Spirits are a staple of mysticism and magic all over the world but our modern society tends to regard spirits as fantasy and delusion. This view of spirits and the spirit world tends to come down to the assumption that they just aren't "real." Of course when we say "real" here we mean it in the materialist sense of physical existence, strings and pulleys, visible causation.
What about the mind though? It should come as no surprise to any mystic or magician that the mind is the fundamental tool of the occult arts. The mind is also how we perceive and interpret our world. I think most people would agree that the mind is very real even though it's rather hard to quantify in the materialist sense. Does something happening in the mind or being perceived solely through the mind make it any less real? The mind has a level of "real" all its own.
Most spirit communication relies on an altered state of consciousness or a level of trance in order for it to take place. These very altered states that make working with spirits possible are the same things that make spirit communication seem so improbable to most people. We've been conditioned to believe that our minds are fallible, cannot be trusted, and are prone to leading us astray. All of this may be true to a point but it cannot be absolutely true as we experience everything through our minds and most of us have come to a consensus about things that are true and real despite being perceived through the mind. The fallibility of perception and the mind is an easy way to explain away things we don't want to exist or are difficult to accept while still relying on our perceptions to understand the more desirable parts of our reality or the things that just can't be ignored.
So do spirits need to have an objective material presence to be considered real? I would say not considering that the very label of "spirit" has connotations of an incorporeal existence in the first place. We've just been conditioned to accept anything not solid, material, and objectively verifiable as being false. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, this skepticism toward unverifiable claims or experiences. However, belief in objectively unverifiable phenomena or the belief that phenomena that happen solely in the mind are still real are not threats like they seem to be perceived in some arguments and debates.
In my opinion, just interacting with an entity or intelligence that could be considered a spirit, whether it exists outside of the mind or is just an expression of the mind, makes the spirit real. Charging a spirit with a task and then reaping the desired outcome makes the spirit real. Whether the outcome was coincidence makes no difference from a pragmatic perspective. This isn't going to satisfy staunch materialists but those are the types that usually aren't going to delve into this area of study in the first place.
Believing in a spirit world or in the existence of spirits does not undermine empirical evidence or scientific achievement. The very unverifiable nature of spiritual phenomenon, how illogical it seems to be, means that science and those that tout it as a superior epistemology shouldn't be all that concerned with it anyway. Whether it's "real" or not doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. People will continue to have experiences with spirits, work with spirits, and espouse the existence of a spiritual world whether the materialists like it or not. Hopefully this musing has given you something to think about.
I think it should also be noted that it's been one year to the day since I started this blog. Thank you to everyone that stops by to read my posts. It's the readers that have kept me going with this project whenever I'd thought I'd run out of things to say or when I wondered if it mattered at all. My only hope is that whatever I have to say gets others thinking about these subjects and maybe inspires them to take the information further.
Showing posts with label belief. Show all posts
Showing posts with label belief. Show all posts
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
The Power of Belief
The Dark Side of the Placebo Effect: When Intense Belief Kills
There is a lot of New Age emphasis on thinking positively and believing in things to make them real. While a lot of this moves into the realm of visualizing yourself as rich and famous there seems to be a darker side to belief. Whether we think of it as a mystical technique or simple biology there is little argument that what we believe can affect us on a physical level. The placebo effect is a popular example of belief affecting biology. What about when placebo goes bad?
Depending on the specifics and the depth of belief, the nocebo effect can actually be deadly as is argued in the book discussed in the link above. As little as we understand the placebo effect we understand nocebo even less. Obviously there are ethical problems when it comes to testing the nocebo effect so it may be a long time before we get much understanding of it. I don't think we need to know the specifics to utilize the effect though.
Jumping back to the mystical side now, if we can cause bodily changes with our beliefs then this seems like a very useful ability worth cultivating. I think that anyone that has experimented with the vaguely-named practice of energy work can understand how a belief in an action can produce a physical sensation. This seems most useful in the form of the placebo rather than the nocebo, but these are just two sides of the same coin. If we can actively affect how our biology works with our belief then could we affect other aspects of the physical world? It might be something worth experimenting with.
What you could take away from the above article as well as this article is that what we believe has real consequences. Regardless of how superstitious or illogical a belief may be it can still have an effect on us. I have a feeling this applies to less superstitious and more logical beliefs as well in the sense that they could limit our potential in mystical or spiritual pursuits.
