@ Ellie, well yeah probably not, but you can’t tell me you don’t have many preset notions about what flying is, and the possibility of it. Even if we currently believe in something, our subconscious plays a big (if not bigger) role. I think there are limits to this though, like you were saying, however I feel like the limits are ones we impose on ourselves. I’m sure if every single person on the earth believes we could fly, then maybe we could..who knows because everyone will probably never all think the same thing. :)
@ Alexa. I’ve watched this a few times before. :) We are very unaware of our surroundings. I mean we know a lot, but a lot of what we know is assumptions, and just a general idea. For example, aren’t refrigerator magnets supposed to be impossible based on the way we look at science? If light slows when it goes through glass, what speeds it back up after it passes? That is also supposed to be impossible. I’m off topic a bit, but our universe does contain at least what seems to be impossibilities.
This also popped up in my news feed a few weeks ago. I feel it relevant:
I frequent the healthy living section of Huffington Post. :)
This wormhole show sounds alot like ‘what the bleep do we know’, a 2 hour long or so movie all on the nature of our universe. I would check it out if you haven’t, many aspects are covered and especially interesting is one of them is about observation, they found that when an observer is watching something happen, the particles involved change from random movements to more synchronized ones. Or vice versa, I can’t recall but I do know they change drastically when an observer is present. I think this has have to do with lab conditions, as alex I think said, where if 10 people agreed the experiment was impossible, it couldn’t happen. but at the same time if the subjects mind was powerful enough they could break through
First I just wanna touch on a huge misconception that I’m seeing pretty frequently…there is a huge difference between “indigo children” and “super-psychics” the latter are the ones reported to have psychic powers such as telepathy and telekinesis. Whereas, indigo’s seem to fit a picture that is different than what the average kid used to be…they are often diagnosed with add/adhd, they learn differently, are more rebellious, and tend to be very smart despite doing poorly in today’s schools.
That is the episode that covers super-psychics and indigo children if you watch that you can learn the difference.
Next which is something Jeff touched on I think and goes a long with what Alex was saying about belief. Also, this brings a lot of what I believe is as close to proving some of these seemingly impossible theories.
In quantum physics there is a theory called the wave-duality theorem which was come up with after the findings of an experiment that has been replicated many times called “the double slit experiment.” The theory states that all matter exists as both a wave and a particle. When a particle is observed it acts as a particle, but when it is unobserved it becomes a wave and can go through other matter. Watch the video explaining the experiment.
Also there was a blog post on this topic
Other theories such as string theory are beginning to use math to prove all the mysteries of the universe.
*Edit* This is a little off-topic and just my opinion, but I see no point in placing people into categories such as “mystic” or “skeptic”…I think I said this before, but I go into these discussions neither believing or disbelieving anything. At the same time however its a much more fun conversation talking as if what you’re saying is true because it allows you to more freely explore any idea.
A mystic is someone who is spiritual, and I have seen more than one person on here use the word spiritual to describe themselves. A skeptic is someone who doubts, and we’ve seen plenty of that. These are not discriminatory terms and I see no problem with using them.
@ Ellie, I agree.
@ Chris [Believing that were more than just base chemicals simply because you read something that told you to believe so.]
You read somewhere that we’re nothing more than chemicals and mathematical processes. And now you believe it. You can’t see/hear/feel/smell/taste the chemicals and you can’t see/feel/smell/taste/hear the maths, so they’re nothing but thoughts. There’s no proof at all. You have no proof to support your idea and you have none to render mine invalid. You’re just projecting, it’s all an illusion in your mind.
I don’t believe what I believe because I read so somewhere, I question everything. I believe what I believe because I can SEE and FEEL it around me, It’s first-hand knowledge, not second-hand “knowledge” like what you read somewhere. If you don’t experience it yourself/do it yourself you DON’T KNOW it, you just THINK it’s true. You don’t question stuff enough.
Don’t be such an ignorant fool.
^very good points. All knowledge is based on assumptions anyways, and all ‘truths’ we have come from thinking differently.
@Alex Real knowledge isn’t based on assumptions, opinions or thoughts. That’s just belief. Real fact is what your senses percieve when your mind is still and open, something that just is.
Man, an insect knows more about reality than most people do, because the insect can’t make up fantasy realities to deflect actual reality like 99.9% of the human population do.
People spend their whole lives walking around in a daze of false knowledge. And they’re usually very quick to preach their shit to just about anyone. The more you know, the more you know that you don’t know much at all.
