Alan Watts: This Is IT: Become What You Are

[BikerDude]

When I see a groundswell from Princeton and Harvard that says they've found evidence of the efficacy of prayer or quantifiable evidence of telepathy I will listen. If there was something to this it would be studied.

What's wrong with the studies that have already found that there's something to telepathy? The famous CIA and Russian research in the 60's found some interesting things that were worth looking into. How do you know if these Ivy League schools aren't going to  seriously research this at some point? Just because it's not on your timetable and to your liking, doesn't mean it is to be wholly dismissed.

I included Princeton on purpose.
Princeton had a self funded group that spent 28 years.
They claimed to have found modest results but were debunked by peers.
http://skepdic.com/pear.html

Perhaps the most disconcerting thing about PEAR is the fact that suggestions by critics that should have been considered were routinely ignored. Physicist Bob Park reports, for example, that he suggested to Jahn two types of experiments that would have bypassed the main criticisms aimed at PEAR. Why not do a double-blind experiment? asked Park. Have a second RNG determine the task of the operator and do not let this determination be known to the one recording the results. This could have eliminated the charge of experimenter bias. Another experiment, however, could have eliminated most criticism. Park suggested that PEAR have operators try to use their minds to move a "state-of-the-art microbalance" (Park 2008, 138-139). A microbalance can make precise measurements on the order of a millionth of a gram. One doesn't need to be clairvoyant to figure out why this suggestion was never heeded.

CIA and Russian studies amounted to zero.
In fact the Russian studies are a laughing stock.
I mean IF there was anything to it that would be the biggest discovery since Newton.
Trust me scientists would be working on it.
James Randi has debunked over and over this nonsense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTXmo4_LR4w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acfHRGxwV_E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsrQAl5Vp24
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsrQAl5Vp24
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWt1vxnYX1w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQoUmuSNS3E


It's all a bunch of non sense. And it's laughable the way they gravitate toward things like quantum non locality.
The idea that observing a quantum phenomena changes it is enlisted by every type of charlatan in defense of their nonsense even when the actual science has nothing to do with what they are claiming. It's like a one size fits all excuse. "Well of course the psychic can't make a prediction when everyone is watching" Too many unbelievers in the room?

Ha!
Laughable!

[BikerDude]

When I see a groundswell from Princeton and Harvard that says they've found evidence of the efficacy of prayer or quantifiable evidence of telepathy I will listen. If there was something to this it would be studied.

What's wrong with the studies that have already found that there's something to telepathy? The famous CIA and Russian research in the 60's found some interesting things that were worth looking into. How do you know if these Ivy League schools aren't going to  seriously research this at some point? Just because it's not on your timetable and to your liking, doesn't mean it is to be wholly dismissed.

Without supporting evidence why believe it?
This is my point. The default position for this non sense is belief.
It's clearly a desire to believe from the start.
The default position on something should start with disbelief and evidence should overcome that.
If you provide some supporting evidence I'll look at it.
But I'm sorry I just don't find the links provided earlier to be of any substance at all.
If I need to explain why belief in Astrology simply disqualifies someone then we need to agree to disagree.
The point is that IF it was true it wouldn't be ignored. They absolutely would have gotten around to it.
It would be common knowledge. Core science.

It's like Bigfoot.
I'm easy to convince. Just show me a body.
Without that existing I am righteously skeptical.

[Hominid]

Vagina?

[BikerDude]

Vagina?

Well sorry but I gotta say "Johnson".
Peace out.

[Hominid]

Vagina?

Well sorry but I gotta say "Johnson".
Peace out.

I respect your opinion dude... I also hold strong conviction about using the scientific method, and being sceptical.  I guess I come from a slightly different angle due to past experience that has me personally convinced that some of these "woo woo" things have validity, though the evidence is mostly either anecdotal (as in my case), or from others who I trust and love. My original point was that if there seems to be a rational explanation for mystical experiences, then I'll listen, because me, and too many other people, have had things happen that defy "normal" science and go beyond the 5 senses. 

[BikerDude]

Vagina?

Well sorry but I gotta say "Johnson".
Peace out.

I respect your opinion dude... I also hold strong conviction about using the scientific method, and being sceptical.  I guess I come from a slightly different angle due to past experience that has me personally convinced that some of these "woo woo" things have validity, though the evidence is mostly either anecdotal (as in my case), or from others who I trust and love. My original point was that if there seems to be a rational explanation for mystical experiences, then I'll listen, because me, and too many other people, have had things happen that defy "normal" science and go beyond the 5 senses. 

