Printable View
I think it's saying that it is unnecessary to create an explanation for something which would end up causing even more questions. like I couldn't say that wind is an invisible person running past me very fast, because that would be far to complicated and much harder to explain than just air moving. Not that that is a much better explanation.
Ahhh, I see. Thanks for clearing that up. Haha.
I think it's akin to the theory that the simplest solution is usually the best. And correct me if I'm wrong, Nina.
I read your comment again. I now realize that you meant all AP related phenomena could be accounted for by REM sleep, and not that they are all proven to be REM sleep. Sorry about the misunderstanding.Quote:
Originally Posted by RCLefty
I understand the importance of Occam's Razor. I'm just saying that someone who has experienced AP may understand it a little better than we do. True, experiencing something doesn't automatically make you an expert on it, but we should take first hand accounts into consideration before dismissing the entire concept. This is especially true since many APers on this forum are also experienced in the ways of dreaming, and should be able to tell the difference.
How about a Oriyucans Razor for dumbies> Since i am not that familiar with this obvious physical anchor of solidity. When dreams say so much more on true intention. I can only try to understand such simplicities. Though it sounds like a replay of the chaos theory. Enlighten me.
[edited]
Occam's Razor, or "principle of economy," states a good deal more than just accepting the "simplest" solution.
Nina, you might find it frustrating that Occam's Razor is used by those with whom you disagree, or used a lot, or used to "end" a conversation, but this has nothing to do with its relevance.
And in reference to the Skepdic link, William of Ockham (or Occam) did in fact admit that, strictly speaking, God might be supposed not to exist at all.
What Occam's razor describes is intuitive to most of us to a greater or lesser degree.
Most of us have at least some sense of the principle it describes, but relatively few of us comprehend its larger implications.
Now, you don't have to like it, but Occam's Razor has something to say about AP. If you don't know what that something is, I would direct you to my previous post. If you have a rebuttal to that, then let's hear it. If you think I've misapplied Occam's Razor, then show me how. If you think it shouldn't be applied at all, then show me why.
Otherwise, you're just whining.
Occam's Razor is not some sleight of hand. I'm not "cheating" at debate by bringing it up. And I'd be willing to bet that you're no more annoyed by people bringing it up than I am by people who whine about arguments they don't think they should have to refute.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCLefty
First of all...your ego is astounding.Quote:
Originally Posted by RCLefty
Secondly, I have nothing wrong with people disagreeing with me...what I do have issue with is when people, who apparently have limited MISunderstanding of the concept attempt to use it as an explanation.
Occam's Razor refers to a concept that states "Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily." It was NOT intended to be used to evaluate claims of the paranormal as skeptics today use it for.
"The principle of simplicity works as a heuristic rule-of-thumb but some people quote it as if it is an axiom of physics. It is not. It can work well in philosophy or particle physics, but less often so in cosmology or psychology, where things usually turn out to be more complicated than you ever expected. The law of parsimony is no substitute for insight, logic and the scientific method. It should never be relied upon to make or defend a conclusion. As arbiters of correctness only logical consistency and empirical evidence are absolute." - Phil Dibbs, Physicist
Thirdly, what is "simpler" is often relative. Simplicity is subjective and the universe does not always have the same ideas about simplicity as we do.
Fourth, even if we take Occam’s Razor at face value the way skeptics use it, just because one explanation is more likely doesn’t mean that it’s always the correct one. For example, if I toss a die, it is more likely that I will get numbers 1-5 than it is that I will roll a 6. But that doesn’t mean that a 6 will never come up. Therefore, occasionally an unlikely explanation can be expected to be true sometimes. However, skeptics treat Occam’s Razor as if it were an absolute rule and use it as an excuse for denying any claim, no matter how valid.
Last, when someone during an NDE or OBE hears a conversation or witnesses something many miles away and later upon verification, it turns out to be true, the skeptics will say that the simpler explanation is that the patient knew about the detail or conversation beforehand but forgot it. Likewise, if someone has a close up encounter of Bigfoot, skeptics will use Occam’s Razor to claim that it is more likely that the experiencer was either lying or hallucinating. Even if none of those alternate explanations are true, skeptics will still insist on them anyway, using Occam’s Razor as justification. Hence, they prefer a false non-paranormal explanation, even if untrue, rather than accept the truth that it happened the way described. This is clearly a case of bias rather than objectivity. What skeptics don’t seem to understand is that reality is not confined or measured by Occam’s Razor, and the use of Occam’s Razor in this manner does nothing but impede progress and learning.
This whole Quantum Jumping thing sounds like something Steve Pavlina would market. No matter how legitimate the information is, I refuse to pay for something such as that.
I think that is one thing we can all agree on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geeome
Yup, seconded!
That's a false analogy. The 2 given positions (roll 1-5 VS roll 6) are not opposing theories, they're predictions and come from the same theory at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquanina
I don't think this as been mentioned yet, but with supernatural explanations the problem is worse than the explanation just being needlessly complicated. Some or all of the added complications are concepts which for all we know are completely imaginary.
