View Full Version : a few words about "evidence" and "proof"
ArmsMerchant
2006-09-16, 20:39
These words keep popping up a lot, like turds in a punchbowl--they add nothing of value to the mix and muddy the water, so to speak.
People ask me to "prove" what I state. Okay, suppose I say that I had a bowl of Life cereal with a sliced banana on it for breakfast this morning? I know I did--I was there, I experienced it and I remember it. But I can't really "prove" this to anyone. I could take you into my cabin and show you the peel and the used bowl--still, the chance exists that that was yesterday's breakfast. Or even someone else's breakfast.
I have stated that I drive a 1991 Mazda MPV. I have posted pictures of it. Is that proof? Maybe those are pictures of someone else's car. Suppose I post a copy of my owner's card. How do I prove that the name on the card is "really" me? I can't, really.
I have stated that my wife has four great-grandchildren. How do I "prove" this? I have no evidence, not even a copy of her family tree--which wouldn't "prove" anything since famliy trees can--and have--been faked. I accept it as true because my sweety has no reason to lie.
I have stated that I have done laying-on of hands healing. I know this, I was there, as was the person I healed plus two witnesses. Maybe I am lying. Maybe the person who said I healed him was lying--although we all saw the swelling and inflammation go down. No way to really "prove" any of that happened.
Now, all of you reading this--think about your parents. Can you "prove" they are really your parents? Maybe you were adopted--many adoptees do not know they were. Suppose you do a DNA test--is that "proof"? People can--and have--bribed lab techs. People can--and have--faked DNA tests. And birth certificates.
I know what I know--or remember--about God and such because I have experienced it. I know what I know about my past lives because I remember them. What I have read about God and accept as true, is because it resonates with me, and "feels" right. (Our bodies have a great deal of wisdom, we need only know how to tap into it.)
Words are the language of the mind--feelings are the language of the soul.
I think that some--perhaps many-- of those who demand "proof" and "evidence" are not so much seeking truth as showing off, or trying to be cute. They are to be pitied.
[This message has been edited by ArmsMerchant (edited 09-16-2006).]
Raw_Power
2006-09-16, 20:44
Your post doesn't make me desirous to except God because I've 'gone done seen the light' and realised that we don't need proof but only to believe, in fact, it's done quite the opposite, it's merely reaffirmed my extreme scepticism.
EDIT - also, let’s say a policeman enters a crime scene. A woman has been murdered and her son blames her husband and her husband blames her son. What would you do? Would you take both their words for it and lock them both up, possibly punishing an innocent, or would you search for evidence that’ll make your judgment of whom is guilty and whom is not more accurate?
[This message has been edited by Raw_Power (edited 09-16-2006).]
ArmsMerchant
2006-09-16, 20:51
Metaphysics and law are two wildly different fields.
Since you ask--I would do nothing. The guy probably deserved it, and the family's troubles are none of my business anyway.
we aren't asking you to prove personal things, we don't care about what you drive. if a god treats everybody equally(which is about 6 million people) then there should be proof. there is also obvious evidence against it. alot of it is why does this person have aids and this one not have it. why did this childs mom die giving birth and that childs mom live.
saying that proof and evidence is not needed, shows that you have a lack of proof. it is true you cannot prove anything personal on the internet because it could be anybody's. but proving somithing like a god, or something philosophical or physical is possible. you can also find scientific proof and other forms of proof on the internet.
EDIT: what guy it was a wife. which is a girl. and since two views that are contradictory and you must take both of their words for it, you wouldn't do anything? that is weird, because hypothetically you were a cop and it was your job and there would be some physical evidence lying around.
how about try and provide evidence of other people's experiances. if other people have similar experiances to you then that can be considered indirect proof.
[This message has been edited by Graemy (edited 09-16-2006).]
Raw_Power
2006-09-16, 20:54
The guy probably deserved being unjustly locked up?
You see, this is the problem with theological metaphysics. Philosophical Metaphysics present arguments that can be studied and argued, theological metaphysics merely states somethimg and says believe me and ask no questions. It's utterly absurd. If we go by your rules, we might as well believe that there is a giant pink dildo floating in the sky because I say so and you cannot prove me wrong.
[This message has been edited by Raw_Power (edited 09-16-2006).]
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
These words keep popping up a lot, like turds in a punchbowl--they add nothing of value to the mix and muddy the water, so to speak.
Oh brother. Evidence and proof are worthless concepts to you? They have no value? They "muddy" the water? No they "clear" the water.
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
People ask me to "rpoove" what I state. Okay, suppose I say that I had a bowl of Life cereal with a sliced banana on it for breakfast this morning?
Some here have stated that the Earth is under 10,000 years old. Statements like that are going to have reasonable people screaming out for a reasonable amount for strong evidence. This is not a bad thing. Skepticism for outrageous claims should have people asking for evidence. Some may have a hard time believing that the Earth is billions of years old. If they're ignorant to the facts of science, they also have a legitimate reason to ask for a reasonable amount of strong evidence. This is a good thing all the way around. It shouldn't be thought of as turds in a punchbowl for crying out loud!
No one is going to ask you to provide evidence for what you had for breakfast because no one gives a shit!
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
I have stated that I have done laying-on of hands healing. I know this, I was there, as was the person I healed plus two witnesses. Maybe I am lying. Maybe the person who said I healed him was lying--although we all saw the swelling and inflammation go down. No way to really "prove" any of that happened.
Yes, there is. Prove that you can provide these miraculous services. Visit your local hospice and heal as many as you can. This service won't go unnoticed and in no time you'll be the single person on Earth to prove that miraculous healing is the real deal and you'll probably also convince millions of atheists (such as me) to start looking towards God, because finally someone showed us doubting Thomas' some real evidence.
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
In general, I think that those who demand "proof" and "evidence" are not so much seeking truth as showing off, or trying to be a pain in the ass.
Of course. Rational, skeptical people who demand a reasonable amount of strong evidence for extraordinary claims are just show offs and get a kick out of being a pain in the ass. Everybody knows that; no proof necessary.
truckfixr
2006-09-16, 21:13
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
These words keep popping up a lot, like turds in a punchbowl--they add nothing of value to the mix and muddy the water, so to speak.
People ask me to "prove" what I state. Okay, suppose I say that I had a bowl of Life cereal with a sliced banana on it for breakfast this morning? I know I did--I was there, I experienced it and I remember it. But I can't really "prove" this to anyone. I could take you into my cabin and show you the peel and the used bowl--still, the chance exists that that was yesterday's breakfast. Or even someone else's breakfast.
I have stated that I drive a 1991 Mazda MPV. I have posted pictures of it. Is that proof? Maybe those are pictures of someone else's car. Suppose I post a copy of my owner's card. How do I prove that the name on the card is "really" me? I can't, really.
I have stated that my wife has four great-grandchildren. How do I "prove" this? I have no evidence, not even a copy of her family tree--which wouldn't "prove" anything since famliy trees can--and have--been faked. I accept it as true because my sweety has no reason to lie.
I have stated that I have done laying-on of hands healing. I know this, I was there, as was the person I healed plus two witnesses. Maybe I am lying. Maybe the person who said I healed him was lying--although we all saw the swelling and inflammation go down. No way to really "prove" any of that happened.
Now, all of you reading this--think about your parents. Can you "prove" they are really your parents? Maybe you were adopted--many adoptees do not know they were. Suppose you do a DNA test--is that "proof"? People can--and have--bribed lab techs. People can--and have--faked DNA tests. And birth certificates.
I know what I know--or remember--about God and such because I have experienced it. I know what I know about my past lives because I remember them. What I have read about God and accept as true, is because it resonates with me, and "feels" right. (Our bodies have a great deal of wisdom, we need only know how to tap into it.)
Words are the language of the mind--feelings are the language of the soul.
I think that some--perhaps many-- of those who demand "proof" and "evidence" are not so much seeking truth as showing off, or trying to be cute. They are to be pitied.