I used to hang out with people like that also.
One day I sobered up and said "you know I'm sick of this bullshit".
It inevitably hinged on a romance for spooky nonsense.
A desire to believe.
And the sad thing is that looking back it was understood to be BS in an unspoken way.
A love for tripy non sense.
That's no way to approach life IMHO.
I find it a tragic waste of time and attention span.
And essentially a wellspring of misinformation.

I do in fact dig certain things about eastern philosophy but I find that lately I'm seeing a lot of stuff that goes right off the deck into the water.
I really enjoy the whole Siddahartha sound of the water, one with all thing.
Because for me it's completely compatible with rational science. I don't buy that we are literally one with everything but I do believe that we (as in our brains, bodies, emotions, beliefs fears, 'ie' everything) are not separate. That is we are the product of the influence of absolutely innumerable factors over the course of millions of generations. As such creation or nature or whatever you want to use has made an exact fingerprint upon our state and the state of every other creature in existence. And in that relation there is a lot of information that we can get in touch with. I think it's the core of what would be called intuition.
For instance.
I have found over the years that if I go away into the woods hunting for a number of day. Get away from everyone else. Totally reset the hard drive. And if I undertake the activity of hunting I actually get into a very different frame of mind. I mean I tap into a part of my existence that is very real and the product of millions of generations spent as a hunter. It makes perfect sense that our natures would have this sort of a "remnant psychology".  I find the idea of it perfectly rational. I think that we have moved farther and farther away from our natures and our minds and psychology is left with all of this untapped information that once we simply knew like a reflex. Wordless understanding. I think much of that is the wellspring that we derive our fascination for spirituality.

[Hominid]

Whatever floats your boat I guess! Just because it can't be proven/disproven by science, doesn't make it any less real. You *may* be dismissing things that science will eventually discover; remember, science is constantly unveiling truth and to be so negatively dismissive of something you haven't experienced or understand doesn't make it any less real.

[BikerDude]

Whatever floats your boat I guess! Just because it can't be proven/disproven by science, doesn't make it any less real. You *may* be dismissing things that science will eventually discover; remember, science is constantly unveiling truth and to be so negatively dismissive of something you haven't experienced or understand doesn't make it any less real.

The operable word being real.
I'm not trying to be difficult but when we determine that something is real we require more than intuition or anecdotal evidence.
If science discovers it then I'll believe it.
But again you starting with belief rather than skepticism about things like telekinesis?
You really want to do that?
Amazing

Doesn't the mean that Unicorns, fairy's leprechauns, and the flying spaghetti monster are real as long as some people believe strongly enough?

[Hominid]

Whatever floats your boat I guess! Just because it can't be proven/disproven by science, doesn't make it any less real. You *may* be dismissing things that science will eventually discover; remember, science is constantly unveiling truth and to be so negatively dismissive of something you haven't experienced or understand doesn't make it any less real.

The operable word being real.
I'm not trying to be difficult but when we determine that something is real we require more than intuition or anecdotal evidence.
If science discovers it then I'll believe it.
But again you starting with belief rather than skepticism about things like telekinesis?
You really want to do that?
Amazing

Doesn't the mean that Unicorns, fairy's leprechauns, and the flying spaghetti monster are real as long as some people believe strongly enough?

Now you're being demeaning and facetious; no need to be - I'm not some new age air head trying to convince you that I rode a unicorn.  I didn't say I started out with belief; I started out with personal experience. Anecdotal as it may be, it's 100% real in the same way your experience today eating lunch was real.  You don't need a science experiment to confirm that experience any more than I need one to confirm mine.

[A Stoned Buddha]

Whatever floats your boat I guess! Just because it can't be proven/disproven by science, doesn't make it any less real. You *may* be dismissing things that science will eventually discover; remember, science is constantly unveiling truth and to be so negatively dismissive of something you haven't experienced or understand doesn't make it any less real.

The operable word being real.
I'm not trying to be difficult but when we determine that something is real we require more than intuition or anecdotal evidence.
If science discovers it then I'll believe it.
But again you starting with belief rather than skepticism about things like telekinesis?
You really want to do that?
Amazing

Doesn't the mean that Unicorns, fairy's leprechauns, and the flying spaghetti monster are real as long as some people believe strongly enough?

