Psion Guild Forums  

Go Back   Psion Guild Forums > Defense > Public defense department forum > Archive

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-03-2009, 10:21 AM   #21
Pat McDonald
Very, very pale grey
 
Pat McDonald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 2,473
Rep Power: 11
Pat McDonald is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by swiftsilver View Post
I never claimed that I lacked faith. What I claimed is that you know very little about ouija boards, and have far too much faith in the infailability of organized religion.

You told someone who had already stated their religious beliefs that by not being formally made a part of an organized religion, they were basically asking for this to happen. I'd take that really offensively if I were Kami.
You are mistaken on 2 counts. First, that I deemed that a formal religion was OBLIGATORY. I do not belong to a formal religion. But I can quite happily take part in a beneficial religious observance. And being part of a formal religion can give a basis for spiritual growth. Without a framework, such growth can be wild, spontaneous, uncontrolled and scary.

The second count is that I was saying that this sort of problem stems from NOT being part of a formal religion. You have twisted my words around. What I have stated (twice now) is that this sort of problem COMMONLY manifests itself when you mess about with a Ouija board like it's a game of Monopoly.

For actions, there are consequences. Do you deny that?
__________________
Beware virii that hide in signatures. Nasty, nasty hackers out there. Usually they appear in Personal Messages, not on a forum.

You think I don't know. Well, maybe you're wrong. Maybe I'm wrong.

But assuming you are always right always puts you in the wrong.

Because assume just makes an ass of u and me.
Pat McDonald is offline  
Old 08-03-2009, 10:44 AM   #22
Pat McDonald
Very, very pale grey
 