That Occam's Razor is pretty much used in every day life. Nobody talks about it but you don't need to talk about the meaning. You don't live your life to the meaning in everything, but you do occams razor in pretty much every thought, or non thought. The simpliest answer does tend to be the right one. Of course i don't agree with how people use it "oh i must have cut myself", then "oh aliens must have done it" or whatever. People like reaching for the stupidest things to say to define 2 meanings. Why not something simple, instead of something way out there like aliens must have did it from the razor blade. Seems some people like reaching for the stars when they are defending what they are talking about.
Attempts at muddying the water with semantic squabbling about what "occams razor" really means changes nothing.
At a simple level there is no scientifically validated evidence for Astral Travelling. Which is not to say there has been no attempts to do so.
The "travellers" like to pretend they are marginalised by sneering scientists.
The truth is, the scientists have investigated...and found nothing.
This is not the same as the childish argument constantly reitterated on the board, that "science" simply hasn't caught up with "reality" :roll:
Another fact is that sleep science and the understanding of how the brain functions has come on in leaps and bounds. Now you may not be able to understand the science yourself, or you may not be interested in understanding, but ignoring salient information, or pretending it doesn't exist is highly spurious. For example how many times do you read in BD that we only use 10% of our brains? A wives tale. Scientists now know that we use all of our brain power. And whilst they don't know everything there is to know about sleep, they know an awful lot.
Again, the only "evidence" for AP is anecdotal. Yet we know that the logic centres of the brain shut down in rem sleep. Making anecdotal "evidence" highly unreliably.
Again, subjective experiences ultimately can be defined as dream content.
"I know it was an OBE. Because I read I would see my body in bed, and I did".:D Yeah, and I spend an afternoon visiting the zoo, and had a dream about penguins. So what?!
I want to second this.Quote:
Originally Posted by moonshine
And furthermore, I want to point out that it is only in this context that Occam's razor becomes especially relevant, here.
Because we don't have data sufficient to support the conclusion that AP exists, we have to ask ourselves one question:
What is more likely, that dreams exist along a continuum of experience, and can easily create a facsimile of such phenomenon, or that the "soul" (whose own existence is itself not supported by evidence) is literally leaving the body and viewing objective reality by utterly non-physical means?
I would also like to consider something else, which is that at least in the case of the invisible ninja, I could never prove one way or another that he was the one who cut my face, rather than my own razor. In the case of OBE/AP/AT, however, if I were leaving my body and viewing the world without it, it would be fairly simple to construct an experiment that would prove this.
Considering how many people there are who are hard-core believers in this class of phenomena, it seems reasonable to suppose that some experimental evidence would have emerged by now.
Well, I'm sorry that you have that impression. Possibly, it is my own fault that you have it, but I also recall that ego/arrogance/hubris is a favorite ad hominem accusation (whether true in a given case, or not) for believers in the paranormal to level at Science, or its representatives.Quote:
First of all...your ego is astounding.
What I definitely am guilty of is being very forceful in how I express my opinions. I don't feel bad about this, but neither will I pretend it is some sort of virtue, as some people often do. I will say, however, that I have what seem to me to be noble reasons for it; namely, that I find the frightful lack of critical thinking skills (or even a good handle on what critical thinking means) in our culture to be a genuine threat to our long term stability, as well as our short-term happiness.
I think the whole scientific breakdown failed to do just that, no facts were presented, thus a Yoko Ono's razor left John Lennons wifes legs stubbley. What you all have missed is the clear ability of consciuos expansion through vibration. Density is the slowest vibration. Yet it is relevant consciousness vibrates well beyond sound, past light & an atempt to mingle with our antimatter self.... All these frequencies are within the range of human consciousness & can indeed be manifested by thought. The simple fact of this merger would cause a colision releasing massive gamma streams, to further be converted into pure energy & if spanning accross many folds of time, will inturn manifest back into matter. Do i need to get the physics book out for you guys??? As we align, we are doing just that...Its almost an unknowing atempt to shake hands with our antimatter. Antimatter in relation to position is undetermined, as it has been directly related to other elements in molecular modeling....any one????? yes, electrons are also undetermined. though it is viewed as matter, the simple fact is this only represents its physicalities, yet still undetermined to be matter by laws. It is measured in weight at any one givin location, which its vibration far exceeds any sound scale. Infact it has been recorded to exceed time space. Yes, the human mind fires faster than the speed of light. This distance from the antimatter body as it were can be recorded by precognitive distance, while in a sleep state observed by EEG. But keep in mind this is only a measurement at that very second & will not prove effective in comming to any frequent localities. The simple FACT that this antimatter is beyond time space while we are sitting back here pondering is in itself astounding. Scientists have come to the conclusion that this antimatter is not only connected to us by electron fields, but gamma streams as well, & is believed to be a more accurate form of measurement. Yes, gamma.. An ancient DNA encoding in all humans to impliment this gamma as a doorway to information, originating from mitochondria using methods of photosynthesis to convert this gamma(antimatter) into energy(matter). Stored in the human body as photons of light. with a constant stream connecting us to our antimatter self. As our antimatter is in no givin location or TIME. This means the applications for utilizing this is beyond anything science can percieve. Akashic Records starting to ring a bell? It is very relevant of states of consciousness & how lucid is merely a dream of reflection(alpha-theta) where astral takes on a deeper self of awareness(delta-theta-gamma). In my studies i believe the delta is oscillating into deeper states of delta as it teeters into epsylon. This very act of oscillation is proof of conscious expansion. The desire & strength of ones mind determines this journey to break from the physical itself. But once you shake hands with your antimatter, you in theory die & are reborn into a merger of data streams of past/present/future as time was never relevant to begin with. )))VIBRATE
You do realise your post made absolutely no sense right?
