Jump to content


Click Here To Visit Our Sponsor


Photo

Hypothetics


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#16 Nor'Easter

Nor'Easter

    Junior Villager

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:I'm a writer. I am fascinated by the theo-philosophical implications of metaphysics and the paranormal.

Posted 05 February 2009 - 09:15 AM

Nor'Easter,

Wow, you brought alot of them to the table. I'll take a stab at a couple of them:

1. Who says they are spirits? Well, I think this is probably because many of the appearances have been people that the observer recognizes that has passed away or has been historically researchable. I suppose it could be true that they are not ALL spirits of dead people.


The point I was making was that the concept of "spirit" was invented by very primitive people. People who had no idea what the moon actually was - considering when the initial concept of spirit was conceived, it's not likely that the best and brightest had a clue as to what that pale glowball inn the sky actually was. They were guessing, and we've decided that they were right. That kind of strikes me as odd, since we don't assume that they were right about anything else - dragons, giants, elves, magic and other staples of their world.

We know that there have been forms of natural energy - in existence as long as nature's been around - that we've discovered fairly recently (last 100 years or so), and much of it has been invisible to the 5 human senses, even while it's always had an impact on us and the world around us. We know that there are photographic technologies that can give us a glimpse of energies radiating from us, and that these energies adjust in accordance to our state of mind, and are therefore dynamically a part of our physiology. And yet, we still cling to this romantic notion of the human being as a corporeal Camry being driven around by a supernatural commuter that's going somewhere or other via this whole process, and gets out when the car wraps around a pole, to either leg the rest of the journey to heaven, snag another homo sapien 4 door and drive on to who know where, or linger at the scene of the crash refusing to let the whole thing be an end in its own right.

Then there are the folks who just can't bring themselves to believe in anything they can't choke down even if they bury it in ketchup.

I am convinced that we aren't asking the right questions about all of this. I am also convinced that some guy that's been dead for 5 thousand years, is not the person I should look to for answers concerning what I am, how I came about, and why I exist. I used to think it was insane to allow 16 year old kids to choose their career paths for the future. I sure as hell wasn't wise enough to know what career I would be right for me as a 40 year old adult. I feel even less confident that a man (or group of men) who sincerely feared that a dragon would fly by and burn the village to the ground, had any real insight into why the atoms that make up my body were set to spin in the way that they do. And I figure that if that level of revelation is beyond him, then why should I believe him when he tries to tell me who set that atom to spin and why they did it.

Anyone can give an explanation. Doesn't make it true, though. Maybe spirits aren't spirits. Maybe there are no spirits at all. Maybe we're looking at something entirely different, but haven't figured out that we have the responsibility to figure out what the hell they are on our own. We have the technology to get a break in this case, but we won't break anything if we allow reality itself to be defined by people who couldn't have possibly known anything at all about it.

2. Ghost don't have a human brain. That one is a much more puzzling question, I think. We have scientifically proven that learning is a process of the brain. However, if one is to believe that our brain is really just a transceiver for our soul, maybe all we are really looking at are the data behind processed and transmitted. Very good question, though, and forces us to assume an answer not easily explainable or measureable.

What do you think?


The human brain processes information. It accepts data, translates that data, assimilates that data, stores that data, retrieves that data, and creates new data by comparing and contrasting that data with other data. This is learning, but it's also what allows us to BE who we are as we become even more of ourselves from moment to moment. I've known people who were hit with schizophrenia (hits in the late teens/early 20's generally) and they became completely different people overnight. Even when they got on the meds, they never came back to being who they were, ever again. Head injuries will often change a person completely, even if only emotionally. The raw person is forever gone, and it's almost like Invasion of the Body Snatchers in how it feels if you were really close to the person. Now, if the soul were the actual core of the person, wouldn't that soul "peek out" now and then to just let you know that your old friend was still in there somewhere?

Consciousness is that sense of "being" that we look to as our proof that we are more than the sum total of the electrons, neutrons and protons that come together to allow us to eat cereal in the morning. That consciousness is the "self", the dynamic intellect that defines us each as individuals. The question is - is that self in control of the brain, fed by the brain, and served by the brain; or is that self the result of the brain?

When the brain dies, what becomes of that self? If that self is left behind, freed by the death of that brain, then is that self free to continue in development, and if so, then what was the reason for the brain in the first place. Reality doesn't add useless noise to any process, and I'm loath to personify the nature of existence with schemes, dramas, and Peyton Place plot lines involving superhero entities with supervillain counterparts, with the "poor widow" human soul being invariably tied to a railroad track somewhere as the 5:15 bears down on it and all of eternity holding its breath on the outcome.