No proof is really needed as to what you had for breakfast, what you drive, your grandkids, or other claims of this type. These types of claims , while they may or may not be true, do not conflict with reason. There is nothing abnormal or unusual about driving a car, eating breakfast , or having grandkids.
When you begin making extraordinary claims (healing through the laying on of hands, past lives, etc.), your claims now conflict with what is known. Thus the demand for evidence to support your claims. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you are unable to demonstrate that your claims are valid, it is reasonable to conclude that your claims are false.
I feel no need to show off or be cute. If your claims are true , you should have no trouble providing evidence to prove that they are true. If you cannot, the odds are that you are either delusional or lying.
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
I know what I know--or remember--about God and such because I have experienced it. I know what I know about my past lives because I remember them. What I have read about God and accept as true, is because it resonates with me, and "feels" right. (Our bodies have a great deal of wisdom, we need only know how to tap into it.)
I hear what you are saying, however it is hearsay, and every person deserves the same evidence as doubting Thomas. If one is able to accept your words as testimony of real personal experiences, add that to the thousands/millions of other personal experiences, and see how many agree, would that be sufficient evidence for the skeptic? For me, no. I would still want to check for the scars!
quote:Words are the language of the mind--feelings are the language of the soul.
I think that some--perhaps many-- of those who demand "proof" and "evidence" are not so much seeking truth as showing off, or trying to be cute. They are to be pitied.
Are words the language of the brain? If so, how are they created? Can one trust all thoughts as truth? Brain researchers discovered words are created in the speech centre of the brain, most come from a region in the left hemisphere( a few - usually the 'off the cuff' things that makes one wonder from where in our minds did that come from, originate in the right hemisphere).
Is it because of the power of words, and because one is conditioned to accept words originating in one's head as 'truth'?
Could it be that in moments of some states of consciousness, such as creativity and spirituality, the right brain is dominant, and working on a different wavelength to the left brain? Speaking a different language?
Is it possible that an illusionary belief that a thought/voice originated, outside of oneself? With a 'higher being? but is it?
Is it that one has tapped into one's own higher self? Or could it be that your left brained speech centre has delivered up a regurgitated sermon - forgotten by your consious mind but happened upon whilst your mind was engaged in a sub-conscious google like search of it's data/memory base?
BTW being "pitied" is a real downer http://www.totse.com/bbs/frown.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/frown.gif)
Namaste http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)
Real.PUA
2006-09-16, 23:09
Basically you said this "Nothing can be known to absolute certainty so you should believe that I have psychic powers when I tell you I do."
Logic aint your strong point, is it? Back to the looney bin for you. You being crazy is a much more probable explanation than you having psychic powers.
[This message has been edited by Real.PUA (edited 09-16-2006).]
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
I think that some--perhaps many-- of those who demand "proof" and "evidence" are not so much seeking truth as showing off, or trying to be cute. They are to be pitied.
Since it's already been pointed out (exhaustively so) the importance of evidence and proof for the substantiation of a claim, I'd like to point out how, if you fail to demand evidence and proof for claims, your own assertions are easily refuted.
If there is no burden of proof, then what is stopping me from claiming that I've communicated with god and he has told me that you do not do "laying-on of hands healing", that you have not had any past lives, and that all of your claims of this nature are your own schizophrenic delusions? Nothing.
Either you do admit the importance of proof and evidence in the consideration of claims, or you do not, and your claims are easily refuted by any other baseless claim we can dream of.
So please let me know if next time you make a claim, I can so easily demolish it by conviniently "recalling" a conversation I had with an omniscient god.
[This message has been edited by Rust (edited 09-17-2006).]
i dont really know, but...
i dont think he cares if you belive it or not. i think he's just letting you know, what he belives. maybe he's delusional, who knows? but what, personally, would someone gain from spreading this kind of advice? because this advice seem to be (to me anyways) the main messege of most religions...ya know, treat others as you want to be treated, blah blah...and wether its all true or not will never be knowen, but people who live by those morals are happier and more peacful, so who cares?
about healing, if the other person no longer feels symptons, then i suppose it worked. trying to get people on the net to belive simply by telling them that wont work, because people tend not to accept things outside of the environment they are used to. but it does not really matter if you belive it or not, because the belief wouldnt change anything. its pointless, just like this post...in a way.
quote:Originally posted by Obbe:
i dont really know, but...
i dont think he cares if you belive it or not. i think he's just letting you know, what he belives. maybe he's delusional, who knows? but what, personally, would someone gain from spreading this kind of advice? because this advice seem to be (to me anyways) the main messege of most religions...ya know, treat others as you want to be treated, blah blah...and wether its all true or not will never be knowen, but people who live by those morals are happier and more peacful, so who cares?
about healing, if the other person no longer feels symptons, then i suppose it worked. trying to get people on the net to belive simply by telling them that wont work, because people tend not to accept things outside of the environment they are used to. but it does not really matter if you belive it or not, because the belief wouldnt change anything. its pointless, just like this post...in a way.
QFT
There is no "evidence" or "proof" that Jesus is the son of God. But, there is quite a bit of historical information out there for people to review. Like the fact that Jesus was elected to be the son of god by Rome and was used as an attempt to control and conquer the rest of the known world. So, when you realize that none of you Christians would have any fucking clue who Jesus was if Rome didn't decide it was a good tool for world domination, things become a little more clear.
ArmsMerchant
2006-09-18, 18:49
[
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
In general, I think that those who demand "proof" and "evidence" are not so much seeking truth as showing off, or trying to be a pain in the ass.
Of course. Rational, skeptical people who demand a reasonable amount of strong evidence for extraordinary claims are just show offs and get a kick out of being a pain in the ass. Everybody knows that; no proof necessary.
[/B][/QUOTE]
If you must quote me, please get it right and refrain from editing what I said.
I have said many times that the less you believe and the more you know, the better off you are.
Are you deliberately missing my point? Can you really be that obtuse?
Indeed, there are none so blind as those who will not see.
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
If you must quote me, please get it right and refrain from editing what I said.
What are you trying to pull here ArmsMerchant? I have never edited anything from someone's post and claimed it was a quote. All of the quoting I have done has been by copying and pasting. The only reason my quote of yours differs from what is now in your OP is because you have edited it after I copied it.
I'll take it for granted that your accusation is an honest mistake on your part and that you are not deliberately attempting to make me appear to be dishonest.
ArmsMerchant
2006-09-27, 19:37
quote:Originally posted by Rust:
Since it's already been pointed out (exhaustively so) the importance of evidence and proof for the substantiation of a claim, I'd like to point out how, if you fail to demand evidence and proof for claims, your own assertions are easily refuted.
If there is no burden of proof, then what is stopping me from claiming that I've communicated with god and he has told me that you do not do "laying-on of hands healing", that you have not had any past lives, and that all of your claims of this nature are your own schizophrenic delusions? Nothing.
Either you do admit the importance of proof and evidence in the consideration of claims, or you do not, and your claims are easily refuted by any other baseless claim we can dream of.
So please let me know if next time you make a claim, I can so easily demolish it by conviniently "recalling" a conversation I had with an omniscient god.
Perhaps I failed to make myself clear. The point I was trying to make is that assertions of a metaphysical nature cannot be proven or disproven. One can amass any amount of "evidence"--i.e., eyewitness testimony, videos, whatever--and one who is bound and determined to disbelieve may well assert that the witnesses are lying and that the videos were faked.
What's more, in my world, there is no difference between say, eating breakfast or getting a message from God. It all just happens. I am privileged to live in a world full of wonders and miracles. Anyone who chooses to, can live in a world equally wondrous and joyous. One only has to make the choice.
I have never claimed to be special or unique in this respect, having stated numerous times that we are All One, and no one is any better than anyone else.
I do claim to have absolute certainty regarding the truth of the following:
God is love, and does not judge or punish. Over the years, I have gotten many messages from God, in many forms.