Pat McDonald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 2,473
Rep Power: 11
Pat McDonald is on a distinguished road
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
Me personally, I'm not a fan of either, but more so because I deem it a logical consequence of tarot and ouija being what they are that the information coming from them cannot really be confirmed as being anything but caused by the person using them, having no actual validity.
Wrong. They cannot be analysed by the person using the Ouija board or Tarot deck. But they can be analysed by giving the pracitioner a known and given target that the practitioner is blind to, and then comparing their outback with known data.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
Of course, I've always figured that they have some ability to glean information, because there's the possibility of people using their inherent sensing abilities and subconsciously using that to cause themselves to draw the right cards, but it's an indirect method and I personally favor trying to sense stuff directly, as I believe ultimately that will lead to a far higher chance of finding things out accurately than cards or ouija boards could, at least, once you've developed your abilities well enough.
Correct. The ability is built into the human mind, and everybody has the potential to develop it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
I don't exactly know where you got this from. Ultimately, the glass is just glass, so I doubt doing that will do anything to prevent any negative results, unless you believe that breaking the glass will somehow protect you AND have the psionic ability to defend yourself accordingly without realizing it.
All things have a spirit. You could view the word "spirit" as an existence within a higher dimension(s) that are unobservable from our usual 4. Nontheless, if you view it from a spiritual angle, then the breaking of the glass releases the spirit from it's captivity. Trapped, it feels antagonistic against it's captors and seeks release, causing mischief in the process.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
Of course, I'd love to know how exactly you feel about a board that doesn't have a glass, but instead uses an empty hole in a plastic frame (or any material frame, really).
I think I have made my feelings about this form of psychic functioning quite clear, but for you, I will state again; "I won't deny there is knowledge and power there, but it's twisted and slanted."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
The assumption that this is a child is not logically deducible from the information given in this thread. Age has little to do with it, as rudimentary knowledge of psychology would indicate. People have nightmares at every age, evil entities included. It happens. The subconscious mind pulls some wierd shit out, often at random. Furthermore, you cannot take dreams of a certain general theme and assume all of them to have the same cause and meaning. Freud may have done so, but then again, Freud's ideas haven't really proven themselves capable of generating valid insight into the psyches of the great majority of people, let alone all of them.
It was a case of me assuming (always I bad idea - I put my hand up to it, guilty) that this individual did not have nightmares prior to the experience. It is quite common for nightmares regarding evil entities to start around age 7. If you didn't go through that, then perhaps your memory is at fault?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
Each detail in the dream has a cause and meaning unique to the person dreaming, because that person's mind has a unique concept map, unique associations between ideas, and meanings attributed to things based on previous experience more so than to any prototype linked to all humans. Even if you assume a sort of collective unconscious, which is reasonable given that we know telepathy exists, it's still fairly well demonstratable that personal experience tends to over-ride that in terms of how people start to think about things.
A lot of words to describe "I don't really know. Nobody really knows."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
First, even IF religion had anything to do with it, I would think that any dieties involved would be kind enough to protect a child without the requirement of being "formally brought into a religion".
But I will restate again; if there is a Supreme Being, then there has to be an opposite number.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
Pickiness about that technicality aside, my personal opinion is that if a diety chooses to let anyone, let alone a hypothetical naive and fairly inexperienced child suffer, just because that child doesn't accept them as their god, then that diety should be rejected as the cruel and discriminating entity that it is, and it certainly doesn't deserve anyone's worship.
So you think suffering is unnecessary and cruel, in each and EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE. WRONG.
Without suffering, and feeling pain, and being down, where would the point be in being consoled, and comforted, and uplifted?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
Furthermore, there is absolutely no evidence that people formally brought into a religion are less likely to experiment with things like ouija, and among those that is, the driving motivation, especially at that young age, is a conditioned fear responce to things they are taught to associate with evil, more so than anything else.
You play with fire, you get burnt. That teaches you not to play with fire. And if you do go for a formal religion, they tend to warn you to avoid things like Ouija and Tarot, and that prevents this sort of problem happening in the first place. Prevention is better than cure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
Not to mention the fact that there's plenty of people who are religious, very piously and sincerely so, and who still cannot get their issues involving entities sufficiently resolved, even with all the formalities of blessings, exorcisms, etc.
A sweeping, generalising, stereotyping statement that has no relevance to the subject under discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
I happen to agree with the last part. The only contradiction I will put forth is that it's possible the very belief that it saying goodbye will make the entity leave might cause the person to subconsciously use energy in a way that will ensure that it does.
If it works, does it matter? If it's you or a priest telling it to clear off and don't come back? Or do you just hate religion and can't see anything good in it, so it must always be evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
Of course, I suspect any powerful enough entity will be able to find a way to stay and/or a way to get back once made to leave (especially since most people don't really shield their residences and don't really have anything but their possibly non-existant subconscious defences to stop it).
Well, my point exactly. If you can't handle an intruder you find someone else to turf him off your premises.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
I personally think it's more likely she's geisting too (funny how that became a commonly used verb among psionics sites so quickly), though I still feel uncertain about it.
Fair enough. She could be. She could not be. Kami doesn't care, he just wants the problem resolved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
For what it's worth, with the ouija board, it is also possible that the girl's very own geisting is the cause of the ouija board movement.... So while the information it gave contradicts it, it's possible it only does so because this seemed to be the more likely possibility in the mind of the person in question.
I don't recall seeing a mention of the ouija board moving without contact BUT... I won't argue about that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
I have a fairly good argument against this, and will gladly further discuss that belief with you further once I have more time and better internet.
Well, I'd love to hear it. Because my belief in a Supreme Being is not based on books, but on the fact that I'm still alive when I should, by rights, be dead. And if you felt your life had been saved by outside, supernatural intervention, then I feel safe in saying you would be grateful to, and recommend belief as a form of insurance.
God's the best bet you could ever make. If you're wrong, you lose nothing. If you're right, you gain everything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
That is hardly a logical link. The existence of entities in the form of energy is one thing. The existance of an all-powerful entity (or nearly so) that is by definition not scientifically comprehendable or explainable is another. A hypothetical god-like entity could technically exist in such a belief system, but ultimately, that is NOT a god, but merely a very very powerful entity, energy-based or otherwise. Another matter that I need to come back to when I have more time.
But a hyperdimensional being would, to our perspective, be totally indistinguishable from a Supreme Being. It could move, at will, backwards and forwards in time (Eternal). It could freeze time, alter the universe, and switch time back on again. And it would be capable of pretty much everything.
And matter IS energy. Condensed, reasonating, but it's only our limited perception that gives rise to the myth of "solid matter".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
That's not joining the dots. That's taking one dot and assuming the paper MUST go in infinitely downwards, and the dot is actually a line that you're looking at from the right angle. No, the existance of a god does not imply the existance of an opposite. The existance of a god implies only that a god exists, and that all phenomena that the definition of the word 'god' implies can be caused by that entity (or entities, in the case of multiple gods). The existance of an opponent entity, and/or a side of its followers, is not only inherently an assumption that is too dichotomic (ignoring that there may be more then just two sides, of varying alliances), and which ultimately stems from taking for granted the principles presented in the modern monotheisting religions, which assume that their god is inherently good and that the evil must inherently be represented by incarnations there-of.
Check your dictionary/thesaurus under "logical train of thought".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychokinetic Wannabe View Post
A truly logical approach to the existance of a god implies only one thing: That nothing else can be certainly known to us about the matter, because we are inherently inferior and not fit to assume what the god or gods or other entities are up to. Because we have no right to assume one way or the other that the god would actually leave the opposing entity to exist. If the god is almighty, it is just as likely to remove from existance it's 'opponent', as it is to leave it alone to bring about suffering for us morals, out of some notion of testing our moral worth.
Or of challenging us to increase our perceptions, to make moral judgements, and to exert free will.
__________________
Beware virii that hide in signatures. Nasty, nasty hackers out there. Usually they appear in Personal Messages, not on a forum.