Classic hauntings tell us that ghosts have a very limited capacity for education. In fact, if they had any capacity at all, they have gotten pretty BAD_WORD bored with standing in a corner, staring at people and moving stuff and making footsteps and muttering monosyllabic ghost phrases, and would have let that uselessness die a few hundred years before a ghost buster team finally outed the whole sad OCD-addled scenario with its 21 century technology. Still, these ghosts seem to be content to remain in some pretty ghastly locations, and generally seem to want to be left alone - which no one in human form would ever want. I mean, they should be hitting us up for news and screaming at us to get them the hell out of those creepy places, if they're really stuck there and fully functioning intellects. Even crazy fully functioning intellects aren't THAT crippled. Solitary confinement isn't attractive to anyone, and yet this bunch seems to prefer it. I never forget that after the ghost video ends, that whateveritis, is still there, and still doing the same stuff within the small area that it was caught on film doing what tiny insignificant thing it does, and has been doing for a very, very long time. To me, that argues against the notion that these are thinking beings - at least in the sense that they would have thought as living human beings. Even the most dynamic and sophisticated of hauntings involve a spirit that resembles a horse wgho can count to ten by banging his hoof on the stall door on command. Nice trick, but I'd hate to be so limited, myself.

No, I don't believe that ghosts are people without bodies. They exist, and we need to figure out what they are, but before we can do that, we need to get rid of all pre-conceived notions about them and start fresh. If not, the more we learn, the less we'll be able to make sense of them, and the more we'll feed into the whole idea that they're just figments of our imaginations.

Edited by Nor'Easter, 05 February 2009 - 09:18 AM.


#17 Retro

Retro

    Villager

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 253 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest, USA

Posted 05 February 2009 - 09:55 AM

Hmm, I take it that you do not believe in psychic abilities either, then?


All I can say is that neither should we assume that our ancestors were wrong either. Because much of your comfortable life would not exist without what they have learned and taught. I suppose we can't trust fire, either?

I would argue that our ancestors were probably MUCH more aware of the observations of the world around them than you and I are. We take for granted everything we have learned from them and call it 'intelligence.' But without their observations, we would be no more advanced than them.

I do agree with you, however, that we are most likely asking the wrong questions. My own experiences tell me that these spirits ARE dead people, and I am not 100 million years old.


Here's my hyptothesis:


We are actually just information, just a dream if you like. Chunks in some ethereal stew. Psychic links between people exists because we are actually all connected on that plane. When we die (or wake), that chunk of stew is still floating out there. Therefore, we can still connect psychically.


Of course, we can argue about what we 'believe' but my very own experiences confirm absolutely for me that these are dead people. Probably not all of them, but without a doubt some of them. I cannot explain the mechanism or the science with any confidence, but it isn't just a matter of 'belief' or superstition for me.

#18 Nor'Easter

Nor'Easter

    Junior Villager

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:I'm a writer. I am fascinated by the theo-philosophical implications of metaphysics and the paranormal.

Posted 05 February 2009 - 02:54 PM

Hmm, I take it that you do not believe in psychic abilities either, then?


No, I do believe in psychic ability. I don't dismiss any evidence, and there's plenty of evidence for that. I'm not a skeptic. I am someone who wants to better classify what it is that I believe in.


All I can say is that neither should we assume that our ancestors were wrong either. Because much of your comfortable life would not exist without what they have learned and taught. I suppose we can't trust fire, either?


Fire and existential reality are two very different things. Also, being able to make fire, and being able to determine, and qualify, the quantum mechanics involved in the phenomenon that is fire is like the difference between designing and engineering digital processor technology and using this laptop here to respond to your post.

A philosopher once described the human approach to larger reality as being akin to a member of an isolated primitive tribe on an island that stumbles upon a digital watch that was dropped by an anthropologist (a visitor that none of his people ever noticed to have been there). the native picks up the watch and studies the little designs that appear and disappear, change and morph, and after a while, he begins to see a pattern that allows him to accurately predict which design will appear next. Suddenly, he feels a sense of "knowing" this strange device, and teaches all the others about what this device is and what its function is. It's a shape design changing thing, and the next design to show up will be...

As you can see, he never understands anything about the watch, and will never be able to understand anything about it, because he lacks the necessary foundational knowledge of the culture, the technology, the concept of time measured in minutes, hours, seconds, and even the basic notion of numerals - which is what those designs actually are. He just knows that it will produce this next design, and now he knows everything he needs to know about that mysterious things that's just become less mysterious in his mind.

I would argue that our ancestors were probably MUCH more aware of the observations of the world around them than you and I are. We take for granted everything we have learned from them and call it 'intelligence.' But without their observations, we would be no more advanced than them.


They were a lot more aware, but it was because they lacked the foundational knowledge of what was actually happening all around them, and had to make it up as they went along. They also didn't have whole industries that constantly explained what was happening (weather service, storm tracker doppler radar) around them so that they wouldn't have to be so intensely observational. They also lived in small communities (relatively speaking, when compared to the hyper-connectivity of today's global community) and few communities agreed on the foundational premises that explained reality. That caused a lot of confusion for anyone that might have been less provincial in their outlook, and a lot of purging was done to people whose "explanations" weren't in line with the established wisdom.

In fact, we only know what the powerful and protected have allowed us to know, and since when has power been the preservation agent of truth?

I do agree with you, however, that we are most likely asking the wrong questions. My own experiences tell me that these spirits ARE dead people, and I am not 100 million years old.

Here's my hyptothesis:

We are actually just information, just a dream if you like. Chunks in some ethereal stew. Psychic links between people exists because we are actually all connected on that plane. When we die (or wake), that chunk of stew is still floating out there. Therefore, we can still connect psychically.