There is a lot of New Age emphasis on thinking positively and believing in things to make them real. While a lot of this moves into the realm of visualizing yourself as rich and famous there seems to be a darker side to belief. Whether we think of it as a mystical technique or simple biology there is little argument that what we believe can affect us on a physical level. The placebo effect is a popular example of belief affecting biology. What about when placebo goes bad?
Depending on the specifics and the depth of belief, the nocebo effect can actually be deadly as is argued in the book discussed in the link above. As little as we understand the placebo effect we understand nocebo even less. Obviously there are ethical problems when it comes to testing the nocebo effect so it may be a long time before we get much understanding of it. I don't think we need to know the specifics to utilize the effect though.
Jumping back to the mystical side now, if we can cause bodily changes with our beliefs then this seems like a very useful ability worth cultivating. I think that anyone that has experimented with the vaguely-named practice of energy work can understand how a belief in an action can produce a physical sensation. This seems most useful in the form of the placebo rather than the nocebo, but these are just two sides of the same coin. If we can actively affect how our biology works with our belief then could we affect other aspects of the physical world? It might be something worth experimenting with.
What you could take away from the above article as well as this article is that what we believe has real consequences. Regardless of how superstitious or illogical a belief may be it can still have an effect on us. I have a feeling this applies to less superstitious and more logical beliefs as well in the sense that they could limit our potential in mystical or spiritual pursuits.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Otherkin
I don't usually get intentionally involved with otherkin. This is not because I have a prejudice against the belief but because the otherkin community, much like a lot of related communities, tends to create a great amount of drama and I just get burnt out on that after a while. However, I do end up encountering those that identify as therians or otherkin by virtue of the subjects I'm interested in and the circles I travel in. Without making any attempt to flatter or offend I'll muse a little on the topic of otherkin.
The majority of otherkin I encounter are of the belief that they are other than human in soul. The dominant theory I come across is that they have been reincarnated into a human body when they originally inhabited the body of another species. I'm not perturbed by this sort of belief and I'm unconcerned if the people around me subscribe to it. To each their own. I believe some relatively strange things myself.
I do occasionally encounter individuals that claim to mentally shift. They claim that their mentality or mind will shift from that of a human to that of their original species. This is an interesting concept to me but this is another belief that doesn't really bother me one way or the other. I seem to recall reading about other types of non-physical shifting at some point but I can't say I remember them right now. This idea of shifting could probably also be elaborated on a lot if the particular otherkin claims to have multiple souls residing in the same body (as I have seen before in the past).
Then we get some people that claim to be able to physically change their form. I almost immediately disregard these claims for a number of reasons, chiefly because it seems to defy quite a few physical laws to an extreme degree. Most of the time when confronted with this kind of belief I'll just listen to what the other person has to say and I may ask questions. I would like to see them physically transform, of course, but I'm not going to demand they do so as that would be rude even if they are capable of doing it.
In some cases it's not really a total transformation from human to animal that is claimed but simply an augmenting of human senses or abilities that would seem to coincide with what the otherkin's original form would be able to do. I think we're all capable of some extraordinary feats when we set ourselves to them and whether one attributes this to the human mind or having been some other species in a past life doesn't seem to matter from a practical standpoint.
Something that I do see more than one would think is a belief among otherkin that eventually some great event will occur and everyone will assume their "true form" again. This may be tied to some story of war on the astral planes, the veil between worlds becoming thinner, or variations on these themes. I don't see this as much different than a belief in the Rapture or the Apocalypse and in comparison it's not necessarily that "out there."
My final thoughts on the subject of otherkin are that they have beliefs just like anyone else. Some of the beliefs are more "out there" than others, even within the otherkin community, but given the whole of world beliefs they really aren't that strange. I think some people may take it too far but this can be said of anything that people are wont to do. Overall, otherkin are (currently) people just like anyone else and are susceptible to human foibles just like the rest of us regardless of what species they may have originally been. With this in mind I try not to treat otherkin any differently than people that identify totally as human and I hope you'll attempt the same should you encounter anyone that claims to be otherkin.
The majority of otherkin I encounter are of the belief that they are other than human in soul. The dominant theory I come across is that they have been reincarnated into a human body when they originally inhabited the body of another species. I'm not perturbed by this sort of belief and I'm unconcerned if the people around me subscribe to it. To each their own. I believe some relatively strange things myself.
I do occasionally encounter individuals that claim to mentally shift. They claim that their mentality or mind will shift from that of a human to that of their original species. This is an interesting concept to me but this is another belief that doesn't really bother me one way or the other. I seem to recall reading about other types of non-physical shifting at some point but I can't say I remember them right now. This idea of shifting could probably also be elaborated on a lot if the particular otherkin claims to have multiple souls residing in the same body (as I have seen before in the past).