Life is eternal.
God wants nothing from us.
Everything that happens, happens for a reason. God gives nothing but blessings and sends nothing but angels.
Free will is absolute.
There are no villains or victims. The world is as it is because we, collectively, have chosen that it be so. The only enemies we have are fear and guilt.
If my clarity on these points is mistaken for arrogance, pomposity, or delusion, that is not my responsibility.
Xerxes89
2006-09-27, 21:15
"Absense of evidence is not evidence of absense" - George Bush about the WMD's.
http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)
God bless, Nigga Jesus
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
Perhaps I failed to make myself clear. The point I was trying to make is that assertions of a metaphysical nature cannot be proven or disproven. One can amass any amount of "evidence"--i.e., eyewitness testimony, videos, whatever--and one who is bound and determined to disbelieve may well assert that the witnesses are lying and that the videos were faked.
You made yourself clear enough the first time.
The same thing can be said of virtually anything else. The point of evidence is not just to prove something beyond all doubt, but to remove reasonable doubt when that is not possible.
Eyewitness testimony, videos, photos, et cetera, are all astronomically better than nothing at all, which is what claims of these nature offer.
If you can communicate with god, then a test which can prove this (or at least remove reasonable doubt), can be created. That's not how reason works; evidence is required in order for something to be substantiated, which I suspect you agree with whenever the claim seeks to refute what you've said (the point of my first post). If I were to make the claim that I talk to god, and that he has told me that you do not, then you'd either demand evidence, or dismiss my claim completely because of the lack of it.
[This message has been edited by Rust (edited 09-28-2006).]
I agree with both sides.
How, you ask? Well, I would expect someone preaching to me to present evidence as to WHY they're preaching it. But on the other side, supposing I had an experience, I wouldn't tell anybody about it because of a lack of proof. If there is nothing to back me up but my own word, I know no one will listen.
DiRtY-CrAcK-WhOrE
2006-09-28, 10:06
I want to know why someone who walks around preaching god and saying they live in such a wonderful and joyous world and they have had so many experiences with the 'almighty' is sitting at their computer, on a simple forum, trying to state their point/view and not actually outside enjoying life and doing more for this world which seems to have so many problems. If i had had a 'vision' or experienced something of god then i would be outside sitting in a sunny field thinking about it, not tryin to tell everyone that it happened and it doesnt matter whether they believe or not.
Also, you people complain that 'what kind of God would let millions of people starve?'if people have been givin free will by what ever means, either a higher power or simple intelligence, what is stopping us from simply walking down the road and killing our neighbour? If it us who decide to do something then the conscequences should be pinned on us not some 'God' who sat by and did nothing to prevent it.
Well being someone who has read alot and seen alot of movies in my spare time i have my own view of religion. There are so many of them and all of them claim to be the right one yet if a person is good in life, never commits a crime, is nice and respects everyone but is a Buddhist and worships Buddha because that was how he was brought up, what would happen if Buddhism was just some made up thing by an old man way back in time and Christianity was the real deal? Would that man be condemned to hell for worshipping a false idol? How can we know which God is real and which one is a load of crap with all these threats of damnation or what not? I'm not saying either religion is wrong or right I'm just saying that there are too many views and too many twisted minds out there to know what to believe any more.
I hope this makes sense.
[This message has been edited by DiRtY-CrAcK-WhOrE (edited 09-28-2006).]
ArmsMerchant
2006-09-28, 18:37
quote:Originally posted by Martini:
What are you trying to pull here ArmsMerchant? I have never edited anything from someone's post and claimed it was a quote. All of the quoting I have done has been by copying and pasting. The only reason my quote of yours differs from what is now in your OP is because you have edited it after I copied it.
I'll take it for granted that your accusation is an honest mistake on your part and that you are not deliberately attempting to make me appear to be dishonest.
Do you understand what "in general" and "some" mean? In other words, NOT EVERYONE.
Sure, SOME people who question and doubt are sincere and have positive motivation. SOME peole do the same thing, for nagative reasons.
Those are GENERAl statements, okay? I am not attempting to judge any specific individuals, okay?
ArmsMerchant
2006-09-28, 18:49
quote:Originally posted by truckfixr:
No proof is really needed as to what you had for breakfast, what you drive, your grandkids, or other claims of this type. These types of claims , while they may or may not be true, do not conflict with reason. There is nothing abnormal or unusual about driving a car, eating breakfast , or having grandkids.
When you begin making extraordinary claims (healing through the laying on of hands, past lives, etc.), your claims now conflict with what is known. Thus the demand for evidence to support your claims. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you are unable to demonstrate that your claims are valid, it is reasonable to conclude that your claims are false.
I feel no need to show off or be cute. If your claims are true , you should have no trouble providing evidence to prove that they are true. If you cannot, the odds are that you are either delusional or lying.
Sigh. I gues this proves--if nothing else--what difference worlds we inhabit. In my world, there is nothing "abnormal" about performing what some people call miracles. In my world, every sunrise, every rainbow, every fucking TREE is a miracle.
When I was doing shamanic work more or less fulltime, it was no big deal to retrieve a soul or do an exorcism. That's just what shamans do. (For me, it would be a REALLY big deal to repair a car--for a competant mechanic, it is no big deal.)
But I reiterate--proof is simply not possible. My goodness, if you have a rash and a doctor gives you a cream to smear on the rash, and the rash goes away--what PROOF do you have that the cream CURED the rash? Maybe the rash would have gone away without the cream.
But when I do a soul retrieval for a cleint--and see a light come back into their eyes that was mnssing before, and share their tears of joy and wonder, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that I have healed them.
But can I prove this? Can the client? I don't think so.
So y'all can accept what I say, or not. It makes no difference to me.
But part of my dharma is to spread the word in any way I can, cast the seeds where they might. If they fall on barren ground, so be it.
If anyone doubts my word, so be it. I know I don't lie. My god and all those people closest to me know this as well, and that is good enough for me.
Real.PUA
2006-09-28, 21:00
Western medicine is based on evidence. The cream has been shown the cure rashes in clinical studies and the in interactions of the chemicals in the cream and your body have been well described in scientific literature.
You could easily prove that your soul retrieval works. Simply compare it to a placebo in a blind test. Bingo bango you just won the randi one million.
[This message has been edited by Real.PUA (edited 09-28-2006).]
quote:Originally posted by Graemy:
we aren't asking you to prove personal things,
God is a personal thing.
quote:Originally posted by truckfixr:
I feel no need to show off or be cute. If your claims are true , you should have no trouble providing evidence to prove that they are true. If you cannot, the odds are that you are either delusional or lying.
Prove this.
quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:
You could easily prove that your soul retrieval works. Simply compare it to a placebo in a blind test. Bingo bango you just won the randi one million.
After learning and enough experience one learns to differientiate between a placebo effect, and the real thing.
If you have no experience, then you are very perfectly correct in saying what you said.
quote:Originally posted by Raw_Power:
theological metaphysics merely states somethimg and says believe me and ask no questions.
It depends on your experience, if you have no experience with this subject then it's going to seem like theory and speculation. If you have, then it seems like science must seem to now. Until then, all you can do is hope, blindly believe, and speculate. If you'd like to truly understand where all that is coming from, or sourcing, then you have experience it. Then it's not speculation, it's a reality.
Until then..what can do you? You can rule it out, but that just places further distance between the present moment and the moment that you finally experience it.
quote:Originally posted by Martini:
Of course. Rational, skeptical people who demand a reasonable amount of strong evidence for extraordinary claims are just show offs and get a kick out of being a pain in the ass. Everybody knows that; no proof necessary.
Like someone said in another forum, "In the old country we call that being a stubborn jackass".
It's not because proof is not necessary, it's because with something like this, you don't walk into proof, you have to create it, you have to make it a possibility before it can ever happen. Just say it's much more special and much more fragile than proof of a rock falling on someone's head. This is proof that you love and that you know how to be in balance with your body and nature, and thus work that balance and do things with it.
