Being Open Minded

[Khaz]

Alright, I've been doing a LOT of thinking lately, and come to a problem. I recall hearing this quote more than a few times... Some people are so open minded their brains fall out![/b] This is very true, but has got me thinking. How far is too far with being open minded? To clarify: I've been investigating some really weird stuff lately, things that I a while ago would have found (and in some cases, still do find) impossible. However, having encountered some weird things that seem to be true, I can't help wondering what else may be out there. One example is the phoenomenon of "Party Levitation", which I brought up in another thread. It appears to be quite possible, and while it can be explained to some extent it's still pretty supernatural. I have become worried in my exploration about losing my objectivity by going too far. There are some things that one could easily delude themselves into thinking are possible. What if, for example, you try to do something like Astral Projection. It's a pretty sketchy topic, but there are many who swear it's possible. What if in trying to do it, you allowed yourself to believe that it would work to the extent that your mind fabricates the experience? It would seem as real as anything, but it wouldn't be. Still, you'd come out of it believing that it is possible, and that you had done it. In my specific case, I've been investigating stuff even more far-fetched than Astral Projection... I will not tell you what I've been doing, at least until I've some to some conclusions about it. The only thing is, even though I know it is physically impossible, (and I don't use that word lightly,) I have encountered some people who swear it is true, and that they can do it. On top of that, one person has offered to personally teach me to do it as well. No charge, no strings attached, no purchase necessary. So far, everything he has said seems straightforward and completely normal aside from the fact that it is impossible. I have been puzzling over why someone would do and say these things if it's not real. They have no motivation I can see to go to these lengths. Then a thought hit me. What if they simply believe it is real? I've been thinking ever since then, partially out of fear that the same could happen to me. What if I completely lose sight of reality, and come to believe this when it's not true? I want to look into it with an open mind to discover if there is ANY truth to it, but how can I keep from accidentally deluding myself into believing it? Even further, there's also the issue of mental problems as a result. One thing I want to know: Can things like Schizophrenia and such be induced for a period of time, or be accidentally caused permanently? If so, that would explain SOME of the things I've seen... Anyways, if you read this far... Thanks. I'd appreciate another point of view on this. Please, post your comments... Even if they're limited to "You're an idiot for even considering the possibilities." Thanks.

[Revero]

When dealing with such issues, we need a healthy dose of skepticism. That doesn't mean we should close our minds to everything out of the ordinary, but as you said, we can't be so open-minded that our brains fall out. We need to maintain a good balance between the two, which means carefully looking at the evidence, examining all the possible explanations, and approving a hypothesis only when the others have been ruled out. Or, if there are multiple competing hypotheses that seem equally likely, remember Occam's Razor, which states that the simplest is most likely the correct one. We have to be careful, when selecting something as fact, to make sure that it is falsifiable. That is, it should be possible to prove it wrong if it is indeed wrong. I would recommend reading The Fine Art of Baloney Detection by Carl Sagan which deals with this. Take for example the lost continent of Atlantis. Polls show that about a third of adult Americans believe that in the distant past, an entire continent sunk somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean (or one of a myriad of other locations). Now, geologists have a pretty good idea of what sorts of things happen to continents and what erodes them, and they're thoroughly convinced that nothing can destroy an entire continent overnight. If this did happen 10,000 years ago (a very short time on a geologic scale), we ought to have seen some evidence of this, some large continental shelf somewhere, some ruins of ancient cities somewhere on the ocean floor. We have found none. You'd think somebody from this civilization, if it was nearly as advanced as its proponents claim, would have sailed out to other lands and introduced their advanced technologies to other civilizations, or at least left some kind of evidence of themselves. We have found none. And what is the source of knowledge about this lost continent? Plato. An entire advanced civilization with thousands or millions of inhabitants, and only one guy wrote anything about it, in a work that might very well have been intended as a work of fiction. Go figure. That doesn't mean we need to throw out anything that sounds too good to be true. There are tons of such weird theories out there, and most of them are most likely false, but we need to be open to new ideas. New ideas are how science evolves. But we need to test the new ideas to make sure they're not just figments of people's imaginations. Take Galileo as an example. To the people of his time, it was unthinkable that heavy things do not fall faster than light things. It was unthinkable that the Earth was actually rotating around at thousands of miles per hour and yet nobody could feel it. But because of him and many other scientists, we now have undeniable empirical evidence that this is the case. People once doubted the possibility of lucid dreams, but thanks to the experiments of researchers like Stephen LaBerge we have empirical evidence that it is a real phenomenon. That's the key: empirical evidence. That's what sets astronomy apart from astrology, conventional medicine from faith healing and homeopathy, evolution from creationism, and psychology from parapsychology. It is also important to remember that just because we don't have an adequate explanation for something, that doesn't make it "supernatural". People used to have no idea what caused rain, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and diseases, because they simply didn't have the tools to understand what was going on, so they attributed these things to the work of supernatural entities. In the modern age of science and technology, we now know a lot more about the universe, so supernatural entities can only exist as explanations for those few things we don't fully understand yet, like consciousness. Consciousness is a very complex phenomenon, undoubtedly the most complex issue in all of biology. Just because we don't have any comprehensive theories about how everything in the mind works, people like to assume that our minds are really controlled by immaterial entities in some sort of parallel universe of "soul stuff". But if our personalities really come from such a place, how can chemical drugs and brain injuries alter someone's behavior and personality like they do? All the empirical evidence points to the brain as the origin of consciousness, and just because it is so complex that we don't get how all of it works doesn't mean that we need to posit some sort of supernatural entity behind it. It's okay to say "I don't know", to admit that we don't have all the answers when we don't. Be open to new theories, but don't jump to conclusions until the phenomenon has been thoroughly tested. As Carl Sagan put it, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

