Mod+ Introduction to Explorers & Implementers

#1
Saiko says:
Much of the discourse on here is what I call intellectualizing. Opinions about what's been read/heard/watched etc. And back-and-forth about those opinions. Opinions about opinions ya might say.

I'd like to see a sub-section that was focused on doing. Using OBEs as an example the threads would be for those who engage them, what their experiences have been, what techniques they used, etc. Of course those who haven't yet accomplished such but are actively working on implementing the would also be welcome to participate. However the participation would still be focused on their doing, their experiences and not on their thoughts about what they've read.
 
#2
I'd like to see a sub-section that was focused on doing. Using OBEs as an example the threads would be for those who engage them, what their experiences have been, what techniques they used, etc.
As you know, there are already many discussion groups centered around such things. Do you (or does anybody) have in mind a way to make it particularly relevant to the Skeptiko Forum participants? That would be great.;)
 
#3
As you know, there are already many discussion groups centered around such things. Do you (or does anybody) have in mind a way to make it particularly relevant to the Skeptiko Forum participants? That would be great.;)
There are already many discussion groups centered around everything here so that's irrelevant. IME the great majority of them either .well . .suck or are focused on a specific area of exploration

As for making this relevant, that's up to you, me and all who use it. I believe that as long as the naysayers, pseudo-skeptics, debaters and those who want to intellectualize post in other sub-forums - and we all respect others' experiences, approaches and even ideas for approaches - we'll be able to stimulate people to their own explorations and glean ideas, refinements for our own.
 
#4
I believe that as long as the naysayers, pseudo-skeptics, debaters and those who want to intellectualize [..] we'll be able to stimulate people to their own explorations and glean ideas, refinements for our own.
What exactly are you referring to as "intellectualize"?

I'm not sure how you can efficiently do "refinements" without debate and intelligent speaking, because those two concepts are integral to improving ideas. (Socrates' method is meant to debate someone to expose failures of consistency so someone can make their ideas consistent.)
 
#5
What exactly are you referring to as "intellectualize"?

I'm not sure how you can efficiently do "refinements" without debate and intelligent speaking, because those two concepts are integral to improving ideas. (Socrates' method is meant to debate someone to expose failures of consistency so someone can make their ideas consistent.)
Given that you are "not sure" I'd say this section is not for you. Of course what you mentioned has a valid place - in fact most of the overall forum is geared to that. This sub-section is for utilizing other methods, enhancing other abilities. It is not for debates, "improving ideas", hypotheses, testing, data analysis, proving or any of those sort of approaches. All those things are what the other sections and especially the Consciousness and Science section - are for.

This section is for those who are sure and are, in whatever way(s) to whatever degree, delving into - exploring and implementing - their own abilities. I expect this section will be less trafficked but - if it can be kept to its intent - very valuable
 
#6
Given that you are "not sure" I'd say this section is not for you. Of course what you mentioned has a valid place - in fact most of the overall forum is geared to that.
You misunderstand my use of the words "not sure" to mean skeptic. What I have said, if read closely, is that I don't see how you can refine an idea by never criticizing it. This looks akin to making a forum for people who sketch pictures, and then telling people to never criticize any of the sketches for any reason:

  • It is not for debates: As I already mentioned, those are unavoidable. This right now is a debate, I am positing that your parameters are nonsense and will not help people with what you want them to be doing. If someone mentions a different meditation technique, that is also a debate.
  • "improving ideas": Okay, so we should delete Frank's post where he posits his own experience as a means to be a better psychic? He's offering "ideas" for "improving" your abilities.
  • hypotheses: A hypothesis is as simple as saying, "I think there is food in the fridge."
  • testing: So if someone suggests a new meditation technique (which they aren't allowed to do as I mentioned above) I'm not supposed to "test" it or recommend someone else try it because I did it?proving: Not even to oneself?
  • or any of those sort of approaches: What approach is left? Blind back patting of anything and everything someone posts?

It sounds like what you want is the old Haven, which was succinctly described as a "no debunking" forum. Are you saying, with the description you have given thus far, I can go write a post about a fictional experience seeing parrots carry briefcases of million dollar bills and nobody at all is allowed to tell me, "That sounds like a very strange dream."? Because that would be data analysis. I'm not seeing the point of having a forum where someone can say to go stand with your full body weight on three bent fingers and shout "POTATO!" ninety times as a technique for something, and completely barring all forms of dissent or "I don't think that works" or "That just made my hands hurt."

Please explain to me how that would be "very valuable", or if you meant the old Haven rules.
 
#7
You misunderstand my use of the words "not sure" to mean skeptic. What I have said, if read closely, is that I don't see how you can refine an idea by never criticizing it. This looks akin to making a forum for people who sketch pictures, and then telling people to never criticize any of the sketches for any reason:.
Folks like you puzzle me. You have an entire forum that fits your desired parameters yet you will still be irked that there's a section that operates in ways not within your sanctioned approaches.

The sketch is a good analogy. It's a section for people to develop their sketching abilities and for others to offer hints on how people may expand aspects of their sketching. It is not a section for critiquing or criticizing sketches or for proscribing how/what people should sketch.

