Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Reductionist Fallacy: Religious Delusion

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 3:52:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
As someone who is generally opposed to religion philosophically and empirically, I really hate to reduce people's religious experience claims to hallucinations or delusions. It honestly doesn't seem like a valid response to these claims.

In fact, I think this is laziness and incompetence on behalf of the atheists and skeptics. It's not a very well thought out rebuttal to such experiences. It's like they just spout "delusion!" gleefully as if that's the slightest bit convincing or profound of an answer. Seriously, how often do YOU accidentally hallucinate or experience temporary delusion that skews reality? If one were to believe in Pink Unicornism deeply enough, could they just as easily manifest hallucinatory entities into reality?

Since many of these people are sincere, we need to inquire deeply as to what is actually occuring here.

What is going on in their psyche at that moment.
What is happening around them.
What preconceived beliefs do they have.
Is it a phenomenal natural event.
Does each individual create their own authentic reality.

Thoughts?

.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 4:05:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 3:52:56 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
As someone who is generally opposed to religion philosophically and empirically, I really hate to reduce people's religious experience claims to hallucinations or delusions. It honestly doesn't seem like a valid response to these claims.

In fact, I think this is laziness and incompetence on behalf of the atheists and skeptics. It's not a very well thought out rebuttal to such experiences. It's like they just spout "delusion!" gleefully as if that's the slightest bit convincing or profound of an answer. Seriously, how often do YOU accidentally hallucinate or experience temporary delusion that skews reality? If one were to believe in Pink Unicornism deeply enough, could they just as easily manifest hallucinatory entities into reality?

Since many of these people are sincere, we need to inquire deeply as to what is actually occuring here.

What is going on in their psyche at that moment.
What is happening around them.
What preconceived beliefs do they have.
Is it a phenomenal natural event.
Does each individual create their own authentic reality.

Thoughts?




.
.
.

It's easier to make fun of someone than to refute someone's beliefs through reason and logic.

I think it's safe to say that any atheist who accuses religious people of hallucinating or being deluded, we can stop taking those atheists seriously.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 4:15:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 3:52:56 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
As someone who is generally opposed to religion philosophically and empirically, I really hate to reduce people's religious experience claims to hallucinations or delusions. It honestly doesn't seem like a valid response to these claims.

In fact, I think this is laziness and incompetence on behalf of the atheists and skeptics. It's not a very well thought out rebuttal to such experiences. It's like they just spout "delusion!" gleefully as if that's the slightest bit convincing or profound of an answer. Seriously, how often do YOU accidentally hallucinate or experience temporary delusion that skews reality? If one were to believe in Pink Unicornism deeply enough, could they just as easily manifest hallucinatory entities into reality?

Since many of these people are sincere, we need to inquire deeply as to what is actually occuring here.

What is going on in their psyche at that moment.
What is happening around them.
What preconceived beliefs do they have.
Is it a phenomenal natural event.
Does each individual create their own authentic reality.

Thoughts?




.
.
.

Often. I think that's kind of the point behind the whole idea of religious experience being delusional. All humans- atheists included-often have delusions and hallucinations that they are not aware of. We think we hear one thing, but really it was another. We believe we remember this happening, but really it was something else. We really have quite a terrible capacity to remember details of events in our life with clarity- even momentous ones. And for the religious, with the preconceived notion of the supernatural being a possibility, it makes it all to easy to attribute strange perceptions and memories to the supernatural.

Of course, when someone simply says, "delusion!" it is rhetoric and it isn't very productive- but it isn't at all far from the truth.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Lickdafoot
Posts: 5,599
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 4:18:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I agree that it's rather vapid to pass off every religious experience as a delusion.

Out of Body experiences are considered a type of delusion (disassociation) as well, even though countless of people have experienced it and have supposedly observed things going on around them that couldn't have been known if they were simply hallucinating.

I do think however that most religious experiences cannot be observed in a very objective way because it is generally spontaneous and exclusive to one or very few people. If you haven't witnessed something firsthand then you really would not be able to do much more than speculate about it.
WAKE UP AND READ THIS: http://www.debate.org...
Lickdafoot
Posts: 5,599
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 4:25:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 4:18:50 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
I agree that it's rather vapid to pass off every religious experience as a delusion.

Out of Body experiences are considered a type of delusion (disassociation) as well, even though countless of people have experienced it and have supposedly observed things going on around them that couldn't have been known if they were simply hallucinating.