You don't just flip a switch. You make it happen.
Until you make it happen, you're not going to see proof.
Does this mean it doesn't exist? No.
But that's why we call those people "stubborn jackasses", just because they think they're right, when here we are doing the very thing they proclaim to be impossible. It's nearly laughable. But guess what most people say? That what goes on is "absurd, impossible". Ok. But we're still doing it. What do you want? You can't win.
You want proof, you want to learn about it? Then you'll have to work by the same rules that we have, the same rules that the universe has operated on since the beginning.
Oh you don't want to? You want science? You want mans way of doing thing? Then guess what you are?
quote:
If there is no burden of proof, then what is stopping me from claiming that I've communicated with god and he has told me that you do not do "laying-on of hands healing", that you have not had any past lives, and that all of your claims of this nature are your own schizophrenic delusions? Nothing.
BUT have you actually done it? No! And you know that! So you wouldn't be anything but a liar and a fraud!
quote:
Either you do admit the importance of proof and evidence in the consideration of claims,
You're doing with two different worlds! How can you call proof of one proof of the other!??? They work differently, and they have to because that's part of what makes them the way they are!
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
Sigh. I gues this proves--if nothing else--what difference worlds we inhabit. In my world, there is nothing "abnormal" about performing what some people call miracles. In my world, every sunrise, every rainbow, every fucking TREE is a miracle.
This is synonymous with this:
quote:Originally posted by DiRtY-CrAcK-WhOrE:
If people have been givin free will by what ever means, either a higher power or simple intelligence.
That^ IS a miracle! And because we've found a way to put it into words, we think it's nothing! We think it's just another mundane factor of life! That's downsizing a very big thing, it's something very very powerful, and yet we only use it for the lowest amount of production it can possibly do. Just the physical work, count money, watch something, read something, we don't imagine anything! Yet we are created to.
[This message has been edited by ate (edited 09-29-2006).]
Sponsored Links
2006-09-30, 01:28
I have an '89 Mazda 929. Nice car, not much to look at though. And that's a FACT.
Just put a starter and timing belt on (and the other 3 belts as well).
Rizzo in a box
2006-09-30, 13:04
In the end, everything is based on faith. Some things seem more reasonable than others, but science is basically "having faith in my perceptions of someone else's perceptions".
Real.PUA
2006-09-30, 13:28
quote:Originally posted by ate:
After learning and enough experience one learns to differientiate between a placebo effect, and the real thing.
If you have no experience, then you are very perfectly correct in saying what you said.
No, actually you need statistical evidence to prove something is idfferent than placebo. You are partially correct in that statistics can be learned.
The point being is that soul retrieval could be PROVEN to work more than a placebo if it actually does. You have a knack for completely missing the point and spouting logical falsehoods. You are a moron.
quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:
No, actually you need statistical evidence to prove something is idfferent than placebo.
So you'd have to walk into a wall more than once to know what's going on?
Would you back up, and then run forward...just to be sure?
quote:
You are partially correct in that statistics can be learned.
Experiences can be remembered?
quote:
The point being is that soul retrieval could be PROVEN to work more than a placebo if it actually does.
Riiight, and you know about soul retrieval how?
Are you spouting a falsehood? Do you have experience with this?
Wouldn't soul retrieval work on something which sources from a realm entirely different from the physical.
Aren't the terms you are using sourcing from a concept in the physical realm? Hmmm, isn't that like painting yourself black and then hiding in front of a white wall?
Kind of makes you look stupid...
quote:
You have a knack for completely missing the point and spouting logical falsehoods. You are a moron.[/b]
Less insults, more thoughts, please, they kind of reverse that whole "you're a moron" concept, and place it on yourself.
[This message has been edited by ate (edited 09-30-2006).]
Real.PUA
2006-09-30, 20:05
quote:Originally posted by ate:
So you'd have to walk into a wall more than once to know what's going on?
Would you back up, and then run forward...just to be sure?
A wall is OBSERVABLE, thus, the analogy fails entirely.
quote:Experiences can be remembered?
Yes. And if you happened to remember your experiences perfectly including the experience of testing a placebo then yuo might have something.
quote:Riiight, and you know about soul retrieval how?
Are you spouting a falsehood? Do you have experience with this?
ArmsMerchant just mentioned it. But he gave me enough information to know it could be tested and proven to work (assuming it does).
quote:Wouldn't soul retrieval work on something which sources from a realm entirely different from the physical.
You have actually hit on a key point. Whether or not a soul was retrieved is hidden, it cannot be directly observed (unlike with the failed wall analogy). Yet AM said the client would "know beyond a shadow of doubt that they were healed." This is directly OBSERVABLE. This is where INFERENCE comes into play. We can only know with certainty the observable, not the hidden. Can we reliably infer that because the client claims to "know beyond a shadow of doubt that they were healed" that their sould was retrieved? The answer requires concepts of Bayesian inference (statistics) to test. I won't go into the details here, but one thing that is required is the testing of alternative theories (ie the placebo effect).
quote:Aren't the terms you are using sourcing from a concept in the physical realm? Hmmm, isn't that like painting yourself black and then hiding in front of a white wall?
Kind of makes you look stupid...
AM made PHYSICAL CLAIMS (that the client would say the soul retrieval worked).
quote:Less insults, more thoughts, please, they kind of reverse that whole "you're a moron" concept, and place it on yourself.
It's only when you ignore and/or fail to understand the simple thoughts that insults are used.
quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:
A wall is OBSERVABLE, thus, the analogy fails entirely.
Not if you're blind! You see a wall through a perception, through sense, the same thing goes for everything else, if look away from seeing the wall, or if you don't use the sense to see the wall, YOU CAN'T!
The analogy works.
quote:
ArmsMerchant just mentioned it. But he gave me enough information to know it could be tested and proven to work (assuming it does).
How does it work?
quote:
You have actually hit on a key point. Whether or not a soul was retrieved is hidden, it cannot be directly observed (unlike with the failed wall analogy).
If you can't see it you're blind! Many humans are, it's just the way things are right now! Don't fight it, accept the truth, it's apparent all over the world!
quote:
Yet AM said the client would "know beyond a shadow of doubt that they were healed."
Exactly, when you hit the wall. YOU KNOW! There's no need for re-trials!
quote:
This is directly OBSERVABLE.
By whom?
quote:
This is where INFERENCE comes into play. We can only know with certainty the observable, not the hidden.
The isn't hidden to everyone, so while others are uncertain, others have no doubt and no reason to.
If someone would like to lose all doubt as well, they should travel the path that the others have already traveled! Not going through their own means which would lead them in circles.
quote:
Can we reliably infer that because the client claims to "know beyond a shadow of doubt that they were healed" that their sould was retrieved?
Call it what you like!
quote:
I won't go into the details here, but one thing that is required is the testing of alternative theories (ie the placebo effect).
Call it what you like!
quote:
AM made PHYSICAL CLAIMS (that the client would say the soul retrieval worked).
A soul is not physical! The person could say anything and it wouldn't change that!
quote:
It's only when you ignore and/or fail to understand the simple thoughts that insults are used.
Anyone could say anything about anyone, the only difference is when you cease to say things like this productivity increases 10 fold, so let's stop!
Real.PUA
2006-09-30, 20:59
quote:Originally posted by ate:
Not if you're blind! You see a wall through a perception, through sense, the same thing goes for everything else, if look away from seeing the wall, or if you don't use the sense to see the wall, YOU CAN'T!
The analogy works.
Where in your analogy did you specify that the agent is blind? You didn't. But it doesnt matter, because even if you are blind the WALL IS OBERSVABLE (by touch)! The soul retrieval is not directly observable, it is hidden. We only conclude that the sould retrieval worked by INFERING it through some observable phenomenon occured (that the client said he is healed).