As for your comment about fictional posts - no doubt someone could troll if they want to. But that holds true about any subject with any approach. If I post about the pizza I made yesterday how will you know if it's false? Will criticizing my description of how I made it make it any more factual? I will trust that most people aren't pathological liars.

The fact that you repeated "refine an idea" after I already responded to it along with the tone of your post strengthens my thinking that it isn't that you don't understand - it's that you dislike the intent of the section not being within your sanctioned approaches. I'm not about to debate that intent. As I also said before, this may not be the section for you. There is - once again - the entire rest of the forum for you to take those approaches that you prefer. At this point, I'd ask that, if the goal and parameters of this section aren't what you favor you please move on.
 
#8
The sketch is a good analogy. It's a section for people to develop their sketching abilities and for others to offer hints on how people may expand aspects of their sketching. It is not a section for critiquing or criticizing sketches or for proscribing how/what people should sketch.
Okay, so suggestions are fine then.

I wasn't sure where exactly the line was between "this drawing is bad" vs "if you try drawing in a clockwise swirl the knees might be easier for you" sat in the range of acceptability.
 
#9
Okay, so suggestions are fine then.

I wasn't sure where exactly the line was between "this drawing is bad" vs "if you try drawing in a clockwise swirl the knees might be easier for you" sat in the range of acceptability.
Yes! Well-meaning suggestions on enhancing the doing are not only fine - they are encouraged. Glad we got clear on that :) But please bear in mind that it's a suggestion and that one of the things about these areas is there's rarely a successful "one size fits all" approach.
 
#10
You misunderstand my use of the words "not sure" to mean skeptic. What I have said, if read closely, is that I don't see how you can refine an idea by never criticizing it. This looks akin to making a forum for people who sketch pictures, and then telling people to never criticize any of the sketches for any reason:

  • It is not for debates: As I already mentioned, those are unavoidable. This right now is a debate, I am positing that your parameters are nonsense and will not help people with what you want them to be doing. If someone mentions a different meditation technique, that is also a debate.
  • "improving ideas": Okay, so we should delete Frank's post where he posits his own experience as a means to be a better psychic? He's offering "ideas" for "improving" your abilities.
  • hypotheses: A hypothesis is as simple as saying, "I think there is food in the fridge."
  • testing: So if someone suggests a new meditation technique (which they aren't allowed to do as I mentioned above) I'm not supposed to "test" it or recommend someone else try it because I did it?proving: Not even to oneself?
  • or any of those sort of approaches: What approach is left? Blind back patting of anything and everything someone posts?

It sounds like what you want is the old Haven, which was succinctly described as a "no debunking" forum. Are you saying, with the description you have given thus far, I can go write a post about a fictional experience seeing parrots carry briefcases of million dollar bills and nobody at all is allowed to tell me, "That sounds like a very strange dream."? Because that would be data analysis. I'm not seeing the point of having a forum where someone can say to go stand with your full body weight on three bent fingers and shout "POTATO!" ninety times as a technique for something, and completely barring all forms of dissent or "I don't think that works" or "That just made my hands hurt."

Please explain to me how that would be "very valuable", or if you meant the old Haven rules.
I see this thread as being a place where experiences can come and talk about what its like going down the rabbit hole. People can believe there is no rabbit hole or think they know more about Wonderland and what it feels like getting there, but actually they are wrong.
 
#11
Saiko says:
Much of the discourse on here is what I call intellectualizing. Opinions about what's been read/heard/watched etc. And back-and-forth about those opinions. Opinions about opinions ya might say.

I'd like to see a sub-section that was focused on doing. Using OBEs as an example the threads would be for those who engage them, what their experiences have been, what techniques they used, etc. Of course those who haven't yet accomplished such but are actively working on implementing the would also be welcome to participate. However the participation would still be focused on their doing, their experiences and not on their thoughts about what they've read.
Alex, are we allowed to start threads on psi experiments in this forum or not? Some of what Saiko has stated in his 'forum rules" thread seems confusing.
It is not for scientific approaches, testing, proving, analyzing, measuring, etc. Those approaches and topics are for the Consciousness and Science section
He says science is not allowed and has interrupted threads in this forum to tell people not to put experiment threads here.
Let's put it this way - if it's about "proving", "testing" or data gathering/analysis it is not what this subsection is about.
I thought we could have experiment threads here and have the discussions about the experiments in the Consciousness and Science forum. Is that correct?
 
#13
I described my experiences taking classes in mediumship here:

http://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/psi_experience
...
The first time I tried to do mediumship in class I was astonished with the results. I did exactly what the teacher said and it seemed to work. After a short period of meditation, I looked around the class (we were sitting with the chairs in a circle) and when I got to one particular person it seemed like I was looking at him through a zoom lens. He stood out from the other students in my field of vision. I tried looking around again and the same thing happened when I got to him. Then I closed my eyes and in my mind's eye there appeared a tall man in a uniform. When my turn came to describe my experiences, this person said that his grandfather had been tall and wore a uniform on his job. The teacher of the class encouraged me to try to get more information and I tried again and saw a scene of the sea shore. It turned out the grandfather had also lived near the water. I had never experienced anything like this before in my life. I was in shock for a couple of days afterwards.
...
and here
http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2012/10/what-is-it-like-to-communicate-with.html
Visual perceptions would appear in my mind's eye, like remembering what something looked like, like a dream, like hypnogogic imagery. It was quite an ordinary sensation which is why it can be hard to teach some people to recognize their psychic perceptions. They are expecting something extraordinary and mystical, and overlook the ordinary.