@manimal. Personal knowledge is different from real knowledge. There is, you could argue, no real knowledge. Science is our greatest tool for discovering ‘truths’ and its all based on one assumption or another. Even personal knowledge is based on some assumptions that you know are true, but you cannot prove.
@Alex Nothing real is personal. In fact, nothing is personal.
Real knowledge can only be achieved by first hand-experience. Reading about other people’s alleged scientific progress will never give you knowledge, just belief. Truth and actual fact aren’t even the same thing.
Real knowledge does exist. And it isn’t based on assumptions. That it doesn’t exist is an assumption. You don’t believe in it because you can’t remember ever experiencing it, so you decide to call it non-existant. That’s jumping conclusions. Most people don’t experience actual reality, so they find it hard to believe, but then again this site is called high existence, not normal-illusory-mindless-opinionated existence. Reality is in the higher levels, not in the lower levels where thoughts and opinions dominate. You’re looking for it in the wrong place.
Lack of proof is never proof of the opposite.
Well, based on your arguments you have assumptions as to what reality actually is. You said nothing is personal, then said real knowledge can only be achieved by first-hand experience. That is contradictory.
I don’t have assumptions about reality. I used to, but I don’t. That’s why I can see it. First-hand experience isn’t personal, because an ego would only block reality. There is no contraditcion, personal and first-hand experience are different concepts.
You ASSUME that knowledge is always based on assumptions. It isn’t true. You assume that experience would be tainted by assumptions of the past. Read what I wrote again, OPEN MIND. If your mind is open you don’t assume anything and you don’t label what you experience, you’re just present. This is what the term “high existence” usually refers to. As I said, you’re assuming things about a higher state of mind that you’re not in. That’s like me saying “The moon isn’t a rock, it’s a big cheese” when I’ve never been to the moon. You’re making theories about things you DO NOT KNOW, and you claim that it’s fact.
We can comprehend real knowledge, but our thinking mind can’t understand it. There’s a huge difference between understanding and KNOWING. Again you’re assuming things that you haven’t experienced (well, you experience it continually all the time, but you’re blocking it so you don’t really experience it.)
You’re making assumptions about assumptions about assumptions about assumptions, etfc. You have a great intellect but you don’t seem to understand that it’s useless for anything but thinking. And you don’t seem to notice that you’ve given it control over your life.
Read the posts that Jordan put in the blog. That’s what this site is all about, it’s not about ignoring the golden wisdom he posts and then discuss pointless subjects with a closed mind. It’s about achieving a higher existence, not about trying to win arguments about things you don’t know.
Wow Manimal that really sounded like a thesis for believe whatever I want and if it doesn’t fit with you then you ain’t high!
That in itself isn’t a high existence. I’m a skeptical bastard and don’t believe in any of this shit but I consider myself a HEathen because I still consider myself a spiritual person as a hardcore buddhist. Myself and Jordan are it seems fundamentally opposed in beliefs but we exchange cordial messages and thoughts none the less.
Being able to coexist and exchange views even vehemently is a high existence sir not having everyone accept any shit anyone wants to trot out. Have your views challenged and relish it.
Buddhist monks have a tradition were heated debate is encouraged in order to facilitate their philosophy and their arguments are famously heated and demanding but they seek a higher existence.
@Peter I agree completely
@Manimal I simply wanted to point out that as soon as Chris left you turned on someone else and began to tell them how wrong you are. This is not the basis for intelligent discussions. The difference is in how you go about explaining your point. If you just tell the other person they are wrong it will get you no where and that sounds like a pretty lowly existence to me.
@ manimal, im sorry but I simply do not believe you don’t have assumptions. You ASSUME you are correct in what you are saying, and I am not. That is an assumption. I understand what you are saying, but I feel you are using it in wrong contexts, and in wrong ways. Also, what makes you think you have experienced this? Further, what makes you think I haven’t?
Also, Please define “First hand” please.
Sorry if I came off cross. I had just got off work. :D
:D I was pissed last night I’m now crawling through HE to see just what I was writing…oh dear. This one was a little less nicely worded than normal Peters writing!
@hollowinfinity, What’s the “solar max” you speak of?
@spaceangelmichelle, what separates you from a ‘regular human’?
@spaceangelmichelle, I share your overall storyline… Not the details just the overall feeling of it.
I’m sorry, but what is all this Crystal stuff and Indigo badge stuff?
biggest crock of shit I’ve ever read, concentrated in one thread.
Reading people isn’t some kind of magical ability, its just watching non-verbal communication.
Falling for a “mediums” reference to you as a crystal child is just READING you and then telling you what you’d like to hear, so hopefully you come back ($ in hand).
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.