Do OBEs exist? (Discussion)

[GreenDragon]

@Remember Tomorrow

I totally disagree, and that from a neutral standpoint, as logic must be by definition neutral and is so, otherwise some would use logic in a faulty way, there is no inbetween.

Logic only operates on our models, if the model is faulty the logic might as well be also, it makes no difference.

I do not define myself through disproving others beliefs/wishes, and Paulius shouldn’t do the same, he should conclude 50% on what OBEs are and if they exist, simply because he hasn’t experienced OBE.

Personally I’m just trying to explain where you are making faulty assumptions that the ‘evidence’ you perceive is absolute. It’s not 50%, just because there are two options. Otherwise it’s 50% that invisible nymphs inhabit your computer screen. They either do or don’t. The 50% figure you quote has no meaning or weight as far as I can see at all.

I can be the same towards others, however from the overview that is given if you do a personal research, an overview I didn’t possess before I started searching myself it is highly propable, only from that, that OBEs do exist.

What you are saying here is actually quite rude. You are saying I am right, you are wrong, you lack the understanding or knowledge of what I’m discussing. You simply can’t seem to acknowledge that others might read all you have, experience all you have yet still reach a different conclusion. You are asserting your perception is flawless.

Yes I am absolute in that, and why shouldn’t I be, from a neutral standpoint, aren’t you absolute in the existence of LDs, why not apply the same criteria because OBEs sound more curious?

Your standpoint isn’t neutral, nobodies standpoint is truly neutral, we can aspire to neutrality but since all we think about operates on models we build, anything we consider is automatically filtered through our own perspectives.

Also more trivially it is interesting to see a previous message of mine, I don’t tell you to accept it as information, but I pinpoint the way of how my thinking was before and how is it now:

This sort of argument is common from believers towards Atheists. Conversion stories, or explanations of how your mind changed aren’t convincing. The reason why is we are imperfect and biased. It doesn’t matter who you are, you can be the very top neuroscientist in the world, that doesn’t make you immune from being mistaken.

OK, if our senses “fool” us with reality then what is the difference. What is the pragmatic difference, this is more of a philosophical nature. In the same way you can’t trust that you just typed this.

If you put a straight object into a deep pot of water you will see it bend. It’s called refraction, the water affects the light coming through it. If we rely only on what we see, we would be fooled into thinking the thing we see is bent. That does not mean however that what we see really is bent.

Actually strange as it might sound, they do not conflict at all, sure religious books have been “polluted” by human thought, but the “basis” and many teachings of all religions

Not to sound cynical but what you are saying here comes across as, “Hey, if we remove all the stuff I deem to be polluted it matches up perfectly.” It’s just not convincing I’m afraid, these people didn’t claim the experience was evidence of a god kinda like the one of their religion. They asserted that they experienced convincing proof of the literal correctness of their beliefs.

What you posted at any rate however does not disprove my way of thinking about OBEs and so on, disproving other’s disprovals isn’t proof on itself.

I’m not trying to disprove your ‘proof’ merely explain to you why your proof isn’t absolute and that others really can hold different views that are just as sound as yours are. Please take a moment to ask yourself why somebody who has stated clearly that they believe in OBE, might be putting forwards points against what you are arguing. I feel like you’re fighting to prove OBE so hard you aren’t considering what I’m trying to communicate.

@Paulius

@Remember Tomorrow

it is you that made a claim

Wrong, it is you.

Unless you’ve changed your position since I last understood it, you also were making a claim by saying that OBEs do not exist. You weren’t saying, there is no evidence so I discount it until there is some, you made an affirmative claim that they don’t exist. From my perspective that would be succumbing to the same fundamental flaw I feel Remember Tomorrow is, just from the scientifically minded side of things.

I feel its critical to accept and understand where we are making assumptions that can’t be justified. They can be reasoned, but not justified. The assumption that everything must be able to be described using scientific method and empiricism, is one place we make a reasoned assumption. Well reasoned I’d add hastily, but still only reasoned. So too the decision to ignore OBE as a valid possibility until evidence that meets your criteria is produced.

