Nondualism vs Dualism

[Won2blv]

Do you agree that we're not ACTUALLY experiencing the actual sights we see, the smells we smell, and the noises we hear, but rather we are experiencing a slightly delayed version that our consciousness creates? Almost like a movie production and we are the only guest invited.

Yes. All of reality is filtered through our senses.

But here's the thing. If 1000's of people (that are not suffering from some mental illness) all examine the same coffee mug, with some minor discrepancies, you will get very close descriptions. They are using their senses, as flawed as they are, to describe something that they all can agree exists in reality.

With your, and my Ayahuasca experiences, there is no way to relates those to anything that exists in reality.

Yes, I agree that a schizophrenic is not experiencing reality from the viewpoint of one agreed upon consensus, but I do believe that their consciousness created a real image or experience and that the image or experience is based on some kind of root of reality, or else it wouldn't exist. Maybe the consciousness is creating a false image, but that image may be a short cut the brain takes to express a feeling. So in my opinion, I believe it would be better for a schizophrenic to embrace their visions with the knowledge that it is their special experience. But only if they have the mental capacity to understand that there is still one general reality

You are just wrong on this. It is almost certain, that schizophrenics are not experiencing something in reality.

As far as allowing schizophrenics to 'embrace their visions' is cruel, and quite possibly dangerous to the embrace their visions and to other people.

And I wasn't saying you completely agreed with me, I just thought it interesting that you had similar epiphanies with just a different narrative.

But the difference is, you are the one adding a whole bunch of stuff that is not in evidence. So, you are the one being irrational about your experiences, I am basing mine on actual evidence.

I guess the point I'm trying to make, is that my experience led me to believe in a narrative of my creation story from the big bang forward. Because even though I believe that at the big bang there was immaterial (non-physical matter) higher beings, I know there was definitely no higher beings of a material (physical matter) form. And I know I'm not the only human that has striven to tell a tale to myself from creation until present day. I seek a narrative the same that BILLIONS of other humans seek it. Mine just happens to align with Mormonism. And that is humorous to me because I spent my whole life growing up in Utah a mormon hater.

So that is real to me. For some odd reason, I relate to so much of Joseph Smith's life story and beliefs. And this came out of nowhere about 2 years ago. The entire experience is subjective, I get that, but it is still real to me

[The Grand Nudger]

It was real to you beforehand.  None of this has anything to do with the drugs you took.  Own it, at least, lol. As with so many other "the drugs made me X" stories, it just isn't so.

[Jehanne]

If the mind is a product of the brain, then it is physically impossible for someone to have a genuine out-of-body experience whereby their "soul" leaves their body and witnesses events in the physical world that they cannot possibly see.  Near-death experiences, if verified under controlled conditions, would be proof of an immaterial soul:

Sam Parnia -- AWAreness during REsuscitation (AWARE) study

Mmmm ... no ... in my opinion ... lots of assumptions being made

Something like a magnet could be seen as having woo before we understood the physical phenomena ....

Apples & Oranges.  Magnetism was observed centuries before Faraday & Maxwell (and, later on, Einstein & Feynman) developed the physical models of it.  In the case of NDEs, such have not even been observed, unlike magnetism.

[madog]

Mmmm ... no ... in my opinion ... lots of assumptions being made

Something like a magnet could be seen as having woo before we understood the physical phenomena ....

Apples & Oranges.  Magnetism was observed centuries before Faraday & Maxwell (and, later on, Einstein & Feynman) developed the physical models of it.  In the case of NDEs, such have not even been observed, unlike magnetism.

If NDE has not been observed how can you say its not apples and oranges?

[Angrboda]

Yes, and how does that falsify materialism?

If the mind is a product of the brain, then it is physically impossible for someone to have a genuine out-of-body experience whereby their "soul" leaves their body and witnesses events in the physical world that they cannot possibly see.  Near-death experiences, if verified under controlled conditions, would be proof of an immaterial soul:

Sam Parnia -- AWAreness during REsuscitation (AWARE) study

Exactly what observables would confirm an NDE and how would they demonstrate the existence of the non-material or the soul?

[Simon Moon]

I guess the point I'm trying to make, is that my experience led me to believe in a narrative of my creation story from the big bang forward. Because even though I believe that at the big bang there was immaterial (non-physical matter) higher beings, I know there was definitely no higher beings of a material (physical matter) form. And I know I'm not the only human that has striven to tell a tale to myself from creation until present day. I seek a narrative the same that BILLIONS of other humans seek it. Mine just happens to align with Mormonism. And that is humorous to me because I spent my whole life growing up in Utah a mormon hater.

So that is real to me. For some odd reason, I relate to so much of Joseph Smith's life story and beliefs. And this came out of nowhere about 2 years ago. The entire experience is subjective, I get that, but it is still real to me

I guess the difference between us, is a care if my beliefs are true, or likely true. I want to have as many true beliefs and as few false beliefs as possible. You don't seem to have this same desire.

At least, you are not using the best set of epidemiological tools known, to get you to true beliefs. Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Zoroastrians, etc, all get to mutually exclusive beliefs, using similar methods as you have; subjective feelings and what is 'real to them'.

I don't care what is 'real to you', I care what is demonstrably real.

