Originally Posted by
Planewalker
So just because "not a lot, if anything, says it can't be true", it is right? That's bullshit.
If you read his post, you'll see that he said that there is a lot of evidence supporting it, which is a phrase you seem to have skipped over. This is a prime example of selective quoting.
"Scientific community" is just another vague replacement for the term "someone".
While that is very true, the subconscious is recognized by actual scientists, who have real PhD's, and who have spent their lives studying human behavior
Yeah, sure, if I don't agree, I haven't understood it. Where have I heard that argument before?
The thing is, it seems like you legitimately don't understand the subconscious. If you're being influenced by outside entities, that's not subconscious. To be subconscious, it has to be a part of you. The subconscious can be manipulated by basically anything, though - if you see your friend shot and killed, or if you are in an accident, having a casual conversation with someone, seeing a tree, though to a lesser degree - all those can manipulate your subconscious, but none of them are your subconscious.
O yes, it has. I even gave a famous example.
What is this example? (I can't argue for or against this because I don't know what you're talking about)
Then I feel sorry for you.
It's true, though. What good have we ever done in the universe? We kill each other, destroy anything we see, kill animals for no reason, then elect people to tell us exactly what to destroy next, politicians who would not hesitate to nuke the world to oblivion if it would get them more power.
Where did I say that there "must [...] be some outside force"?
What we know about the brain is pretty much irrelevant. The important question is: What do we know about reality?
So if, in 10 years, you have some brain disease, and you are told that you're going to die because funding that could have gone into researching the brain went to finding more out about the ocean, instead, you won't be in the slightest bit annoyed?
I'll answer with a citation from Aleister Crowley's Liber ABA, where he wrote on Dhyana:
"It is, then, difficult to overrate the value that such an experience has for the individual, especially as it is his entire conception of things, including his most deep-seated conception, the standard to which he has always referred everything, his own self, that is overthrown; and when we try to explain it away as hallucination, temporary suspension of the faculties or something similar, we find ourselves unable to do so. You cannot argue with a flash of lightning that has knocked you down.
Any mere theory is easy to upset. One can find flaws in the reasoning process, one can assume that the premisses are in some way false; but in this case, if one attacks the evidence for Dhyana, the mind is staggered by the fact that all other experience, attacked on the same lines, will fall much more easily.
In whatever way we examine it the result will always be the same. Dhyana may be false; but, if so, so is everything else.
Now the mind refuses to rest in a belief of the unreality of its own experiences. It may not be what is seems; but it must be something, and if (on the whole) ordinary life is something, how much more must that be by whose light ordinary life seems nothing!
The ordinary man sees the falsity and disconnectedness and purposelessness of dreams; he ascribes them (rightly) to a disordered mind. The philosopher looks upon waking life with similar contempt; and the person who has experienced Dhyana takes the same view, but not by mere pale intellectual conviction. Reasons, however cogent, never convince utterly; but this man in Dhyana has the same commonplace certainty that a man has on waking from a nightmare. "I wasn't falling down a thousand flights of stairs, it was only a bad dream."
Similarly comes the reflection of the man who has had experience of Dhyana: "I am not that wretched insect, that imperceptible parasite of earth; it was only a bad dream." And as you could not convince the normal man that his nightmare was more real than his awakening, so you cannot convince the other that his Dhyana was hallucination, even though he is only too well aware that he has fallen from that state into "normal" life."