I do think however that most religious experiences cannot be observed in a very objective way because it is generally spontaneous and exclusive to one or very few people. If you haven't witnessed something firsthand then you really would not be able to do much more than speculate about it.

By this, I am not saying that out of body experiences are necessarily religious, but rather they are both a natural occurence that we haven't yet been able to explain.
WAKE UP AND READ THIS: http://www.debate.org...
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 4:30:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 4:25:40 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:18:50 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
I agree that it's rather vapid to pass off every religious experience as a delusion.

Out of Body experiences are considered a type of delusion (disassociation) as well, even though countless of people have experienced it and have supposedly observed things going on around them that couldn't have been known if they were simply hallucinating.

I do think however that most religious experiences cannot be observed in a very objective way because it is generally spontaneous and exclusive to one or very few people. If you haven't witnessed something firsthand then you really would not be able to do much more than speculate about it.

By this, I am not saying that out of body experiences are necessarily religious, but rather they are both a natural occurence that we haven't yet been able to explain.

Well, there are explanations- perhaps not ones with consensus. I would just hope that people pick the explanations that most match what we know to be true about the world. It seems some people would prefer to believe in the most unlikely explanation (according to what we have evidence for) which is that it is an "out of body" experience. I would say it is more of an "out of rational mind" experience... but I don't know that. It is just the most likely.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Lickdafoot
Posts: 5,599
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 4:47:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 4:30:02 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:25:40 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:18:50 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
I agree that it's rather vapid to pass off every religious experience as a delusion.

Out of Body experiences are considered a type of delusion (disassociation) as well, even though countless of people have experienced it and have supposedly observed things going on around them that couldn't have been known if they were simply hallucinating.

I do think however that most religious experiences cannot be observed in a very objective way because it is generally spontaneous and exclusive to one or very few people. If you haven't witnessed something firsthand then you really would not be able to do much more than speculate about it.

By this, I am not saying that out of body experiences are necessarily religious, but rather they are both a natural occurence that we haven't yet been able to explain.

Well, there are explanations- perhaps not ones with consensus. I would just hope that people pick the explanations that most match what we know to be true about the world. It seems some people would prefer to believe in the most unlikely explanation (according to what we have evidence for) which is that it is an "out of body" experience. I would say it is more of an "out of rational mind" experience... but I don't know that. It is just the most likely.

Could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by that? how does calling it "out of rational mind" more effectively explain what is happening? These people are perceiving things from a separate perspective than their body.
WAKE UP AND READ THIS: http://www.debate.org...
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 4:54:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 4:47:15 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:30:02 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:25:40 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:18:50 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
I agree that it's rather vapid to pass off every religious experience as a delusion.

Out of Body experiences are considered a type of delusion (disassociation) as well, even though countless of people have experienced it and have supposedly observed things going on around them that couldn't have been known if they were simply hallucinating.

I do think however that most religious experiences cannot be observed in a very objective way because it is generally spontaneous and exclusive to one or very few people. If you haven't witnessed something firsthand then you really would not be able to do much more than speculate about it.

By this, I am not saying that out of body experiences are necessarily religious, but rather they are both a natural occurence that we haven't yet been able to explain.

Well, there are explanations- perhaps not ones with consensus. I would just hope that people pick the explanations that most match what we know to be true about the world. It seems some people would prefer to believe in the most unlikely explanation (according to what we have evidence for) which is that it is an "out of body" experience. I would say it is more of an "out of rational mind" experience... but I don't know that. It is just the most likely.

Could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by that? how does calling it "out of rational mind" more effectively explain what is happening? These people are perceiving things from a separate perspective than their body.

The Fool: the problem here lickda is that is seem you are saying well if somebody came and said they seen zombies, how do you account for them seeing zombies? and the answer, No they have to account for the existence of zombie not others. its thier claim.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 4:56:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 4:54:25 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:47:15 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:30:02 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:25:40 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:18:50 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
I agree that it's rather vapid to pass off every religious experience as a delusion.

Out of Body experiences are considered a type of delusion (disassociation) as well, even though countless of people have experienced it and have supposedly observed things going on around them that couldn't have been known if they were simply hallucinating.

I do think however that most religious experiences cannot be observed in a very objective way because it is generally spontaneous and exclusive to one or very few people. If you haven't witnessed something firsthand then you really would not be able to do much more than speculate about it.