Then we get some people that claim to be able to physically change their form. I almost immediately disregard these claims for a number of reasons, chiefly because it seems to defy quite a few physical laws to an extreme degree. Most of the time when confronted with this kind of belief I'll just listen to what the other person has to say and I may ask questions. I would like to see them physically transform, of course, but I'm not going to demand they do so as that would be rude even if they are capable of doing it.
In some cases it's not really a total transformation from human to animal that is claimed but simply an augmenting of human senses or abilities that would seem to coincide with what the otherkin's original form would be able to do. I think we're all capable of some extraordinary feats when we set ourselves to them and whether one attributes this to the human mind or having been some other species in a past life doesn't seem to matter from a practical standpoint.
Something that I do see more than one would think is a belief among otherkin that eventually some great event will occur and everyone will assume their "true form" again. This may be tied to some story of war on the astral planes, the veil between worlds becoming thinner, or variations on these themes. I don't see this as much different than a belief in the Rapture or the Apocalypse and in comparison it's not necessarily that "out there."
My final thoughts on the subject of otherkin are that they have beliefs just like anyone else. Some of the beliefs are more "out there" than others, even within the otherkin community, but given the whole of world beliefs they really aren't that strange. I think some people may take it too far but this can be said of anything that people are wont to do. Overall, otherkin are (currently) people just like anyone else and are susceptible to human foibles just like the rest of us regardless of what species they may have originally been. With this in mind I try not to treat otherkin any differently than people that identify totally as human and I hope you'll attempt the same should you encounter anyone that claims to be otherkin.
Saturday, May 14, 2011
If ETs are coming to Earth then where are they?
I've brought up the similarities between UFO sightings and older, more magical phenomena like fairies before. I have been thinking for a while that these phenomena are one and the same and the extraterrestrial explanation is just our modern take on something that has been happening for a very long time. Pondering the Fermi Paradox earlier today it occurred to me that the evidence of intelligent extraterrestrials visiting us (or existing at all) is severely lacking. Sure, there are lots of things that could be interpreted as evidence for extraterrestrials, but there doesn't seem to be anything really concrete that says "All of these things are caused by aliens."
No doubt the UFO phenomenon is real. People see strange and unidentifiable objects in the skies all the time. Unidentified does not necessarily mean extraterrestrial though. That we jump to the extraterrestrial hypothesis as an explanation for UFOs tells how much our collective thinking has been affected by the times we live in. Science fiction influences aside, we assume that since we can travel into space that an advanced alien civilization should be able to travel much farther into space, bend space and time itself, and generally defy the laws of physics as we know them.
That's the real rub of it: the defying of the laws of physics. To get here from another star in a timely manner, as well as to remain undetected by humans, these aliens would have to have technology that resembled magic to us simply because it would defy all understanding that we have of how the universe works. We're talking faster-than-light travel, wormholes, unimaginable energy sources, etc. Thinking about this, there's little wonder some ufologists have looked at the magical descriptions of strange things in the past and decided that they must be the product of extraterrestrial technology.
There is another possibility though, just as incredible but for some reason treated as infinitely less likely. What if all of these unexplained UFO sightings, alien abductions, messages channeled by contactees, etc. are the product of spirits? I should probably clarify what I mean by spirits here. I mean beings from beyond the physical plane of existence. More modern terms might be extradimensionals or ultraterrestrials. I am not referring to ghosts or the souls of deceased humans, but beings that have never been human at all.
Grimoires of magical knowledge such as the Keys of Solomon discuss at length how to contact non-human spirits. To most people this will seem impossible, but once you've accomplished it for yourself it seems a lot more believable. Beings capable of moving between planes of existence, in some cases capable of affecting events on the physical plane, seem to be on par with how we think of extraterrestrials; especially in some New Age circles and UFO cults. There are also parallels between spirit channeling and the channeling of extraterrestrials. When looking at the similarities, extraterrestrials and spirits could be interchanged in most narratives and the story would remain the same.
The more I ponder this subject the more I think that it's likely that we aren't being visited by extremely advanced flesh-and-blood intelligent extraterrestrials. The odds against them existing, finding us, having enough interest to interact, and then having the ability to get here are just staggering. But what about beings (spirits) that are capable of moving between planes of existence, not bound by the limitations of time or space, that have been interacting with humans since the dawn of our species? Is that any more likely? It bypasses several of the problems in the extraterrestrial hypothesis at the cost of invoking a mystical view of reality that is extremely distasteful to some people.