You think I don't know. Well, maybe you're wrong. Maybe I'm wrong.

But assuming you are always right always puts you in the wrong.

Because assume just makes an ass of u and me.
Pat McDonald is offline  
Old 08-03-2009, 01:29 PM   #23
kami
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 53
Rep Power: 0
kami is an unknown quantity at this point
Swift "You told someone who had already stated their religious beliefs that by not being formally made a part of an organized religion, they were basically asking for this to happen. I'd take that really offensively if I were Kami."

I didn't at first (read below as to why I do now). I'm used to people judging me and discriminating me because I'm atheist. It's nothing new. I'm not surprised someone as religious as Pat assumes as much as he does because of that.

Pat "Kami doesn't care, he just wants the problem resolved."

Ok, that's the part where I just got pissed off. You didn't really bother me before, and that just sparked my fury. First of all, I'm a girl, but that's not why I'm mad. What I'm mad about is you saying I don't care. How DARE you judge me when you don't even know who I am. She is my best friend, I care about everything that happens to her. If she is geisting, I care, if it's an entity, I care, if it's gone, I CARE. Of course I want the problem resolved but don't you dare say that I don't give a shit.
kami is offline  
Old 08-03-2009, 07:21 PM   #24
Psychokinetic Wannabe
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 4
Rep Power: 0
Psychokinetic Wannabe is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrco.gllrdo
If a lot of people believe in one particular thing, it will create something like a "Super-Thought". A lot of people are pouring energy into one idea, thus creating a thought with a lot of energy. Since it has a lot of energy, it can perform "miracles".
My personal hypothesis on the matter (I keep away from the word 'theory' because I like to keep that for the actual scientific theories that earn that word through rigors of testing and verified validity, or things equally well verified, even if not accepted by science), is that human beings create the very gods they worship by believing in them. Basically, by having enough wills believing in approximately the same thing, they subconsciously slowly trickle together enough energy and concepts about what the diety/dieties is/are like to create a sort of powerful, complex energetic construct, which, with time, could become a sort of hub for the thoughts of its worshippers, linked to them telepathically, etc. Whether these constructs ever become entities in their own right, let alone intelligent and sentient, is another matter, although I think it's possible. Of course, that's why I stick all of this into the realm of 'hypothesis', because I talk only of possibilities, and I wouldn't trust my psionic perceptive abilities to determine for certain if something like this actually happens or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrco.gllrdo
Anyways, the reason why it might be picky is because if one person wishes to worship it and the other one doesn't, it will obviously want to pick the guy who worships it. Why settle for no power when you can get more power with the other choice? If you think about it, all humans are selfish. Hell, I can even go as far to say existence itself is selfish, simply for the fact that it continues to exist.
Well, my personal experiences with myself and other people indicate to me that selfishness is not the natural predisposition of human minds - apathy towards the suffering of those we aren't close to is, and selfishness just follows, because it's natural when you don't automatically feel compassion for most people you interact with. That, and that altruism, in humans and other entities, though rarer and harder to find than needles in actual haystacks, isn't some naive myth, and does exist.

Whether or not existance is selfish or not hinges on whether existance is capable of chosing to exist or not exist, and if so, if it actually choses to exist merely for its own sake, rather than for the sake of all those innumerable minds it contains that do wish to continue to exist.

