By the way I used to hang out with heavy psychoactive drug users and I've actually seen people overdose and convulse. What did their friends say "She's having a good time"
I had a friend Steve, said he'd kick my ass if I ever got into those drugs. Said all of his friends were either dead or in jail from drug use. Steve was also a heroin, crack, cocaine, PCP, etc... addict.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
By the way I used to hang out with heavy psychoactive drug users and I've actually seen people overdose and convulse. What did their friends say "She's having a good time"
I had a friend Steve, said he'd kick my ass if I ever got into those drugs. Said all of his friends were either dead or in jail from drug use. Steve was also a heroin, crack, cocaine, PCP, etc... addict.
Obviously there's a negative side to any drug use, if not taken with caution. Daniel Pinchbeck's book confronts this aspect.
This isn't the whole picture though.
Well the Shamans aren't walking through walls, are they? If it was possible and these Shamans had acheived it, we would all know beyond a doubt, it'd be recorded on video and broadcast around the world, scientists would be studying the phenomena. No. What happens is they take psychoactive drugs or meditate to put themselves into a psychoactive mental state. They may feel like they are transcending reality, but in reality they are convulsing on the floor, and when they die from over-dose, what do you call that? Becoming one with the universe? No wonder so many people kill themselves to acheive spiritual oneness with the universe. Hey, next time a comet flies by let's suicide and we will all become God.
it is hard to study a phenomena when our science doesn't have the abilitiy to measure it yet
not to mention that society is a little slow at figuring things out. i mean some people actually think hallucinogenic drugs kill people. these substances have been used safely and therapeutically for many years and the research is already out there, society just hasn't caught on yet. shamanism has been used for healing people for ages, i'll find you some documentaries if you'd like
Let's not overlook the fact that our own brain produces DMT which is one of the most powerful psychedellics on the planet produced by our pineal gland. this pineal gland (labeled the seat of the soul by Descartes) is also formed 49 days after conception which is precisely when it is determined whether the baby will be male or female. Now isn't that fascinating? Also, I believe it is of Buddhist (people that actually spend their days meditating and focusing on the mind as opposed to our dumbed-down tv watching society) belief that it takes 49 days to reincarnate; a cool little coincidence. Maybe there's a purpose for these substances...
..and you will come to find that we are all one mind, capable of all that's imagined and all conceivable
it is hard to study a phenomena when our science doesn't have the abilitiy to measure it yet
not to mention that society is a little slow at figuring things out. i mean some people actually think hallucinogenic drugs kill people. these substances have been used safely and therapeutically for many years and the research is already out there, society just hasn't caught on yet. shamanism has been used for healing people for ages, i'll find you some documentaries if you'd like
Let's not overlook the fact that our own brain produces DMT which is one of the most powerful psychedellics on the planet produced by our pineal gland. this pineal gland (labeled the seat of the soul by Descartes) is also formed 49 days after conception which is precisely when it is determined whether the baby will be male or female. Now isn't that fascinating? Also, I believe it is of Buddhist (people that actually spend their days meditating and focusing on the mind as opposed to our dumbed-down tv watching society) belief that it takes 49 days to reincarnate; a cool little coincidence. Maybe there's a purpose for these substances...
All that stuff also leads to insanity. Psychosis can be an early warning sign for schizophrenia. By taking Psychoactive drugs, your deliberately inducing a psychotic episode. I've taken drugs and I know what the experiences are like, and honestly, nothing special about them, it's just fucking with your mind.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
by psychoactive i was sorta referring to LSD, Shrooms, salvia, the ones used for mystic states
hey, i don't see any on that list, go figure
Shrooms have an interesting effect. I felt like my sensory input was more distinct, but that's about it. Perhaps I don't have these extremely mystical out-of-this-world experiences because I'm in touch with reality and I don't particularly want to escape it.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I've taken drugs and I know what the experiences are like, and honestly, nothing special about them, it's just fucking with your mind.
Depends on the individual, and his/her approach and reasons for taking the drug, or drugs. Tribal peoples don't take hallucinogenic drugs in order to fuck with their minds. They have been taking them since pre-history for practical and spiritual reasons. The ancient Egyptians, Aztecs, Toltecs, Mayans, Celts, Native Americans, aborigines, Siberian shamans, e.t.c, e.t.c, also spent hundreds, and thousands of years living with, and applying these shamanic experiences to their everyday lives, for medicinal use, spiritual and intellectual guidance, and for communicating with the natural environment around them. Again, drugs aren't always used. These heightened states of consciousness can be accessed in other ways too.
Many people in the modern world take psychedelics merely to 'get out of their heads', and to 'fuck with their minds'. This doesn't mean that that is all their is to it.
Read Daniel Pinchbeck's book. He covers all the angles, and ties these questions up with a comprehensive knowledge of philosophy and literature to boot.
Well the Shamans aren't walking through walls, are they? If it was possible and these Shamans had acheived it, we would all know beyond a doubt, it'd be recorded on video and broadcast around the world, scientists would be studying the phenomena.
