For skeptics and believers alike...

[wombing]

hullo, just thought i'd throw my two cents in. there are many supposedly supernatural' abilities out there- the ability to see auras, telepathy, telekinesis, levitation, clarivoyance, etc etc etc. and as with anything there are usually two general viewpoints on both of them. the complete skeptics, who wish to reduce everything to a concept explainable by the 'laws' of physics, and verifiable experiments, before they'll accept it as real. this stems from the desire to possess a mode of perception untainted by whimsical notions and outright bullshit. and the complete believers, who wish to believe some phenomena is real because they hope it might improve their life, expand 'reality', and improve their interactions with others. they usually desire to possess a mode of perception that is mysterious, and intuitive, and pregnant with incredible possibilities. of course there are many states in between, but from what i've seen, it seems most are near to one end of the spectrum. in that light, i just wanted everyone to think about what the word "supernatural' means. (from merriam-webster online) Etymology: Medieval Latin supernaturalis, from Latin super- + natura nature 1 : of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe; (especially : of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil) 2 a : departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature b : attributed to an invisible agent (as a ghost or spirit). now i ask you to consider evolution. to an ameoba, the quality of being a complex, multi-cellular organism would certainly be supernatural, would it not? or to be more accurate, it wouldn't even 'occur' to it, because intelligence as we know it is a product of our sophisticated brain circuitry. however, it was perfectly within the laws of the universe for us to eventually exist. we just hadn't manifested in the physical universe yet. what is the biggest law we have attached to the universe? what is the biggest limiting factor on life, as a general concept? atrophy. the universe as a whole tends towards disorder more than order. all human knowledge, all other natural laws, are based upon that. they only acquire meaning set against that backdrop, as black ink can only be constrasted with white paper. or more acurately, that contrast only have meaning if some form of intelligence is there to understand it. 'Life' is simply an arbitrary human concept we afix to organisms which operate in opposition to that general tendency. it interests us only because it IS us. what is the SINGLE quality needed to ensure life survives and evolves? DNA, or encoded information. skeptical reductionists loathe the idea of a literal six day creation. they think it a fairy tale to believe some floating, disembodied consciousness created this whole vast universe, which we are far from comprehending. yet what is the alternative? evolution. a process starting billions of years ago. and what is it that made it possible? DNA. every form of life possesses DNA. we can explain how it works to some degree, but no scientist can say WHY. why is it that life should exist at all? why is it that some mysterious code has physically manifested itself into the complex interwoven tapestry called nature? is there a reason that can be clearly shown? of course not. Life just is. what caused DNA to be? what causes it to continually improve its commands, working up from, and creating all of life from, single celled organisms? Chance can't be the cause. chance is the effect. so my point to this rambling post? why shouldn't supernatural powers be probable. Life is the improbable. we exist only as bizarre machines which manage to harness the energy of a burning, dying ball of energy/light millions of miles away, which is somehow harnesed by plants into order and more useable energy. and so on through the food chain. to an ameoba, existing as a multi-cellular plant is supernatural. it is 'departing from what is usual'. to a plant, growing legs and walking is supernatural, it would appear to 'transcend the laws of nature". but not nature as a whole, only its individual nature. to the great apes greater intelligence would seem supernatural. developing the sophisticated method by which we transfer and refine information , namely, language, the means by which i currently communicate with you, would seem supernatural. yet what caused all of this? what caused all of evolution? DNA, the cosmic intelligence, apparently predisposed towards growth rather than decay, inexplicably and inexorably though that may be. our human intelligence is simply a rung on the ladder it is building. not being able to explain something doesn't mean it isn't