The soul retrieval is hidden and the wall is observable, thus the analogy FAILS. Are you claiming that the wall is hidden or that the soul retrieval is observable? If not, you must accept the failure of your analogy.
quote:How does it work?
You do not need to know how something works to know whether or not it works. Do you think most people know how their car works?
All I need to know is the results (observable phenomenon). AM made claims to observable phenomenon, that's all that can be tested or proven.
quote:If you can't see it you're blind! Many humans are, it's just the way things are right now! Don't fight it, accept the truth, it's apparent all over the world!
How is this at all related to my comment of "You have actually hit on a key point. Whether or not a soul was retrieved is hidden, it cannot be directly observed (unlike with the failed wall analogy)."
Are you saying you (not me) can directly observe that a soul was retrieved? If so, then you are making physical claims which can be tested. If not, you have posted irrelevant crap.
quote:Exactly, when you hit the wall. YOU KNOW! There's no need for re-trials!
If the wall is invisible or if other people present are blind how do we know that you are not just a really good mime? We need to repeat the test and we need to blindfold and spind you around so you dont know the exact location of the wall.
But still the wall is OBSERVABLE, by sight or touch. A soul retrieval is not, thus a soul retrieval must be inferred by some observable phenomenon in this case that the client claims he was healed. If a soul retrieval is directly observable (like a wall) it can be directly tested (like a wall).
quote:By whom?
By anyone, you moron. Anyone can observe whether or not a client claims to be healed.
quote:The isn't hidden to everyone, so while others are uncertain, others have no doubt and no reason to.
If someone would like to lose all doubt as well, they should travel the path that the others have already traveled! Not going through their own means which would lead them in circles.
If it isnt hidden, then it is directly observable and can bet tested. Regardless, AM made physical claims which can be tested even by those that cannot see the magical fairy dust. You fail on every level if this argument.
quote:Call it what you like!
Call it what you like!
Moron.
quote:A soul is not physical! The person could say anything and it wouldn't change that!
YOU FUCKING MORON. I have said this whole time that the soul is "hidden." What is physical/observable is that the client claims he was healed. The claim itself is physical. Jesus Christ! You are a real stupid one.
quote:Anyone could say anything about anyone, the only difference is when you cease to say things like this productivity increases 10 fold, so let's stop!
Stop acting like a complete moron and you'll stop being called a complete moron. I have no other words to describe someone as stupid as you.
[This message has been edited by Real.PUA (edited 09-30-2006).]
quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:
Where in your analogy did you specify that the agent is blind?
If you aren't aware that a soul is something many people do not believe they are aware of, in other words "blind to" then you don't know what we're talking about.
quote:
But it doesnt matter, because even if you are blind the WALL IS OBERSVABLE (by touch)!
All senses would be encompassed under a person being blind to it!
If you cannot percieve something then you cannot percieve it!
This doesn't mean you can feel it but not see it, or see it but not hear it! You simply don't know it's there!
The wall analogy works because everyday, every constant waking moment you could say we are in behing a wall of perception never making contact as long as there is distance between us, the second you come into realization of what we are talking about it's just like BAM!
quote:
We only conclude that the sould retrieval worked by INFERING it through some observable phenomenon occured (that the client said he is healed).
This is an objective occurrance, subjectively many MANY things will show you what's happening.
quote:
The soul retrieval is hidden and the wall is observable,
Like I said, the wall isn't observable to a person who is blind to it!
quote:
thus the analogy FAILS.
I do believe I've shown you why it works!
quote:
Are you claiming that the wall is hidden
With the perception to hit the gone, there would be no way of knowing.
Without sensing that you have a higher self, you simply would go through life without knowing, that's a free-will.
Gaining the perception is like running smack dab into the wall! There's no buts about it!
quote:
that the soul retrieval is observable?
You can't see it, but you can sense it other ways.
In a manifested form you could see it with human eyes if you'd like, but that would be your own imagination aiding it's presence.
quote:
You do not need to know how something works to know whether or not it works.
If you wish to know something about it, if you wish to know the "why's" that are there, then yes you do!
quote:
Do you think most people know how their car works?
I don't believe they do! But they are not the ones attempting to disect the existence and workability of it!
You are!
quote:
All I need to know is the results (observable phenomenon).
To know the results of what ArmsMerchant calls a "soul retrieval" you must have one!
quote:
observable phenomenon,
You can see other people react, but you are watching them, not a soul being retrieved!
quote:
How is this at all related to my comment of "You have actually hit on a key point.
You said a soul is either observable or not!
It's up to the person what they wish to experience!
quote:
Are you saying you (not me) can directly observe that a soul was retrieved?
Only for myself, although there ways to see others, yet most humans can't!
quote:
If so, then you are making physical claims which can be tested. If not, you have posted irrelevant crap.
Make no claims.
quote:
If the wall is invisible or if other people present are blind how do we know that you are not just a really good mime?
You either trust that I am not!
OR
You find out for yourself by traveling the same path everyone does! Travel the path if you'd like to experience what others have!
If not! You can only wonder about it.
quote:
We need to repeat the test and we need to blindfold and spind you around so you dont know the exact location of the wall.
The wall is a metaphor and so is the soul!
Spinning a person around and blind folding them would reduce their ability to find that wall in physicality.
So then is the soul somewere in physical space where you must look for it, and walk to it in order to find it!?
The soul is a concept, and it is a consciousness entity, the fact of "bridging the gap" between the "wall and you" is only creating a healthy relationship between you and the soul!
Spinning yourself around would mean that the soul would literally be in physical space, and that you could run in one direction and find it or another.
The fact that there is wall and a person used in the analogy means that there is an end result and a distance between that result and most people's current positions.
You can move foward to meet that goal, or you can stay where you are!
There is no other space, there is no other option, you can't go to the left and do something else, because you'd simply be the same as if you hadn't moved at all. The only option is to bridge the gap and hit the wall! Nothing more, just a metaphor.
Spinning yourself in circles could only be compared to confusing a person within their search for a healthy relationship with themselves, and is not what we're talking about!
To confuse a person in order to test whether they can regain themselves is something like a game!
quote:
ut still the wall is OBSERVABLE, by sight or touch.
In this analogy the soul, like the wall, to many humans on this planet, would be undetectable other than the means we have of knowing it.
A person would be entirely blind to the wall, and would accordingly act as if it never existed, doing things that defy it's presence.
The same goes for a humans understanding of the soul, if they believe they don't have one, then they will be disconnected from it's existence.
quote:
A soul retrieval is not, thus a soul retrieval must be inferred by some observable phenomenon in this case that the client claims he was healed.
It is not a physical occurance! You would decide this if you experienced it!
quote:
If a soul retrieval is directly observable (like a wall) it can be directly tested (like a wall).
A wall in the analogy, that you would be totally perceptually blind to, would be undetectable until you decided to bridge the gap of your perceptions and acknolwedge it's existence, ultimately causing to slam into it, causing you to be quite sure of it's presence!
Note this doesn't happen in an area where people go to find themselves!
This happens within your own sphere of consciousness! Within your own experience, the wall is only real to you once you become aware of it!
quote:
By anyone, you moron.
Take a nap please.
quote:
Anyone can observe whether or not a client claims to be healed.
Not entirely!
The only certainty would be on the part of the spiritual guide and the participant!
Everything else you are observing from the outside are just people who may say things, and may appear to change!
quote:
If it isnt hidden, then it is directly observable and can bet tested.
You have free-will! One person does not decide your fate! If you do not want to see it, you won't!
If you do not want it to be observable and tested, then it won't be!
This is not in physical space mind you! So there is no way to physical take a bit of soul, and put it under a micro-scope! (HaHaHa)
quote:
Regardless, AM made physical claims which can be tested
If you believe what the person said you may believe they had a soul retrieval, if not, it wouldn't change anything until you experienced it yourself!
quote:
even by those that cannot see the magical fairy dust.
Could I get some of this in my coffee!!!???
