Home | Community | Message Board

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Original Sensible Seeds High THC Strains

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: Poid] * 1
    #14183518 - 03/25/11 07:41 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

I am tending to agree with you. Guess I am daffy as well. :goose:


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #14183576 - 03/25/11 07:49 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Pair-o-dox! :datass:

:goose::goose:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: Poid]
    #14183593 - 03/25/11 07:51 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quackers and milk?


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #14183615 - 03/25/11 07:54 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Poidy, want a quacker?



--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesoldatheero
lastirishman
 User Gallery

Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,856
Loc: Flag
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: R2-D2]
    #14184714 - 03/25/11 11:21 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

What you are experiencing is 'material' (without further trying to divide experience into internal/external and all that fuckshit). Literally, WHAT YOU ARE EXPERIENCING is the 'material'. The only material is material experience.
The only 'immaterial' is 'immaterial'. "Something" cannot be immaterial, only the void, the complete absence of all beingness, including nothingness (the perception of nothingness) is actually immaterial, as it is immateriality itself.




Thing is when we say shit like that IMO it is a copout. You are basically just defining the material as "that what is" what does material actually mean? If you ponder it deeply do you really fathom what it actually is? Can you describe it to apart from the senses? IMO all we have is our experience and we dub matter as the external cause of experience but we have no real conception what matter is beyond our experience. Do you see the anomaly?


--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: Freedom]
    #14185961 - 03/26/11 09:25 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Guruu:

Have you answered those points I took with your claims?

Specifically, I don't think you've ever explained the simple, essential, question of how these "internal energies" things could be known to someone yet not be scientifically investigated.  You've said they are detectable, yet incompatible with some proffered scientific outlook, but beyond this conclusory statement, i don't believe you've offered anything- either in support of that conclusion or otherwise establshing your point.

This comes up all the time.  Can we get someone who feels certain things are immune to scientific inquiry yet observable, detectable, to explain how this could be, especially given the argument to the contrary put forth in this thread: if you can detect/observe it that means through which you do so is also a means through which you may scientifically investigate it.

It seems like people have simply equivoacted or made conclusory claims as to the nature of science that seem unrecognizable and highly questionable. Have we seen any on-point defense of this common claim?  It would be nice to be able to resolve the matter somewhat.

Quote:

Freedom said:
this is how it works: we can make different conclusions from the same data. For example:

is it a duck or a rabbit?









What does the answer have to do with anything?  What does the fact that different conclusions may be drawn from the same data have to do with anything?  I don't think you've responded to Orgone's argument nor explained how something can be determined to exist and not be scientifically examined/tested/detected.

In your specific example you have not defined what a bunny or a duck is, and so I don't see how the two subjective descriptions are particularly useful to this point.  It is plainly an image which could be likened to any number of things.  So what?  That doesn't mean the nature of the image is at all ambiguous, only what it represents or appears to be- I fail to see how the question of this subjective interpretation is on point.


Quote:



That was just a simple example to show the principal. When you have a complex data set you can find what ever you want to look for:




So what?


Quote:

Our internel experience is an extraordinarily complex data set. You can find whatever constellations that you look for.




What does that mean?  I get you are referring to some picture of points, but how does this have anything to say regarding the topic?

Quote:

This process is just like when you look at a rorschach blot. I would argue that what you find when looking at the your internal experience tells you more about your bias then it does about what is really going on. When you say that something is obvious, its like me telling you, "Look at this inkblot, its obviously a cricket" :




Why?  The rorsarch instructions are to try to fabricate some scene represented by the image.  Answering that it looks like a cricket does not mean you find it to be intentionally representing it or anything of the sort.

Again, have you explained what your point is and how that has anything to do with the topic? 

---


As Orgone notes: people have made these claims constantly "Science can't test emotion", "Science can't prove what's in your mind", "Science can't touch experience", "Science can't explain faith/spirit" (College of Cardinals meeting resulted in this statement being made by someone to the press, soemthing I found pretty ridiculous.  I doubt the cardinals know jack shit about science generally, they should ask some of the compotent philosophers the Vatican has).

Can we not get anyone to justify these claims now that we've discussed it on point?  Nobody has conceeded the issue either, so I assume this view remains as popular as it was.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: Freedom]
    #14186031 - 03/26/11 09:48 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Freedom said:
is it a duck or a rabbit?





I don't see how anybody could possibly mistake that to be a rabbit...