On an unrelated note, you quote by entering
Code:
[quote]
before the text quoted, and the same thing, but with a "/" before the word quote, at the end of the text. OR, easier, when you're typing your post, you can type or copy/paste the text into your post, highlight it, then, at the top of the text box, click the button that looks like a square speech bubble. In the same row as the bold, italic, and underline buttons are. If you hover your mouse over it it should show what each button does, so you can find the right button that way, in case "square speech bubble" isn't sufficient as a description. If you want it to show who said the text you're quoting, instead of
Code:
[quote]
write
Code:
[quote="(name here)"]
(with the quotes). You don't need to add the name to the "/quote" part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
First, that I deemed that a formal religion was OBLIGATORY.
Nay, that is not what he implied. He said that you placed too much faith in organized religion: Meaning, you gave it too much credit. That is not equivalent to suggesting that you thought it necessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
And being part of a formal religion can give a basis for spiritual growth. Without a framework, such growth can be wild, spontaneous, uncontrolled and scary.
You know what else can be scary? The kind of spiritual framework that tells you that if you stray from the path, you will suffer eternaly. And not scary because it's unpleasant to think about, but because beyond a certain point, it causes inhibition in spiritual growth, and because of the psychological scarring that can leave in children sufficiently susceptible and indoctrinated early enough in such a manner. Now, obviously, that's not all religions, but it is part of most religions that hold that there is a good god and an evil opponent entity, so it's more relevant to this discussion than, say, the merits of frameworks given by Buddhism, Hinduism, the various versions of ancient Egypt's religion, etc...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
You have twisted my words around. What I have stated (twice now) is that this sort of problem COMMONLY manifests itself when you mess about with a Ouija board like it's a game of Monopoly.
You also stated, before and since, that religious frameworks make it less likely that people treat Ouija like a game of monopoly (not in those words, obviously, but basically the same thing). I won't even deny that that's true - what I will argue is that this effect is obtained less through rational warning and more through the underlying message that "it's evil and if you screw with it bad things will happen to you" - the problematic part being the implied negative nature of the practice, where as the same effect can be achieved through merely the fundamental warning "if you screw with it and don't take precautions, bad things can happen to you. Note the difference in that the former implies inherent negativity and leans more towards fear, while the latter gives a more accurate assessment of risk, and doesn't make a "sweeping stereotyping generalization" about the board or the forces/energies involved. Now, I'm not saying that this is how all religious frameworks treat ouija, and obviously, there is variation with each parent. However, I will claim that the majority of people subscribing to a religious framework that would warn people against ouija are also the same parents that will tell their kids that it's evil, that screwing with it is a sin and that it will summon evil entities etc. And most religious frameworks, on that note, lack any intricate knowledge about what those entities are, nor do their encourage any sort of pursuit of that understanding, and as such, most warnings coming from such frameworks would leave it at that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
For actions, there are consequences. Do you deny that?
No. I will, however, deny the general, vague notion that the mere fact that causes exist for effects can in any way serve as evidence for anything. It is no more evidence for any sort of specific premise or conclusion than the description "this book has words in it" is evidence that the books contents cover a specific topic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
Wrong. They cannot be analysed by the person using the Ouija board or Tarot deck. But they can be analysed by giving the pracitioner a known and given target that the practitioner is blind to, and then comparing their outback with known data.
The fact that you said I am wrong and then basically agreed with me that there is no way for the user to know for certain if their results are correct and/or what they mean without independent verification is... well, that's just that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
Nontheless, if you view it from a spiritual angle, then the breaking of the glass releases the spirit from it's captivity. Trapped, it feels antagonistic against it's captors and seeks release, causing mischief in the process.
That's assuming an Ouija board functions by trapping a spirit (or whatever you wish to view it as) inside the glass. Ultimately, IF it does so, there's no reason to believe that glass, as a substance, has intrinsic properties that allow it to trap spirits. If a spirit gets trapped, than something must somehow seal it in there, be it the belief of the user(s), some power in the board itself, some other entities or constructs or whatever. And furthermore, it is equally possible that the glass (or, rather, whatever somehow traps the spirit there) automatically releases the entity at the end of the session. Of course, I highly doubt that the glass, as such, is in anyway involved in trapping or summoning the entity, except as maybe the focal point of such things if the user(s) believe that's supposed to happen and subconsciously cause it it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
I think I have made my feelings about this form of psychic functioning quite clear, but for you, I will state again; "I won't deny there is knowledge and power there, but it's twisted and slanted."
You missed the point of what I was saying. I wasn't asking you if you thought boards without a glass were better or worse as tools/methods - I was trying to point out, to you, a fundamental flaw in your reasoning, and to see if my question would make you think about it. Namely, if a board does not use anything, where the glass would be, how, in your mind, must it function? Where exactly would it trap the spirit, and if it doesn't why must more conventional ouija boards be assumed to trap any such spirit?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
It is quite common for nightmares regarding evil entities to start around age 7.
See, that was the point of my earlier rant: No it's not. It is common, but just as common as it is for age 6, or 5, or 4, or 8 or 9 or 10 etc. I would go further each way, but younger then 4, most people can't remember enough to know for certain, or coherently express their nightmares for others to know of their content. I wouldn't really go higher than 10 because I think statistically, most people have had their first nightmare of that nature earlier on in life. My point is it doesn't matter if she never had such nightmares before the experience. (I am sure she did, because it's too common a theme in dreams for it to be statistically likely that she didn't, however, I also keep in mind that it was hypothetically possible that she really never had one, unlikely as it is.) Unless you have very, very large scale studies to prove this, you cannot, if you know how intricate human minds are, logically assume that it's a common enough pattern for such nightmares to start around a specific age. There is absolutely no evidence that such nightmares are more common at that age, or that they are less likely to happen at a later age.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
A lot of words to describe "I don't really know. Nobody really knows."
Again, you missed the meaning of what I was saying. It's not "Nobody really knows", it's "everyone can know, assuming they have sufficient information about the individual in question". Basically, if I can be slightly more asinine in my mode of expression: If you had a decent understanding of human psychology, you wouldn't allow yourself to assume what the psychological explanation is for a specific person's dream, without knowing enough relevant information about that person specifically. Let alone that all (or even a great majority of) "children around age 7" having nightmares about evil entities are having them because of thoughts about good and evil forces in the world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
But I will restate again; if there is a Supreme Being, then there has to be an opposite number.
Repetition isn't proof. If you could logically deduce, from the premise "Good entity exists", that "Evil entity must exist", it would be one thing. But you can't. All you have is the belief that it must be so, and the fact that it doesn't occur to you to elaborate on how you derive that conclusion implies to me that your belief came from being brought up in a culture that, arbitrarily, assumes that there is a dichotomy between the forces or good and evil, and that both of those forces must be personified as entities. The very notion that there are 'good' and 'evil' forces, let alone entities embodying them, is an over-simplification of the world. Even if you forego the good/evil dichotomy, and merely say there must be a suprememe being and it's opposite, not necessarily good/evil, than you still can't logically prove that the existance of one must imply the existance of another, unless you first make the assumption that a universe couldn't possibly exist without such a counter-balance of forces. That assumption, in turn, is not logically deducible from anything thus far verifiably known about the world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
So you think suffering is unnecessary and cruel, in each and EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE. WRONG.
And you accuse others of twisting your words... Of course, I as a matter of course give you the benefit of the doubt and say that it's just as likely you just misinterpreted what I was getting at rather than intentionally misrepresented it.