(HaHaHa)
quote:
You fail on every level if this argument.
I don't think anyone does! Although your knowledge could be improved through direct experience with what you are talking about!
quote:
Moron.
Another nap already?
quote:
I have said this whole time that the soul is "hidden."
If you can't see it then that's the way you chose to live!
quote:
What is physical/observable is that the client claims he was healed.
You would be seeing people speak and express raised emotion! Not a soul, just results, I believe you want to "see" a soul, or feel or touch one! Just like the wall! You want to detect it!
This is not possible for anyone but yourself!
quote:
The claim itself is physical.
A soul retrieval is not entirely physical! Yet you are making it out to be!
quote:
Jesus Christ!
Does he do soul retrievals???
(HaHaHa)
quote:
You are a real stupid one.
Take one more nap and you may be rested enough to speak without crying!
quote:
Stop acting like a complete moron and you'll stop being called a complete moron. I have no other words to describe someone as stupid as you.
Whoops!
I spoke to soon! http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)
truckfixr
2006-09-30, 22:41
quote:
Merriam-Webster Online:
delusion
One entry found for delusional.
Main Entry: de·lu·sion
Pronunciation: di-'lü-zh&n, dE-
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Late Latin delusion-, delusio, from deludere
1 : the act of deluding : the state of being deluded
2 a : something that is falsely or delusively believed or propagated b : a persistent false psychotic belief regarding the self or persons or objects outside the self that is maintained despite indisputable evidence to the contrary; also : the abnormal state marked by such beliefs
- de·lu·sion·al /-'lüzh-n&l, -'lü-zh&-n&l/ adjective
- de·lu·sion·ary /-zh&-"ner-E/ adjective
synonyms DELUSION, ILLUSION, HALLUCINATION, MIRAGE mean something that is believed to be true or real but that is actually false or unreal. DELUSION implies an inability to distinguish between what is real and what only seems to be real, often as the result of a disordered state of mind <delusions of persecution>. ILLUSION implies a false ascribing of reality based on what one sees or imagines <an illusion of safety>. HALLUCINATION implies impressions that are the product of disordered senses, as because of mental illness or drugs <suffered from terrifying hallucinations>. MIRAGE in its extended sense applies to an illusory vision, dream, hope, or aim <claimed a balanced budget is a mirage>.
I almost expected to find a picture of ate beside this definition.
Ate, it is not that the average normal human is blind to the world. It is that a few such as yourself, allow your imagination to over rule your ability to differentiate between reality and fantasy.
I'm not calling you a liar.(You may actually believe in the nonsense you are asserting). I'm simply stating that you have an extremely weak grasp on reality.
quote:Originally posted by truckfixr:
Ate, it is not that the average normal human is blind to the world.
We are blind to the truth about themselves and their origins.
quote:
It is that a few such as yourself, allow your imagination to over rule your ability to differentiate between reality and fantasy.
This is true if you believe in it!
When the time comes, you will just how far beliefs like these get!
As for now, they cause your life to lack without you knowing it!
quote:
I'm simply stating that you have an extremely weak grasp on reality.
I'll do more bench presses.
(Ha)
quote:Originally posted by ate:
Take a nap please.
.....
Could I get some of this in my coffee!!!???
(HaHaHa)
......
Another nap already?
......
Does he do soul retrievals???
(HaHaHa)
ROTFL http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif) http://www.totse.com/bbs/cool.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/cool.gif) classic refreshing humour, well done http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif) http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif) Perhaps a hint of sarcasm? IMHO 'ate' your posts are a little hard to follow, lots of thoughtful points but maybe it's the format of your replies .. bit disjointed? Could be me? Admire your patience tho http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)
Peace http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by redzed (edited 09-30-2006).]
Real.PUA
2006-09-30, 23:45
You totally lost ge point with the wall analogy. if the person is blind to it by all senses, then yes it is hidden. It this situation that you have contrived explain how this blind (by all senses) person who know when they hit the wall.
I will reply to the rest of your illogic when this point have been addressed.
[This message has been edited by Real.PUA (edited 09-30-2006).]
quote:Originally posted by redzed:
IMHO 'ate' your posts are a little hard to follow, lots of thoughtful points but maybe it's the format of your replies .. bit disjointed?
What should I do?
quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:
[B]If the person is blind to it by all senses, then yes it is hidden.
Equivalent to not acknowledging any existence of a self other than the boby.
quote:
It this situation that you have contrived explain how this blind (by all senses) person who know when they hit the wall.
They gain the sense, or merely acknowledge that they've had it this entire time, yet have chosen to ignore it for whatever reasons, most often simply to re-learn.
quote:
The wall analogy works because everyday, every constant waking moment you could say we are in behing a wall of perception never making contact as long as there is distance between us, the second you come into realization of what we are talking about it's just like BAM!
This distance signifies the change required within our own beliefs and perceptions in order to acknowledge the presence, and in this analogy in order to "hit the wall" and come to the end result of being totally aware of the self.
As long as there is distance, in the analogy it's physical, in reality it's a matter of beliefs and will, then you will be perceptually blind to what we are speaking of.
For as long as you exist,you will have to accept the fact of something higher if you want to experience it.
When the gap is bridged, when the person begins to learn, and work and build relationship with nature and their own multi-aspectual self, they slowly bridge the gap. When the moment of true and undoubtable realization comes you have hit the wall and that's the last time you will ever do it, or ever be seperated from it. Unless of course you desire to experience distance again.
quote:
I will reply to the rest of your illogic when this point have been addressed.
Nap-time first!
It would help.
Real.PUA
2006-10-01, 00:43
So the blind person suddenly gains sight (or acknowledges that he had it the whole time)... great analogy.
There is no way to seperate whether you gained a sense, or whether you've had this sense forever, yet decided to ignore it for learning purposes.
Part of being human is having the ability to learn from yourself, and another part is having a multi-aspectual self. You have many forms, learning for just one of those forms is limiting, you never exist in just one, but you can imagine it to be so by limiting your awareness to whatever you'd like.
When people are limiting their awareness of a certain emotion, or a certain aspect of their own consciousness, they are not destroying that consciousness or causing it to not exist, yet they are not aware of this form of their own consciousness until the re-acknowledge it, and re-incorporate it into their own life.
This means that it still existed within them every step of the way, along with the ability to perceive it, yet their own will and belief system is capable of creating a life experience where they are aware of it or not.
The blind person is not aware of either, in the analogy, the wall, or in reality, the higher concept of self.
The sudden realization causes them to SEE!
They have gained sight!
Yet, to the higher self, the realization of it's lower form to it never was blind but only imagining life to be that way, creating the experience from it's own imagination.
It is your belief system which will cause this blindness, and it is your belief system which after change will cause you to see that blindness never existed!
So you gain a sense, and in turn realize that you had never actually lost it.
This is the seperation of mankind with it's truly spiritual self, right-brained way of thought, natural connection to the planet etc etc etc etc, whatever you want to call it.
Individually speaking. When a person realizes, the meet themself for the first time, truly experiencing the essence of a soul with infinite potential of awareness, and a constant emotional state of what humans loosely refer to as "love". That's the closest you come without experiencing.
So we have this concept, this ability, and this experience inside of us, we never really lose it. Yet through the desire to experience different (in this case lower and more limited; it's the human way, at least in the beginning) forms of life and existence you can obtain a limited awareness and re-gain it. Even though the only re-gaining done, is the letting go of that false and narrowed awareness.
This all happens and works because this universe is naturally based upon your own reflection consciousness and it's ability to create what you wish to experience exactly as you are experiencing it.
You can affect the universe and your experience on a quantum level, and so your awareness and belief most definately affects your experience of the outcome of things.
So yes, right now many humans are totally blind to this, yet they are constantly seeing it every where they look, constantly percieving it, constantly using it.
The only difference between now and then, is that we will begin to acknowledge this!
truckfixr
2006-10-01, 02:06
You are soooo full of shit.
