Philosophy Now Forum

So you actually agree that one single NDE should make science abandon its materialistic dogmas

Okay so you have come to a philosophy forum, created a thread called "The Limits of Science", and you spent 10 screen attempting to "appear philosophical" to us. But now your true motivations surface. You are here to proselytize paranormal pseudoscience.


My friendly suggestion to you skakos, is the following. Take this advice seriously. I'm not trying to trick you, I'm trying to help you better communicate to us and for us to better communicate to you. Don't shrink back into a hole of fear and avoid my suggestion as an underhanded attempt to attack you. Okay, having said that, consider the following.

If you want to discuss paranormal phenomenon, you need to make individual threads in regards to individual claims of paranormal activity. So instead of shrouding paranormal claims with lots of philosophical fluff, make a specific thread in regards to remote viewing. A specific thread dedicated to psychic powers. Make a specific thread dedicated to Dean Radin and PSI phenomenon. And we will, as intellectuals, deal with each claim in a targeted and rational manner. Running around like a crazed person with their hair on fire ranting at everyone because they will not "abandon their materialist dogmas!!!" is 1) not sane. 2) Not fulfulling. 3) Not fruitful for discussion. 4) antithetical to communication of ideas.

So the ball is in your court now , skakos. If you so wish, you can continue your paranormal spiritual consciousness rant for another ten pages in this thread. Or you can grow up, and make new threads for particular spiritual claims.

That is, make a new thread and talk to us like a marginally sane adult.

Your choice.
Do what you think is right.

Kuznetzov. Адмирал флота Советского Союза Кузнецов

well said.

I like many others never say never. but the evidence has a small degree of 'substance'
so we hover in zone between belief and disbelief. i have put in many hours on research.. always elusive the result
raised on movies like fire starter. it is easy for the non critical to fall back on that old fob of remote viewing. And as a young lad i fell in love wit drew barrymore
yes she was like 6 or 7 but i was 9 or 10...i thought her mature enough to deal with older men... like 10 lol
i found remote view far less realistic then pyrotechnics which does not require godlike ability of seeing from afar.
with pyro its all burn you fuck.. which is really what many think anyway.

but cannot do. if they could the streets would be awash in ash and bone.

so thank your diety that paranormal; is not [normal]

great movies always have humour. even gladiator had moments of laughter . tasting the meal has them all laughing.
such brutal times when one laughs because the food in not poisened. i give thanks every day. [for timelike curves allow that i might have been born in ad 12 or 2300]
the trick is to balance. that requires experience and skill. In gladiator there us no humour in maximus killing. he does it so well it is beyond skill.
it becomes something close to paranormal.
When skill transcends belief their is the paranormal;.
something the emperor only realizes in last moments.
that a man can be driven into such a corner.
To become the most dangerous of all men . one who does not care.

----------one of the great movie lines . hellboy 1 scene 1 [the us sargent says '3 days ago i had never even heard of para-abnormal']--------------

Kuznetzova wrote:

So you actually agree that one single NDE should make science abandon its materialistic dogmas

Okay so you have come to a philosophy forum, created a thread called "The Limits of Science", and you spent 10 screen attempting to "appear philosophical" to us. But now your true motivations surface. You are here to proselytize paranormal pseudoscience.


My friendly suggestion to you skakos, is the following. Take this advice seriously. I'm not trying to trick you, I'm trying to help you better communicate to us and for us to better communicate to you. Don't shrink back into a hole of fear and avoid my suggestion as an underhanded attempt to attack you. Okay, having said that, consider the following.

If you want to discuss paranormal phenomenon, you need to make individual threads in regards to individual claims of paranormal activity. So instead of shrouding paranormal claims with lots of philosophical fluff, make a specific thread in regards to remote viewing. A specific thread dedicated to psychic powers. Make a specific thread dedicated to Dean Radin and PSI phenomenon. And we will, as intellectuals, deal with each claim in a targeted and rational manner. Running around like a crazed person with their hair on fire ranting at everyone because they will not "abandon their materialist dogmas!!!" is 1) not sane. 2) Not fulfulling. 3) Not fruitful for discussion. 4) antithetical to communication of ideas.