Personally, after the experiences I've had, I'm more inclined to believe in spirits than extraterrestrials visiting us. I would even go so far as to say that those claiming to have encounters with extraterrestrials through channeling or abduction may actually be contacting non-human spirits (if they are contacting anything at all). Again, it is our modern mindset that prohibits us from believing in spirits but allows us to accept extraterrestrial visitation as a possibility. If UFOs and other phenomena ascribed to extraterrestrials are actually caused by spirits then that could explain why we can't seem to find these mischievous aliens; they simply aren't sticking around on the physical plane long enough to be caught. Not being native to the physical plane, they may even be incapable of truly being "caught" as we might catch an animal in order to study it.
Whether a strange being is an alien or a spirit may ultimately be totally up to the perceptions and beliefs of those encountering it. These are just my ongoing observations and musings on the subject; take them as you will.
No doubt the UFO phenomenon is real. People see strange and unidentifiable objects in the skies all the time. Unidentified does not necessarily mean extraterrestrial though. That we jump to the extraterrestrial hypothesis as an explanation for UFOs tells how much our collective thinking has been affected by the times we live in. Science fiction influences aside, we assume that since we can travel into space that an advanced alien civilization should be able to travel much farther into space, bend space and time itself, and generally defy the laws of physics as we know them.
That's the real rub of it: the defying of the laws of physics. To get here from another star in a timely manner, as well as to remain undetected by humans, these aliens would have to have technology that resembled magic to us simply because it would defy all understanding that we have of how the universe works. We're talking faster-than-light travel, wormholes, unimaginable energy sources, etc. Thinking about this, there's little wonder some ufologists have looked at the magical descriptions of strange things in the past and decided that they must be the product of extraterrestrial technology.
There is another possibility though, just as incredible but for some reason treated as infinitely less likely. What if all of these unexplained UFO sightings, alien abductions, messages channeled by contactees, etc. are the product of spirits? I should probably clarify what I mean by spirits here. I mean beings from beyond the physical plane of existence. More modern terms might be extradimensionals or ultraterrestrials. I am not referring to ghosts or the souls of deceased humans, but beings that have never been human at all.
Grimoires of magical knowledge such as the Keys of Solomon discuss at length how to contact non-human spirits. To most people this will seem impossible, but once you've accomplished it for yourself it seems a lot more believable. Beings capable of moving between planes of existence, in some cases capable of affecting events on the physical plane, seem to be on par with how we think of extraterrestrials; especially in some New Age circles and UFO cults. There are also parallels between spirit channeling and the channeling of extraterrestrials. When looking at the similarities, extraterrestrials and spirits could be interchanged in most narratives and the story would remain the same.
The more I ponder this subject the more I think that it's likely that we aren't being visited by extremely advanced flesh-and-blood intelligent extraterrestrials. The odds against them existing, finding us, having enough interest to interact, and then having the ability to get here are just staggering. But what about beings (spirits) that are capable of moving between planes of existence, not bound by the limitations of time or space, that have been interacting with humans since the dawn of our species? Is that any more likely? It bypasses several of the problems in the extraterrestrial hypothesis at the cost of invoking a mystical view of reality that is extremely distasteful to some people.
Personally, after the experiences I've had, I'm more inclined to believe in spirits than extraterrestrials visiting us. I would even go so far as to say that those claiming to have encounters with extraterrestrials through channeling or abduction may actually be contacting non-human spirits (if they are contacting anything at all). Again, it is our modern mindset that prohibits us from believing in spirits but allows us to accept extraterrestrial visitation as a possibility. If UFOs and other phenomena ascribed to extraterrestrials are actually caused by spirits then that could explain why we can't seem to find these mischievous aliens; they simply aren't sticking around on the physical plane long enough to be caught. Not being native to the physical plane, they may even be incapable of truly being "caught" as we might catch an animal in order to study it.
Whether a strange being is an alien or a spirit may ultimately be totally up to the perceptions and beliefs of those encountering it. These are just my ongoing observations and musings on the subject; take them as you will.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Breaking Down the Barriers of Doubt
Breaking down the barriers of doubt is a very important process for anyone hoping to achieve paranormal or occult feats. Do not get me wrong; doubt is a very important thing to have. However, as anyone that has ever applied for a job or tried out for a team can tell you, doubt can work against you. This is especially true in the field of the paranormal. Doubt can keep us from even attempting anything at all, let alone actually achieving substantial results.