So you assume.
Anyway, if you go by OBE records (Out of Body Experiences), we can all walk through walls once we get out of our body.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Anyway, if you go by OBE records (Out of Body Experiences), we can all walk through walls once we get out of our body.
Peace
Dan
Again that is experiential.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
And again, what isn't? What information do we have that is not experienced in some way?
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
And again, what isn't? What information do we have that is not experienced in some way?
Peace
Dan
If you want to nit-pick at words.
Gravity. Everyone experiences it. No one can say that gravity does not exist because everyone experiences it. We can objectively prove it through external stimulation. You can't prove to me that God exists because I have never and will never experience God. Because first you must believe God exists and convince yourself. Whereas I don't need to believe gravity exists for it to still exist.
You still haven't quantified how you discriminate between truth and falsehood when it comes to experience.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Gravity. Everyone experiences it. No one can say that gravity does not exist because everyone experiences it. We can objectively prove it through external stimulation. You can't prove to me that God exists because I have never and will never experience God. Because first you must believe God exists and convince yourself. Whereas I don't need to believe gravity exists for it to still exist.
Exactly. Since everyone experiences gravity, we are fairly certain of that. (although we may not really know how it works, we just sense it)
I am not proving god to you, as that is impossible. Equally impossible to disprove of course, which makes it a rather uninteresting debate. But all information we have and receive is filtered through human minds, our own or others. Since all information is filtered, it makes no sense to talk about "objective" evidence, as thew only way we can know it, is through a subjective account. This is where the chasm of phenomenology and logical positivism starts in philosophy. Everything is experienced.
You still haven't quantified how you discriminate between truth and falsehood when it comes to experience.
I judge from my own experience on the one hand, and in relation to other information I possess on the other. What you are going at is criteria for when an experiential account solidifies into "solid evidence". It never does. However, just because something isn't hard evidence, does not mean it's nonsense and can be automatically discarded either. What counts is the number of accounts, and their consistency.
Much research is based on asking people of their experiences. For side-effects of drugs for instance. The entirety of social sciences pretty much, or should it suffice to say that any field or subject concerning humans at some point rely on experiences of test subjects.
There are no clearcut line between "scientifical evidence" and "the rest" as you would have it. The use and breakthrough of qualitative methods in science corroborates that.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Exactly. Since everyone experiences gravity, we are fairly certain of that. (although we may not really know how it works, we just sense it)
I am not proving god to you, as that is impossible. Equally impossible to disprove of course, which makes it a rather uninteresting debate. But all information we have and receive is filtered through human minds, our own or others. Since all information is filtered, it makes no sense to talk about "objective" evidence, as thew only way we can know it, is through a subjective account. This is where the chasm of phenomenology and logical positivism starts in philosophy. Everything is experienced.
I judge from my own experience on the one hand, and in relation to other information I possess on the other. What you are going at is criteria for when an experiential account solidifies into "solid evidence". It never does. However, just because something isn't hard evidence, does not mean it's nonsense and can be automatically discarded either. What counts is the number of accounts, and their consistency.
Much research is based on asking people of their experiences. For side-effects of drugs for instance. The entirety of social sciences pretty much, or should it suffice to say that any field or subject concerning humans at some point rely on experiences of test subjects.
There are no clearcut line between "scientifical evidence" and "the rest" as you would have it. The use and breakthrough of qualitative methods in science corroborates that.
Peace
Dan
That's a poor system of discrimination in my opinion. What counts to me is reproducability. A person can drop a ball in-front of me and say "Look, gravity" and I will go "Oh ok". But you cannot say "Look God", "Look Aliens", "Look Bigfoot" or anything like that. Those experiences are not reproducible.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
That's a poor system of discrimination in my opinion. What counts to me is reproducability. A person can drop a ball in-front of me and say "Look, gravity" and I will go "Oh ok". But you cannot say "Look God", "Look Aliens", "Look Bigfoot" or anything like that. Those experiences are not reproducible.
Well, if I said "look bigfoot" and pointed at bigfoot, then I guess you would have to believe it... Bigfoot will not appear from me just saying the words, but if i point it out to you while i say it, it would be another matter. I can't reproduce the World Trade Center collapsing, and going there in a while won't show a trace of them or their fall. Doesn't mean it isn't true.
It (our senses) is a poor system of discrimination, but sadly the only one we have. If you claim knowledge seperated from experience (or experience related to you, and this telling would thus be the experience), then you are in effect claiming god.
That the discrimination does not satisfy the scientifical ideals I am well aware.
(edit) Well, gotta go sleep now. Work is on in 7 hours again.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
If I look at the Rocky Mountains in B.C. I look in awe. But I do not feel God. That's entirely perceptual.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I'll give this one a final bump too. Read this book people! It's inspiring in many ways while laying out a model for existence.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Comments
I had a friend Steve, said he'd kick my ass if I ever got into those drugs. Said all of his friends were either dead or in jail from drug use. Steve was also a heroin, crack, cocaine, PCP, etc... addict.
hey, i don't see any on that list, go figure
Not yet, although I have a copy. I haven't read any Terrence McKenna.