By this, I am not saying that out of body experiences are necessarily religious, but rather they are both a natural occurence that we haven't yet been able to explain.

Well, there are explanations- perhaps not ones with consensus. I would just hope that people pick the explanations that most match what we know to be true about the world. It seems some people would prefer to believe in the most unlikely explanation (according to what we have evidence for) which is that it is an "out of body" experience. I would say it is more of an "out of rational mind" experience... but I don't know that. It is just the most likely.

Could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by that? how does calling it "out of rational mind" more effectively explain what is happening? These people are perceiving things from a separate perspective than their body.

The Fool: the problem here lickda is that is seem you are saying well if somebody came and said they seen zombies, how do you account for them seeing zombies? and the answer, No they have to account for the existence of zombie not others. its thier claim.

A simple reason why we should think it completly irrational, is because how could they see there body, WITH NO FRIGGIN EYES!!!!
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:04:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
What is going on in their psyche at that moment. -
Usually fear, disorientation, a sense of disconnectedness from one source and connectedness to another.

These seemingly supernatural events seem to be as natural and as common as anything else in some areas of the world. I think that everyone does create their own interpretations of reality. For instance, while one person may think about money all the time and eventually become rich - they may attribute it to the Law of Attraction. Whilst a Christian might pretext the same thought to "the lord" and attributed his monetary manifestation to prayer and the lord. Whilst another person might perform a ritual in which they cast a spell upon themselves by chanting over and over, and attribute their eventual monetary situation to the moon goddess or satan or what have you. You get the drift.

I think that the mind is very receptive to conditioning and emotion.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:05:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Let me make clear:

I don't believe the religions are true.
I don't believe the apparitions are real or authentic religious figures.
I don't believe that they are hallucinations. There's no evidence for that either.
I don't believe that every single one is a liar.

I really don't claim anything. I just think it's an issue that needs to be examined and thought about more carefully. I don't have an answer.

I would like to see if anyone can come up with any valid ways to dismiss religious experience. As of yet, the hallucination theory is baseless and has no evidence. That response comes from a flaw in modern skeptics thinking.

.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:07:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 5:04:32 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
What is going on in their psyche at that moment. -
Usually fear, disorientation, a sense of disconnectedness from one source and connectedness to another.

These seemingly supernatural events seem to be as natural and as common as anything else in some areas of the world. I think that everyone does create their own interpretations of reality. For instance, while one person may think about money all the time and eventually become rich - they may attribute it to the Law of Attraction. Whilst a Christian might pretext the same thought to "the lord" and attributed his monetary manifestation to prayer and the lord. Whilst another person might perform a ritual in which they cast a spell upon themselves by chanting over and over, and attribute their eventual monetary situation to the moon goddess or satan or what have you. You get the drift.

I think that the mind is very receptive to conditioning and emotion.

Good answer. :)

.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:12:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It doesn't change it being a delusion, no matter how much depth you go into it. The Freudian argument against religion (and the moral argument) basically states religion is a delusion, but does it through logical and empirical reasoning. Hume's "On Miracles" (chapter eleven of his book I think) basically goes on about how people who believe in miracles are listening to a delusion, or an irrational answer. If people say "It's a delusion" with no reasoning, then yes, it is poor. However, there is (usually) a reason behind it.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:16:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I would like to add that i have had various "supernatural" experiences. One of which was a time when i went into a daydream and viewed a friend (look up remote viewing) who i had no idea of his location, hadn't spoken to him in months.. etc.. I called him after the 'experience' and it turns out everything I saw in my 'vision' was exactly in line with what he was doing, where he was, and all that. Thing is, i could never logically explain the how and why to this process, I only know that it DID happen.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:17:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 5:12:07 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
It doesn't change it being a delusion, no matter how much depth you go into it. The Freudian argument against religion (and the moral argument) basically states religion is a delusion, but does it through logical and empirical reasoning. Hume's "On Miracles" (chapter eleven of his book I think) basically goes on about how people who believe in miracles are listening to a delusion, or an irrational answer. If people say "It's a delusion" with no reasoning, then yes, it is poor. However, there is (usually) a reason behind it.