[kimpossible]

Excellent reply! I'd just like to add, re: party levitation and "some extent it's still pretty supernatural" Only as supernatural as magnetism. Which occurs in nature, and is therefore by definition "natural" rather than "super-natural"

[Khaz]

Originally posted by kimpossible Excellent reply! I'd just like to add, re: party levitation and \"some extent it's still pretty supernatural\" Only as supernatural as magnetism. Which occurs in nature, and is therefore by definition \"natural\" rather than \"super-natural\" Let it be known that I am not a fan of the Diamagnitism theory. I think it's just people grasping at a non-existant explanation. Just my opinion... EDIT: Oh, one more thing: What if what you're looking into is one of those things that kinda requires belief to work... The implications of that could be horrendous....

[kimpossible]

I have personally been involved in measuring the gaussian flux during a party levitation. So I'm prehaps a bit more convinced. I think there's a thread on it around these parts.

[Khaz]

Gaussian Flux? Okay, you used a term I don't know. You win.

[Leo Volont]

A website explaining Party Levitation: http://antigravitypower.tripod.com/BioGrav...y/clarklev.html

[Khaz]

Sorry Leo, but been there! I'm still not so sure about it, but whatever. Just, it's one of those things that seems impossible, but we have found an explanation for. There may be other things that seem impossible we just haven't found the explanation for yet.

[Ex Nine]

I don't think it's possible to be too open-minded. If there are ever people who seem so open-minded that their "brains have fallen out," they're actually just engaging in another form of closed-mindedness. However, it takes great skill and bravery to open one's mind. I think your fear is quite rational. When people open their minds they drop the use of ignorance as a defense against unpleasent things. Yes, I think there are cascade effects that lead to mental illnesses, incredible social alienation, nervous breakdowns and all sorts of other dangers. I mean, who knows, really? That's the whole point. That's the risk. You don't really know what you'll find, good and bad. But the whole point of taking a risk is to bring reward. Skepticism is all about open-mindedness to me. Carl Sagan also said that our progress would be marked by the courage of our questions.

[Revero]

Note that if you really can prove, under proper observing conditions, that any kind of "levitation" exists, you can win yourself an easy $1,000,000: http://www.randi.org/research/index.html

[Khaz]

$1,000,000!!! Ha, that's it! I'm learning telekinesis! Edit: It's good to hear these things exist... I always wondered if any science-types had offered a reward for proof.

[kimpossible]

He specifically dismissed "party levitation" as not being "levitation" I'd agree with him, incidentally. Gaussian flux - changes in the Gauss readings on a meter. Changes in the magnetic field, in short, that are not consistant with other explanations (high iron content, radioactive events, solar flares, etc.)

[Khaz]

Alright, I hate to hijack my own thread, but just for a moment... I don't get the diamagnitism theory. I understand the principle of what it is, but not how four people standing in a certain way can cause it.... If you get that part of it, please explain.