[Mr18111]

"Quote:
And to answer your question, the phenomenon or experience does exist. But what it actually is no one can completely say.

These is precisely what I am trying to explain, and I have done in as much detail as possible, I have repeated this thing incalculable times, if I had to quote myself on this a whole page would be filled. I have also linked MANY scientific researches, and others I hesitate to do so, they are more precise, but I hesitate due to forum rules, can PM though both you and Paulius if he ever intends to read what I link. "

Well if what I stated in my previous post is exactly what your trying to say, then you would not be trying to convince others what am obe is, due to the fact that you can’t say what it is. And I have an open mind, send me a pm with links to articles that yu think are interesting and pertain to obe, I’ll read I have nothing to do at work. But remember I’m not trying to be convinced as I have no beliefs in this subject, and believe nothing in general so please, send links to interesting, fun reads

[Remember_Tomorrow]

The thing is that in the way you perceive things I totally agree, you just think for some reason I am not of the same subjective way of thinking, but if I had to pinpoint my totality of thoughts, I would say that eternal search and doubting on various levels is the only way to go, not conclude at any stage, and so that “subjective” thinking takes a more objective nature in that aspect. Disproving the disproval isn’t proving, it might be partially but it lacks vital parts such as asserting new information. You need to have knowledge from different parts of our life to understand what is going on, I don’t criticize as you might think.

It’s like saying that since it’s in the bible for instance, every little detail is wrong, that is on itself totally superficial and metaphysical way of thinking. You compare for instance things under different situations, because the unicorn in the screen has no importance, even if it is there. Yes you can only practically be 0% safe, 50% or 100%. You base your possibilities ( and that might seem correct at the time) on current data, but you don’t now what other data is available, Socrates’ saying " I only know that I don’t know" isn’t random and has a much heavier impact in fact. About the intuition of, sages belonging to millions of years ago, having to do with matters of a scientific nature I can go on in detail although how that happened, it is not needed as it isn’t a vital part of our discussion. Western thought is very dogmatic I have discovered only months lately. Atheism is unknowingly a masked religion, because the REAL atheist has to completely disregard where the information stems from, you don’t even IMAGINE and expect at any rate what is there in the hindu scriptures ( this is a part of the 6th corrolary of logic, that you aren’t aware of your ignorance), I don’t use this as evidence for now ( which is heavy evidence for other matters however),. You think, so well what there might be there, what can it be, well go and see and tell me by a neutral standpoint. There are no religions, man has created the dogma, it doesn’t mean that everything inside in it’s totality ( the totality that you actually perceive) is true but if the bible says do not kill that doesn’t mean an amoralist can go on by saying that ("ah, it’s in the bible, so it must be ‘false’, there will be no punishment thereafter, so let’s kill for this and that). So at any rate I can’t agree with your argument on disproving the disproval. Of this whole argument religion was not anyway the central subject, you just compared religion, which shouldn’t be compared anyway to the 50%, you didn’t disprove the 50% by then. I have explained in much detail why we must be 50% in a previous message, take your time to read it.

This is just to clear out the method, for OBEs I have posted down many things, the fact alone that not every scientist can be collectively lying I think speaks tons. Then we can’t prove LD either cause our mind “fakes” us.

note: reread I made many corrections, sorry for that

[Paulius]

@GreenDragon

@Paulius

@Remember Tomorrow

it is you that made a claim

Wrong, it is you.

Unless you’ve changed your position since I last understood it, you also were making a claim by saying that OBEs do not exist. You weren’t saying, there is no evidence so I discount it until there is some, you made an affirmative claim that they don’t exist. From my perspective that would be succumbing to the same fundamental flaw I feel Remember Tomorrow is, just from the scientifically minded side of things.

That was what I meant. I hold an atheistic position towards OBE’s. I say that OBE’s do not exist in much the same manner as I would say that a God does not exist. It is not exactly a claim, since it is a negative anyways. It is the most rational assumption based on the lack of evidence to the positive statement. If I’d say that the existence of OBE’s is 100% impossible - that would be a claim which I would need to prove. Now I merely reject Remember Tommorow’s claims that lack valid evidence. I do not totally deny the possibility of OBE’s. Sorry if my comment was misunderstanding.