I said nothing about suffering as a whole, as a phenomenon of the world. I don't think it's actually necessary, but on that note, I feel it is very useful for human beings to learn to empathize and thus for the progress of a person's ethical development. I said something about a diety that allows suffering to happen - specifically, that diety's ethical worth. (To be even more specific, I said something about a diety's ethical worth if it allows suffering in a very specific hypothetical instance, thus making your interpretation of what I said a complete logic fail.)

Basically, what I think is this: If an entity can prevent suffering without doing something worse or crueler (if that's a word) by doing so, and knows about said suffering, it is unethical for it not to. Maybe suffering is necessary (though I could argue against that too), and it's certainly a good source of understanding and ethical growth under the right circumstances. But god or not, if an entity lets someone suffer, especially when it knows it can stop that suffering, it loses any right to claim that it's ethical, let alone absolutely good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
Without suffering, and feeling pain, and being down, where would the point be in being consoled, and comforted, and uplifted?
That a set of pleasant emotions can arise as a consequence of there being a set of negative emotions/events/experiences does not justify the existance of the latter. IF all positive emotions would vanish without the suffering being discussed (and, for sake of argument, all suffering, though that wasn't what I was talking about), then you would have a point. But there are plenty of positive experiences that can exist without needing a backgroung of negative experiences for them to be appreciated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
And if you do go for a formal religion, they tend to warn you to avoid things like Ouija and Tarot, and that prevents this sort of problem happening in the first place. Prevention is better than cure.
They tend to warn you, but they also tend to 'warn' you by making you afraid of it or making you automatically associate it with evil. (Before you latch on to a source of misinterpretation, I emphasize the words TEND TO - I recognize that there are acceptions.) Prevention is better than cure when the prevention's side effects are not worse than the thing cured, and even when side effects aren't a greater evil, when there are other methods of prevention (and/or cures) with less negative side effects, it becomes poor judgement to use that specific method of prevention. In this case, prevention through begetting fear or bias towards a category of objects and/or behaviors involving it has the potential for causing far worse reprecussions in how effected human beings might later act.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
Well, I'd love to hear it. Because my belief in a Supreme Being is not based on books, but on the fact that I'm still alive when I should, by rights, be dead.
For the former, I stand by my promise to pick up that discussion with you when internet is cheaper and I have more time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
And if you felt your life had been saved by outside, supernatural intervention, then I feel safe in saying you would be grateful to, and recommend belief as a form of insurance.
Barring very strong evidence, I would not feel certain enough that my life was saved by a great being, and if so, what kind. I would be greatful to that something, would broadcast a telepathic message signifying that, and would believe what I actually know: That something, possibly sentient possibly not, caused my life to be saved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
If it works, does it matter? If it's you or a priest telling it to clear off and don't come back? Or do you just hate religion and can't see anything good in it, so it must always be evil?
I don't hate religion. I do however know that what's good in religion is not dependant and/or exclusive to religion (By that merit, even if I didn't see anything good in religion, that doesn't mean I would automatically see it as evil. Note the automatic assumption of a dichotomy in your thinking). If it works, it does matter how it actually worked, because if you sprinkle water and read some prayers while subconsciously doing psionic stuff, you start to think it's the water and the prayers and/or some entity doing the job for you. If you actively psionically deal with a situation, you learn, you get better at it, and so forth. Priests don't always succeed at shutting down paranormal phenomena in severe cases. Of course, nor to psions, mages, or whatever - but the latter have a higher chance of actually knowing what's going on, and by merit of directly percieving what they are working with, rather than letting an untrained subconscious do it, are less likely to hit a wall when they come up against something powerful enough. It's the same argument as can be used for, say, the progress of sciences. If someone invents an accurate sight for a cannot, it matters how they calculated the trajectory of the cannon-ball. True, a cannon can keep shooting at massed infantry without a sight and be pretty good. But eventually, those weapons would've hit a wall, when just eye-balling it and trusting to faith that the weapon will hit causes you to hit a maximum peak in improvement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
But a hyperdimensional being would, to our perspective, be totally indistinguishable from a Supreme Being. It could move, at will, backwards and forwards in time (Eternal). It could freeze time, alter the universe, and switch time back on again. And it would be capable of pretty much everything.
Incomprehensible power does not equal divinity. A god is a god. A being that we're just not powerful or perceptive enough to distinguish from a god is still by definition not a god. Given an infinite lifespan, each of us might, eventually, learn to do all of the above. That does not make us gods. And the fact that some primitive life-form takes us to be gods, is only proof of the fact that we ourselves can't assume a being to be a god until we're capable of telling for sure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
And matter IS energy. Condensed, reasonating, but it's only our limited perception that gives rise to the myth of "solid matter".
I am aware of the fact. I mentioned 'energy-based or otherwise' not because of ignorance of that technicality but because I was getting at what I just elaborated about above: That a practically all-powerful being could arise from a mere mortal physical life-form that managed to keep itself alive while developing psionically. The energy based just meant that I was including both entities that started out as entities without bodies made out of matter, and those that may very well have had, or still have, such bodies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
Check your dictionary/thesaurus under "logical train of thought".
I will resist the temptation to respond to your indirect ad-hominem that I don't get what is logical with a similar one, and will instead say that if you disagree with my logic, then indicate where it is that you see a logical flaw, and we can go from there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat McDonald
Or of challenging us to increase our perceptions, to make moral judgements, and to exert free will.
I am aware of that argument. I will however counter that having a good and an evil entity at all influencing us mortals is like trying to give a toddler a choice between two toys, and then putting two expert, extremely powerful telepaths into the room, and have each try to suggest the toddler towards one of the toys. The desire the toddler would have originally felt has about as much influence on the outcome as a hand-held fan on the direction of atmospheric wind currents. You could argue that if the telepaths exert equal force, then the will of the toddler is the deciding factor, and this is true, but if this is the case, then there's no need for the two telepaths at all. The supreme being could easily destroy the other, and then just not interphere in the thoughts of mortals. Finally, you could argue that the two entities by influencing mortals give the mortal differing arguments, thus making them chose a moral side only after they have all relevant information, like the telepaths might highlight the advantages of their target toy and the disadvantages of the other toy in the mind of the toddler, but even if you argue that finding that having that information given to you is better for personal growth than learning to find it on your own, you could still have the supreme being just drop packets of al relevant information into the minds of mortals before the choice comes, rather than duking it out with a counter entity.

