain it, so we're not going to bother keeping track of it because it's unverifiable data. By unverifiable they simply mean that they aren't going to trust the doctors. They're going to just ASSUME that the doctors must have made a misdiagnosis and the disease wasn't as bad as they had originally thought during the first visit.

By the way, if shamanism is true, a person doesn't need to practice shamanism for it to work. The practice of shamanism is simply a set of guidelines that people have traditionally used to help these processes along. Even the shamans will confess that sometimes they work and sometimes they don't. This doesn't bother the shamans because they understand these things are a request for assistance, and sometimes there is no assistance forthcoming. And there may be reasons for this. Shamanism is not the same as science. Shamans don't claim that if you do precise things you will get precise results.

So this time the scientists get to roll there eyes and say to the shamans, "So in other words it's just the luck of the draw! Randomness!".

YES! It is a form of randomness! But the shamans have learned how to toss the spiritual dice! And all they are saying is that the more you toss the dice the better your chances will be that the numbers you're hoping for will come up!

Moreover, the shamans will also claim that the more you toss the dice the better you will get at tossing them.

Science has become so depending on mathematics. They want equations that when you run through the calculations you come up with at NUMBER and that number is the CORRECT ANSWER PERIOD!

In fact, that's precisely Newtonian Science! Classical physicists believed that EVERYTHING could be calculated and you can get a CONCRETE ANSWER EVERY TIME!

In fact, this was the catastrophe of Quantum Physics! Quantum Mechanics came along and says NO! On the basic fundamental level of reality ("actuality" as Michael prefers to call it) the universe is RANDOM CHANCE! It's not truly possible to calculate anything on a fundamental level of reality.

But the scientists argue, "Ah! But we can calculate PROBABILITIES!" . They are resting on the idea that probabilities offer some kind of 'concreteness'. But they don't really. They are only meaningful in large scale situations when you have huge conglomerations of billions upon billions of atoms, then you begin to see some sense of mathematical 'probability curves' but those CURVES are entirely DEPENDENT upon the large scale situation. Change the large scale situation and the probabilities curves change!

Change what you INTEND to MEASURE and you get a different RESULT!

Well, this is PRECISELY what the shamans are DOING! They are changing what they focus their INTENT on and that changes the PROBABILITY CURVES of the RESULT!

In a very real sense Shamanism was dependent upon the probabilistic nature of the universe LONG BEFORE Quantum Mechanics was ever discovered!

Yes, shamanism DEPENDS on PROBABILITIES, that's what DRIVES IT! If it wasn't for the probabilistic nature of the universe shamanism wouldn't be possible.

So to laugh it off as 'just randomness' would be the same thing as laughing off Quantum Mechanics as nothing more than 'just randomness', yet Quantum Mechanics is one of the TWO GREAT PILLARS of MODERN SCIENCE! The other pillar being General Relativity.

In other words, if Quantum Mechanics has any merit at all, then so does Shamanism!



I can't be sure, and neither would it make any difference if I was sure, one way or the other.

And my reasoning comes FROM SCIENCE!

Science itself has totally recognized and experimentally verified that virtual 'particles' are constantly popping into and out of existence all the time everywhere. This is happening so intensely that it's hard to fathom the scope of it!

But just to help rituality this a bit let me try by saying this: There many virtual partials are popping into and out of existence even within the EMPTY SPACE within every single atom.

WITHIN VERY SINGLE ATOM!

There are MORE virtual particles popping into and out of existence than there are atoms in this universe!

In fact, in order to get the correct numerical results for the forces within atoms scientists must calculated by the forces of virtual particles by integrating over INFINITY!

In other words, they must assume that there are an infinite number of virtual particles popping into and out of existence within EACH and EVERY atom in this universe!

What does that say about the universe? It tells me that there are far more virtual particles that there are atoms.

Scientists also KNOW that virtual particles are very REAL in that they affect the outcome of measurable events in this universe, such as the forces between subatomic particles as well as between the atoms themselves.

So now let's go back to look within our brains.

How much of our brain actually BELONGS to US?

