Xanth,
you seem to have some some well defined opinions on many of the subject matter discussed here. I'm always interested in hearing the viewpoints of everyone who has taken the time to study, practice and understand important issues. if you are willing to answer, i have a few casual questions that I'd like your viewpoint on.
To be completely fair, I'm not very interested in discussing which view is right and which is wrong; I'm much more interested in the process of how you came to believe what you believe - the process we all go through in wading through the intellectual quicksand of dogma, new-age-ism, quackery, science, philosophy, etc. I'm not going to argue with you about your views.
Q.1. It's important to have a coherent, cohesive, comprehensive worldview - important yet difficult to do considering how little we know about the universe and ourselves, and how convenient magical thinking is.
How have you assembled your worldview? How do you reconcile strange experiences (such as AP) with science and modern thinking? Is AP "all in ones head?" Should we wait for science to explain everything before we adopt a personal view of magical things? Should our personal experience trump scientific consensus?
Hey bardips. :)
Obviously, these questions are open to *EVERYONE*.
And I'd love to see other responses as well. I'll try to get the ball rolling.
Quote from: bardips on September 28, 2010, 15:51:23
Q.1. It's important to have a coherent, cohesive, comprehensive worldview - important yet difficult to do considering how little we know about the universe and ourselves, and how convenient magical thinking is.
Well, what exactly is "magick". You call it "convenient"... and I agree with that assessment, in that, what humanity didn't understand in the past we pushed it into either the realm of "gods" or "magick". If there's another category there, I'm sure someone will add it in. :)
QuoteHow have you assembled your worldview?
A complete worldview? I haven't... still working on it really.
I doubt I ever will though. There's just so much of this world to take in.
Of what I have "assembled", I guess I've never really gave it much thought.
QuoteHow do you reconcile strange experiences (such as AP) with science and modern thinking?
Again, I don't think I've ever really given it more than a fleeting thought.
If I had to say, I'd say that I don't view stuff like "Astral Projection" or other metaphysical experiences as being outside "normal" human experiences.
QuoteIs AP "all in ones head?"
It depends in what context you're asking...
If you're asking does Astral Projection happen WITHIN you, sure, I think I can agree with that.
Or are you asking does it happen within your physical brain? I do not believe that is the case.
QuoteShould we wait for science to explain everything before we adopt a personal view of magical things?
Well, we already know that people can experience things like Astral Projection without ever having hear the term before... or with no prior belief in it.
So no, I don't think you need to wait for science to 'catch up'.
QuoteShould our personal experience trump scientific consensus?
That depends on how highly you regard "science" and if you believe our current sciences can explain things to your satisfactory. :)
I look forward to reading other responses! :)
nice, i'm all about this.
as far as a comprehensive worldview....hmm
I mean, that's what we're all doing all the time with our normal perception. We experience, analyze that experience, determine how useful it is to our own personal "bigger picture", whittle it down to it's base elements and store that schema for future use. As we grow, these things change and are replaced by newer and more effective/efficient models. The question is, can anyone ever really have a completed worldview or paradigm of reality? Seeking that worldview is essentially the most important thing in my life. By that I mean that for me, understanding the infinite dynamic between myself and my environment (be it social, terrestrial, astral, psychological, etc. etc.). I want to know what my reason for being is. But again, the difficulty lies in "nailing it down". Let's jump forward a little bit to what I have determined and what seems to have remained fairly constant throughout my journey.
First, in this experience of human life, change is the norm. While I too grapple with the nature of change, cause and effect, time and how my perception of these events alters their presentation, it seems obvious from my experience that nothing ever remains the same. I have some theories about it, like in each moment our awareness dies and is reborn into a simultaneous moment. The new moment is slightly altered from the old moment and so we experience this as change. There then would have to be an infinite selection of moments all existing simultaneously, and with proper control one could transfer to any of them. (potential explanation of time travel?) Though, out of habit for cause and effect, we move to the next logical moment, but we don't have too necessarily. Anyway, change is constant, however you want to describe it.
