Psychic Experience - Actually psychic, or explainable by science?
A lot of the people in these forums have very open minds, which is a great thing, because I love to see other people debate topics and I love to throw in my alternate viewpoints when applicable. :p One of the topics a lot of people on these forums are particularly open to (for obvious reasons) is the topic of psychic phenominon. Are psychic experiences caused by people actually being psychic, or are they caused by your body interpreting normal, biological events and twisting them to fit a psychic mindset?
This is my belief:
After you vote, post what makes you side with your choice. The goal isn't for everybody to argue with each other what it is - real or not! - but to get a consensus on what makes up everybody's unique belief system. If you genuinely believe in psychic abilities, what influences your choice? And you to, science folk, what makes you put so much faith in science and less in personal experiences?
Obviously, I go with science... for the above reasons. :) I don't claim to know everything that science knows, so I'll be the first to say that a lot of your specific questions directed at me (if any!) dealing with the scientific understanding about paranormal activities will be "I don't know". But I do know the major gists of everything, which provides enough evidence for me to side with science and logic.
I go with science. However, we dont have the science to explain it yet...
Something I plan on working on in my life...
Here's my opinion. (as of now, it is subject to change as I learn more!)
I believe that our brains operate at certain frequencies. Science proves this now. I forget the exact frequency's science says our brains are typically at, at the different levels of consciousness. Like, when we are awake and focused we're at one frequency, sleepy, we're at another, and semi-conscious, we're at another, and dreaming, yet another.
I belive that the spirit world, universal ebb and flow, whatever it is, are easier to pick up on at certain levels. This in part explaining why certain people are more "sensitive" than others. Their brains are just at a different frequency. Some people can hear higher pitched noises and freqency's more than others. Is this considered a psychic ability?..Not usually until some of these same people may claim to hear voices or spirits, all of the sudden people dont accept it as science and it becomes paranormal or just crazy, lol. But I think it is still science based.
Humans also put out a different electromagnetic fields. It could even be as complex and individual as different fingerprints or maybe not.
But, some people claim to see Aura's. This too could be an effect of actually being able to see the emf around people.
Just like our frequency's change when our brains are at different levels, our emf's would too. So, it's hard to call it just psychic or just science at this point. It's considered psychic now, but very soon I hope science can figure more out.
One example, from my own personal experience, I have an effect on lights. Neon, old-school bulbs, doesn't matter. It seems when I'm really rested and all hyper, I actually have less of an effect. If I'm deep in thought and kinda tired, I'll have more of an effect.
I work in an industrial plant that has all kinds of different kinds of lights, mostly flourescent, and some co-workers actually won't drive around with me becuz the light thing freaks them out. Some lights turn off and some will turn on. I think it is possibly because our electromagnetic field is greater than we realize. Those particals that travel back and forth in the lights are affected by different emf comming into it's area. That being why it would go off, come on, or even blow out if the electric charge was suddenly higher than the outlet usually handled.
Ever since the light bulb was invented, it seems to be one of the most common things involved in ghost stories. Lights turning on or off. Could be because this other side that we dont know also operates on a certain EMF we havent been able to land right on, just go around it. I mean, we all know the EMF meter is a major tool in ghost investigations...Science...
The light thing with me personally has been something that has gone on since I was a kid. I go through an unusal amount of light bulbs. Growing up my parents blamed it on faulty wiring. Then we moved and I had the same problem. Then they came out with the energy efficent bulbs. Dont go through them near as fast, but definetly more than average. I have had my alternator go out in both vehicles I have purchased, soon after I purchased them. In different moods, my car starts funny. I cant count how many lights and blinkers I've gone through between both of my cars I've owned. Both were bought new..They had no problems any other time. In my opinion this is not necessarily because I'm psychic or something, just usually running on a different emf. I was electrocuted when I was a little kid. Could be part of the reason, but science isnt quite there yet...
But, I feel we are on our way....Did all that make any sense?
Even though I think things can be explained by science eventually, it won't make psychic things any less amazing, just more credible...
I believe in life after death. Science can't disprove this.
As we get to the ether after death, there are of course other beings.
Why shouldn't we be able to communicate with them while we're still on earth?