[Mr18111]

I don’t think you’ve been hard to understand paulius, your saying a lot of what I’m trying to say. Some people would rather just convince others.

[Remember_Tomorrow]

How many times I have to repeat this, this is becoming exhausting, you can have your opinion but must be doing circles by will. It would be much more respectable if you explained at least as having been asked so many times why is that true. Why a negative isn’t an assertation… The OBEs do not exist and why are you there, I don’t understand?

And yes I have posted as I will say for a millionth time, info on extrasensory perception, of scientists of various specialities, you just haven’t looked at all or even read my quoting of them, you just didn’t know of that before as I did so, now that you know find a way to dismiss all of that, they are at least 50% ( not these specific ones, but the scientific community) yet for some unknown reason you are safe on OBEs, consciousness, everything!

[Mr18111]

@Remember Tomorrow

How many times I have to repeat this, this is becoming exhausting, you can have your opinion but must be doing circles by will. It would be much more respectable if you explained at least as having been asked so many times why is that true. Why a negative isn’t an assertation… The OBEs do not exist and why are you there, I don’t understand?

And yes I have posted as I will say for a millionth time, info on extrasensory perception, of scientists of various specialities, you just haven’t looked at all or even read my quoting of them, you just didn’t know of that before as I did so, now that you know find a way to dismiss all of that, they are at least 50% ( not these specific ones, but the scientific community) yet for some unknown reason you are safe on OBEs, consciousness, everything!

So you won’t send me a pm with interesting links?

[Remember_Tomorrow]

I hold an atheistic position towards OBE’s. I say that OBE’s do not exist in much the same manner as I would say that a God does not exist.

Dismissing God is fakely dismissing everything that you don’t know that can exist. The bearded figure in the sky should not important to both a religious person and an atheist. You have stuck in the bearded figure.

I do not totally deny the possibility of OBE’s. Sorry if my comment was misunderstanding.

Thus if this isn’t 50% then what it is? There is no other way and I have explained why. How can a fact for me for instance, be less than 50% at least for me. It shows that the whole method of possibilities you have used has no special significance. what if a 0.00000000001% possible thing happens, what is the importance of your way of using possibilities, you must read “possibility theory” if you haven’t. You didn’t read corrolaries, you didn’t read Ramsey theory which is mathematic, already.

[Remember_Tomorrow]

So you won’t send me a pm with interesting links?

Look at your PM for your interesting links, but do not discuss them here. I guess all these cardiologists, neurosurgeons, dr*g specialists, physicists, medical doctors are all idiots and lying as a whole or are just stupid.

So in effect OBEs can also be triggered by ******, the same way they might be produced naturally in the pineal gland as dreams, your everyday viewings when awake are, you saw how in detail

note:

So you won’t send me a pm with interesting links?

This message that this quote refers to was referring in itself to Paulius BTW

[Paulius]

It is not the object of discussion, but it seems that Remember Tomorrow misunderstands the concept of Atheism. As an atheist I must correct RT on this matter.

@Remember Tomorrow

Atheism is unknowingly a masked religion

No. Atheism is not a religion by definition. It is the lack of belief. It is not a “masked” religion in any ways.

@Remember Tomorrow

because the REAL atheist has to completely disregard where the information stems from, you don’t even IMAGINE and expect at any rate what is there in the hindu scriptures ( this is a part of the 6th corrolary of logic, that you aren’t aware of your ignorance)

You don’t know how atheism works at all. Atheists are besically scientifical minds, which accept or reject other’s claims, based on the strength of those claims. All we request is some good evidence, and we would be happy to take up any religion. The reason why we are atheists is not some kind of hate towards religions or something like that. The reason why we are atheists is because there is no reason why someone should believe in those religions, since they are not supported by any evidence whatsoever.

@Remember Tomorrow

There are no religions

There are. Christianity, Islam, Buddhism just to name a few.