Atheists are commonly claiming to be in the minority. Doesn't it seem pretty arrogant to claim that the vast majority of the world are all deluded, and the minority of atheists are the only ones who see clearly?
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:21:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
And i consider myself to be very grounded. I'm not the type to burn incense and smoke pot all day listening to the indigo girls waiting for the government to collapse. I have a collection of many strange experiences that i've had and can explain in great detail, but the only response i ever get is that it is either shrugged off, or i am concluded to be slightly off kilter or psychotic.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:24:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 5:17:04 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/16/2012 5:12:07 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
It doesn't change it being a delusion, no matter how much depth you go into it. The Freudian argument against religion (and the moral argument) basically states religion is a delusion, but does it through logical and empirical reasoning. Hume's "On Miracles" (chapter eleven of his book I think) basically goes on about how people who believe in miracles are listening to a delusion, or an irrational answer. If people say "It's a delusion" with no reasoning, then yes, it is poor. However, there is (usually) a reason behind it.

Atheists are commonly claiming to be in the minority. Doesn't it seem pretty arrogant to claim that the vast majority of the world are all deluded, and the minority of atheists are the only ones who see clearly?

It's like everyone sees themselves as more enlightened that everyone else in some way. Every group has their ideas, but I think true change comes from sticking to a set of beliefs and just ending up wherever it takes you, rather than staying on a ground level so-to-speak and not being able to choose a culture or faith because you find things wrong with each one. This is the point I feel that I am at now, it's like... I'll never find the infallible solution to life so I might as well adhere to certain practices that i feel comfortable with.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:29:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 5:16:19 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
I would like to add that i have had various "supernatural" experiences. One of which was a time when i went into a daydream and viewed a friend (look up remote viewing) who i had no idea of his location, hadn't spoken to him in months.. etc.. I called him after the 'experience' and it turns out everything I saw in my 'vision' was exactly in line with what he was doing, where he was, and all that. Thing is, i could never logically explain the how and why to this process, I only know that it DID happen.

Remote viewing, nice! That is one I actually find to be a real and valid, as well as explainable experience. I've seen books at Barnes & Noble that actually describe how to remote view and how it works.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:31:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 5:16:19 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
I would like to add that i have had various "supernatural" experiences. One of which was a time when i went into a daydream and viewed a friend (look up remote viewing) who i had no idea of his location, hadn't spoken to him in months.. etc.. I called him after the 'experience' and it turns out everything I saw in my 'vision' was exactly in line with what he was doing, where he was, and all that. Thing is, i could never logically explain the how and why to this process, I only know that it DID happen.

You should check out "Men Who Stare at Goats" (the book, not the movie).
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:37:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I feel that many people argue with me that remote viewing is not possible as it has no scientific basis. They want proof without actually doing the work to get the proof... Arrogance man, it's a shame because i believe people could really find out some great things about life but it's as if they refuse to put in effort. I mean as a child, didn't we figure out about gravity before we had the empirical evidence? The only way to prove certain things is through yourself, and not to rely on others for the 'evidence'.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:46:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Since we're sharing supernatural experiences, I will share mine:

When I was a child I had the ability to either float or slow down time. Here's why. I lived in a house with carpeted stairs. I used to play on them a lot by either sliding down them or jumping from top to bottom. I also happen to possess very vivid and accurate memories of myself going all the way back to age 3 or 4, I shock my parents.

One time, while jumping off the stairs I floated in mid-air as if I was in slow motion or hovering. I realized what I just did and was amazed, so I immediately tried to do it again only to just fall straight to the ground at the speed of gravity. I never attempted to replicate that experience since, perhaps I should try again.

.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:54:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 5:46:02 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Since we're sharing supernatural experiences, I will share mine:

When I was a child I had the ability to either float or slow down time. Here's why. I lived in a house with carpeted stairs. I used to play on them a lot by either sliding down them or jumping from top to bottom. I also happen to possess very vivid and accurate memories of myself going all the way back to age 3 or 4, I shock my parents.

One time, while jumping off the stairs I floated in mid-air as if I was in slow motion or hovering. I realized what I just did and was amazed, so I immediately tried to do it again only to just fall straight to the ground at the speed of gravity. I never attempted to replicate that experience since, perhaps I should try again.


Yeah, i have very vivid memories that date back to age 2 for sure and possibly even 1.