I also think that you don't have to decide between science and believe. They do not contradict each other.
I think brains do work on different frequencies, think of savants they certainly do!
I'm amazed you can look scientifically at your light bulb experiences. Still pretty amazing.
As a passionate explorer of the psychic myself I was gifted with the opportunity of having a discussion with a physics professor a few weeks ago and it was refreshing because he neither took the view of completely believing nor negating psychic or spiritual phenomena. Rather he came from a point of view of what science was presently able to measure and how one could possibly go about measuring psychic or spiritual phenomena based on developments and evolution from present tools and resources.
What I found interesting about this professor was that he wasn't trying to prove anything to me, he was just having a discussion about what he thought to be possible regarding the measurement of psychic/spiritual energy based on what he knew to be presently possible.
He was also completely open either way to these hypothesis' being proven or dis-proven in the future as tools are developed. He also made the interesting comment that even once something in science is proven it is never completely proven and even once something is dis-proven it is never completely dis-proven - because science makes allowances for variables that it does not yet have an awareness or knowledge of.
He also made the comment that "of course science is going to find out a lot more in the future, its never stopped, if we'd found out everything already then science would be a dead and no longer evolving art and I'd be out of a job."
When I asked him whether he had a personal opinion either way on psychic phenomena he said "I've been in this profession so long that its hard to take a black and white opinion, because the very basis of research is always going to bring new light to old information. Whether I have an opinion or not doesn't seem to matter when the results of particular research come in and so over time I've come to believe in my research, ideas and new potentials rather than opinions."
Overall, this was one of the most enlightening and growth inducing discussions I've had in a long time.
I chose the latter option. I twas a recent conversion for me. I find too many logical errors to be able to believe totally in psychic phenomena.
lasti, no offense, but you are building on an unfounded assumption, just because science can't disprove it. Science doesn't disprove anything. it comes up with theories based on data. It doesn't actively try to disprove, unless it is logically so because of what is proven.
I have a few problems with believing in a soul. I know that's not psychic ability, but it is supernatural/paranormal so close enough. I actually wanted to start a thread with these discussions, but see people getting so defensive around here that I don't know if we can have a calm discussion without resorting to attacks.
My question is this:
Does the soul follow the laws of physics?
If so, of what is it composed?
What is its source of energy? Every action takes some energy, and energy can neither be created nor destroyed. The soul must then have some source of energy so that it can continue to exist. The body has nourishment from food, drink, oxygen, etc.
Further, when people have some brain damage, their personality often changes significantly, or they lose memory. Doesn't the soul retain this information, if it exists? Why do they change?
If the soul does not follow the laws of physics, why not? What excludes it from this?
I find that this is the base of any discussion of psychic or paranormal phenomena. If we don't know if the soul exists, then we can't build on top of that concept.
I believe psychic is science - just science that has yet to be discovered, or articulated and widely discussed. It's not provable, but I go by what I have experienced, which is knowing things about people that I can't even see, and it's not just lucky guess stuff, it's a genuine knowing. My hands get hot and my heart and gut feel different when the connection is on.
I believe it has to do with the energetic connection we all share, at the sub-subatomic level - but that's not research, either, just a feeling. I put a lot of stock in my feelings, which won't convince anyone else, but that's not why I'm here. I'm not here to prove or disprove anything. I'm here to live my life as openly, honestly and deeply as I possibly can, and I love where my path has brought me.
Why make this poll in the Psychic & Paranormal forum? Way to go to get an unbiased result... :p
Undeniable scientific proof of psychic phenomena:
YouTube - "Science and the taboo of psi" with Dean Radin
I saw part of that video a while ago, though never finished it because it is so long. My question is, is anything there actually proven? Is anything published in a peer-reviewed research journal? If it's not, it's not worth anything, even if it is a professor talking about it.
Yes, it's been replicated independently by skeptical scientists.
Two more questions!
Which journal, and which scientists, if I may ask? :p
Indeed, if it were truly reviewed and published, I should think we'd hear more about it. I remain skeptical.