@Remember Tomorrow

man has created the dogma

That is true, and that’s one of the reasons why many people are atheists.

@Remember Tomorrow

bible says do not kill that doesn’t mean an amoralist can go on by saying that ("ah, it’s in the bible, so it must be ‘false’, there will be no punishment thereafter, so let’s kill for this and that).

So you take the example of morality. That is a usual card played by theists. Do you really think that morality comes from religion? If yes, I strongly advice you to read R. Dawkins’ “The God Delusion” on this matter. If morality depended on the religion, atheists would be baby-eating monsters. Yet somehow, they aren’t. On the other hand, it means that theists are baby-eating monsters, but they don’t practice such “morality”, since they have faith in the bible. You should be realising the nonsense of the assumption that morality comes from the bible.

Anyway, on the matter…

@Remember Tomorrow

I have explained in much detail why we must be 50% in a previous message, take your time to read it.

I’ve also in detail explained the analogy with the dinosaur. Take your time to read it.

@Remember Tomorrow

Then we can’t prove LD either cause our mind “fakes” us.

You are oversimplyfing our statements regarding the inaccuracy of our mind. What we have in mind is that anecdotal evidence doesn’t count. It doesn’t count because it’s damn easy to fool the human mind. There have been tons of people who claim to have been abducted by aliens, there are tons of people who have seen God, there are tons of people who claim that they have experienced something dubious (i.e. OBE’s). Yet are we supposed to believe that alien abductions, visits of deities and these dubious things really exist? Our mind is very inaccurate. We exaggerate things, we lie unconsciously, without realising it. We see patterns everywhere and we apply them to our daily Lives.

What do you see below?

Do you think you see a smiley face? NO. You merely see two dots, followed by a bent line on a yellow background.

Our brain makes these things familiar to us. When we see something new, we might say - “Oh, I remember that! I have seen it somewhere!” even though you have never seen such a thing. The face on Mars is a good example. Later imaging showed that it is simply a mountain, even though many movies were made regarding the aliens that have supposedly “built” this face. We are dumb and we must live with this thought, as sad as it might sound. Our personal experiences are ignored by the scientific community for a good reason.

However, you simplify this argument to the extent that you start talking like: “Well, how do you know what you see and what science says is true then?”. You must understand that this is an utter oversimplification. We do have senses that we perceive reality with, even though sometimes inaccurately (Green Dragon gave a nice example with water refraction). We also do have machines and computers that perceive reality better than us and gives us better definitions (that’s why I ask you to do your OBE research in laboratory conditions). Science mainly use these computers and machines to do the work. They are precise and I see no reason to doubt the results.

[Remember_Tomorrow]

Man, just leave it, no offense and sorry for that. You’re defining yourself through supposedly disproving me, it is you that simply engaged the very words “religion” “god” etc in the conversation. I don’t care for these terms, you base your whole way of thinking on being “anti-these terms”, disproving the disproval isn’t proving on itself. This is NOT deduction. There is Islam, Christianity, Judaism only for you, I never made metaphysic claims but skeptical ones. Or otherwise quote these claims. You have taken a random totally non-definable by definition concept just as gud or so in the same way theists do, and you base your logic on pretty much this non-logic. I never referred anywhere to simplistic concepts such as religious books etc, for me there are no religious books, I can’t phrase that more simply, if I find a tiny piece of logic inside ( for instance just as “don’t kill” or so) I don’t dismiss it because it’s in a “religious book”, and do not even try to connect this to my claims for OBE and start me over and over and over again, you must do this by will.

Our mind is very inaccurate

so why doubt at all anyway? lol

We see patterns everywhere and we apply them to our daily Lives.

true

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_Cave

also what triggered Plato to conclude on this or the example he used for that in “Republic”:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_Er (NDE)

[GreenDragon]

[mod]
It’s with regret that I lock this topic. As I said in an earlier edit, the forum is first and foremost a community of lucid dreamers. The debate in this topic is repeatedly becoming heated and I sense not going anywhere. In the interests of keeping the atmosphere here friendly, I will lock it.

[/mod]