Well if we are arrogant enough to claim personal ownership to the atoms that make up our brain, we can at least say that the atoms that make up our brain BELONG to US.

But what about the infinity of virtual particles that are constantly popping in and out of existence within our brains and AFFECTING all of the atoms within our brain. Do they "BELONG to US"?

Where does our brain leave off and the void from whence these infinite virtual particles arise begin?

I see no reason whatsoever to believe that there exist any distinction between us and the 'void'. There is clearly NO BARRIER preventing these virtual particles from popping in and out of existence in our brains and AFFECTING the atoms that make up our neural nets.

In fact, when viewed in this way science has actually VERIFIED that we are indeed ALL CONNECTED to the 'void' from whence these virtual particles arise.

As far as I'm concerned science has already proven that we are indeed connected to a common realm 'beyond' that which we would normally associate with 'reality' in a Newtonian sense.

We are all connected to 'the void'.

Science has NO CLUE what 'the void' is.

But they have VERIFIED that virtual particles are CONSTANTLY coming in to being from this 'void' and disappearing back into this 'void', but not without having a DIRECT AFFECT on the matter and atoms within our 'reality'.

So science has indeed verified that our brains are not entirely OURS. We are clearly connected to a "void" which science can't even begin to describe or put their finger on.

In fact, 'void' is truly an improper word because if virtual particles can come from this 'void' then there must be something more to it than merely a 'void'.

I personally feel that science has already proven that we are all directly connected to these ultimate 'substrate' of existence.

So when you talk about "Our Brain" like as if it is a solitary thing that has no connection beyond the confines of our skulls, I think you are assuming a lot that even modern science does not support.

According to modern science all of our brains are directly connected to a very active 'common void' which science has absolutely NO CLUE ABOUT.

So why would you even speak about are brains as though they are islands? That's not even scientific.

Science necessary must disagree with that conclusion.

Science has us all connected to the 'common substrate' via virtual particles. And science has NO CLUE how that substrate works, or what its nature is. In fact, it appears to be ruled by the laws of Quantum Mechanics which blows away all the Newtonian restrictions of space and time. In fact Quantum Mechanics even blows away the Relativistic notion of the speed of light being a barrier. In the Quantum World particles exhibit non-local behavior which means that Cause and Effect even gets tossed out the window!

So when a shaman says, "Your results may be probabilistic, but you can change the probabilities by doing these particular things", why should we laugh at that. Isn't that PRECISELY what the SCIENCE of Quantum Mechanics says the world is LIKE!

You tend to view your brain as an isolated computer. You think that it has a given amount of data and that it can't be affected or changed from the outside world expect through your own experience and senses.

But the brain words on the level of PHOTOS and ELECTRONS, both of which are SUB-ATOMIC particles and can be GREATLY INFLUENCED by virtual particles that are CONSTANTLY popping into and out of existence in your brain!

Your brain is NOT the ISLAND that you have convinced yourself to believe that it is.

I feel that what you have created is truly a "Newtonian" absolute view of reality. You have convinced yourself that you are isolated from the rest of the universe. You are nothing more than a biological sack of completely isolated atoms that is unaffected by the "external" world other than via your physical senses.

But modern science truly does not support that view. You are being constantly influence by an infinite flux of virtual particles that pervade every ounce of your being.

You are NOT the Island that you believe yourself to be!

And even science has verified this FACT.

(sorry for the long post, I'm just a rambl'n man)

Well, I only hope that after having read my above post, you realise that what you are calling "within" is not cut-and-dried.

You seem to think that your body is a 'sealed' container and nothing can 'get in' unless it penetrates your skin or senses.

I think the constant flux of virtual particles (that science recognizes and has experimentally verified to exist) shows that what you think of as a 'sealed vessle' it not sealed at all.

Your brain is totally open to the void as if it has no 'container walls' at all.

You're not a sealed unit.

And science has no clue what the 'void' is, other than the fact that it's truly not a 'void' at all.

ABSOLUTELY 'Abra'!!! (I knew I could count on you to articulate it infinitely better than I ever could; part of the unified particles theory!!! just flow!)