I'm with you dude, all the way up to one point, where my experience stops. I can say any sort of rational things, but of course they're only considered rational by people who have shared similar parts of the same experience I have. We understand the concept "car" because you and I have shared the same experience of "car." We know what a "car" is comprised of. To someone who hasn't experienced a "car" it could seem to be nothing more than a multitude of separate parts stuck together, or maybe a pile of refined organic and inorganic compounds. All of which are correct, but "car" is meaningless without the experience of "car." So, I guess what I'm saying is, we don't all share the same experiences. We are each looking through our own unique prism of experience to the light of the now reality. So, while I too generally begin with disbelief, I also can't claim any certain "truths" or "lies" of the universe.  I rely and trust the experiences of others in so many different ways in my life. Do I know if the math checks out in the engineering of the brakes on my truck? No. But, I trust them anyway. Of course, we all draw a line somewhere in the sand of what we will or won't take on face value, but I wouldn't want to slam the door shut on the potential of other new shit to come to light. So much shit everywhere, just doesn't fucking matter to me anymore, man. 

[cckeiser]

The answer to the question..."What is the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything?" is not 42.
They just heard it wrong.
The answer is "Fortitude"....as in "to Abide".

[A Stoned Buddha]

The answer to the question..."What is the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything?" is not 42.
They just heard it wrong.
The answer is "Fortitude"....as in "to Abide". 8)

Now that is some profound shit. My mind is fucking blown. Well done!

[cckeiser]

The answer to the question..."What is the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything?" is not 42.
They just heard it wrong.
The answer is "Fortitude"....as in "to Abide".

Now that is some profound shit. My mind is fucking blown. Well done!

[forumdude]

Man I hate words sometimes. They're so vague. Sometimes I wonder if I have a bit of the aspergers, but then I see people arguing over words like this and I think that maybe we could all benefit from more aspergers. A word like "real" can mean a lot of different things and lead to misunderstandings and arguments.

Another ambiguity is when we chide each other. Are the chidings meant to sound as rough as they do? Biker Dude sounds mean, but that just might be his style.

Use smiley faces when being snarky, fellas. I know they're sort of teenagegirly but they go a long way towards proffering the proper respect, even if it's to someone who you think has got it all wrong. Sort of like how the British always say "sorry" all the time. Some yanks think it's annoying and silly but I think it's a nice form of social lubricant. Same with these stupid smiley winky faces. Too easy to take things the wrong way.

[forumdude]

Biker Dude is right about a lot of this, if not all, IMDO. Any time someone invokes subatomic physics to explain "unexplainable" phenomena on the macro level you can be pretty sure it's wrong. To go in the other direction (macrophysics to human experience) one might as well say that the relativistic nature of human cultures is due to the theory of relativity.

The observer effect, the uncertainty principle, quantum entanglement - these have all been used to aggrandize the importance of human psychology in relation to physics but always requires a massive leap and some sort of X-factor to connect them. And that X factor is so enormously large that it's no less deus ex machina than deus himself. For instance, there's this idea that human creativity begins on the subatomic level and sort of "percolates" up. This is a nice idea, linking our egos to the fabric of the universe. But it's just an idea. Same with the idea that we can influence subatomic actions with our minds - it's a total misreading of what the observer effect is all about. And reams and reams of lousy books from the Tao of Physics to the Dancing Wu Li Masters have run roughshod over the fucking rules of discourse in order to sell their books.

The only series of books that seemed to pay proper respect to physics when trying to be spiritual about it were the ones by Dana Zohar. But to be honest I read them years and years ago and probably they were full of shit too. I don't know.

Anyway, I think the baton has been taken up by the conspiritualist movement, mostly in really terrible movies. Zeitgeist? Thrive? I don't know for sure.

What's most interesting about this is the dogged need for humans to believe in this so-called "magic". I wonder where it comes from. As a kid I used to read super hero comics and desperately wish I could have a super power. I think maybe it's the same thing. Our will to power. But I think we can develop super powers of creativity and insight just by reading and writing. That's pretty fucking miraculous if you ask me.

Not to discount the experiences anyone has had. Sometimes incredible stuff happens and we can't explain it. And it's awesome when it does. It's just a shame that very often there's a reasonable explanation. In the tiny percentage of cases where there isn't, it can lead to a massive new discovery, but so far telekenisis has never been shown to be scientifically "true." Which is probably just as well. Otherwise we'd all be dead in a week.