[Scruffy]

I agree that there is no such thing as being too open minded. There is a huge difference between being open to new ideas, and giving them a chance no matter how absurd they may seem, and accepting every new thing you hear as true. After all, a good deal of the science that people now put utmost faith in was at one time considered by the most people to be completely bogus. Just because something is far out, doesn't mean it can't be true. Where being open minded can get you into trouble is when you are naive about it. If you don't give the things you're heaing ample consideration, weight the evidence for and against, then you're going about things the wrong way. Some things will even require a bit of digging to form a well-backed opinion on. As long as you take things with a bit of skepticism, you shouldn't have anything to worry about. Now, as to party levitation, I think the solution is quite simple. Firstly, lets do a little math. The average man weighs 150 pounds. If four people are lifting him, thats 37.5 pounds per person. If each person uses one finger from each hand, thats about 19 pounds per finger - not really all that much. The other factor here deals with our minds decieving us. Say you pick up a small ball of lead. Though small, it will weigh a few pounds, due to the high density of lead. We pick it up and think "Wow, this is pretty heavy," because we expect something of that size to weigh less. On the other hand, if you were to pick up a large box, and upon lifting it, discover it only weighed a couple of pounds, you would probably think it quite light, because of the assumption that a large box will have something in it and thus, weigh more than a couple of pounds. The same thing is happenning when lifting the person: we expect a load of more than 19 pounds per arm, because after all, we're lifting a person, so that person feels quite light to us. Lastly, we can lift more than we think we can. I'm of a light build, and not particularly strong, yet I can lift my 240 pound, 6 foot 3 friend clear of the ground. If I was lifting only a quarter his weight, I would have it pretty easy.

[Revero]

Originally posted by kimpossible He specifically dismissed \"party levitation\" as not being \"levitation\" I'd agree with him, incidentally. I see. Looking into the matter, it does seem to not really be levitation per se, but it is cloaked with lots of pseudoscientific mumbo-jumbo, and it seems the author doesn't really understand the mechanisms behind this parlor trick, giving people the impression that it involves some kind of paranormal element, when as Scruffy so aptly explained, it can be understood by a rudimentary knowledge of physics. However, the prize still stands for anybody who claims they can prove any paranormal or supernatural ability of any kind, as long as you're willing to be observed in such a way that the possibility of cheating is eliminated. Not only would you get a cool million dollars for yourself, you would offer the scientific community concrete empirical evidence of a whole new phenomenon to explore, which for me at least would be just as great a reward.

[♥Mark]

Originally posted by Khaz Alright, I hate to hijack my own thread, but just for a moment... I don't get the diamagnitism theory. I understand the principle of what it is, but not how four people standing in a certain way can cause it.... If you get that part of it, please explain. Could be that you don't understand it because it's complete BS. Remember, being open minded doesn't just mean being open to the possibility that something seemingly extraordinary is real, but also open to the possibility that certain things (extraordinary or otherwise) are not.

[Khaz]

Well, I believe that it is possible.. I've seen too much evidence, even though I haven't managed it myself. Let me point out one thing, though. In the instructions, it says to try it first without the whole thing you do beforehand. This is solely to demonstrate that it cannot be done otherwise! The "simple physics" explanation cannot be true, since it can't be done without all this other stuff...

[Alucinor Architecton]

this is to the first post. All i have to say is: If you believe it is possible, then it is possible. who is to say what Reality is? If it is your reality, then it's still reality. Who is to say if a madman is mad? Maybe everyone else's reality is so far-off that you're the only one realing seeing the true reality? Some more stuff to think about, but you prbably have enouhg from what I've read . . .

[♥Mark]

IRT Khaz Sure, that's if we're to take the instructions as credible. I refer you back to Scruffy's post. Originally posted by Scruffy ...The average man weighs 150 pounds. If four people are lifting him, thats 37.5 pounds per person. If each person uses one finger from each hand, thats about 19 pounds per finger - not really all that much... As open minded as I may be, I still find it pretty hard to believe that I couldn't lift 19 pounds with one finger. I've done this "group levetation" thing before. We had a bunch of people stand around one other who was laying on the floor and chanted "Light as a feather, stiff as a board" over and over, and were able to easily lift them off the ground. We did it in a much different fashion than what the website describes, and yet were able to easily do it. There's really nothing supernatural about this. You show me a way to levitate without having to have four people lift you into the air in order to do it and then maybe we'll be onto something.

[Khaz]

Well, I've tried it just the way the website describes. When we tried, there was no way at all we could lift him with our fingers. Also, when done right, it's supposed to take next to no effort. One more thing: Try actually taking 40 pounds and lifting it with just your two fingers, arms outstretched fully. I think you'll find it quite difficult.