Complete confidence and belief are a prerequisite for many occult and paranormal pursuits, belief in both the sought phenomenon and in one's own abilities. This really isn't that different than more mundane pursuits like shooting a basketball or jumping a hurdle though. However, like with shooting hoops and jumping hurdles, one has to start at the beginning when it comes to the occult. Many traditions and paths have basic exercises designed for new initiates and future techniques build upon these basic exercises. One has to walk before they can run and this applies to occult pursuits just as much as it applies to everyday pursuits.
I bring this up because not only do these beginner exercises build necessary skills (in both occult and mundane examples) but they also build confidence. These exercises or techniques become easy and the practitioner comes to have little doubt in the possibility or in their own ability to perform a given task. To use an occult example, a neophyte will most likely have doubts about the possibility of and their own ability to perform a physical evocation of a Goetic spirit. If they can push their doubts aside long enough to actually attempt the evocation they will likely fail.
More than one seeker has been stopped in their tracks when a spell they attempted failed or they couldn't perform a certain exercise successfully. This causes people to give up on the occult and move on to some other interest. Those that stick with it come to learn why their initial attempts failed and in my opinion it is because the beginner is likely to try to perform a task that is outside of their capability, both in ability and in belief. They have not done much occult work prior and therefore have not loosened the fetters of doubt through experience of occult phenomena. This doubt causes them to fail because they do not really believe it can be done or do not believe that they are capable of doing it.
I am not just referring to conscious doubt either. Conscious doubt is usually pretty easy to dispel. Subconscious doubt is the tricky thing that one has to deal with. Subconscious doubt plays a very prominent role in the occult as the occult is a primarily mental field. Even with all the wands and robes, the human mind is still the center of all magic and mysticism. If your own mind is working against you then you will surely fail at a mental pursuit. How do we get past subconscious doubt then? As the saying goes, "Seeing is believing."
We do the beginner exercises, we build our skills brick by brick. Greater skills lead to more profound experiences and profound experiences lead to the erosion of the subconscious barriers of doubt. The more "impossible" phenomena we experience, the more we weaken that barrier of doubt that has been built up in our minds and thus the more we open ourselves to more impressive experiences. This is why it is important to start at the beginning and build your skills from the ground up.
Speaking from experience, I know that this is not always easy when you first pick up a book on magic or occultism and decide that the basic exercises are boring or stupid. I had this attitude for a long time and that amounted to my becoming little more than an armchair occultist in many respects because nothing seemed to feel right or work right. When I went back and started at the beginning I began to have a lot more success. As I have more successes my doubt erodes, both my doubts in the possibility that these things exist and my doubts in my own abilities to do these things.
These ingrained doubts are no one's fault. Our subconscious mind manages our reality. It keeps track of our everyday concerns, sorts our thoughts and feelings, and makes it so we can function in our mundane lives. Most people are caught up in their everyday societal pursuits and their subconscious minds become attuned to this. Anything paranormal is out of the ordinary and there is a deep reflex to reject these things as they seem to have no place in our everyday reality as we understand it. If you want to become adept at paranormal or occult pursuits then you need to get rid of your doubt, both on the surface and deeper down.
You do not do this by having blind faith or deluding yourself; you do it by having genuine paranormal experiences. This is empiricism in its purest form, an experiential approach to the paranormal (and reality for that matter). Start from the beginning of the book and learn the basics. Do the beginner exercises until you are confident in your abilities. Only then will you be able to progress to truly amazing experiences.
Good luck to all of you out there that are brave enough to try these things for yourselves and get your own proof.
Complete confidence and belief are a prerequisite for many occult and paranormal pursuits, belief in both the sought phenomenon and in one's own abilities. This really isn't that different than more mundane pursuits like shooting a basketball or jumping a hurdle though. However, like with shooting hoops and jumping hurdles, one has to start at the beginning when it comes to the occult. Many traditions and paths have basic exercises designed for new initiates and future techniques build upon these basic exercises. One has to walk before they can run and this applies to occult pursuits just as much as it applies to everyday pursuits.
I bring this up because not only do these beginner exercises build necessary skills (in both occult and mundane examples) but they also build confidence. These exercises or techniques become easy and the practitioner comes to have little doubt in the possibility or in their own ability to perform a given task. To use an occult example, a neophyte will most likely have doubts about the possibility of and their own ability to perform a physical evocation of a Goetic spirit. If they can push their doubts aside long enough to actually attempt the evocation they will likely fail.