So, ultimately, there is an equivalent result, and both with and without an opponent entity, the same goal can be reached. Thus, the odds of a supreme being keeping an opponent around still become basically a matter of the being's whim, rather then necessity to achieve any goal.

Now, about that bit about belief in a god being the safest bet: No, it's not. It would only be the safest bet if only one religion existed, or was even possible. Then, yes, belief in one god would cause you to be saved if it existed. However, you are believing in one possible configuration of the universe (or multiverse, if you chose), and you only lose nothing if the non-religious athiests turn out to be right. If ANY of the other hypothetical religions that are concievably possible turn out to be right, and you believe in the wrong god, or even in the right god but have the wrong conception of him/her/it, you are going to be just as damned as those without any faith. Of course, it could turn out that there is a god that allows any who believe in some religion to some positive%2

Last edited by Psychokinetic Wannabe; 08-03-2009 at 07:48 PM.
Psychokinetic Wannabe is offline  
Old 08-03-2009, 10:25 PM   #25
mrco.gllrdo
Dead account :'(
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 247
Rep Power: 0
mrco.gllrdo is an unknown quantity at this point
Sweet! I know how to quote! Thanks for the info PK wannabe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ("Psychokinetic Wannabe")
You also stated, before and since, that religious frameworks make it less likely that people treat Ouija like a game of monopoly (not in those words, obviously, but basically the same thing). I won't even deny that that's true - what I will argue is that this effect is obtained less through rational warning and more through the underlying message that "it's evil and if you screw with it bad things will happen to you" - the problematic part being the implied negative nature of the practice, where as the same effect can be achieved through merely the fundamental warning "if you screw with it and don't take precautions, bad things can happen to you. Note the difference in that the former implies inherent negativity and leans more towards fear, while the latter gives a more accurate assessment of risk, and doesn't make a "sweeping stereotyping generalization" about the board or the forces/energies involved. Now, I'm not saying that this is how all religious frameworks treat ouija, and obviously, there is variation with each parent. However, I will claim that the majority of people subscribing to a religious framework that would warn people against ouija are also the same parents that will tell their kids that it's evil, that screwing with it is a sin and that it will summon evil entities etc. And most religious frameworks, on that note, lack any intricate knowledge about what those entities are, nor do their encourage any sort of pursuit of that understanding, and as such, most warnings coming from such frameworks would leave it at that.
I was raised in a catholic atmosphere. I thought that if I committed any sins I would go to hell. Not believe in God? Go to hell. Disobey parents? Go to hell. Know more about entities, including demons? Go to hell. I was restricted from my right to learn. That pissed me off immensely. So, I began to learned. The teachings though left a scar on me. I'm scared to have an OBE. Why? Because I think Satan will be waiting on the other side and will possess me. Not necessarily Satan, but you get the picture. There's still some other stuff that scarred me, but I just wanted to show an example of my own personal experience.
mrco.gllrdo is offline  
Old 08-03-2009, 11:18 PM   #26
kami
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 53
Rep Power: 0
kami is an unknown quantity at this point
IMPORTANT (not to go off topic of this wonderful religious topic but back on topic of this original thread) My friend just texted me updates about what's happening (I have contacted the Defense Department).