A more generic seeming experience i often have is that I can essentially decide if i want to view auras, but i'm not really that good at it and i don't practice that much. It usually just requires me to close my eyes and do a general void meditation for between 30 and 90 minutes. When i open my eyes and remain still my vision will include regular reality plus very solid auras while remaining still. Normally i can hold my hand out in front of me and determine where the sun is because i can see energetic beams coming from my fingertips and they point to the sun as if they are connected to it. This is a very subtle attribute but it is there, and it can be tested by walking outside and looking to see where the sun is.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:56:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
And i mentioned my aural ability earlier today and was asked about my most recent CAT scans. Haha, i really thought more highly of e-intellectuals.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 5:58:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 4:05:00 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/16/2012 3:52:56 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
As someone who is generally opposed to religion philosophically and empirically, I really hate to reduce people's religious experience claims to hallucinations or delusions. It honestly doesn't seem like a valid response to these claims.

In fact, I think this is laziness and incompetence on behalf of the atheists and skeptics. It's not a very well thought out rebuttal to such experiences. It's like they just spout "delusion!" gleefully as if that's the slightest bit convincing or profound of an answer. Seriously, how often do YOU accidentally hallucinate or experience temporary delusion that skews reality? If one were to believe in Pink Unicornism deeply enough, could they just as easily manifest hallucinatory entities into reality?

Since many of these people are sincere, we need to inquire deeply as to what is actually occuring here.

What is going on in their psyche at that moment.
What is happening around them.
What preconceived beliefs do they have.
Is it a phenomenal natural event.
Does each individual create their own authentic reality.

Thoughts?




.
.
.

It's easier to make fun of someone than to refute someone's beliefs through reason and logic.

I think it's safe to say that any atheist who accuses religious people of hallucinating or being deluded, we can stop taking those atheists seriously.

You are right, we should take people who believe they have had supernatural experiences with magical spirits from other dimensions way more seriously than rational skeptics who believe they may be mistaken.

Do you ever stop and think about the things you type?
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 6:01:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 5:58:19 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:05:00 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/16/2012 3:52:56 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
As someone who is generally opposed to religion philosophically and empirically, I really hate to reduce people's religious experience claims to hallucinations or delusions. It honestly doesn't seem like a valid response to these claims.

In fact, I think this is laziness and incompetence on behalf of the atheists and skeptics. It's not a very well thought out rebuttal to such experiences. It's like they just spout "delusion!" gleefully as if that's the slightest bit convincing or profound of an answer. Seriously, how often do YOU accidentally hallucinate or experience temporary delusion that skews reality? If one were to believe in Pink Unicornism deeply enough, could they just as easily manifest hallucinatory entities into reality?

Since many of these people are sincere, we need to inquire deeply as to what is actually occuring here.

What is going on in their psyche at that moment.
What is happening around them.
What preconceived beliefs do they have.
Is it a phenomenal natural event.
Does each individual create their own authentic reality.

Thoughts?




.
.
.

It's easier to make fun of someone than to refute someone's beliefs through reason and logic.

I think it's safe to say that any atheist who accuses religious people of hallucinating or being deluded, we can stop taking those atheists seriously.

You are right, we should take people who believe they have had supernatural experiences with magical spirits from other dimensions way more seriously than rational skeptics who believe they may be mistaken.

Do you ever stop and think about the things you type?

Rational skeptics may be less intelligent than other people because people who have these supernatural experiences are totally rational people that totally believe in math, science, and logic but ALSO have cool experiences. It's like being rational +. If you aren't rational + then you're reducing yourself to the more boring side of life.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 6:04:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 6:01:55 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 4/16/2012 5:58:19 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:05:00 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/16/2012 3:52:56 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
As someone who is generally opposed to religion philosophically and empirically, I really hate to reduce people's religious experience claims to hallucinations or delusions. It honestly doesn't seem like a valid response to these claims.

In fact, I think this is laziness and incompetence on behalf of the atheists and skeptics. It's not a very well thought out rebuttal to such experiences. It's like they just spout "delusion!" gleefully as if that's the slightest bit convincing or profound of an answer. Seriously, how often do YOU accidentally hallucinate or experience temporary delusion that skews reality? If one were to believe in Pink Unicornism deeply enough, could they just as easily manifest hallucinatory entities into reality?

Since many of these people are sincere, we need to inquire deeply as to what is actually occuring here.

What is going on in their psyche at that moment.
What is happening around them.
What preconceived beliefs do they have.
Is it a phenomenal natural event.
Does each individual create their own authentic reality.

Thoughts?




.
.
.

It's easier to make fun of someone than to refute someone's beliefs through reason and logic.

I think it's safe to say that any atheist who accuses religious people of hallucinating or being deluded, we can stop taking those atheists seriously.