Lets get this straight, a person with absolutely no senses walks into a wall and simultaneously gets all of his senses back. You honestly think that's on the same level as what you're arguing? Also, how would you get one to forget, ignore, relearn or manipulate their senses in any way that would work for this analogy?
...Prove it
^ Trying to be cute there http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)
quote:Originally posted by sketchy:
Lets get this straight, a person with absolutely no senses walks into a wall and simultaneously gets all of his senses back.
I'm not sure you get it, but I'll say you do. So yes.
quote:
Also, how would you get one to forget, ignore, relearn or manipulate their senses in any way that would work for this analogy?
Hahahaha, and that's the big secret of human consciousness isn't it? How things work, why we are the way we are.
You can either die.
Or you can be re-reborn while living through altering your consciousness. Elevate it. Expand it. Love is the usual cause and effect.
Decisions!
Note: No one is "gotten" to do anything.
[This message has been edited by ate (edited 10-01-2006).]
ArmsMerchant
2006-10-02, 18:58
quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:
Basically you said this "Nothing can be known to absolute certainty so you should believe that I have psychic powers when I tell you I do."
Logic aint your strong point, is it? Back to the looney bin for you. You being crazy is a much more probable explanation than you having psychic powers.
Not at all. What I HAVE been trying to say is that NOTHING can be proven with absolute certainty, so don't waste time and energy asking me to prove this or that. Anyone over the age of seven or so should realize that pretty much any kind of evidence can be faked--especially through the use of computers. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable, as anyone with any trial experience knows.
As a rule, however, most people have some sort of valid reason for lying. Men usually lie to look good, women usually lie to avoid conflict. I have no reason to lie. I stand to gain nothing by lying, but would lose a great deal of self-esteem if I should stoop to do so. I realize that sort of puts me in the minority, but there it is. I am far from perfect, and have done--and will continue to do --various things that I would prefer not to become public knowledge. Lying, however, is not one of them.
As far as the insanity charge goes, I have to plead nolo contendre. One is said to be legally insane if one does not know the difference between right and wrong (this varies somewhat from state to state, but that is pretty much the gist of it). In my view, there is no such thing as "right" or "wrong." These are judgemental labels we place on things which say nothing about the things themselves.
Clinical insanity is something else. According to the standard diagnostic manual of the American Psychiatric Association, ANYONE who accepts the reality of psychism or any sort of ESP and so forth is clinically insane. That would include me, most people I know, the thousands of clients my wife and I have served over the years, and many people who post here and in PD.
[This message has been edited by ArmsMerchant (edited 10-02-2006).]
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
Not at all. What I HAVE been trying to say is that NOTHING can be proven with absolute certainty, so don't waste time and energy asking me to prove this or that.
...
^ Sow your field, take your crop and in the end the one with the larger harvest wins.
Real.PUA
2006-10-04, 16:42
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
Not at all. What I HAVE been trying to say is that NOTHING can be proven with absolute certainty, so don't waste time and energy asking me to prove this or that. Anyone over the age of seven or so should realize that pretty much any kind of evidence can be faked--especially through the use of computers. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable, as anyone with any trial experience knows.
It's not just that you yourself have not provided substantiated evidence that your are psychic, it's that no one ever has for anyone.
And yes you do have plenty to gain by lying (efame for one), although that is not the only explanation. You may actually believe you are psychic (thus not lying), but that doesnt make it so. This is where evidence is required because there are more probable explanations for the given observations. Evidence would be any observatins that support you being psychic but do not support other explanations (like you being crazy or dumb).
[This message has been edited by Real.PUA (edited 10-04-2006).]
truckfixr
2006-10-04, 19:19
ArmsMerchant. I have to ask. Do you charge people for your healing and soul retrieval services, or do you perform these services out of the goodness of your heart?
ArmsMerchant
2006-10-05, 19:39
quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:
Western medicine is based on evidence. The cream has been shown the cure rashes in clinical studies and the in interactions of the chemicals in the cream and your body have been well described in scientific literature.
You could easily prove that your soul retrieval works. Simply compare it to a placebo in a blind test. Bingo bango you just won the randi one million.
Wrong, wrong, WRONG, for many reasons. Medical tests use many people; soul retrieval is a very personal, one on one thing.
No ethical shaman would ever PRETEND to do a soul retrieval, which would be necessary in a so-called double blind thing.
Medical tests use the same dosage and so forth; soul retrieval is always different--people lose different amounts of soul energy through different traumas.
Sandra Ingerman has written of soul retrieval being done without a person's knowledge, which strikes me as unethical, although done for positive reasons. For details, see her books.
Finally, no medical or spiritual healing modality always works. For some people, for instance, valium does nothing to relieve their tension; for some people, sould retrieval doesn't help relieve their symptoms.
Randi's offer is basically a scam. He is a mediocre stage magician, an came upo with a brilliant way to market himself.
Good grief, I could do a hundred successful soul retrievals, and have a hundred people swear on a hundred Bibles that it worked and pass a hundred polygraph tests to that effect and Randi could still claim that all 101 of us were lying and perpetrating a huge fraud. And there is NO WAY he could be proven wrong, although all 101 of us would KNOW that he was.
Real.PUA
2006-10-05, 23:53
Medical tests use many people only to prove that it works. Generally, medicince is prescribed in a personal way (for an individual patient).
In the blind test the participants could be made aware that they either would recieve a soul retrieval or the placebo. They just dont get to know which they are getting. What is unethical about that? Everyone is informed of what is going on and has given consent.
Of course Randi wouldnt believe you based on people swearing. No rational human would take testimony alone as sufficient evidence for the paranormal. That's why you and Randi both agree BEFORE HAND on what constitutes a successful soul retrieval. If it performs better than a placebo you got something. This is what EVIDENCE IS ABOUT. Clearly you *could* prove that soul retrieval works, but you choose not to.
You could try emailing randi or posting on the jref forums to get a good protocol going to prove soul retrieval works. Assuming you get a good protocol and then you go for the million. If the results go the way you agreed would constitute a success you get the million. I dont think you'd bother trying because your too afraid to be proven wrong. That's why all you can do is come up with excuses for why sould retrieval cannot be tested.
[This message has been edited by Real.PUA (edited 10-05-2006).]
quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:
Randi's offer is basically a scam. He is a mediocre stage magician, an came upo with a brilliant way to market himself.
He pretty much doesn't do any magic any more and his work is all devoted to the non-profit organization he runs. If the challenge is a way to market himself, then he's doing a terribe job at getting money.
No, it's not a scam. It's a legitimate challenge. The reason you have to call it a scam is because you would have no other reason not to take it, aside from being full of shit.
Take the challenge. What better way to show that it is a "Scam" than by accepting the challenge and describing the whole process in detail. Since you both must agree to a valid test of your powers, then we would expect to see some unreasonable requests in the testing parameters if it were in fact a scam. Accept it and show us.
It sounds like Real's understanding is only of the physical, materialistic knowledge.
And Rust is personal about it? :/
Real.PUA
2006-10-06, 09:03
quote:Originally posted by ate:
It sounds like Real's understanding is only of the physical, materialistic knowledge.
And Rust is personal about it? :/
AM has made physical, materialistic claims. That's what we can test. I've said this several time already in this thread. Why do you make me repeat myself ad nauseum? Trolling?
[This message has been edited by Real.PUA (edited 10-06-2006).]
quote:Originally posted by ate:
And Rust is personal about it? :/
Personal? He made the outrageous claim that it was a scam, but I can't possibly suggest that he may be lying? Go troll somewhere else please.
quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:
AM has made physical, materialistic claims.
This is not what he's claiming, he's not claiming a soul retrieval is equivilant to any physical process.
quote:
That's what we can test.
And...you won't find it there!
quote:
I've said this several time already in this thread.
See below response.
quote:
Why do you make me repeat myself ad nauseum?
