Originally Posted by Chimpertainment
You call them "claims". I call them experiences. The experience is valid because it has been experienced. However, the interpretation of that experience is where people get tripped up. For instance, when someone thinks only mainstream science should be accepted as fact without leaving room for any independent thought.
Isaac Newton invented calculus, by himself. His own personal experience led him to construct a mathematical portrait of gravity and physics. The point is truth comes from experience, not accepting a "fact" because it was found using the scientific method. On the other hand, there are many people smarter than us and in that, humility is a big part of accepting truth.
I accept repeated observation of specific experiential phenomena as science.
But here we have nothing to hold on to except "talk". Lucid dreaming was proven in a controlled study by LaBerge using specific eye-movements during REM sleep. The same could easily be done for shared dreaming, but for some reason, after all these years, it hasn't been done.
Interestingly enough, strict evidence based science led us to believe we had explained everything in nature by the year 1900. Many people claimed we were done mapping out the universe. If all you want to accept is what is being fed through your 5 physical senses, you are missing out. There is a lot of of me than you cannot see.
Also, saying "nonsense" as if you are dismissing everything I say out of hand is just as "hypocritical", geez.
Another also: I believe in god and im not sure when I condemned anyone for that belief. I certainly dont believe in any religious god but im not sure you would understand that point of view either.
So you believe in the existence of God, but at the same time that all religions are false. I can understand that.
Overall, I accept everything as truth and lie simultaneously.
Hmm. I'm not sure how that would work. Believing in Hinduism and Christianity at the same time would be very irrational, seeing how one religion completely contradicts the other. Therefore I don't see how someone can accept everything as truth. It is illogical.
I am not perceptive enough to know any "objective reality". The truest truth I know of is the ever pervading love that fills the universe and I try to go from there. Accepting others experience rather than rejecting it off hand because it wasnt yours is very important. Being afraid of other's opinions will lead you deeper into your own fear.
You are saying we should take our limitless experience of the unconscious and subject that to "controlled" scientific study. Yeah, good luck with that.
I am talking about shared dreaming in a controlled study. A simple password along with eye-movements is all it takes. What is the problem with that? LaBerge has done it with simple lucid dreaming, now why not take it one step further when two individuals supposedly "meet" in a lucid dream?
The only issue here is this: You all want to make shared dreaming "unsuitable" for a study, and make up tons of excuses why it wouldn't work in a study. The only reason is to justify the fact that all these years of research hasn't shown a shred of evidence for shared dreaming.
Yet the same people who believe in shared dreaming despite the lack of scientific evidence are most of the time the same people who mock Muslims, Christians, Hindus, etc., for believing in God and the after-life. It truly is hypocrisy.
|
|
Bookmarks