Obviously there's a negative side to any drug use, if not taken with caution. Daniel Pinchbeck's book confronts this aspect.
This isn't the whole picture though.
it is hard to study a phenomena when our science doesn't have the abilitiy to measure it yet
not to mention that society is a little slow at figuring things out. i mean some people actually think hallucinogenic drugs kill people. these substances have been used safely and therapeutically for many years and the research is already out there, society just hasn't caught on yet. shamanism has been used for healing people for ages, i'll find you some documentaries if you'd like
Let's not overlook the fact that our own brain produces DMT which is one of the most powerful psychedellics on the planet produced by our pineal gland. this pineal gland (labeled the seat of the soul by Descartes) is also formed 49 days after conception which is precisely when it is determined whether the baby will be male or female. Now isn't that fascinating? Also, I believe it is of Buddhist (people that actually spend their days meditating and focusing on the mind as opposed to our dumbed-down tv watching society) belief that it takes 49 days to reincarnate; a cool little coincidence. Maybe there's a purpose for these substances...
All that stuff also leads to insanity. Psychosis can be an early warning sign for schizophrenia. By taking Psychoactive drugs, your deliberately inducing a psychotic episode. I've taken drugs and I know what the experiences are like, and honestly, nothing special about them, it's just fucking with your mind.
Shrooms have an interesting effect. I felt like my sensory input was more distinct, but that's about it. Perhaps I don't have these extremely mystical out-of-this-world experiences because I'm in touch with reality and I don't particularly want to escape it.
Depends on the individual, and his/her approach and reasons for taking the drug, or drugs. Tribal peoples don't take hallucinogenic drugs in order to fuck with their minds. They have been taking them since pre-history for practical and spiritual reasons. The ancient Egyptians, Aztecs, Toltecs, Mayans, Celts, Native Americans, aborigines, Siberian shamans, e.t.c, e.t.c, also spent hundreds, and thousands of years living with, and applying these shamanic experiences to their everyday lives, for medicinal use, spiritual and intellectual guidance, and for communicating with the natural environment around them. Again, drugs aren't always used. These heightened states of consciousness can be accessed in other ways too.
Many people in the modern world take psychedelics merely to 'get out of their heads', and to 'fuck with their minds'. This doesn't mean that that is all their is to it.
Read Daniel Pinchbeck's book. He covers all the angles, and ties these questions up with a comprehensive knowledge of philosophy and literature to boot.
Anyway, if you go by OBE records (Out of Body Experiences), we can all walk through walls once we get out of our body.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Again that is experiential.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
If you want to nit-pick at words.
Gravity. Everyone experiences it. No one can say that gravity does not exist because everyone experiences it. We can objectively prove it through external stimulation. You can't prove to me that God exists because I have never and will never experience God. Because first you must believe God exists and convince yourself. Whereas I don't need to believe gravity exists for it to still exist.
You still haven't quantified how you discriminate between truth and falsehood when it comes to experience.
I am not proving god to you, as that is impossible. Equally impossible to disprove of course, which makes it a rather uninteresting debate. But all information we have and receive is filtered through human minds, our own or others. Since all information is filtered, it makes no sense to talk about "objective" evidence, as thew only way we can know it, is through a subjective account. This is where the chasm of phenomenology and logical positivism starts in philosophy. Everything is experienced.
I judge from my own experience on the one hand, and in relation to other information I possess on the other. What you are going at is criteria for when an experiential account solidifies into "solid evidence". It never does. However, just because something isn't hard evidence, does not mean it's nonsense and can be automatically discarded either. What counts is the number of accounts, and their consistency.
Much research is based on asking people of their experiences. For side-effects of drugs for instance. The entirety of social sciences pretty much, or should it suffice to say that any field or subject concerning humans at some point rely on experiences of test subjects.
There are no clearcut line between "scientifical evidence" and "the rest" as you would have it. The use and breakthrough of qualitative methods in science corroborates that.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
That's a poor system of discrimination in my opinion. What counts to me is reproducability. A person can drop a ball in-front of me and say "Look, gravity" and I will go "Oh ok". But you cannot say "Look God", "Look Aliens", "Look Bigfoot" or anything like that. Those experiences are not reproducible.
It (our senses) is a poor system of discrimination, but sadly the only one we have. If you claim knowledge seperated from experience (or experience related to you, and this telling would thus be the experience), then you are in effect claiming god.
That the discrimination does not satisfy the scientifical ideals I am well aware.
(edit) Well, gotta go sleep now. Work is on in 7 hours again.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Depends what you mean by 'God'.
If I look at the Rocky Mountains in B.C. I look in awe. But I do not feel God. That's entirely perceptual.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965