One term to describe an effect is not as good as any other.
In our example there is the nebulous term, “the supernatural” (spirits cause it) or the more specific term, “ideomotor effect” (physiology causes it): we can test and refute physiological causes, we can not test the supernatural - this is a truly meaningless explanation for us as it is ceases the possibility of any further inquiry (We can, however, rule out supernatural causes by finding a natural cause).
What other current system of gathering knowledge is privy to studying the supernatural?
I’ll await your answer while meditating at my scientific shrine… praying to the universal laws for a grant
A sailor good at finding water… I just found that funny.
You are a person that does not believe in spirits. So you ridicule those that do. Shame on you. There are nine times more believers in spirits than those who don’t.
I am glad you were entertained.
Well I did follow the directions–not sure why you are questioning me or my motives? There was no difference in the movements. I am very open to different things in life, but I need more then a ‘just because’ for me to accept them.
You seem to ascribe to me a Science bent–untrue my friend, as I tend towards the Artistic side of life. If one goes into a beautiful Cathedral one often experiences a rush of feelings based on the Architecture. The compression of space and use of light tied together with what most people is a spiritual place contribute to that feeling. I wouldn’t tie it to some mythical explanation when I, as the creator of that space, know what is causing those feelings. There is no need to find a spiritual explanation where one doesn’t exist.
Do I wonder why it swings at all? Not really–why would I? And even if I did, why would I ascribe some mythical relationship there when a substantially more likely reason would explain it? Do you walk around the earth each day and wonder why some mythical magical thing keeps you from floating into space? Or do you accept Gravity as a more likely and logical explanation?
As to your story–again why would you tell me this unless you wanted me to gain something from it? What do you gain from just passing it on? Certainly you aren’t saying you told me this story without a purpose?
How about an entire article complete with 18 cites … does that make a dent?
It’s not like someone couldn’t explain something and said, “Hey, I know. I’ll come up a term for something that hasn’t been tested or proven at all and I’ll call ‘the ideomotor effect’ … that ought to shut them up.”
No, the person who did that came up with, “it’s the spirits.”
You really don’t have any idea what science is, do you? Let me boil it down to one fundamental concept for you: the scientific method.
If you apply the scientific method to a question, it doesn’t matter whether the question (or your response) is materialistic, spiritual, or anything else. It merely tests whether your response is a valid answer to the question. Is it repeatable? Is it measurable? Are the results internally consistent?
Science doesn’t worship materialism. If it could be said to “worship” anything, it would be logic and consistency. If 476 people have 476 different explanations for some phenomenon, then (at least) 475 of them are probably wrong. Even in this thread, ouija board believers can’t agree on why it works. Non-believers haven’t seen any valid evidence that it does work.
You need to back up a step. Use your ouija board to determine my bank account number, or Guin’s mother’s middle name, or the contents of 25 sealed and shuffled envelopes (in order). Do this in a controlled environment.
Arguing about why it works is meaningless until somebody can show that it does, and that has never been done.
You said to try it. I told you that I had. Now what?
Do you have any evidence to support this claim?
Even the number was only 10%, it would be a very sad statement about humanity.
Seems everyone wants to teach me about science. How it must be repeatable, etc. In my life experiences very little has been testable and repeatable. Spiritual things are not about materialism, nor will they ever be, nor does that mean they are non-existant. Spiritual people far out-number the materialists. If you look at all the great leaders and teachers of history, they are spiritual people. There is a reason for that. Now if you wish to play the piano well it is necessary to practice, practice, and practice. If you wish to play the ouija, pendulum, or other tools used by spiritual people practice is also needed. A simple five-minute trial will not show you anything. Spiritual growth is emotional growth. It is learning to choose those things that are beneficial to you and others. It is tolerance, patience, compassion, and understanding of all things life has to offer. It is looking beyond good and evil, beyond black and white, seeing the diversity of life and embracing it.
Well, if you would not continually post non-scientific stuff while claiming it is science, fewer people would feel this compulsion.
And nothing in your life appears have had a scientific basis, either.
And yet you told another poster to go out and perform just such a five minute trial as if it would show him something. Perhaps you should consider what you really want to express instead of constantly contradicting yourself.
It’s a shame that we’re not using this thread anymore, but okay.
I’d re-ask the same question I asked there and never got an answer to. Namely, what epistemological process do we have access to when one spiritual revelation contradicts another? As I stated at the time, I had a very moving liminal experience years ago, and I documented it years before I brought it up in a debate. But it contradicts those of many other people. How do we determine whose experience was more ‘right’?
Along the same lines, I’ve practiced hypnosis before as well as allowed myself to be hypnotized numerous times in order to observe how it worked. The persuader exercise with the pendulum is quite simply explained by sub-conscious movements in one’s musculature. It can very easily be ‘directed’ by the hypnotist saying things like “you will notice the pendulum is beginning to swing in a circle” or “even though you’re not moving your hand, you’ll see that the pendulum is starting to swing from side to side.”
As I’ve seen exactly how this can be done (as both subject and hypnotist) what reason do we have to posit any "super"natural explanations, at all?
I miss that personal thread also, at least I wasn’t censored every other post.
OK. I read your post and I don’t grok. The reason you never got an answer was you have provided one for yourself as to what it was and how it happened. So most will just leave it be as I will.
I will offer a few observations.
What you experienced was unique and personal to you, as are all of these “spiritual” experiences. Other people will experience other things, such as “God” being male, or as I did being, just being. The love part is common experience and the total acceptance of you as you are is the most common. This experience can be caused by meditation, or just relaxing, free of materialistic cares. In deeper experiences such as the near death experience one is usually out-of-body observing their own body as dead. This leads to a different interpretation than you have given it.
I noticed when you replied to my other post you ignored the part where I asked you for any supporting evidence whatsoever for your claim that 90% of people believe in spirits.
I couldn’t find out exactly how this poll was mediated (no demographics, methodology, nothing - where and how did they present this; Malls, College Campuses, Churches?) but it really doesn’t matter. This is still just an appeal to consensus and as such is bunk-all useful in determining the reality of the issue.
Look, if you claim spirits are real (i.e. can interact with our world) then give us something to back it up; how do you know this?
Then you should really step out of the debate. If you refuse to provide anything other that “I just know,” you can’t be taken seriously.
I would submit that the only thing you *experienced *was a halucination, of which there is much more proof as a phenomenon than spirits doing, well, anything.