"So im at my grandparents visiting colleges n finishing math. grr anyway sory i havnt texted u. i havent had my phone. omg so much happened w it. like how it turned off all the power in our house in front of my mom. i was like mom im not breaking things shes like what is a ghost ha. i was like the lights r going to go out n in the morning the attict will b ripped apart by a screw driver. guess what it happened she thought it was a power surge. the next day there was a screw driver shoved into the plyboard in the attict in an unreachable spot we saw it in a pic from a wire camera my parents said oh well the roofer forgot his screwdriver. sure its too ironic n he found it the item was my dads n then he thought i put it there my parents r in denial lots of other stuff happened. at my grandparents nothing happens but i sense him...i feel hes a watching psyco i know"

"Well for one it doesnt want ppl to know its there also it does not make its presence known to others. i mean my parents or jon (her brother) cant sense it. also i feel bad. those ppl prob think im crazy."

"If they attacked it i didnt notice. hes really strong because hes constantly feeding off my dads temper."

(that's it so far)

EDIT: Newest ones

"i just am worried cuz i think it drained me. as weird as it sounds i tried doing a shield n making a ball when my body got cold i couldnt feel my hands. after that i have been sleeping like crazy n im worn out. i tried again to make a (psi) ball but the energy is gone. i see nothing."

(this was a response to me asking her how she knew that the power would go out and about the screwdriver and for her to try and push it away from her)

"He told me. when i was fighting w my mom i saw it in my head so i thought i would say it aloud. i dunno i guess i wanted it to happen to prove that i was seeing something. it happened. it tells me. i tried telling it to go away just when i received ur text. i focused but then i fell asleep. its still there its in my head n it likes it...it likes me i dont think it wants to go...i sound crazy maybe i unconsciously created him ya thats it im better wah what do i do? im not making sense? im in denial! this isnt happening!"

Last edited by kami; 08-04-2009 at 01:20 AM. Reason: more texts
kami is offline  
Old 08-04-2009, 04:09 AM   #27
kami
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 53
Rep Power: 0
kami is an unknown quantity at this point
SITUATION HAS ESCALATED
She has seen him in the mirror, an outline. There are noises and she is extremely cold.
I'll post more texts about it in the morning but if anyone is reading this, please try something, no matter how skilled.
kami is offline  
Old 08-04-2009, 07:19 AM   #28
swiftsilver
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: toronto
Posts: 22
Rep Power: 0
swiftsilver is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally Posted by kami View Post
SITUATION HAS ESCALATED
She has seen him in the mirror, an outline. There are noises and she is extremely cold.
I'll post more texts about it in the morning but if anyone is reading this, please try something, no matter how skilled.
whether it's an actual outside entity or her geisting has become totally irrelevant at this point. If it didn't exist before, she's made it exist.

in the previous post it mentioned that it was speaking to her, or something resembling that. This is bad. When shit hits the fan like this, with only a single person being antagonized, I tend to go back to my Thelemic roots and go for a star sapphire. Unfortunately, such things are difficult at a distance.

If she feels more confident in the light, make sure she stays well lit. If the lights go out, keep a flashlight. If she thinks that something makes her safer, let her do it. With beings that feed off of fear and belief, a placebo goes a long way. If you can get her to believe that something will make it go away, that will (most-likely) get you some time.

