I had some weird thoughts due to the discussion of paranormal activity at the forum, but soon evolving into something more... Its long, but worth reading I hope.
People investigating the paranormal from the believers sources will find that there are lots of experiments which give evidence of significant paranormal effects -with chances millions to one for the effect to be a coincidence.
However, equally many other similar experiments have gotten no results whatsoever.
What is interesting here is that studies show that scientists who believed in paranormal effects got positive results, while the results of the sceptic scientists fell to chance.
We might then speculate whether:
1) the believing scientists cheated the sceptics. 2) the believing scientists cheated themselves. 3) the scientists' belief-system influenced their experiments.
1) Its a scam: We know for sure that there has always been telephathy scams and spiritists hoaxes around for the last 100 years, but everyone with a little knowledge of what is going on in paranormal research, even if sceptic, would not accuse the scientists involved in modern paranormal research of cheating.
2) The believing scientists cheated themselves: Selfdeception is a common human trait which is of course unconscious. This might involve 'putting aside' an experiment that destroyed the good statistics (and even make rational excuses for why this experiment should be disregarded). This is referred to as the 'filedrawer problem'. This might be a viable explanation for why believers get results, but the file drawer problem is of a quite general nature, and as such is certainly not limited to scientists investigating the paranormal. However, ever since pointed out, the file drawer problem is accounted for in all modern paranormal experiments. Still, some scientists get extraordinary results.
Option 3) We create reality: This is a dangerous statement because it undermines all scientific objectivity. But, really, is there a world out there independent of our experience of it and how would you ever know if this was the case?
You might think that you are 'here and now' due to some evolutionary mechanism, but how do you know that you do not create the past? You pick up some clues that you choose to emphasise and create them into a belief-system that is constantly reinforced by new experiences (which is experienced that way due to the nature of the belief-system... you see the loop).
What makes history real, is in what degree it brings the past closer to the present. A logical structure has no place for "leaps of faith". Accepting its beforehand agreed upon premises, the beginning of the logical argument is equal to its end.
In this way the theory of evolution has merit, because, accepting the premises on which it is built, it explains a lot from very simple assumptions.
All such theories will seem like good explanations for a while, but in the end they all implode upon themselves, hen and egg, observer and observed.
A scientific structure is only consistent up to point break. It is like a tower you build to reach the sky. It depends upon the seeker how many bricks he must lay down before he understands that he will never reach the sky in that way (and with this realization he understands that the sky is the limit ). Most people will, however, find themselves a nice room in the tower and trust that the people at the top eventually will work things out. But hey, some might start looking at the bricks in the wall, and might suddenly discover that they in fact aren't real...
There is no scientific truth. Yes, the sun rises in the east, but thats the way I want it. I couldn't want it any other way, because I absolutely do not believe that I am strong enough to fight against gods or dragons. Neither do I cut off my head in order to think more clearly. My computer is certainly a product of quantum mechanics, but that does not mean that quantum mechanics is a true theory or that my computer is real in an absolute sense. It is all part of a limited structure that is suspended in unlimited space.
A guru can also hang suspended in space, but that is only for the believers to see .
But what if this reality trip applied in some degree to science as well? We might say that a scientific theory that is eventually "proven", was there all the time. It was just a matter of someone discovering it and fighting the paradigmatic battle for a while before getting accepted. Not so me thinks...
Agreed upon reality is the great dragon that does not know any reality outside his smokey nostrils. A formidable and powerful beast.
A person charging the dragon front on, will not stand a chance. You cannot kill the dragon. The only way is to ride the dragon, that means that you respect and work with the dragon, but you do not let him pull you down to his vibrational level.
A scientific theory is only a consistent structure that has, through the struggle of the individuals that created it or approved of it, won the world-dragons favor. The universe is infinite in possibilities! It does not HAVE to be thus or that.
There are many scientists that have already solved the earths energy problems, with solid evidence to back up their claims, but will this technology really help us? There are, after all, always something left to be desired...
There are also a lot of people who have experienced the "paranormal" (me too, me too!), but what is the point of talking of these things, scaring some, harvesting scorn from others, if you can not pass on the insight in the same spirit as it was given to you?
Do we want to rape the dragon so that our own ideas can conquer the world? Is that a "good" thing to do?
I'm no longer sure that I believe (oups.. that word is dangerous) that this is the way to do it. It seems like the eternal dead end, repetitve and roaring. So I leave the dragon in peace, and if he asks, I will answer.
But love is an end in itself -and it conquers all. I do believe that
|