If you have no understanding at all of physics then please don't pretend you do. Randomly throwing around sciency words doesn't make you look smart, just ignorant.
This is where all of this modern spirituality exploded out from, the clear possability of this antimatter in our dreamstates & possible relations to our subconscious mind. It in a very very strong way sudjects that if you dont make this connection, you sieze to exsist after life. It can be determined to some sense in relation to some mystical attributes, such as clairvoyance/precognition. These factors in turn will determine your level of quantum entanglement. If you never astral projected, then this could be it for you. You would have to be spread out through time space to manifest into reality after your physical body has failed. The worse part for all scheptics is this is very likely. They didnt miss any calculations here. If you dont atleast consciously attempt to merge & more over even more effective to just have an open mind about EVERYTHING in observation. There is no heaven, there is no hell. But there is a void... & there is manifestation. Humanity takes these stored photons for granted everynight they close their eyes & project light from darkness. Where is your antimatter self???? mine travels in time, & to me that is definative quantum entanglement.
I have done more research in frequencies/vibrations. I have discovered the true cycle of the Earth ends on Feb 29th every 4 years. this alignment is in closest cooralation to the PISCES harmonizing at 7.72htz.. The only sign in alignment with the Earth frequency in relation to the tesla ressonance of 7.83htz. So the simple FACT that birthdate plays a dramatic role in the human experience. That should make you strongly consider how you percieved your Pisces friend pryer to this FACTUAL assesment. Factual.....it is in harmony as everything is on the planet Earth, with the musical note of B. This frequency of B aligns with all states of awareness, infact it is the only one that aligns with all forms of consciousness, including epsylon & gamma which are out of sync with many other signs. So this alignment with pisces includes epsylon/delta/theta/alpha/beta/gamma & further aligns on multi functions of delta-theta & theta-alpha... This isnt as easily obtainable for say a Libra or Virgo. & although this is using zodiac signs in relation to months, it is far from delving into Paganistic rituals & goes straight to the science of it all. Look it up yourself, but beware it requires math/science/deductive reasoning.... And its all right in front of everyones face. But you cant get a highly trained scientist to admit his whole career is a wash out, especially at university prices nowadays. They would just assume kill you to shut you up.
What i have stated has infact been documented, what trash can do you live in?Quote:
Originally Posted by Scatterbrain
Although we have many missinformants out there that call themselves physicists, I am here to tell you i do much research on this topic.
Do to the simplicity of your dull comment, i would say you have nothing to offer.
Prove me wrong, or just fuck yourself.
If this doesnt make any sense to you, then thats your shortcommings, dont try to conject a statement without intelligeable arguements douchebag, inturn you make yourself look like the jackass.
Yes, I'm the idiot here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamsayer
Starting to get out of hand guys. :?
Scatterbrain is right. It is impossible even to formulate a coherent response to your post, because it is such an inscrutable tangle of fragments of different scientific theories.
The different ingredients are snippets of thought taken indiscriminately, with no regard for whether the theories in question might be competing theories (and hence mutually exclusive) or even discredited altogether.
The sauce holding these fragmentary noodles toegether is a thorough "pop-ification" of the whole mess, wrenching everything out of anything like a proper context and replacing what the theories actually mean with ill-informed popular notions of what they mean.
So, you've compromised the meaning of theories, resurrected dead/unsupported theories, and then chopped them up into little parts and mixed them up to create something that supports what you want.
What is the highest level of Math that you have mastered? (If you choose to lie, do it carefully; you will be tested if you claim Diff. Eq. or anything higher. [Which, itself, would not be nearly high enough to support your claims, and hence the statement I quoted above.]) I don't have a problem with arrogance in and of itself, but it must be justified.Quote:
If this doesnt make any sense to you, then thats your shortcommings, dont try to conject a statement without intelligeable arguements douchebag, inturn you make yourself look like the jackass.
You know what...this thread is SO FAR off-topic that I do not know why it wasn't closed sooner. It seems pretty clear that no one has any idea of what quantum jumping is, though it seems unanimous we're not going to pay to learn. If anyone sees a good place to split the topic to continue discussion along a certain line (for example: Occam's Razor, Logical Reasoning/Fallacies in Argument, etc.) let me know via PM and I will do so in Extended Discussion/Philosophy, BD is not the place.