possible. something not being possible now, doesn't mean it can't be possible in the future. and when something is just starting out, it is always hard to verify, it is always hard to separate the neccessary from the extra qualities we tack on to the phenomena. imagine a pre-human first struggling to communicate more deeply with another. imagine the fumbling, trial and error progression of language. to them it must have seemed an external miracle having its way with them. they must have 'attributed it to an invisible agent'. and yet that invisible agent is what formed their bodies, and brains, that invisible agent is the very relating agent struggling to refine itself in the processes of their evolving brains. does it not make sense that they would aid the process by surrendering to it? how is telepathy any different in the context of our present situation? or take eyesight. think of the incredible spectrum of colour we are capable of seeing, compared to other less evolved species. think of how supernatural it would be for a dog to suddenly possess the ability to do likewise. how is being able to see an aura any different? Nature must always perform her work gradually. so skeptics- ask yourself why you attach such meaning to your intelligence, your ability to perceive the neccessary components of nature. could it be you are that very intelligence perfecting itself? and can you admit that nature IS supernatual, in every sense of the word? and that we may create some unneccessary physical laws, the same way those before us created unneccessary dieties and demons? be wary cause and effect methods of perceiving your personal universe doesn't limit your potential. consider that pre-humans only developed language by having faith in progress. if the spirit of skepticism had won out, we would not be conversing right now. that is assuming the orignal humans had freedom of choice. but if they didn't, how are we any different? if every effect has a concrete cause, you are nothing more than a chemical reaction occuring in an unalterable course. quantum physics has suggested that perhaps we are not so smart as we think. after all, why should we be? a blink of the eye (I) ago in the cosmic scope of things we were wandering apes? and what is the most importatnt thing they found? intelligence/consciousness. every scientific and technological acheivement was discovered first in the mysterious realm of the inner universe as a thought or intuitive real-ization. and all real-izations eventually enter reality for the first time. consciousness is the only law. and laws are only made by the limits of the form of consciousness which, at an arbitrary point in time, considers itself the highest good. the pinnacle of evolution, never to be surpassed. if you do not train and perfect yourself to be a god, you will never become one. if you piss on fledgling forms of human perception and believe them impossible, you will obviously never see them verified. expectation creates progress. if a child did not expect to walk like its parents, it would forever crawl. and the most amazing fact of life is that it works 'backwards', in the following sense. the infant mimics that which it can see, that which has already been real-ized. but to surpass the limits and laws of what is believed to be possible, one must mimic phantasms of their imagination. it is certainly good to pick and choose them wisely, but foolish (in my opinion) to ignore their possibilty completely, or one shall forever crawl in a world of crawlers, when they might learn to walk. and the believers, be careful you do not throw skepticism right out the window and waste your lives believing in refinements too far removed from your present potential. the first humans struggling to create a new form of communication would have wasted their lives trying to learn how to fly instead. accept that there are limits for individuals, and choose the arenas of your efforts wisely. personally, i believe one day humanity will look on us the same way we look on primates.perhaps someday some unimaginable form of life will view us as meaningless little ameobe. the way i look at it, the more i bask in the wonderful mystery of life, the more i trust the invisible agent's refinement in my body and mind, the more intricate, beautiful, and vast my own tiny universe shall become. i'm too tired to proof-read this, but i think i've said roughly what i wished to. and maybe i communicated something greater telepathically....to those receptive of course its only up from here. peace and love my cosmic siblings, the invisible agent is the blueprint, guide, and body, love it in your own manifestation, and every other, and you shall know thyself.