The 'WITHIN' has nothing to do with this 'separate' notion of the 'I', the ego, the FALSELY separated 'self', from the rest. The 'WITHIN' evoked, IS FREE of the 'self-aware' generated dimension of separation; falsehood of all falsehoods, whether you tackle it from the philosophical, scientific, or sociological angles.

The 'whithin' that I refer to, and that I suspect 'Abra' might be referring to here, is the very opposite perspective of this 'separate', 'island onto oneself', egocentric and false notion.

Abscence of 'separation',
... is very much what might very much 'be there' (already, always), from everything that science reveals,
... is very much what we would most likely 'experience' (theoretically speaking),

..if it weren't for our infamous 'self-aware' exclusive nature, which seperates, and thus bars us from such experience.

The idea of 'WITHIN', unraveled from the 'ego', PARADOXICALLY EMBODIES THE '... ONE WITH IT ALL...'; fully integrated notion of the unified theory.

Regardless of our neocortex's insistence to separate us from it all, with the very effective 'self-aware', and 'self-centric' exclusive generated illusion and falsehood where humans are cimented at the '... center of it all...',

... it may be that humans are nothing other than an insignificant ('cause the 'universe' does share this 'significance' concept with humans)...

...PART OF IT ALL,

or more accurately,

... AN INTRINSIC ONE 'IN' and 'WITH' IT ALL!!!

... perhaps simply '... flashing in and out of some sort of existence,
to the tune of the Atomic energetic reality within which we oscillate...'

Abra,

As usual, you have provided ample information in support of your position. That's what I enjoy most about discussions with you.

Unfortunately, I'm in between class and work, so I don't have time to respond.

Please be patient, as I do have a responce to present.

One thing I do want to say now, however, is with regards to your statement

I think there are certain functional values that require the kind of 'closed system' thought to which you refer. One of values of logically examining the world, via the closed system view of the physical form, is that we gain insight into behavior. This is a necessary science if we are to understand various cultural views, and the idea and formation of the self-concept.

This is one reason I would say 'yes', I stand in affirmation of what I am accused.

But I also want to confirm that there are, possible, other levels of consciousness that still remain in question. I am simply skeptical, and through that skepticism, like any good scientist, I will continue to look for all and any knowledge or theories that currently exist on both sides of the discussion.

Thanks again for your counter points, I'll be back when I need a break from more 'institutionalized' ideas of knowledge.

Redy

On completing this responce I noticed a post by Voil, intersting and, once again,I think he has addressed certain similarities between, or perhaps that link, what seem to be our converse ideas. I'll be back!

What is reality?

Reality is when you don't get a weeks sleep because your child is crying in pain when she gets a new tooth.

I wish it was a bad dream, but it's not, it sure feels like reality to me!

In the end am I relieved that my little one has her new tooth and can sleep in peace allowing me to sleep in peace also.

Brand new 'little ones', with their crying, and 'new tooth', and 'poopy diapers', and all,

... ARE BY FAR THE MOST FASCINATING 'SELF-AWARE' GENERATED 'REALITY' THERE IS!!!

On the larger picture, the universal DNA keeps 'flashing' in and out of existence!!!

Belated congrats to the mother, and to you 'smiless'!!!

Well thank you very much kind sir as it truly is a blessing to sleep again

I will have one more shot of cognac in your name and to the wisdom you have humbly shared with us on reality

Courvoisier of course!!!

fantastic post that truly questions and peers into the delimited beliefs sold as the minds only true event horizon!!!

peace and peace

Tryin' ta make a livin' and doin' the best you can...

So, if there are these "virtual" particles popping in and out of existence in this realm or here in what we consider "actual", couldn't it be possible that, in a whole/greater picture or other "realm", what we view as "actual" could be considered virtual?

If our synapses constantly fire information chemically AND electrically, couldn't our physical brains (perhaps even our entire bodies) also serve as antennae, transmitting information to and from a collective pool of "information" or substrate, subconsciously connecting each of us to a whole system?