[Revero]

Originally posted by Khaz Well, I believe that it is possible.. I've seen too much evidence, even though I haven't managed it myself. Let me point out one thing, though. In the instructions, it says to try it first without the whole thing you do beforehand. This is solely to demonstrate that it cannot be done otherwise! The \"simple physics\" explanation cannot be true, since it can't be done without all this other stuff... I have a hard time believing this "diamagnetism" explanation is any more reasonable than the simple physics explanation. For example, what is it about alternating genders that makes the "gravity antenna" more powerful? What is it about my Y chromosome, my facial hair or my penis that would make the slightest difference here? Where is the experimental data that shows this has any effect whatsoever? Where is the experimental data that shows it can't be done without all the spiritual mumbo-jumbo? Where are the double-blind tests? Where are the statistics? Scientists would be fascinated if there really was such a thing as "diamagnetism" that could make objects lighter than they actually are. You'd make a revolution in physics, and possibly get yourself a Nobel Prize, if you could show that the human mind can alter the laws of physics. Show me, under proper observing conditions, that anything beyond the simple laws of physics are in effect in this parlor trick, and I'll believe you. And so will James Randi, who will give you $1,000,000 for it. It's worth a shot, isn't it? Just fill out an application, do a few minutes worth of work, and you get a cool million. You don't even need to travel anywhere. Randi will set you up with an experimenter in your part of the world. Or are you too afraid of being proven wrong? Just because you have seen "too much evidence" that something is possible, and you don't completely understand the mechanics behind it, does not mean that anything supernatural is going on. For example, we've all seen the videos of Uri Geller bending spoons supposedly with his mind. But I've seen stage magicians do the same gimmick, and admit that it's all a trick. What's the more reasonable explanation, that this is due to some sort of supernatural psychic power bestowed upon him by extraterrestrials or that he's doing the same thing as the stage magicians?

[Khaz]

Well, I don't know. I don't believe that the whole gender thing is necessary personally.. Anyways, forget it. I just used that as an example. My original question still stands...

[Revero]

My point is that all these supposed "supernatural" phenomena seem to have more rational, natural solutions when we look deep enough. Supernatural seems to be just a word for what science doesn't know yet. When something supernatural is proven to exist, it is no longer supernatural, as it becomes part of our knowledge about the natural world. Anything supernatural, by definition, is not proven and there is not enough evidence to conclude that it is real, so it is rather presumptuous to just assume that it is.

[Theresa]

In response to the poster's original question (In relation to the schizophrenia aspect, anyway) It isn't possible to induce schizophrenia by opening your mind too far- schizophrenia can be brougt on, but it's usually by a specifically large or unsettling event (such as the witness of a death or loss of someone close to you.) Even this is not the most common cause of schizophrenia, not by far. It's a genetic disease, so I wouldn't worry too much about it, anyway. I would imagine that you can convince yourself that something is true when in reality it is not- I just don't think it would go so far as to be regarded as a mental illness. As for the other aspects of your post (or other forms of mental illness), I don't know. You make a very interesting point.

[Khaz]

Originally posted by Theresa In response to the poster's original question (In relation to the schizophrenia aspect, anyway) It isn't possible to induce schizophrenia by opening your mind too far- schizophrenia can be brougt on, but it's usually by a specifically large or unsettling event (such as the witness of a death or loss of someone close to you.) Even this is not the most common cause of schizophrenia, not by far. It's a genetic disease, so I wouldn't worry too much about it, anyway. I would imagine that you can convince yourself that something is true when in reality it is not- I just don't think it would go so far as to be regarded as a mental illness. As for the other aspects of your post (or other forms of mental illness), I don't know. You make a very interesting point. Well, what I was thinking in terms of schzophrenia wasn't just in having an open mind... How to illustrate my point... Alright, using the example of Lycanthropy. (For those who don't know, this is the ability to transform oneself into a wolf, physically and/or mentally.) There are people out there that believe in this, and that they have this ability. Here's the theory: The person wants to succeed at this so badly, their mind fabricates an alternate personality to satisfy the need. Then, the person goes through whatever experience as their fabricated wolf-counterpart. Afterwards, they believe they have "transformed" themselves. If this is possible, would it not result in a schizophrenic sort of condition? Would they not have intentionally forced this mental condition upon themselves, not knowing what they were doing? I don't know all that much about these mental conditions, but it is a concern for me. Do you think my theory on it is plausible?