[Howie]

I would like to add something but... I think That was VERY well put Asher. It seems like you get extremes at both ends. Which it seems to me you are denouncing just that outlook. Nice Job!

[issaiah1332]

I do not think that a majority of psychic powers are real, but I think that when we experience the next evolutionary step (Mental evolution) these powers might be attainable. One question I have always had is, if these so called powers are real then why aren't people ruling and/or changing the world with them?

[wombing]

Originally posted by issaiah1332 I do not think that a majority of psychic powers are real, but I think that when we experience the next evolutionary step (Mental evolution) these powers might be attainable. One question I have always had is, if these so called powers are real then why aren't people ruling and/or changing the world with them? perhaps the very intention to attain and use them for selfish, petty motives consequently bars ever mastering them. .. in almost every case, those who profess, or are testified to have exhibited such supernatural powers, also speak of something beyond the empty striving of the ego. very often, they are said to declare supranormal powers only arise as "side-effects" of awareness, and loving-compassion meditation. if one is truly aware that life is short, and death finds us all, they are not likely to waste their time domineering over others to feed a greed and depravity that will only grow and consume them in the end anyway. if one attains certain unusual gifts as a result of real-izing the interconnectedness of all life, and especially human life, it is very doubtful they would attempt to use them to harm others. telepathy, pre-recognition, healing, etc all presuppose some type of connection between all life, between past future and present. between one's own consciousness, and other consciousness. the ego is always striving, plotting to attain temporary pleasure at whatever expense. it is never satisfied. it can certainly never be empty, and silent. cut off desire, ambition, and verbal-intellectual thought, and it withers and dies instantly. and as i said in my orignal post, that mode of thinking always thinks it is the 'pinacle of evolution'. it cannot truly grow, or create anything new and uncharted.

[Howie]

Originally posted by issaiah1332 I do not think that a majority of psychic powers are real, but I think that when we experience the next evolutionary step (Mental evolution) these powers might be attainable. One question I have always had is, if these so called powers are real then why aren't people ruling and/or changing the world with them? I think you answered your own question: but I think that when we experience the next evolutionary step (Mental evolution) these powers might be attainable.[/b] And it is of coarse debatable at this point which abilities are a possibility and which are not.

[BillyBob]

Originally posted by Asher perhaps the very intention to attain and use them for selfish, petty motives consequently bars ever mastering them. .. in almost every case, those who profess, or are testified to have exhibited such supernatural powers, also speak of something beyond the empty striving of the ego. very often, they are said to declare supranormal powers only arise as \"side-effects\" of awareness, and loving-compassion meditation. if one is truly aware that life is short, and death finds us all, they are not likely to waste their time domineering over others to feed a greed and depravity that will only grow and consume them in the end anyway. if one attains certain unusual gifts as a result of real-izing the interconnectedness of all life, and especially human life, it is very doubtful they would attempt to use them to harm others. telepathy, pre-recognition, healing, etc all presuppose some type of connection between all life, between past future and present. between one's own consciousness, and other consciousness. the ego is always striving, plotting to attain temporary pleasure at whatever expense. it is never satisfied. it can certainly never be empty, and silent. cut off desire, ambition, and verbal-intellectual thought, and it withers and dies instantly. and as i said in my orignal post, that mode of thinking always thinks it is the 'pinacle of evolution'. it cannot truly grow, or create anything new and uncharted. he just said to change the world not to destroy it, you could change the world for the better with some of these powers that you talk about, you said that they see we're all connected.... wouldnt that be all the more reason to go change the world with there powers? (for the better obviously)

[DNK]

It's late, so I can't really read through all that, sorry, but from what I could tell you made some good points. I think there may be some real psychic abilities, but probably many are purely psychological. There's a lot about the brain we don't know yet. One study that comes to mind is the one where they found that circuits actually signalled to one another outside of the logic of the circuitry by randomly coming across a setup which allowed them to broadcast and recieve signals to one another, via the laws of physics. The brain is far more complex than this circuit example, and no doubt is capable of broadcasting signals. Could some psychic phenomenon be explained by this? Auras just another way of the brain assimilating another's brainwaves and creating some device to portray them? Definately possible. Also, we still don't have a comprehensive picture of the universe, which leaves everything up to doubt.

[Night Wolf]

personally, i believe one day humanity will look on us the same way we look on primates.perhaps someday some unimaginable form of life will view us as meaningless little ameobe. [/b] I like that idea. I don't really have much to say actually, apart from GREAT POST! I like the fact that you can so easily argue both sides and have a unique view on the nature of the universe. Of course, not everything is new, but to be able to bring it all together comprehensively is another thing. I can still say I'm a skeptic, because I'll only believe it if I see it. These psi powers that people talk about might not be impossible in the future, but the things we know and can observe at the moment point towards all of it being bullshit.

[Ex Nine]

Communicating with a higher power telepathically and letting go of the responsibility to proofread isn't selfish at all. Higher powers don't need to proofread.