Second, the only truth I can seemingly trust is my own experience. To me, this invalidates objectivity, which leads me to believe that the "physical" is another astral realm or something of the sort. Even when there is an agreed upon "objective" object, like an apple for instance, my perception of it is different from yours. You see the apple and are reminded of the time you bit into an apple with a worm in it and have since been disgusted by apple. I see the apple and am reminded of my childhood growing up in an apple orchard. Two very different experiences of an apple. These experiences then go on to effect not just your perception of an apple, but on to many other aspects of your perception. When it all comes down to it, no one can ever experience something in the exact same manner as someone else, there is ALWAYS a subjective perceptual filter between you and the supposed objective situation to be observed. So, what then is the point of insisting on an objective reality that would exist whether you were here or not? I always say, the universe is anything but wasteful, it always recycles and uses its energy efficiently, no waste. So, if we can only perceive subjectively, wouldn't the existence of an objective reality be wasteful? (i'm also implying that the actual object that we see is not really an object that is there, but rather a metaphor created by our mind and placed in our reality.)
Third, if objectivity is unnecessary, then what are we perceiving in the first place? This is where the slipperiest beast of them all appears, consciousness. If all parts of our experience are subjective interpretations of events then it would seem that mind is the dominant force in reality. What I'm kind of getting at is that reality may indeed be a hallucination or rather a visualization, much like the astral realities that we visit.
Still, all of these points are relatively abstract and malleable. No matter what I discover or realize, it is always flexible because it has to be. Rigidity leads to stagnation and death (i'm using the word death to mean a lot of things here). It seems rather impossible to nail down any firm "comprehensive worldview" and the biggest reason for that is the first point I made. With every single new experience, an old me dies and a new me is born. Even sitting here typing this response is a constant rebirth of a new awareness, one that did not exist (linearly) a moment before. I suppose I should ask clarification on whether comprehensive means complete to you?
I would hope that most of this alludes to some other notions (because honestly i don't know how much of it all i could actually type, my mind goes a mile a minute and much of what I contemplate doesn't come through in any logical linguistic sense, more like feelings, perceptions, etc.) but I'm sure it doesn't do enough, so let me at least address some of the specific questions you asked in relation to what I've already said.
A lot of your questions can honestly be answered with one statement, modern scientific inquiry operates from a flawed fundamental hypothesis, ie that reality is made of a physical substrate from which all things have spawned (however it may have happened is irrelevant). If this fundamental supposition is wrong, then all things that are born out of it are also wrong (though in my 'worldview' they're not really wrong.....yet they are.....hmm). SO, for me the only thing that matters (as I have said) is my experience and how I then make sense of that experience. I do appreciate the notion of critical analysis that is fundamental to science, but that is more of a perceptual tool than a scientific one. But in any case, for me, perception trumps science, always, because you still have to perceive science. But how can we even use scientific discovery in applications related to astral projection and other metaphysical subjects if the foundation on which it's formed essentially denies that these experiences are any more than a random ghost in the machine with no real volition of its own? I don't know about you, but I like to think that there is more to me and just coincidence. So maybe magical thinking isn't really so magical, just in agreement that science isn't the end all be all. hell, in my honest opinion, science is just the newest world religion, something to catch the folks that religion lost. and i don't just mean "scientism" i mean science.
Reconciling metaphysical (or beyond-physical) experiences with modern science is then very very easy. Science is slow, ineffective and completely misguided. It's just interesting to me that I have discovered more about myself and my experience of reality through these apparently pseudo-scientific means (and if you're involved in the world of professional science, pseudo-science is like calling Jesus a crack whore who was just pedaling fortune cookie fantasies so he could buy more crack). Science wants to deny the self, wants to break it all down to it's fundamental parts. For me, the self is reality and trying to deny it is walking the "devil's path".
Like I said, you can make a lot of inferences from what I've said about reality as a whole. I'm not gonna go into anymore right now, but by all means ask me questions if you have them. tell me i'm wrong, tell me i'm brilliant, whatever. maybe some day i'll go deeper into how all of this affects and is affected by the specific experience of astral projection.
Quote from: bardips on September 28, 2010, 15:51:23
Xanth,
Well, since Xanth said it was ok, I'll chime in:
QuoteTo be completely fair, I'm not very interested in discussing which view is right and which is wrong; I'm much more interested in the process of how you came to believe what you believe -
I have very few beliefs, but I believe that they're all important for people's happiness, provided they're nurturing beliefs.
QuoteQ.1. It's important to have a coherent, cohesive, comprehensive worldview - important yet difficult to do considering how little we know about the universe and ourselves, and how convenient magical thinking is.
Well, I'm going to define 'magical thinking' as the process that happens when you connect things that shouldn't be connected because of past results- which brings you to the 'lucky underwear' premise which most people don't even realize they have. I suppose this is what you mean.