More than one seeker has been stopped in their tracks when a spell they attempted failed or they couldn't perform a certain exercise successfully. This causes people to give up on the occult and move on to some other interest. Those that stick with it come to learn why their initial attempts failed and in my opinion it is because the beginner is likely to try to perform a task that is outside of their capability, both in ability and in belief. They have not done much occult work prior and therefore have not loosened the fetters of doubt through experience of occult phenomena. This doubt causes them to fail because they do not really believe it can be done or do not believe that they are capable of doing it.
I am not just referring to conscious doubt either. Conscious doubt is usually pretty easy to dispel. Subconscious doubt is the tricky thing that one has to deal with. Subconscious doubt plays a very prominent role in the occult as the occult is a primarily mental field. Even with all the wands and robes, the human mind is still the center of all magic and mysticism. If your own mind is working against you then you will surely fail at a mental pursuit. How do we get past subconscious doubt then? As the saying goes, "Seeing is believing."
We do the beginner exercises, we build our skills brick by brick. Greater skills lead to more profound experiences and profound experiences lead to the erosion of the subconscious barriers of doubt. The more "impossible" phenomena we experience, the more we weaken that barrier of doubt that has been built up in our minds and thus the more we open ourselves to more impressive experiences. This is why it is important to start at the beginning and build your skills from the ground up.
Speaking from experience, I know that this is not always easy when you first pick up a book on magic or occultism and decide that the basic exercises are boring or stupid. I had this attitude for a long time and that amounted to my becoming little more than an armchair occultist in many respects because nothing seemed to feel right or work right. When I went back and started at the beginning I began to have a lot more success. As I have more successes my doubt erodes, both my doubts in the possibility that these things exist and my doubts in my own abilities to do these things.
These ingrained doubts are no one's fault. Our subconscious mind manages our reality. It keeps track of our everyday concerns, sorts our thoughts and feelings, and makes it so we can function in our mundane lives. Most people are caught up in their everyday societal pursuits and their subconscious minds become attuned to this. Anything paranormal is out of the ordinary and there is a deep reflex to reject these things as they seem to have no place in our everyday reality as we understand it. If you want to become adept at paranormal or occult pursuits then you need to get rid of your doubt, both on the surface and deeper down.
You do not do this by having blind faith or deluding yourself; you do it by having genuine paranormal experiences. This is empiricism in its purest form, an experiential approach to the paranormal (and reality for that matter). Start from the beginning of the book and learn the basics. Do the beginner exercises until you are confident in your abilities. Only then will you be able to progress to truly amazing experiences.
Good luck to all of you out there that are brave enough to try these things for yourselves and get your own proof.
Friday, January 7, 2011
Thailand shows that it is not impossible for the supernatural and the modern world to coexist.
Thais Look to the Supernatural
The Western world typically treats things like astrology and horoscopes as entertainment only. In Thailand, coups have been initiated because of the advice of a fortune teller. Some might argue that this is superstition overriding common sense and reason. The Thais might say that it works for them.
The Western world typically treats things like astrology and horoscopes as entertainment only. In Thailand, coups have been initiated because of the advice of a fortune teller. Some might argue that this is superstition overriding common sense and reason. The Thais might say that it works for them.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Is there a greater significance to the lunar eclipse on the solstice?
Most people are probably aware of the lunar eclipse that is in progress as I type this as it's been on the news a lot. This will be the first total lunar eclipse to coincide with the solstice since 1638. There's a possibility that the moon may even turn blood red.
I've seen some forum chatter about special magical significances or the like, but I don't really know of anything specific myself. I was considering using the occasion to empower a ritual tool, but the weather conditions are not favorable for eclipse viewing where I'm at. In any case, it sets my mind to wondering about the magical possibilities for such a rare event. There's a lot of symbolism involved.
The Winter Solstice (in the Northern Hemisphere) is the longest night of the year and we have the light of the full moon being covered by the Earth's shadow. If you are in the Southern Hemisphere then you have the shortest night of the year with a full moon being obscured by the Earth. I think in both situations there are deeper truths to be pondered when considering the event.
The event itself may hold no power at all, but the power we give to it may be all that's needed to serve whatever purposes we may have.
The eclipse at Space.com
I've seen some forum chatter about special magical significances or the like, but I don't really know of anything specific myself. I was considering using the occasion to empower a ritual tool, but the weather conditions are not favorable for eclipse viewing where I'm at. In any case, it sets my mind to wondering about the magical possibilities for such a rare event. There's a lot of symbolism involved.
The Winter Solstice (in the Northern Hemisphere) is the longest night of the year and we have the light of the full moon being covered by the Earth's shadow. If you are in the Southern Hemisphere then you have the shortest night of the year with a full moon being obscured by the Earth. I think in both situations there are deeper truths to be pondered when considering the event.