[wombing]

Originally posted by BillyBob_001 he just said to change the world not to destroy it, you could change the world for the better with some of these powers that you talk about, you said that they see we're all connected.... wouldnt that be all the more reason to go change the world with there powers? (for the better obviously) i thought somebody might point this out. why aren't people ruling and/or changing the world with them?[/b] my response was referring to the 'ruling' possibility. for me personally, that implies domineering, superiority, inequality, etc. which all stem from 'ego'. 'changing the world" seems to me to imply positivity (as it did to you), which is why i didn't feel the need to comment on that. so i adressed the one possibility with a response, and agreed with the other in silence.

[wombing]

Originally posted by Night Wolf personally, i believe one day humanity will look on us the same way we look on primates.perhaps someday some unimaginable form of life will view us as meaningless little ameobe. I like that idea. I don't really have much to say actually, apart from GREAT POST! I like the fact that you can so easily argue both sides and have a unique view on the nature of the universe. Of course, not everything is new, but to be able to bring it all together comprehensively is another thing. I can still say I'm a skeptic, because I'll only believe it if I see it. These psi powers that people talk about might not be impossible in the future, but the things we know and can observe at the moment point towards all of it being bullshit. [/b] yeah, i haven't found any conclusive evidence myself. although , the reason i can easily argue both sides is that i'm a believer and skeptic rolled into one! for instance, i believe i have seen someone's aura once (without trying to, and unsure as to whether such a thing was real), and often experience 'feeling someone's vibes" so strongly i can easily imagine how telepathy is theoretically possible. but i'll never claim i KNOW that either are objectively real. although a few times i've 'sensed' people in inner turmoil when nobody else seemed to notice anything awry, and they've turned out to be feeling just how i thought they might be. in a particular instance, i made the person comfortable enough to tell me they'd been sexually abused, something they had never told anybody else about, and never planned to. the wierdest part was, they said "i don't even know why i'm telling you this. i think god wants me to.." something like that sure makes things seem a little surreal. or, after reading about influencing random results with one's mind, i have tried various experiments with die, and cards. the most notable success was a time i rolled 5 die, 20 times in a row, concentrating on getting all 6's. 8 times i rolled five 6's, and one 5. (oops, edit-FOUR 6's, and one 5) 2 times i rolled all sixes. and the remaining (10) throws had anywhere from 2-4 sixes with a combination of other numbers. of course, this could very well be coincidence, and other times i have had seemingly little effect on the outcome. But, the fact that this particular time i truly had FAITH i was influencing the outcome, and had the greatest mental clarity out of any of my previous experiments, is enough to keep me wondering and hoping, without being one of those annoying people who claim one single isolated experiment out of many failures is 'proof'. *shrugs* its actually quite frustrating to be a believer and a skeptic at the same time. the way i look at it, even lucid dreaming was viewed by skeptics as bullshit up until recently (i'm sure some still see it that way), but that doesn't mean it hasn't been practiced for thousands of years.... Hopefully one day within our generation, we'll see some solid proof. that'd sure revolutionize the way we view the world, and each other, eh? 8)

[issaiah1332]

I have studied many things, one of which is metaphyics, and I think that many of these things are possible, such as remote viewing. I am just unable to comprehend why these powers are not used to change more things. Take for instance, remote viewing the military took advantage of it in the form of Project Stargate. I think that one day these mental capabilities will bew more widely accepted, after all people usually have a hard time digesting lucid dreaming.

[faerie]

Brilliant post Asher!