As far as Mormonism goes, the only religion that I can think of that is more obviously made up by a single person, is Scientology. The claims of Joseph Smith are so obviously made up, it is laughable. Sorry if this sounds insulting.

[Jehanne]

Apples & Oranges.  Magnetism was observed centuries before Faraday & Maxwell (and, later on, Einstein & Feynman) developed the physical models of it.  In the case of NDEs, such have not even been observed, unlike magnetism.

If NDE has not been observed how can you say its not apples and oranges?

The phenomenon of magnetism was observed centuries before the physical models that both explained, and especially, provided testable predictions of its effects in the physical world.

Let's say that a NDE was observed, that is, someone, such Pam Reynolds, had all of the blood drained from their brain, was flat-lined and was unconscious, and yet, witnessed physical events in the real world while they had no brain activity, a state that is equivalent to clinical death.

What materialistic explanation could there be for such a phenomenon, if it such were ever observed under controlled conditions?

---

If the mind is a product of the brain, then it is physically impossible for someone to have a genuine out-of-body experience whereby their "soul" leaves their body and witnesses events in the physical world that they cannot possibly see.  Near-death experiences, if verified under controlled conditions, would be proof of an immaterial soul:

Sam Parnia -- AWAreness during REsuscitation (AWARE) study

Exactly what observables would confirm an NDE and how would they demonstrate the existence of the non-material or the soul?

Let's say that I could claim to foretell the future, and so, you, an experimenter, decide to test my claim of "prophecy".  I claim that I could predict the outcome of 1,000 tosses of a fair coin that you, a scientist, are going to make in the future.  I write my predictions down, seal those in an envelope and give that to a trusted third party, say, a notary at a prominent law firm.

You, the scientist, conduct the experiment, recording your results, which you then provide to the notary.  In the presence of you, me and many others, the notary opens up my sealed envelope and compares my predictions to your outcomes, and they are exact.  What physical explanation would you propose, especially, if I am able to replicate this experiment with a dozen other scientists on every continent in the World (including, Antarctica)?

[madog]

 

What materialistic explanation could there be for such a phenomenon,  
  

Murder 

[Peebothuhlu]

Uhm... Jehanne?

Neither of those two scenarios in any way are actually similar to "Science'.

Or anything like such.

So... the first thing to ask is;

"Has anything like NDE been tested for?"

"What might even the mechanisms be for NDE's?"

"How might one go about both looking for said events as well as screening out things which might lead to a false positive"

The list goes on.

Just positing 'Dualism' and then... leaving it thre seems... wrong?

Not at work.

[Simon Moon]

If NDE has not been observed how can you say its not apples and oranges?

The phenomenon of magnetism was observed centuries before the physical models that both explained, and especially, provided testable predictions of its effects in the physical world.

Let's say that a NDE was observed, that is, someone, such Pam Reynolds, had all of the blood drained from their brain, was flat-lined and was unconscious, and yet, witnessed physical events in the real world while they had no brain activity, a state that is equivalent to clinical death.

What materialistic explanation could there be for such a phenomenon, if it such were ever observed under controlled conditions?

---

You are passing the burden of proof. It is not up to others to come up with materialistic explanations, if you are the one claiming it has a supernatural explanation. Just because you can't think of a materialistic explanation, does not mean there isn't one. And just because a materialistic cause maybe currently unknown, does not mean that a supernatural explanation for the cause wins by default as the best explanation.

So, lets say the above incident happened as you claim.

How would one go about demonstrating that there is a supernatural cause? How would one go about ruling out all possible natural causes? How would one go about even considering a supernatural cause as a candidate explanation? Wouldn't one have to demonstrate that the supernatural exists, before it can be considered a candidate explanation?

In the history of humanity, anytime a phenomena has been given supernatural explanations as a cause, when the real explanations has been found, it has always been a natural explanation.

Let's say that I could claim to foretell the future, and so, you, an experimenter, decide to test my claim of "prophecy".  I claim that I could predict the outcome of 1,000 tosses of a fair coin that you, a scientist, are going to make in the future.  I write my predictions down, seal those in an envelope and give that to a trusted third party, say, a notary at a prominent law firm.

You, the scientist, conduct the experiment, recording your results, which you then provide to the notary.  In the presence of you, me and many others, the notary opens up my sealed envelope and compares my predictions to your outcomes, and they are exact.  What physical explanation would you propose, especially, if I am able to replicate this experiment with a dozen other scientists on every continent in the World (including, Antarctica)?

Well, at least there is some actual phenomena to look at in this hypothetical.

Isn't interesting though, you have to come up with some extreme hypothetical, that never actually occurs in the real world to make your point?

And once again, you are passing the burden of proof. It would be up to the person claiming that there is a supernatural explanation, to make their case. It is not up to skeptics to prove it is not supernatural.

Houdini performed some of his escapes in the presence of Arthur Conan Doyle (Sherlock Holmes author). After the escape, Doyle examined the ropes and chains and discovered them to be still tied and locked. Since he could not come up with a natural explanation on how Houdini could have performed these escapes, Doyle surmised that Houdini actually could dematerialize.

Was Doyle's thinking flawed? Is so, why isn't yours?