I remember when I first went vegan and learned how food animals were tortured and how they suffer. I told my mom about it and she said, "No way, if that were true, we'd all know about it. It would be on the news media." Uh, wrong. Media doesn't cover everything and they certainly don't go out of their way to expose the horrors of the meat industry. Why do you think the media would go out of their way to give any credence to psychic phenomenon? The truth may be out there, but it ain't on CNN ;)
Before we say what is and what isn't, let's do some research so we don't draw conclusions on faulty assumptions.
Remember the spoon bending powers of Uri Geller?
He was studied closely at various universities and some results were quite remarkable. I remember reading about the Cambridge university experiments some years ago:
The Geller Papers
I think it probable that in later years, his powers dwindled and he may have resorted to faking his abilities on TV.
I believe that consciousness is seperate from the brain; We are more than just a pack of neurons. I believe that each of us is one consciousness divided and that our awareness still exists when the body dies. Much research on people that have had near death experiences corroborates with this. There is so much we do not understand about the nature of reality.
When I say that we would have heard about it, I don't mean necessarily from the media. I mean that it would be more well-known in the scientific community, since it would be quite the breakthrough.
Fair enough. Does anyone have links to published papers on psychic phenomenon that we can review from credible sources? I remember hearing about a place in Arizona that Allison DuBois participated in. They tested her extensively. That might be a good place to start, other than the Dean Radin stuff.
I'll ask you an honest question, MattFYF: how many hours have you spent reading:
Excuse me if I'm being presumptuous, but I'm going to guess zero, suggested by the mere fact that you thought these journals were not peer-reviewed.
You wrote that all parapsychology experiments were flawed. I'm guessing you gathered this conclusion from other skeptics, who also gathered it from other skeptics, etc.
The problem is that no one with a pre-disposed bias against parapsychology really wants to sit down for hours analyzing the million nuances of statistical psychology results. It's easier to just make a few one-ended observations and call it a day.
Once you don't believe in souls and do believe in a random world with the quantum effects that mainstream science assumes as true, you have believe in life after death.
Considering an infinitive time of being dead very small chances are enough to get reincarnated sometime in the future.
To not believe in reincarnation you have to believe that there is something special about a human that isn't created randomly like a soul.
But if you do believe in souls, you do also have to believe in a mean God to not believe in some form of reincarnation.
So whether or not a soul exists, it's resonable to believe in reincarnation.
Brutha, that is simply not true.
Firstly, ar eyou a physicist? Have you studied in detail quantum mechanics? If not, you probably don't know enough to be able to make such sweeping statements.
Secondly, if there is no soul, what exactly si reincarnated? if we are only the body, yet you believe in reincarnation, well there is nothing to be re-incarnated. You can simply believe that people are born.
I have no comment on your other points because, again, I doubt you've studied quantum mechanics extensively enough to be able to make such statements.
this is your specific personality or gene makeup from this lifetime and this lifetime alone. that is reincarnation in the biological aspect.
your soul, or essence, is not a part of your personality. personality is only a part of this one lifetime -- it is not attached to your essence. so when people get brain damage and their personality changes a lot -- its purely a biological factor so it does not have anything to do with the essence.
you essence uses your body like a tool. think of your body as virtual reality equipment that you are assigned to. i know you know what i'm talking about because before you switched your major you agreed with me :p
I was actually contemplating this topic (mostly because of you piano performer) and as laceyjade said we operate at different frequencies. I think it will be possible to proove things when we learn the knowledge to do so. I do recall reading an article that stated that people's auras are now being experimented with and they do think they have finally found a way to prove it scientifically.
as science keeps growing we've learned of things like dark matter -- which they had no idea how to detect because they didn't have the machinery/knowledge to do it. they didn't even know it existed. so why is psychic phenomena different from that? it can be just as aloof as dark matter.
I believe one day it will be proven. and that science and psychic experience go hand in hand. they are not one or the other. so I'm not voting on either as seperate.
I should have made myself clearer; when I wrote that, I was mainly purely referring to actual psychics - such as Erin - who channel spirits, as well as 'paranormal' events such as OBEs. I also was referring to hard, concrete proof that's validated by mainstream science that says "OBEs are a real phenominon" or "Psychics who claim to channel beings from a higher plane are real".