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: Poid]
    #14186080 - 03/26/11 10:11 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Obviously just pixels on a screen and not any sort of animal.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #14186110 - 03/26/11 10:23 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

So I've only been masturbating to screen-pixels this whole time? :crankeytom:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineg00ru
lit pants tit licker
Male User Gallery


Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 21,088
Loc: georgia, us
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #14186127 - 03/26/11 10:28 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Dude I have seriously tried to explain that they are totally detectable but only on an individual basis because these energies are completely intertwined with our mental functioning.  They are only going to be found through actual introspection, and clearing the mind.  If I clear my mind and realize that my thoughts are effecting external reality to a large degree, I can see that clearly and still not be able to prove it to anybody else because you can't force anybody to step back and analyze their thoughts.  Science can't quantifiably measure thoughts.  It can find the correlative brain functioning, but it has nothing to say about the actual thought that we experience in the moment. But these thoughts are completely shaping our external reality. It's detectable by an inner observer (you) and that is the scientific investigation. It's not immune to anything, but it's unlikely that physics, neuroscience, philosophy and psychology will come together and form a coherent map of the entire universe that includes our consciousness any time soon.  I really hope it happens one day, but there's no point waiting before investigating for yourself.

Randoms question: if you thought good, positive thoughts all the time, would your external reality improve in quality of appearance?

This stuff is hard to get across. It's like if a fish was swimming around in the ocean in a bunch of water and you're trying to tell it that actually it is in something called water.  But it doesn't believe you and because water is all it knows, it thinks you're full of shit.  And you're like "jesus just jump out of the water for a second and take a look around, you'll see clearly." And then the fish is like "you still haven't answered my question about why water isn't scientifically detectable!" and proceeds to swim around in angry circles and then try to derail its own thread with a bunch of lame posts.

Quote:


OrgoneConclusion said:

Internal energies :blah:
Trust and openness :blah:

We have gone over this a zillion times. There are 10,000+ religions and countless cults because of this trusting in another and/or accepting one's inner landscapes as representative of any sort of deeper reality.




Yeah...the reason there's so many is because its valid.  This is a classic argument of guilt by association...how about trying to understand my perspective instead of just dismissing it offhand and acting like I'm stupid. I guess I wouldn't expect you to all of a sudden change your worldview, but it wouldn't be a bad idea...

Quote:

These silly ideas never aided the progress of mankind in the slightest; whereas the examining of the external world has yielded wonders never previously dreamed of.




What? What?

Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.- Einstein

Even the investigation of the outer world requires inner evolution.  Any great scientist is very immersed in his being, that's where all the good ideas spring from.  Look within my friend, look within

All right I'm done with this thread, I've done my best, have a nice day :heart:


--------------------
check out my music!
drowse in prison and your waking will be but loss


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: g00ru]
    #14186134 - 03/26/11 10:32 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

If I clear my mind and realize that my thoughts are effecting external reality to a large degree, I can see that clearly and still not be able to prove it




Wow! You can effect external reality with your thoughts and no one but you can witness these changes. :cuckoo: :cuckoo:

Just so you know, if the changes are external they can be witnessed. I know this sort of basic logic is a real strain for you. :shrug:


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineR2-D2
horseradish
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/14/10
Posts: 945
Last seen: 4 years, 29 days
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: soldatheero]
    #14186377 - 03/26/11 11:34 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

soldatheero said:
Thing is when we say shit like that IMO it is a copout. You are basically just defining the material as "that what is" what does material actually mean? If you ponder it deeply do you really fathom what it actually is? Can you describe it to apart from the senses? IMO all we have is our experience and we dub matter as the external cause of experience but we have no real conception what matter is beyond our experience. Do you see the anomaly?



I really believe that on a deep, fundamental level, the "what the fuck and why?" question of reality is completely unanswered. Or maybe "how?". The existenceness of existence seems to me like it's just beyond everything else, and to try and find out why it is so is just the initiation of a very silly loop.

I think you misunderstood what I was I was saying. I believe perception is reality.
Quack.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: R2-D2]
    #14186440 - 03/26/11 11:47 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

All right I'm done with this thread, I've done my best, have a nice day :heart:




Fantastic

Why did you even start if you would have a fit if people disagreed with you, weren't going to address the question, but rather bitch at people personally?  Where did you ever reply to the singular point made: that things which are known can be measured scientifically by whatever process their existance is detected, known?

Seems you've just whined about people disagreeing with you, "dismissing ideas" (despite the detailed replies which go unrebuted),"thinking you're stupid" (nobody said that), and claiming people who disagree with you are arrogant and have problems with their ego.  What brought on these tantrums?  You knew what the thread was about....

You go on and on, but never address the issue and then leave in a huff, declaring "I'm done with this thread". 


Its interesting how the self-declared spiritual people seem to be pretty sensitive and egoistic, even being offended and hurt when nobody insults them or addresses them as a person at all.

Judging from this, I'm not sure this spirituality/mysticism stuff really works too well.. This is one of many times the mystic is the one attacking others, ignoring the argument and bitching about the person despite no provocation, then declaring "I'm going home" when they are pressed to address the topic.  Very "one with the universe", brah. 


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBlueCoyote
Beyond
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 17 days
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: BlueCoyote]
    #14197169 - 03/28/11 10:48 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

And then we see that the whole puzzle was just another part of a bigger puzzle and so on....


