(June 29, 2013 at 5:59 am)enrico Wrote: Let me explain better.
By using a false analogy? That is not what qualifies for a better explanation.
Quote:Suppose we are all try to reach the summit of a mountain.
I follow a certain path while you follow a different path.
Now you can say that my choice is not good while yours is good or you are not interested in it.
Here's where you analogy fails.
We KNOW that the summit of every mountain on earth actually exists. We also know that there are likely to be different routes to the summit. And in the end, it is provable that they can be reached.
None of this is true for your claims.
All you have is your claims of personal experience and the claims of personal experience of others. There is no possible way to prove that your experiences map to anything in reality.
I've explored altered states of consciousness for decades, yoga for 10+ year(it really helped my surfing!), meditate for 10+ years, binaurel recordings, fasting, and other methods. I've had some pretty 'profound' experiences, none of which I have any evidence that they are anything more than drastic changes in brain states.
Quote:Is not that someone try to draw you to the top of the summit so you can finally go back in the dimension where you can put an end to the thirst for the unknown that want leave you alone?
Yeah, sure, an anonymous Internet poster has all the ultimate answers
No thanks, I'll think I'll pass on your unsupported claims.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.