I've not read any of those journals. I've heard of them, of course.
And while you're picking on what I said, I said the research is "almost always flawed" - not 100% always flawed. ;) The reasons I listed are the most common flaws. I'm sure there are a few genuine research papers out there that point towards proof that people have the ability to be psychic (or there are psychics out there), but I haven't heard of it. Maybe I should read those journals!
just had a quick thought. right now we have the technology to measure very basic frequencies in the brain. there is what.. beta, alpha, theta and delta. alpha is the state that is known to be able to make these psychic phenomena occur, but perhaps there are even smaller minute frequencies within the alpha state that we cannot measure yet.
so you know i'm not a physicist PP, but imagination can be just as powerful to create or obtain or spark the new knowledge that might be able to find the proof. its there, just out of our grasp at this moment in time.
i know they did an experiment with snowflakes or crystalization of some sort of substance. the monk? intended half with love based thoughts, the other with hate/anger based thoughts. the love crystalizations turned out to be these magnificent patterns, the hate/anger crystalizations were all scattered, disordered and just a bunch of visual noise. now. this may not include pure scientific approach but emotion seems to be a clear strong factor in this universe -- so it could be the emotionless approach to science is what stops science from being able to discover things.
(this is all hypothetical, i don't claim to be an expert, i'm just speaking of what i've been exposed to)
ie. ghosts who haven't passed on to where ever they're supposed to go, isn't it usually because they still hold on to emotions strongly from their physical state therefore they can't go anywhere? i've heard people talk about how sometimes they can only sense a spirit if they do feel a very strong sudden emotion out of no where (i'm not talking about people with mental afflictions) along with other small factors. so i think emotion needs to be part of more experiments.. or the ability to detect emotion. with technology.
just throwing ideas out there. that is all.
Science is very limited in it's measurability. Consider a thing like when children do something that's cute.
The first time they do it, it might be cute. Heck, even the second, third or fourth time it might be cute. It might be cute no matter how many times it happens. Depending on what it is, it might be incredibly cute the first time it happens, and incredibly annoying the second time. There's no way to use measurements to predict how particular people will respond.
The same can be said about love, hate, or any emotion. In most cases, you can't measure what will set them off, and what won't.
I think psychic abilities fall within the same categories. And I also count on human falliability. We're all human, and sometimes we're wrong.
If you don't believe that there is something special that makes our big bang unique (like a God who created only one big bang which would be a nonrandom factor), you get an infinitive amount of big bangs if you believe in an infinitive amount of time.
We know that there is some chance that a big brain creates humans like us.
If you get enough big bangs you will get one that recreates everyone sometime in the future (and also in the past but that is another matter). Infinitive are enough.
If you wait long enough you get everything reincarnated that was there before death in some future point.
I believe that psychic abilities, phenominons, and experiences are real.
Science can explain most, if not all, things psychic, so I do not believe those things are real.
If you believe that something is real, and science can even explain how it works it is still real. It still does happen.
If you understand science at least you understand how a phenomenon occurs...but that doesn't change the fact that certain phenomenon do happen and are real.
If you don't understand science it will remain like some hocus pocus magic to yourself....but that doesn't make it less real neither.
So some people can doubt certain phenomenon at that stage that science doesn't have an explication for it yet.
I don't know if we always have to wait till science catches up with certain phenomenon.
Yoga is one of the things that I enjoy.
But it is only in the recent years that science catches up with the ancient spiritual explications. And modern science (that I see just as another way of observation and another language of writing down observations and laws that can be concluded) seem to come to same conclusions about many spectra of Yoga as it comes to health.
I think it is good to use other observation methods like they do in modern science.
But I don't think it is always really needed.
Our natural instruments work very well, we can actually feel the benefit of yoga for our health without measurement instruments of modern science.
But if you don't trust your own tools enough...or you feel that they are in trouble and you can't rely on them....it is wise to use some external tools from modern science to check what is really going on.
What created that "big brain"? Why can it always exist, yet the energy within our universe could not always exist? Which is the most likely?
Please cite your source(s).
|All times are GMT. The time now is 02:48 AM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.1.0
Copyright © 2010 by Pavlina LLC