The event itself may hold no power at all, but the power we give to it may be all that's needed to serve whatever purposes we may have.
The eclipse at Space.com
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Skepticism and the paranormal.
If you're a student of the paranormal then seeing the word "skeptic" probably causes you to recoil a bit. Skeptics are seen as those debunkers and deniers for which no evidence is good enough. I am pleased to inform you that these people are not skeptics. These people give skepticism a bad name.
For your consideration here is a definition:
skepticism (uncountable)
1. (US) The practice or philosophy of being a skeptic.
2. (US) A studied attitude of questioning and doubt
3. (US) The doctrine that absolute knowledge is not possible
4. (US) A methodology that starts from a neutral standpoint and aims to acquire certainty though scientific or logical observation.
5. (US) Doubt or disbelief of religious doctrines
(From Wiktionary.)
To me, the overall meaning of skepticism, based on this definition, is that of one that considers evidence and then makes a decision accordingly. This means not jumping to conclusions and, most importantly, not dismissing something out of hand. It is unfortunate that modern skepticism has been co-opted by dogmatic thinkers who are no better than the dogmas they are so proud of opposing. I tend to think of modern skepticism as making a negative assumption, whereas belief is a positive assumption. They're still both assumptions though. Belief is "Mental acceptance of a claim as truth regardless of supporting empirical evidence." (Again from Wiktionary.)
If a negative assumption is a belief just the same as a positive assumption then what is the difference? Well, as any skeptic will be sure to point out, the burden of scientific proof is on the person making the claim and they are exempt from this because a negative cannot be proven. This leads me to my point: If a negative cannot be proven, why hold a negative assumption about something? To make a claim and then fail to back it up without any evidence sounds ridiculous to those that are expected to believe it no matter what the claim is (unless those people have faith). If there is no evidence to support a positive claim then there is obviously no evidence to support the negative claim either. So why assume the negative position? Why not simply say "I don't know," or "We don't know"?
In the case of paranormal claims that have some evidence, whether it be eyewitnesses, photographs, videos, etc. the "neutral" claim is that it must be trickery or illusion. Why? This is not to say that all such things should be believed because many of these things do turn out to be frauds or hoaxes, or less sinisterly, misunderstood natural phenomena or optical illusions. Perhaps this is why some people immediately jump to the conclusion that all such activity is fake. This is perhaps not so bad. The bad part is that when a natural explanation is not forthcoming and no evidence of trickery or illusion is discovered, the pseudoskeptics still cry hoax. What is the difference between this kind of clinging to faith and the clinging to faith of one who continues to believe in a proven fraud?
Then we have events that are seemingly supernatural but can be replicated by trickery. We can present a scene from the Civil War on the big screen, complete with big-budget CGI. It looks like the Civil War but it is not the genuine article. Some propose that the telekinetic feats of Nina Kulagina can be replicated with string. Big deal. Knowledge of the principles of multiplication can be replicated by simply memorizing multiplication tables. My point is that just because something can be emulated through trickery does not mean that it was trickery to begin with.
We must also take into account how many things are known to exist that were previously unknown to us because of the limits to our knowledge and technical capability. X-rays were once denounced as a hoax by Lord Kelvin but with more demonstrations X-rays became accepted and understood and now the majority of people have some understanding of something that perplexed the greatest minds of that time. Did X-rays not exist before they were demonstrated? While a possibility, this seems unlikely and I think most self-styled skeptics would agree.
A key tenet of the scientific method is that a hypothesis must be falsifiable. You must be able to show that the hypothesis is true or false in definitive terms. I can say that the entire universe is contained within an invisible snow globe, but there is no way to prove this. This is not a testable hypothesis and therefore not a valid one as it doesn't allow us to gain any further knowledge or understanding. The lack of existence of something is not testable, so how can we say with any certainty that something does not exist? At best we can say that it has not been conclusively proven to exist. The belief that something does not exist because we can't detect it is just that: a belief. It is an assumption upheld by faith. It is impossible to prove a nonexistence, so how can any skeptic possibly claim with certainty that something is nonexistent?
I am not advocating credulity. I am also not advocating denial. I'm fully aware that nothing I've written here will stop the ongoing battle between believers and nonbelievers. My intention is to get you to think about why you believe the things you believe. There is nothing wrong with belief, but we must be prepared to examine our beliefs as objectively as we possibly can from our subjective human perspective. This includes accepting that sometimes that awesome ghost photo or that UFO sighting is a fake or a hoax.