I really, really hope that the defence department does something soon. Shit doesn't go well when it reaches this point.
swiftsilver is offline  
Old 08-04-2009, 02:19 PM   #29
kami
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 53
Rep Power: 0
kami is an unknown quantity at this point
(before incident)

"The thing is i tell myself to calm myself. i told myself that strongly but he never went away. after we did the ouija board i think an entity go attracted to my aura n i think it wants to eat me up. i meant it just started to make things happen n then it hurt me n now i think it wants to b stuck in my head n eat me up. or possess me the question is why? why me? ... anyway i just feel like its isolating itself from everyone but me because im the only one who can sense it. but it has power over me. i can(t) even try to concentrate about him being gone wo my head hurting. i try to make a shield n i faint u (as in me) try to make a shield but it wont work. im stuck theres nothing i can do until i find out the reason why its doing this"

(I sent a shield after that text as well as a construct/psi ball to steal its energy)

"Well i feel a bit more awake. as for the shield i still think hes here its not helping but i feel a bit stronger. he doesnt seem mad...i think its because im still too weak to get rid of him"

Now for her texts during last night: (my responses are usually to stay strong, find someone to be with, turn on lights, even run or scream, etc)

"Have u gained any of its energy? whats going on? SAM ITS IN THE HOUSE ITS IN THE MIRROR GLAREING I FEEL IT I SEE AN OUTLINE OMG OMG IM COLD SO COLD ICE IM ALONE SAM (my name)! OMG ITS 80 (degrees) HOW AM I COLD? IT WONT GO AWAY ITS THREATENING ME OMG IM SCARED N ALONE IM TRYING TO B STRONG IVE NEVER SEEN IT I JUST KNEW IT WAS THERE HELP PLEASE IM SO COLD"
(11:00 pm eastern)

"I hear noises i want to wake my grandparents up but they cant see it! can u feel anything? im so scared im crying! i hear voices movement its getting colder sam make it stop make it stop make it stop"
(11:03 pm)

"Omg there r so many noises i cant think help me sam i cant move my fingers r freezing dont let me go to sleep"
(11:07 pm)

"Sam my head theres footprints in the carpet there running around me im being boxed in why why i can(t) fight it. it doesnt want me dead it wants my energy so cold so cold i cant move phones dieing whats going on so much noise i cant think it wont go away its mad it doesnt want me dead but it wants me 4 something god i wish i knew what im going crazy sam help! make it stop make it stop"
(11:12 pm)

"Im in the dark im falling asleep the phones blury i cant move so blury so cold tired im shaking but i cant get out of my bed i cant open my mouth"
(11:19 pm)

This next part really scared me.

"Was i talking to u i forget? my head hurts i cant remember? why is it cold? its 80? where am i? my head hurts bye sam"
(11:23 pm)

Once I got that (after calming myself down) I tried my best to make the strongest shield I could and try to give her energy. Finally, from what seemed like forever, I got the next text.

"I have to get out of this room im being drained so cold must move must move"
(11:25 pm)

"Im getting warmer! so close so close something wont let me open the door theres noises out there its too scary"
(11:29 pm)

At this point I told her I shielded her (probably shouldn't have told her, but oh well) and I told her to run out there and scream just to get attention from anyone so she won't be alone.

"So cold its so dark im scared i want to sleep i can barely open my eyes so many noises"
(11:30 pm)

After that I told her she dare not sleep until she is with someone, anyone. I tried adding more to the shield as best as I could, with my limited ability as a novice. I had a bad feeling that she fainted and that was the last text I received from her...so far. Hopefully I'll be getting one soon with good news.
kami is offline  
Old 08-04-2009, 02:48 PM   #30
kami
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 53
Rep Power: 0
kami is an unknown quantity at this point
Finally some good news. She contacted me this morning.

"So i never got out of the room when i woke up. the last thing i remember is having the strength to turn on the light. my grandma found me passed out on the floor the room was lit up. it looked like a tornado hit my room. my body looked ok but this morning i feel like someone used me as a punching bag. thank u for helping me. it could have been worse. it was the scariest experience i have ever been in. ur shield got me to the door. u saved me sam. <3 now i KNOW IM NOT CRAZY my grandma felt me this morning she said i was as cold as ice"
(9:24 am eastern)

Obviously I told her how happy I was to hear from her.

"This will stop. the issue is it now knows that others know about it. be careful i dont want u getting hurt. tell me if u have any info news anything. (from me contacting the defense department) im sleeping w the lights on! i can fight it! its not gonna beat me. im just sore i have handprints on my sunburn. my grandma told me to stop touching it so the marks will go away."

I told her to always stay with someone and keep a flashlight on her (thank you swiftsilver).

"i dunno i dont want to b alone but no one in my family will listen to me. im alone but i have the light. it doesnt do anything in the light for some reason. i put a cream on my body so the marks vanished off my sunburn. sont worry i will b okay. im just happy it happened to me n not u. i dont want it hurting anyone else. i would b sad if it hurt u i would like its my fault u dont want to experience what i went through last night. the scary part is that there is no where to run n that no one would believe u. if i told my parents they would laugh n think im crazy but im not i was still cold in the morning"
kami is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Tags
entity, ghost, haunting

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.