The problem with the labeling of 'magical thinking' as considered by science, is that it's based on an equally faulty premise, and that is that perception has no effect on reality. Scientists are beginning to realize this premise is probably faulty, so we'll have to define 'magical thinking' differently. Which brings me to the next part of the statement- that it is important to have a coherent, cohesive, comprehensive worldview- the problem is, the more comprehensive the worldview becomes, the less coherent it can be, thanks to that good old 'uncertainty principle'. So right away, we can see that the balance between comprehensive and coherent may or may not be possible- because reality doesn't really follow the same rules in all its possible context, as far as science knows.
QuoteHow have you assembled your worldview? How do you reconcile strange experiences (such as AP) with science and modern thinking? Is AP "all in ones head?" Should we wait for science to explain everything before we adopt a personal view of magical things? Should our personal experience trump scientific consensus?
I don't have much of a worldview, because reality is a lot slipperier than we think, so I just wait to see what next scientific discovery invalidates the last one.
ps. Modern thinking is not contemporary thinking- it is the popularization of scientific theory of 50 years ago. The truth is that there is not a lot of scientific consensus when it comes to interdisciplinary branches of science. Geologists, for example, have a different idea of what history is like than some historians, and quantum physicists have a really different idea of reality than biologists, for example.
What we do know is that discovery is exciting and interesting, and it is my hope that it will be ethical also, because that's what will affect us in the future, if there is one.
So I'd say have an open mind, keep your critical thinking, and work to keep a balance between skepticism and belief.
Quote from: bardips on September 28, 2010, 15:51:23
Xanth,
you seem to have some some well defined opinions on many of the subject matter discussed here. I'm always interested in hearing the viewpoints of everyone who has taken the time to study, practice and understand important issues. if you are willing to answer, i have a few casual questions that I'd like your viewpoint on.
To be completely fair, I'm not very interested in discussing which view is right and which is wrong; I'm much more interested in the process of how you came to believe what you believe - the process we all go through in wading through the intellectual quicksand of dogma, new-age-ism, quackery, science, philosophy, etc. I'm not going to argue with you about your views.
Q.1. It's important to have a coherent, cohesive, comprehensive worldview - important yet difficult to do considering how little we know about the universe and ourselves, and how convenient magical thinking is.
How have you assembled your worldview? How do you reconcile strange experiences (such as AP) with science and modern thinking? Is AP "all in ones head?" Should we wait for science to explain everything before we adopt a personal view of magical things? Should our personal experience trump scientific consensus?
I believe they think you are some sort of God...
Quote from: bardips on September 28, 2010, 15:51:23
How have you assembled your worldview?
No. Haven't assembled it.
Read books.
Quote from: bardips on September 28, 2010, 15:51:23How do you reconcile strange experiences (such as AP) with science and modern thinking?
Do more explorations. Find more symmetries. Find more anomalies.
Quote from: bardips on September 28, 2010, 15:51:23Is AP "all in ones head?"
No.
Quote from: bardips on September 28, 2010, 15:51:23Should we wait for science to explain everything before we adopt a personal view of magical things?
Wait.
Wait, wait, wait.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Wait forever.
Quote from: bardips on September 28, 2010, 15:51:23Should our personal experience trump scientific consensus?
As your guide would say:
"It's up to you to decide."Only you can find new ways.
I think therefore I am. Seriously.
Quote from: Stookie on September 29, 2010, 11:28:08
I think therefore I am. Seriously.
If we 'stop thinking' (if that's even possible) do we cease to exist then?
I mean... my thoughts are that even through 'physical death', it's not like you stop thinking.
Can we even do that? Stop thinking?
Who said stop thinking?
Quote from: Stookie on September 29, 2010, 11:49:29
Who said stop thinking?
Well, nobody really... :)
I'm just wondering that if since it's... I think, therefore I am...
What if I stop thinking? ...if that's even possible. LoL
Since we're on the subject, I don't know if "stop thinking" would be the correct term, but you can hone concentration of a thought down to where there is a merging of the thinker and the thought. There becomes no difference or separation between observer and observed, subject and object. A "oneness" of consciousness. I guess you could call it "stopping thought" in a way, but that's more of a physical term of something that is non-physical.
Quote from: Xanth on September 29, 2010, 13:37:09
Well, nobody really... :)
I'm just wondering that if since it's... I think, therefore I am...
What if I stop thinking? ...if that's even possible. LoL
wrong order...I AM therefore I think.
Your question assumes that one has a decisive view on the nature of AP. Many, like me, accept that they don't know whether the experience is magical or in their head. Does that matter? The experience is real, whatever the nature of it might be.
\o/