If you would like to read more eloquent observations on skepticism and the paranormal then please see this article written by the true skeptic Marcello Truzzi. I believe you will like it. If you would like to report your thoughts on what I've written above then leave me a comment below. See you next time.
For your consideration here is a definition:
skepticism (uncountable)
1. (US) The practice or philosophy of being a skeptic.
2. (US) A studied attitude of questioning and doubt
3. (US) The doctrine that absolute knowledge is not possible
4. (US) A methodology that starts from a neutral standpoint and aims to acquire certainty though scientific or logical observation.
5. (US) Doubt or disbelief of religious doctrines
(From Wiktionary.)
To me, the overall meaning of skepticism, based on this definition, is that of one that considers evidence and then makes a decision accordingly. This means not jumping to conclusions and, most importantly, not dismissing something out of hand. It is unfortunate that modern skepticism has been co-opted by dogmatic thinkers who are no better than the dogmas they are so proud of opposing. I tend to think of modern skepticism as making a negative assumption, whereas belief is a positive assumption. They're still both assumptions though. Belief is "Mental acceptance of a claim as truth regardless of supporting empirical evidence." (Again from Wiktionary.)
If a negative assumption is a belief just the same as a positive assumption then what is the difference? Well, as any skeptic will be sure to point out, the burden of scientific proof is on the person making the claim and they are exempt from this because a negative cannot be proven. This leads me to my point: If a negative cannot be proven, why hold a negative assumption about something? To make a claim and then fail to back it up without any evidence sounds ridiculous to those that are expected to believe it no matter what the claim is (unless those people have faith). If there is no evidence to support a positive claim then there is obviously no evidence to support the negative claim either. So why assume the negative position? Why not simply say "I don't know," or "We don't know"?
In the case of paranormal claims that have some evidence, whether it be eyewitnesses, photographs, videos, etc. the "neutral" claim is that it must be trickery or illusion. Why? This is not to say that all such things should be believed because many of these things do turn out to be frauds or hoaxes, or less sinisterly, misunderstood natural phenomena or optical illusions. Perhaps this is why some people immediately jump to the conclusion that all such activity is fake. This is perhaps not so bad. The bad part is that when a natural explanation is not forthcoming and no evidence of trickery or illusion is discovered, the pseudoskeptics still cry hoax. What is the difference between this kind of clinging to faith and the clinging to faith of one who continues to believe in a proven fraud?
Then we have events that are seemingly supernatural but can be replicated by trickery. We can present a scene from the Civil War on the big screen, complete with big-budget CGI. It looks like the Civil War but it is not the genuine article. Some propose that the telekinetic feats of Nina Kulagina can be replicated with string. Big deal. Knowledge of the principles of multiplication can be replicated by simply memorizing multiplication tables. My point is that just because something can be emulated through trickery does not mean that it was trickery to begin with.
We must also take into account how many things are known to exist that were previously unknown to us because of the limits to our knowledge and technical capability. X-rays were once denounced as a hoax by Lord Kelvin but with more demonstrations X-rays became accepted and understood and now the majority of people have some understanding of something that perplexed the greatest minds of that time. Did X-rays not exist before they were demonstrated? While a possibility, this seems unlikely and I think most self-styled skeptics would agree.
A key tenet of the scientific method is that a hypothesis must be falsifiable. You must be able to show that the hypothesis is true or false in definitive terms. I can say that the entire universe is contained within an invisible snow globe, but there is no way to prove this. This is not a testable hypothesis and therefore not a valid one as it doesn't allow us to gain any further knowledge or understanding. The lack of existence of something is not testable, so how can we say with any certainty that something does not exist? At best we can say that it has not been conclusively proven to exist. The belief that something does not exist because we can't detect it is just that: a belief. It is an assumption upheld by faith. It is impossible to prove a nonexistence, so how can any skeptic possibly claim with certainty that something is nonexistent?
I am not advocating credulity. I am also not advocating denial. I'm fully aware that nothing I've written here will stop the ongoing battle between believers and nonbelievers. My intention is to get you to think about why you believe the things you believe. There is nothing wrong with belief, but we must be prepared to examine our beliefs as objectively as we possibly can from our subjective human perspective. This includes accepting that sometimes that awesome ghost photo or that UFO sighting is a fake or a hoax.
If you would like to read more eloquent observations on skepticism and the paranormal then please see this article written by the true skeptic Marcello Truzzi. I believe you will like it. If you would like to report your thoughts on what I've written above then leave me a comment below. See you next time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)