Originally Posted by Dianeva
So, why do you believe it? Or more specifically, I'm sure you know that the brain is capable of generating strange experiences. People hallucinate and feel euphoric connectedness with the world, and that specifically has been correlated with certain brain states that can be inflicted upon the subject in the lab.
You're not trying to encourage people to eat shrooms too are you?
Aside from that, you're making metaphysical assumptions about how reality operates. The fact that these brain states can be "inflicted" on people in the lab is no justification of the materialist model of reality and can peacefully coexist with a wide variety of models.
People's senses of spacial distance in their brains are messed with, and as a result they feel like everything in the world is right there with them, which is where the feeling of 'oneness' comes from.
This is a perfect example of "scientifically" minded people makes asses of themselves.
Postulating that spacial distortion (a lot of fun by the way) is responsible for the feeling of "oneness" is bs. It's my experience that people fall into two broad camps concerning "oneness":
1) the universe is a near infinitely connected network of causality of which we are a mere part
2) we are all part of some creators plan
My tastes run towards the former but either way, we're all in this thing together. The feeling to which you're refering is better viewed as one of the foundations of humanity than as some chemical state to be "inflicted". The fact that there are chemicals which induce it is convenient but it should be cultivated in regular states of mind as well.
All this stuff exists with no drugs. And it's better that way.
Knowing that stuff like this can happen, that the brain is prone to this type of thing, why do you believe that this energy you feel is really there?
You've not said one thing to convince me that it isn't there. With a sober mind, I can feel it and manipulate it in a manner that is mostly consistent and predictable. The fact that experiences in my reality correspond to experiences in your reality in no way means that your reality explains mine.
Different metaphysical assumptions lead to different explanations for experiences and this in turn leads to different realities that we live in. Why not use and employ multiple models if it's convenient to do so? They all have strengths and weaknesses.
It's sort of like quantum jumping between realities. Or picking the right tool for the job.
If some obvious manifestation occurs that is presented to you and to other witnesses, then I might understand believing in it. Even then, I'd question my own sanity.
I find it to be an incredibly useful model. Obviously they're all just coincidences or the lucky result of weak to moderate work from the materialist perspective.
I'd probably try to get it tested somehow, so that it can be scientifically verified so that I know I'm not seeing things and that the person wasn't playing a trick. Have you done anything like this? I guess I'm just asking why, in general.
It's a daily part of my life. The only reason that you have so much faith in science that you never directly experience is because it's a daily part of yours. I too have much faith in science and have not made one statement that in any way contradicts any empirically verifiable fact that I am aware of.
|
|
Bookmarks