You are right, we should take people who believe they have had supernatural experiences with magical spirits from other dimensions way more seriously than rational skeptics who believe they may be mistaken.

Do you ever stop and think about the things you type?

Rational skeptics may be less intelligent than other people because people who have these supernatural experiences are totally rational people that totally believe in math, science, and logic but ALSO have cool experiences. It's like being rational +. If you aren't rational + then you're reducing yourself to the more boring side of life.

There are no "cool experiences" an Christian can have that an Atheist can't, so your argument is moot.
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 6:06:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 6:04:43 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2012 6:01:55 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 4/16/2012 5:58:19 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:05:00 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/16/2012 3:52:56 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
As someone who is generally opposed to religion philosophically and empirically, I really hate to reduce people's religious experience claims to hallucinations or delusions. It honestly doesn't seem like a valid response to these claims.

In fact, I think this is laziness and incompetence on behalf of the atheists and skeptics. It's not a very well thought out rebuttal to such experiences. It's like they just spout "delusion!" gleefully as if that's the slightest bit convincing or profound of an answer. Seriously, how often do YOU accidentally hallucinate or experience temporary delusion that skews reality? If one were to believe in Pink Unicornism deeply enough, could they just as easily manifest hallucinatory entities into reality?

Since many of these people are sincere, we need to inquire deeply as to what is actually occuring here.

What is going on in their psyche at that moment.
What is happening around them.
What preconceived beliefs do they have.
Is it a phenomenal natural event.
Does each individual create their own authentic reality.

Thoughts?




.
.
.

It's easier to make fun of someone than to refute someone's beliefs through reason and logic.

I think it's safe to say that any atheist who accuses religious people of hallucinating or being deluded, we can stop taking those atheists seriously.

You are right, we should take people who believe they have had supernatural experiences with magical spirits from other dimensions way more seriously than rational skeptics who believe they may be mistaken.

Do you ever stop and think about the things you type?

Rational skeptics may be less intelligent than other people because people who have these supernatural experiences are totally rational people that totally believe in math, science, and logic but ALSO have cool experiences. It's like being rational +. If you aren't rational + then you're reducing yourself to the more boring side of life.

There are no "cool experiences" an Christian can have that an Atheist can't, so your argument is moot.

Exactly, anyone can have the experiences. That is my point, i fail to see how it is moot at this point.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 6:07:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 5:58:19 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:05:00 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/16/2012 3:52:56 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
As someone who is generally opposed to religion philosophically and empirically, I really hate to reduce people's religious experience claims to hallucinations or delusions. It honestly doesn't seem like a valid response to these claims.

In fact, I think this is laziness and incompetence on behalf of the atheists and skeptics. It's not a very well thought out rebuttal to such experiences. It's like they just spout "delusion!" gleefully as if that's the slightest bit convincing or profound of an answer. Seriously, how often do YOU accidentally hallucinate or experience temporary delusion that skews reality? If one were to believe in Pink Unicornism deeply enough, could they just as easily manifest hallucinatory entities into reality?

Since many of these people are sincere, we need to inquire deeply as to what is actually occuring here.

What is going on in their psyche at that moment.
What is happening around them.
What preconceived beliefs do they have.
Is it a phenomenal natural event.
Does each individual create their own authentic reality.

Thoughts?




.
.
.

It's easier to make fun of someone than to refute someone's beliefs through reason and logic.

I think it's safe to say that any atheist who accuses religious people of hallucinating or being deluded, we can stop taking those atheists seriously.

You are right, we should take people who believe they have had supernatural experiences with magical spirits from other dimensions way more seriously than rational skeptics who believe they may be mistaken.

Do you ever stop and think about the things you type?

Yes, of course I do. Do you?

The difference is, Theists have evidence to support their claims, and Atheists don't so many of them resort to shifting the burden of proof.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 6:40:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 6:07:40 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/16/2012 5:58:19 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:05:00 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/16/2012 3:52:56 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
As someone who is generally opposed to religion philosophically and empirically, I really hate to reduce people's religious experience claims to hallucinations or delusions. It honestly doesn't seem like a valid response to these claims.

In fact, I think this is laziness and incompetence on behalf of the atheists and skeptics. It's not a very well thought out rebuttal to such experiences. It's like they just spout "delusion!" gleefully as if that's the slightest bit convincing or profound of an answer. Seriously, how often do YOU accidentally hallucinate or experience temporary delusion that skews reality? If one were to believe in Pink Unicornism deeply enough, could they just as easily manifest hallucinatory entities into reality?