Because you dont' seem to understand how your opinionated beliefs are going to change the outcome of your experience with what you're talking about, and yet:
You continue looking for it, or trying to produce a correct notion about it! Each time missing the problem, in the first thing you said!
Hence all the repetition..
quote:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rust:
[B] Personal? He made the outrageous claim that it was a scam.
You were calling him a 'scam'!
quote:
but I can't possibly suggest that he may be lying?
AM, lying? You can believe whatever! But it won't invalidate what he's talking about, just your own self-willed perceptions about it!
quote:
Go troll somewhere else please.
Go missinterpret, misspercieve, and lie elsewhere if I am not going to be allowed to see what you're doing!
Real.PUA
2006-10-07, 05:40
quote:Originally posted by ate:
This is not what he's claiming, he's not claiming a soul retrieval is equivilant to any physical process.
For the zillionth time, he's claiming soul retrieval has physical results. We can test whether or not that claim is true. There is nothing false about the previous two sentences, they are not opinion, they are facts.
Did AM claim that people would know that they had been healed? Yes, he did. That's a physical result that result can be tested like any other physical result.
We cannot test whether or not the soul exists and we cannot test whether or not a soul retrieval actually does something to the soul, but we can test whether or not people will react differently to having a true soul retrieval done or just a placebo.
Let's say all a soul retrieval did was get you an extra bag of cheetos in the after life, that would not be a testable claim. But saying that people will feel different is a testable claim.
[This message has been edited by Real.PUA (edited 10-07-2006).]
quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:
For the zillionth time, he's claiming soul retrieval has physical results. We can test whether or not that claim is true. There is nothing false about the previous two sentences, they are not opinion, they are facts.
If there were none of these, "physical results", would it still exist!?
Is that what makes it a soul retrieval?
quote:
That's a physical result that result can be tested like any other physical result.
The healing is not physical, yet the way they described it to your, they way they used voice to tell you, or any way they tried to communicate non-physical, emotional, and metaphysical experiences of change to you! It wouldn't be understood! You can't tell someone something that must be apprehended in order to be understood, through words or reproductions of that apphrehending experience!
Hence experience is necessary. The only thing you'd be looking at was a reaction, a by-product.
Read the first response. Those by-prodcuts do not create the original event, they source from it.
Look for the source! You're looking to the side and the aftermath!
It's like trying to heal a disease by treating the symptoms!
quote:
We cannot test whether or not the soul exists
Not unless a bunch of people with the ability to apphrehend the soul were doing the testing, otherwise people without the ability to apprehend something, looing for that very thing are going to be doomed to failure!
The sense of an extended spiritual self is not like opening your eyes and seeing when you are born! It is something that happens later in life when you are consciously deciding to bring it into life!
quote:
we cannot test whether or not a soul retrieval actually does something to the soul,
If you have the right idea of what the soul is then, yes you can!
quote:
but we can test whether or not people will react differently to having a true soul retrieval done or just a placebo.
It is either done or not done, you can't fake one!
quote:
Let's say all a soul retrieval did was get you an extra bag of cheetos in the after life,
It more-so affects life down here!
After life you have your soul, you are it, here is where you become seemingly disconnected, through seperating beliefs!
The only afterlife it changes is whether you come back to the earth or not!!!
quote:
that would not be a testable claim
Only if one could breakthrough the veil of consciousness which stops you from seeing into your other forms of existence, simtultaneously as you sit here and deny those very other existences !!!
Otherwise, people who can, would be able to deduct such information!
quote:
But saying that people will feel different is a testable claim.
Yes, but it either happens or it doesn't there is no way to fake it!
Real.PUA
2006-10-07, 08:34
quote:Originally posted by ate:
If there were none of these, "physical results", would it still exist!?
Is that what makes it a soul retrieval?
Without those physical results that AM makes claim to there would be no evidence or proof, which is what this thread is about.
quote:
The healing is not physical, yet the way they described it to your, they way they used voice to tell you, or any way they tried to communicate non-physical, emotional, and metaphysical experiences of change to you! It wouldn't be understood! You can't tell someone something that must be apprehended in order to be understood, through words or reproductions of that apphrehending experience!
That's irrelevent because AM made physical claims and that is all I am talking about. That is all that evidence and proof are concerned with.
quote:Hence experience is necessary. The only thing you'd be looking at was a reaction, a by-product.
Looking for a byproduct is exactly what is done all the time in science. That's what inference is, but I doubt you have studied mathematics.
quote:Read the first response. Those by-prodcuts do not create the original event, they source from it.
True they are by products. That is where inference comes in to play. Inference is used all the time in science. For example, nobody can see a sequence of DNA. So we do various experiments and the results might be something like different colors of flourescence. The different colors indicate what the sequence it, but they are not a direct view. Thus, we infer.
quote:It's like trying to heal a disease by treating the symptoms!
No. It's like diagnosing a disease based on the symptoms (which is done all the time). We are making a guess at something hidden based on obervations.
quote:
It is either done or not done, you can't fake one!
You only need to fake the physical actions. The placebo is purely physical, while the real thing is obviously not. You're just making excuses now.
quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:
Without the physical results that AM makes claim to there would be no evidence or proof, which is what this thread is about.
Look for the evidence of what happens to a persons life, subjectively. That is evidence.
quote:
That's irrelevent because AM made physical claims and that is all I am talking about. That is all that evidence and proof are concerned with.
If you're only going to look at the by-products of the process, without looking at the source, how do you expect to understand how it works!!!??? Or anything else correct about it for that matter..
quote:
Looking for a byproduct is exactly what is done all the time in science.
This isn't about the situation you have in your head as this time in science!
quote:
That's what inference is, but I doubt you have studied mathematics.
For the certain exerpt of understanding that you are takling about, I'd rather not have the knowledge than have the knowledge and not know where to apply it!
quote:
For example, nobody can see a sequence of DNA.
Oh?
quote:
So we do various experiments and the results might be something like different colors of flourescence.
These are things you do, to take something without an image, and turn it into something that your eye can see. DNA is not meant to be looked at, as you can see it hasn't changed anything with our understanding of who we are and what we do. We are supposed to truly learn what DNA is through observing our inner selves, then there would be no objective understanding of it throughout the land, it would only be subjective.
But that is the past, no we have had a blending of subjective and objective experience, so in the future we will both know what it may look like to a human eye, and we will know how to positively interact with it for self-healing and self-growth practices.
quote:
The different colors indicate what the sequence it, but they are not a direct view. Thus, we infer.
What good do the colors which represent the sequence do for you if you can't see it on your own?
How does it help you help yourself?
All it does it bring us more seperated from nature and our inside mentallity and a symbiotic realitionship withour bodies and nature, and press us more into debt and dependancies on technologies and materialism.
quote:It's like diagnosing a disease based on the symptoms (which is done all the time).
After finding out that the disease sources from the immune system, you wouldn't apply topical cream to the skin, you would provide something to affect the cells inside the blood and other areas related to the immune system.
The more we look at why we feel bad, instead of what is actually wrong the more we will learn to temporarily fix the disease and our environment without ever learning to change ourselves! Evolution stops, and we slowly use up our resources until we have nothing left and are left entirely vulnerable to everything that is out there!
Our planet will not last for ever, with this imbalance a civilization will fail quickly, physically!
quote:
We are making a guess at something hidden based on obervations.
Observations of a physical level deal with one perspective, and it is sensed through objectivity.
You do not become what you view. You are not what you are viewing, so there are certain unknowns for us to use to our advantage to shape our reality with the most unbiased and
You could say internal observations are dealing with a situation where you are the observer and you are also being observed, the point of view and the target of your perceptions is the same thing.
quote:
You only need to fake the physical actions. The placebo is purely physical, while the real thing is obviously not.
No one knows what they will do after such an experience until the experience is had!
Can't fake it.
quote:
You're just making excuses now.
You're not connecting the dots!
Real.PUA
2006-10-07, 09:27
Troll