You know... There are so many sides to this discussion, yet Steve's post was written in a way that makes it seem as if there are only two. So it's no surprise that assumptions, misinterpretations and criticisms are plentiful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela  When we find ourselves invalidating, negating, obliterating, declaring fraud, and warning of danger to protect what we ourselves believe -- there's our clue that being open might make a positive difference in the communication, and in our lives. We don't have to make others wrong in order to be satisfied and fulfilled with our own beliefs, or the tools we use to create a life we love. |
And yet this is exactly what Steve's post does. It makes all those who hold an objective perspective wrong (or at least mislead). It encourages the pointless polarisation between the SR and OR perspectives. No surprise given Steve's ideas about polarity and polarisation.
I'd be honestly surprised if anyone who has demanded proof from Steve changed their mind after reading that post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lola What am I missing?
Why is there frequently such a demand for Steve to prove something, anything that he experiences in his personal reality? And I think that is the distinction here. He is sharing his personal experiences. He's not claiming to make verifiable reports of scientific experiments. |
I suspect that the demands for proof are actually criticisms of the explanations linked to personal experiences (Steve's or anyone else's). When someone says "I had a psychic experience" it's not a big deal for anyone else. But when someone says "I had a psychic experience and
this is what it says about reality", that's when people start demanding proof. And Steve has had
a lot to say about reality, under the guise of the SR perspective and its potential for unleashing creativity.
Unfortunately its very easy to confuse someone's account of their personal experiences with an attempt at explaining how those experiences are possible, if someone regularly talks about both.
I'm not saying that's a good thing. Just that it happens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lola Let's say I write a post telling you all about going sailing yesterday. I could embellish that story with great detail, emotion and physical sensation. Can I prove to you that I had a good time sailing with friends yesterday? Not likely. A "good time" is a subjective experience, wouldn't you agree?
...
Or maybe I didn't go sailing at all yesterday. Maybe I'm making it all up. Does it really matter if my story really happened if it sparks within you a desire to experience sailing for yourself? And will you ever REALLY understand the lure of sailing unless you experience it yourself? And if you try it and are a failure as a sailor, does that diminish the validity of MY experience? |
If you lived in the middle of a huge desert we'd be unlikely to believe you. But you are right, that wouldn't change the validity of your experience, just the fact of its occurrence. Likewise it would mean the story is interesting, but ultimately useless to the rest of us who can't share your experience of boats and abundant water in this desolate wasteland. Except perhaps to those who are so very thirsty that they're willing to believe in even the illusion of water, and it becomes real for them too.
That's the difference between an experience of a "good time" versus an experience of water. One tangible, the other is not. One can be easily influenced by state of mind, but to influence the other that way is much much harder.
An experience of astral projection or any other such phenomenon, if it occurs outside the mind, can be objectively verified (where objective verification means verification by other people, or by instruments). That we can't do it yet doesn't mean that it's impossible, nor that we should not try to do it.
Improving mental health (something very important in this age of increasing life-spans and increasing complexity of life) requires doing all that we can to understand how the mind works, and that includes exploring all psychic phenomenon, and pursuing those explorations wherever they lead. So I see nothing wrong with looking for "proof" of psychic experiences, as long as
both those experiencers and "proof-seekers" are free to do what they want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else.