[wasup]

That was really well written, but I don't agree with it. You are distorting the concept of supernatural. You say a multi-cellular organism is "supernatural." There is nothing supernatural about an organism. In no way is it out of the ordinary. And you say if there was skepticism when we were developing language, then we would not be conversing. Well, that is true if the skepticism you are alluding to is skepticism of pretty much anything. We, as athiests, are skeptic about things that do not abide to natural law. Human speech does not have anything to do with that. If I could use that argument against you, I'd say that if religion had survived in ancient times, today we'd debase most scientific proccesses (e.g. evolution) to the "eternal phenomenon that is God." ...Oh wait. Religion acts as a way to conceptualize amazing things (such as the beauty of nature, the complexity of the human mind, the mysterious origins of the universe) that are SEEMINGLY not possible through science, i.e., god must be created such beauty, only some sort of intelligent designer could have created the mind, because proccesses like evolution can not reach that level of complexity, and the theory of the big bang is so mind-boggling and perplexing that it can not possibly have any validity, god created the universe. But if you turn to logic and science, everything had an explanation (some not known yet! science is still advancing). In no way are "auras" another part of evolution or physcic powers. when you say " if every effect has a concrete cause, you are nothing more than a chemical reaction occuring in an unalterable course. " I'm not sure that you are trying to prove me wrong. Because human life is simply a series of chemical reactions and the such. It's all science.

[Tsen]

Hrm...I really will read the whole thread, I promise. But first I just had to comment on something: I do not think that a majority of psychic powers are real, but I think that when we experience the next evolutionary step (Mental evolution)[/b] This isn't entirely right. It would be nice, and it could still be possible, but not with things as they currently are. For a long time now, human beings have more or less stopped evolution in its tracks. It's a good thing they have, in a few ways, and bad in a few ways. Good because promoting evolution would largely mean letting those who are weak die. That goes against human ethics. Just letting people die is wrong. But with weaker and less successful genes being passed on just as much as the highly successful ones, evolution can't occur. But it's bad because it stops progression of the human race. Still, the pros outweigh the cons in my mind--postponing culture for a few million years for us to evolve more is hardly sensible, and technological evolution is already taking place far faster than biological evolution anyways. Heh...sorry if that'd already be posted. Just had to comment, y'know?

[wasup]

Originally posted by asher i don't believe you understand in what sense i used supernatural. and the fact you went off on a tangent about religion doesn't make sense to me. i doubt you even read my orignal post in its entirety. and hence i'm not going to waste my time defending my views. Well, this IS a forum, and because you went \"off on a tangent\" about how us scientists should believe in \"unscientific\" things (or at least, not completely deny them) I decided to as well. And yes, I did read the whole post. all i will say is your 'science' seems to possess all the qualities you tacked onto religion. any theory that tries to claim complete objectivity must account for the subjectivity of language, which yours obviously does not. [/b] I don't see the qualities that I attributed to both religion and science. Also, which theory am I \"claiming complete objectivity\" to as well as subjectivity. You really should back up some of your claims. you are a subject, who taints all 'independent objects' with some degree of your subjectivity. many minds more scientific than either of us find quantum theory feasible. and it is based on probablities (possibilities). it is the only scientific theory i've come across that places the subject, the observer, the scientist, the seer, within the natural system being viewed. become familiar with this theory if you wish to disagree with me. otherwise, don't deny any possibility while simultaneously pretending to be scientific. [/b] When did I deny quantum physics?

[faerie]

I wish I could back this up with an article, but there was a study (or some studies) done in an undeveloped country where the people had not developed a written language. One experiment had a researcher write on a piece of paper 'get me some water' and he asks one of the natives to pass it to his colleague a way off. His colleague gets him some water and the people are amazed and call it magic. Imagine what they would think about mobile phones? Perhaps 'supernatural' isn't the right word, but anything unknown is often called 'magic' and is a phenomenon if it can't be explained at that time. Whether or not an explanation exists is not really the point.

[wombing]

Originally posted by Eric Estrada When did I deny quantum physics? it appears it won't let me quote your entire post, but oh well. all i was saying eric, is that you obviously misinterpeted almost everything i said in my post (compared to how i subjectively meant it ). quantum physics could be bullshit. language is subjective. if you misundertstood the initial spirit of this post as much as it appears you did, i don't think any amount of words could remedy that. we are too different...as subjects. my only point was that neither skeptics nor believers should deny possibilities. if you disagree with that primary point, feel free. if you agree, i'm glad. disregard everything else i said.