So the ball is in your court now , skakos. If you so wish, you can continue your paranormal spiritual consciousness rant for another ten pages in this thread. Or you can grow up, and make new threads for particular spiritual claims.

That is, make a new thread and talk to us like a marginally sane adult.

Your choice.
Do what you think is right.

In this thread we are discussing the limits of science, as the title says so.
Not acknowledging those limits leads to dogmatism. This is a very important thing to understand.

I will not allow you to dictate how and where I write and - most importantly - WHAT to write.
This is the basis of dogmatism and I am specifically talking AGAINST it!

If you knew anything about how the "paradigm shift" works, then you would undestand why even ONE example which is against a specific theory, makes the theory wrong.
The examples of NDEs were recorded by neurologists, not charlatans. They were recorded in hospitals, not churches. And yet, you find them irrelevant just because... well, just BECAUSE!
There are numerous sources I can provide to you, if you wish to see beyond your dogmatic beliefs.

The ESSENCE of science is to examine EVERYTHING!
And yet, you choose not to examine something.
But labeling this NDEs as "not scientific" does not solve the problem. you just hide the problem under your rag.
You are like the detective who is asked "Why don't you look into the cellar for the body?" and he answers "It is not there", just because he is frightened to look there...

Let science be free. Do not ensalve it to your little "agenda".

technically paranormal to me is not nde.
i classify it in my system like i classify skills.
under tag of of skills and attributes.

While nde is a phenomena /unexplained.

Most will totally ignor my view . being champions of one sort of thinking.
skatos an Kuz are both right and wrong at same time
nde is not denial of materialist science
nor is it proof of any greater reality. it just IS
that i use term such . means yes i give it enough worth to actually BE. a player. so moving one square towards nde. but a proof of anything i step back and science gains a square..
I define paranormal as ' ability to do with mind what would 'normally require physical action or use of instrumentality'.
burning someone alive in street by power of mind just does not seem to happen. This is indicative..
Given mans nature to 'burn 1st then think about it after.

Black holes exist purely through indicative evidence. the theory works and the 'effects are seen. the doer is always cloaded in shaddow.
i have read some of nde reports. but like ufo reports the bulk is garbage. some are truly hard to explain in logical terms.. they are rare though.
humanity is VERY good at bullshyte.. and i have a lot of other things to do and if true will i still have to put out garbage and clean house. yes. so they change little but the mind behind the eyes i use to see things with.

Alright. So he has decided that, yes, he will spend 10 more pages in this thread doing paranormal rants and yelling incoherently about "dogmatic beliefs" and "agendas".

Okay. Well. He has made his decision.

Hjarloprillar wrote: nde is not denial of materialist science
nor is it proof of any greater reality. it just IS
that i use term such . means yes i give it enough worth to actually BE. a player. so moving one square towards nde. but a proof of anything i step back and science gains a square..
I define paranormal as ' ability to do with mind what would 'normally require physical action or use of instrumentality'.

Right. I agree. So in the interests of fluid, coherent communication, it would be in everyone's best interest to start a thread dedicated and focused on NDEs in particular. This tactic of lumping all paranormal phenomena into one big set, and then ranting like a madman about "the dogmas of materialist science" is not fruitful for anyone here at all. It's not even a good method for the alleged proselytizer. That is, whatever it is he is trying to achieve in this thread, he is shooting himself in the foot by going about it this way. I extended a hand of invitation to him, and he recoiled from it. (He interpreted this invitation as me quote-un-quote "dictating" to him how and where to write. I am being an honest clear human being here. I am extending friendly invitation in the interests of enhancing our communication with each other, and I stated that motivation in plain text. I'm repeating this a third time now.)