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelearningtofly
Ancient Aliens
Male


Registered: 05/21/07
Posts: 15,105
Loc: Out of this world
Last seen: 12 years, 5 months
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: Poid]
    #14197210 - 03/28/11 10:57 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Poid said:
Quote:

Freedom said:
is it a duck or a rabbit?





I don't see how anybody could possibly mistake that to be a rabbit...



its both d00d


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OnlineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 5,857
Last seen: 4 minutes, 33 seconds
Re: "How can you provide material evidence of the immaterial?" [Re: johnm214]
    #14197644 - 03/28/11 12:30 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

johnm214 said:

Quote:

Freedom said:
this is how it works: we can make different conclusions from the same data. For example:

is it a duck or a rabbit?









What does the answer have to do with anything?  What does the fact that different conclusions may be drawn from the same data have to do with anything?  I don't think you've responded to Orgone's argument nor explained how something can be determined to exist and not be scientifically examined/tested/detected.





Are you viewing this in threaded mode? This is the post I'm responding to:

Quote:

OrgoneConclusion said:
Internal energies :blah:
Trust and openness :blah:

We have gone over this a zillion times. There are 10,000+ religions and countless cults because of this trusting in another and/or accepting one's inner landscapes as representative of any sort of deeper reality.





I'm explaining why I think without the scientific method people draw so many contradictory conclusions from the same data. Specifically the problem bias. One starts with a belief and then looks for data supporting that belief. In an immense data set there is likely to be some kind of evidence supporting that belief.

Quote:


In your specific example you have not defined what a bunny or a duck is, and so I don't see how the two subjective descriptions are particularly useful to this point.




Common definitions.

Quote:


It is plainly an image which could be likened to any number of things.  So what?  That doesn't mean the nature of the image is at all ambiguous, only what it represents or appears to be- I fail to see how the question of this subjective interpretation is on point.
Quote:



That was just a simple example to show the principal. When you have a complex data set you can find what ever you want to look for:




So what?




Fred was indoctrinated with christianity. When he looks at his  experience, he is biased to find the christian god and jesus and evidence of certain kinds of miracles.

Sally has relatively similar experience, yet she was indoctrinated with hinduism, so she is biased to find hindu gods and make different conclusions from a similar data set.

The duck/rabbit image is simple enough that most of us can see both.


Quote:


Quote:

Our internel experience is an extraordinarily complex data set. You can find whatever constellations that you look for.




What does that mean?  I get you are referring to some picture of points, but how does this have anything to say regarding the topic?




The picture of points is the night sky with lines drawn in to represent constellations. This is example is a step up in complexity. At this level of complexity there is no obvious representation like the duck and rabbit. Yet people still find representations. The representations they find (create) are shaped by bias. The greeks thought the gods were up in the heavens, lo and behold they found them, even though the representations are very poor (basically badly drawn stick figures).

Quote:


Quote:

This process is just like when you look at a rorschach blot. I would argue that what you find when looking at the your internal experience tells you more about your bias then it does about what is really going on. When you say that something is obvious, its like me telling you, "Look at this inkblot, its obviously a cricket" :




Why?  The rorsarch instructions are to try to fabricate some scene represented by the image.  Answering that it looks like a cricket does not mean you find it to be intentionally representing it or anything of the sort.




I'm not sure why you think I think the blot was ever intended to represent anything.... I'm drawing an analogy between finding a cricket in a rorschach blot and finding god in your internal experience. You find a cricket in the blot because for whatever reason your mind is biased towards a cricket, you find the presence of god in your internal experience because for whatever reason your mind is biased towards finding the experience of god.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Original Sensible Seeds High THC Strains


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* When a skeptic becomes an evidence and logic dodger!
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
Ego Death 9,838 113 02/07/05 05:51 PM
by Ego Death
* Evidence that OBE's do not relate to the physical world?
( 1 2 all )
PHARMAKOS 1,776 22 05/22/04 12:46 PM
by Zero7a1
* Feelings As Evidence
( 1 2 3 all )
Swami 2,531 59 04/29/05 01:35 PM
by soulmotion
* can there be free will in a material world?
( 1 2 all )
Malachi 2,311 25 11/25/03 01:33 AM
by ZenGecko
* Evidence of UFO's V2
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
Ego Death 8,027 95 02/27/04 07:00 PM
by Atomisk
* Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )
DiploidM 11,781 134 06/04/05 09:28 PM
by psyillyazul
* Materialism
( 1 2 all )
Swami 3,632 30 01/08/04 09:09 AM
by fireworks_god
* So evidence obtained by torture of foreigners is now admissable.
( 1 2 3 all )
JacquesCousteau 2,686 48 12/06/04 01:49 PM
by Phred

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
3,307 topic views. 3 members, 13 guests and 3 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.021 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 12 queries.