Sometimes I would feel words in my mouth as if I was about to say them. Other times words would come to me as if I was thinking them.

Smells seemed to be real, and outside myself as if others could smell them too.

Sounds also seemed to be real, outside myself as if others could hear them.

I usually didn't recognize that I was being influenced when I used a gesture. A couple of times I was told by different sitters that a gesture I made during the reading was significant. The gestures were uncharacteristic of me and very meaningful to the sitter.

Other types of sensations would also occur. Often, if I asked the spirit how he died, I would feel a sensation in the part of my body associated with the cause of death. For example, I would sense a tingling in my chest if the spirit had died of a heart attack.

I would occasionally feel emotions. Once when the spirit wanted to convey her love for the sitter, I felt how she felt. It was a very moving experience.
Spiritual Healing
https://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/spiritual_healing
The link describes the healing technique. When receiving healing you can often feel something like magnetism or heat penetrating your body under where the healer places their hands. When giving healing you feel a sensation of something ("energy") flowing through your body and out your hands. As I learned to do healing the sensation became stronger. While I was taking a certification course in healing I obtained seven affidavits of healing signed by people who felt some form of healing occurred during a healing session I gave them. This is not faith healing, it can be used on infants and animals who don't understand anything about it. It is rather unfortunate that people don't believe in spiritual healing or don't know how to do it because it is very easy and anyone can do it.

Other experiences here:

An experience of non-duality:
https://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/mystical_experiences
...
In the Zen center I went to, students were taught that long practice in meditation can lead to a direct experience of the oneness of all things and that experience will prove the philosophy of oneness is true. The knowledge of this truth of oneness is supposed to eliminate selfishness and have transforming consequences for the experiencer.

I used to go to the Zen center two or three days a week. I would go right after work and I would start meditating a few hours before the evening practice session and then stay for the evening session. On one day of the week there was an extra long evening session so the total time I would spend in meditation that day added up to a good number of hours. One time, near the end of that long evening session, I was meditating, gazing at the wooden floor, (in Zen it is customary to meditate with the eyes open) and I felt myself being pulled forward out of my body for a few seconds. A minute later it happened again for a longer time. During this time I had no sensation of my body at all, the only thing I was aware of was the perception of the floor in my visual field. Because it was the only thing I was aware of, it seemed to me that I associated my self with that thing. I knew I existed but I didn't know where. I knew this image of the floor existed. It seemed natural to associate this image with my self. It seemed like I was this image of the floor.
...


Other experiences meditating:

http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2015/02/joy-during-meditation.html#joy_trip
But this type of serenity meditation creates a feedback loop causing the brain to release endorphins, serotonin and dopamine.

It really is like a drug trip, maybe not a psychedelic trip but it's not normal meditation. Every breath you take is like a hit from a bong, but there's no bong. And it is hugely spiritual. It doesn't require super intense concentration so I think most people could learn to do it. I had to stop the other day because it was so intense I was getting nervous. How many people do you know who were feeling so happy, and connected to all things and feeling such intense metta that they were worried they might never get back to normal? And I felt the presence of non-physical entities too.

It also creates a kind of synesthesia where everything I see and hear I also feel in my body as if they are part of me. There is an effect like the brain is a virtual reality machine and what I see is really a movie inside my head (I am still looking for the screen behind the movie), like my mind contains the whole universe including me walking around inside it. It changes the "energy" of your surroundings too. You could go to the filthiest shack in the poorest slum in the most miserable God forsaken corner of nowhere and meditating this way would make it a place of beauty and joy. These effects are not gross like a psychedelic trip they are subtle like a change in understanding. And these experiences are not restricted to sitting meditation, you can have them walking around town or out in nature.

The best thing about this type of meditation is not the intense experiences, the best thing is that between meditation sessions I'm happier and I worry less.

And it doesn't cause vomiting or diarrhea like Ayahuasca does. It's 100% free. And as far as I know it's legal everywhere.
Spiritual practices and their effectiveness
http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2013/03/spiritual-practices-and-their.html


More...
http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/p/62014-contents-evidence-for-afterlife.html#articles_by_subject_psy_dev
 
Last edited:
#17
It didn't look like fear-mongering. .
??? Fear-mongering doesn't mean "don't do it." It means what you style as "pointing out potential risks. " It's BS. The sort of BS that many accept as sensible.

There is nothing in that BS of value that couldn't have simply been included in an "effective tips" section. That the author thinks of "possible dangers" IMO means he/she would do well to mediate more and write less.

Unless . .it was just added as legal protection.
 
Top