I gave him a friendly warning and he ignored it and continued his rantings.

skakos wrote:...
If you knew anything about how the "paradigm shift" works, then you would undestand why even ONE example which is against a specific theory, makes the theory wrong. ...

Actually no, this is exactly not how Kuhn said 'paradigm shifts' work in science.

skakos wrote:Science is a great tool.
But can science ("exact science" to be exact) investigate everything?
Can it investigate things which cannot be replicated in a laboratory?
Can it investigate things which cannot be measured?
Can it investigate things which happen only once?
What do you think are limits of Science?

Can we know only bits and pieces of Nature but not the whole picture of Universe ?
Does an “absolute” exist ?
If yes:
Can we know the “absolute - absolute parameters - absolute truth “ ?
Do physical laws forbid to know the “absolute - absolute parameters - absolute truth “ ?
Are there limits of Science?
=====…

Near Death Experience.

2 times i have woke in hospital [fast bikes and drugs]

i never had an nde. wish i had.
death holds no fear

i was given life as a gift. i hang tooth and nail to it not at all.
its a continuing horror and a comedy

prill
---------------------------------------------
Does an “absolute” exist ? [Socratus, my DR mengle]
yes reality is.
the absolute
thus supporting any system
without reality.
no support. no systems or verses.
no talky time like this on net. We know 1% of 1% of what exists.
on a good day

where is time and the srt?

socratus wrote:

skakos wrote:Science is a great tool.
But can science ("exact science" to be exact) investigate everything?
Can it investigate things which cannot be replicated in a laboratory?
Can it investigate things which cannot be measured?
Can it investigate things which happen only once?
What do you think are limits of Science?

Can we know only bits and pieces of Nature but not the whole picture of Universe ?
Does an “absolute” exist ?
If yes:
Can we know the “absolute - absolute parameters - absolute truth “ ?
Do physical laws forbid to know the “absolute - absolute parameters - absolute truth “ ?
Are there limits of Science?
=====…

it seem being smart annoyed

where is time and the srt?

ah socratus is no longer in members..
i'll shutup now but do me fav mods send me his email. earned this no? he is one smart guy
he may have left of own accord.. i dont know specifics nor wish to say them here

i'll be a good boy ;for a bit;

Ok limits of science in regards to christian prayer, NDE's, etc here is one literature on the study of prayer

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16569567

Conclusion:Intercessory prayer itself had no effect on complication-free recovery from CABG, but certainty of receiving intercessory prayer was associated with a higher incidence of complications.

"surgery prayer study" NCBI

will yield on the first page alone multiple studies on prayer/sickness.

I dont care about the conclusion just how the study relates to this topic (and it is a good topic skakos to get ones mind thinking). Compare chemistry to this study. Chemistry: anyone on earth mixes element xyz with element abc and reaction fgh takes place. Reproducible, testable with variables controllable. Then go into a prayer study and other areas (NDE's, telepathy, clairvoyance etc) and the number of KNOWN variables is in the zillions + theres all the UNKNOWN variables so this topic is blurring the line between what can be tested, confirmed etc using the scientific method (but then you go into defining that and what is considered a hard vs soft science etc etc) and what may/may not exist but cannot be either said to or not using the scientific method. Interesting that so many studies have been done on prayer i didnt know till just then...

Jinx
Agree that there are huge areas of 'understanding'
we only touch appon.
but pls desist in any further linking to religion.

i DETEST religion.

no because of god.. but because it is a human system that preys on human hope
.
a vampyr of the soul

Kuznetzova wrote:Alright. So he has decided that, yes, he will spend 10 more pages in this thread doing paranormal rants and yelling incoherently about "dogmatic beliefs" and "agendas".

Okay. Well. He has made his decision.

Actually it is you who have decided not to answer to an extremely interesting topic just because you are afraid of the possible answer. Not too scientific attitude if you ask me...

jinx wrote:... Interesting that so many studies have been done on prayer i didnt know till just then...

Of course you didn't.