Of course, we can argue about what we 'believe' but my very own experiences confirm absolutely for me that these are dead people. Probably not all of them, but without a doubt some of them. I cannot explain the mechanism or the science with any confidence, but it isn't just a matter of 'belief' or superstition for me.


I have a theory that I'm finishing up for a book that I'll be shopping at some point. I wish I could go into this end of it all with you, but at this point I can't. I will give you a hint though.

"You could not step twice into the same river..."
~Heraclitus

#19 Retro

Retro

    Villager

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 253 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest, USA

Posted 05 February 2009 - 08:48 PM

I have a theory that I'm finishing up for a book that I'll be shopping at some point. I wish I could go into this end of it all with you, but at this point I can't. I will give you a hint though.

"You could not step twice into the same river..."
~Heraclitus




Sounds like planet cosmology to me. Time is really multi-dimensional travel. Every instance is destroyed and rebuilt, so therefore, that river you step into is not exactly the same river you stepped into earlier (and technically it wouldn't be, because the river is always moving anyway.)


I had similar theories when I was younger and my hypothesis above doesn't negate that at all. I imagined reality like this: Even if you are standing still, time is like the wind blowing against your face. To travel back in time, you only need to turn your back to the wind and move as fast as the wind.

Just watch out for the langoliers. :lol:

Edited by Retro, 05 February 2009 - 08:48 PM.


#20 OMPRDave

OMPRDave

    Village Elder

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 563 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upton, Massachusetts
  • Interests:Family, fishing, hunting, camping, history, photography, poetry/writing, and last but not least, paranormal investigation

Posted 05 February 2009 - 10:10 PM

The langoliers...shudders at time eating pac men with razor blade teeth...
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer

#21 Nor'Easter

Nor'Easter

    Junior Villager

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:I'm a writer. I am fascinated by the theo-philosophical implications of metaphysics and the paranormal.

Posted 07 February 2009 - 12:11 PM

I have a theory that I'm finishing up for a book that I'll be shopping at some point. I wish I could go into this end of it all with you, but at this point I can't. I will give you a hint though.

"You could not step twice into the same river..."
~Heraclitus




Sounds like planet cosmology to me. Time is really multi-dimensional travel. Every instance is destroyed and rebuilt, so therefore, that river you step into is not exactly the same river you stepped into earlier (and technically it wouldn't be, because the river is always moving anyway.)


I had similar theories when I was younger and my hypothesis above doesn't negate that at all. I imagined reality like this: Even if you are standing still, time is like the wind blowing against your face. To travel back in time, you only need to turn your back to the wind and move as fast as the wind.

Just watch out for the langoliers. :whoohoo:


To be honest, that quote refers (to my own notions) to the fact that we, as corporeal beings, do not really exist as we believe that we do. In fact, we aren't really any"thing" at all. We are like rush hour traffic, or flows of water. We are momentary events that become new events from split instant to split instant, and only our thoughts and reactions are real and permanent. Kind of reverse from how we view things, but then, as organized flows of interplay continuums, how else could we be expected to see things.

My theory involves a great deal more than simply that, but that is one of the foundational tenets of the theory. It's fairly well establish, I suppose, so I'm not really giving too much away with these statements. I'm certainly not the first to see reality in this way.

Ghosts? They're more physically real that we are.

Edited by Nor'Easter, 07 February 2009 - 12:11 PM.


#22 Retro

Retro

    Villager

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 253 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest, USA

Posted 07 February 2009 - 02:23 PM

Much of this could explain why space is infinite. Reality is simply built around us at a particular instance in time, so therefore we can never really reach the end of reality.

#23 Kira

Kira

    Village Elder

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,281 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:CT
  • Interests:Intellectual discussions about anything as long everyone respects all opinions given.<br /><br />My dogs, cooking, studying (yes), painting and decorating, and learning something new almost every day that I visit Ghostvillage.

Posted 08 February 2009 - 08:57 PM

I am so fascinated by this discussion. So much of what Nor'Easter is saying makes complete and total sense to me, yet I cannot eloquently explain how I agree along with my own philosophy and thoughts on this topic as has been up to this point.

Thank you for this thread.
The Power of 8 Make Your Wishes Come True!<-Click Here Now

#24 Retro

Retro

    Villager

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 253 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest, USA

Posted 09 February 2009 - 02:48 AM

Well, feel free to add any incomplete thoughts you have. Maybe someone else can help complete it. That's what this thread is about; just a brain dump of thoughts, feelings, questions, etc... It's 'open-mic' night here every night. :ghost:

#25 Kira

Kira

    Village Elder

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,281 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:CT
  • Interests:Intellectual discussions about anything as long everyone respects all opinions given.<br /><br />My dogs, cooking, studying (yes), painting and decorating, and learning something new almost every day that I visit Ghostvillage.

Posted 09 February 2009 - 02:04 PM

Thanks Retro, when I can figure out how to even put my ideas into words, I will definitely contribute. For now I am content reading what you and others have to say.
The Power of 8 Make Your Wishes Come True!<-Click Here Now




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users