Since many of these people are sincere, we need to inquire deeply as to what is actually occuring here.

What is going on in their psyche at that moment.
What is happening around them.
What preconceived beliefs do they have.
Is it a phenomenal natural event.
Does each individual create their own authentic reality.

Thoughts?




.
.
.

It's easier to make fun of someone than to refute someone's beliefs through reason and logic.

I think it's safe to say that any atheist who accuses religious people of hallucinating or being deluded, we can stop taking those atheists seriously.

You are right, we should take people who believe they have had supernatural experiences with magical spirits from other dimensions way more seriously than rational skeptics who believe they may be mistaken.

Do you ever stop and think about the things you type?

Yes, of course I do. Do you?

The difference is, Theists have evidence to support their claims, and Atheists don't so many of them resort to shifting the burden of proof.

"Theists have evidence to support their claims"

Yes, and UFO researches have "evidence" to support their claims, same with people who believe in Big Foot. The question is, is it valid evidence which can only be explained if it happened exactly the way the person in question said it did?

"Atheists don't so many of them resort to shifting the burden of proof."

The burden of proof is on the one claiming their experience was supernatural. You would be shifting the burden by claiming Atheists have a burden by simply being skeptical about these claims, and coming up with more reasonable alternatives which fit more in line with reality and the way it is.

Imagine a scenario, where I said that you may be mistaken about your claim that there is a being who follows you around all day and laughs at you who can't interact with the physical world, or have the physical world interact with him. I'm simply rebutting the person (you, in this case) who has the burden out of proof already due to my skepticism. There is no logic in placing the burden on the one being skeptical about an extraordinary claim, that's simply absurd.

Basically, if you can provide convincing evidence that these experiences are supernatural then I'm all ears. If you are just going to bare assert it, then what's the point?
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2012 7:31:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/16/2012 4:47:15 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:30:02 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:25:40 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
At 4/16/2012 4:18:50 PM, Lickdafoot wrote:
I agree that it's rather vapid to pass off every religious experience as a delusion.

Out of Body experiences are considered a type of delusion (disassociation) as well, even though countless of people have experienced it and have supposedly observed things going on around them that couldn't have been known if they were simply hallucinating.

I do think however that most religious experiences cannot be observed in a very objective way because it is generally spontaneous and exclusive to one or very few people. If you haven't witnessed something firsthand then you really would not be able to do much more than speculate about it.

By this, I am not saying that out of body experiences are necessarily religious, but rather they are both a natural occurence that we haven't yet been able to explain.

Well, there are explanations- perhaps not ones with consensus. I would just hope that people pick the explanations that most match what we know to be true about the world. It seems some people would prefer to believe in the most unlikely explanation (according to what we have evidence for) which is that it is an "out of body" experience. I would say it is more of an "out of rational mind" experience... but I don't know that. It is just the most likely.

Could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by that? how does calling it "out of rational mind" more effectively explain what is happening? These people are perceiving things from a separate perspective than their body.

Because we understand the nature of mind- at the very least, we know it exists. We have no real evidence of a "soul" which can leave the body- we have no evidence of a soul at all. We have no point of reference, no body of knowledge, which would back up the claim that people leave their bodies. I would prefer to take the more likely explanation than one which forces me to rethink all of human knowledge about the world- namely, we don't have real evidence that supernatural things such as this exist.

Religion exists- and most religions (as far as I can tell) believe that humans have souls which can and will leave their body. That is the meme. So we choose to use this to explain things we don't understand. But, if the rise of pastafarianism continues as it is, and people chose to believe that people have out-of-body experiences because noodles pulled their psyche from their heads and gave them a new perspective on themselves- wouldn't you find that a bit unlikely?

As usual with religion and the supernatural, it is a lack of evidence which turns me away. There is no reason for me to believe that our "souls" can leave our body and let us see our own bodies from afar- I would first have to accept that souls are real, which I don't. I have had vivid hallucinations in my life- both on and off drugs -and I find that the less I believe in souls and spirits and other supernatural things, the less I see it. It seems too convenient.

When people believed in fairies, they saw fairies. Before UFO movies were made, nobody saw UFO's. People believe souls can leave bodies, they experience it. Our minds are powerful and also faulty.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.