Freethought & Rationalism Archive

JGL53 · 06-19-2003, 10:00 AM

I'm having trouble following your line of reasoning, Anti-Materialist. Perhaps you are talking over my head

This (your) thread's title is "Dreams are not generated in the brain."

So, in simple terms that even I can understand

, where originally, specifically, do you suspect dreams, including yours, mine, and the dog's, are in fact being generated?

eh · 06-19-2003, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Anti-Materialist
And another thing...

My tarot cards told me that the Amazing Randi is due to lose his million bucks this coming thursday....

Wow, a testible prediction. When this thursday comes, and Randi still has the money in the account, will that lessen your opinion of tarot cards?

Anti-Materialist · 06-19-2003, 02:34 PM

Tarot cards are horse poop...

that comment was made more in the way of humor...

But, to answer the general thrust of your question - yes, if a concept fails under analysis, then that concept should be rejected.

My dreams-not-originating-in-the-brain concept has failed under analysis. Specifically, Jinto gave an excellent explanation as to why the brain would in fact possess the ability to generate a virtual reality environment.

His explanation makes the most sense, and thus should be adopted as the most likely explanation - until a better one comes along.

As to where else dreams could have come from, the answer is simple - the could come from your etheric brain. That would be the data processing center of your etheric body. You know - your soul.

Arguments about whether or not we have a soul could go round and round forever. I can see my own aura. According to new agers that aura is the bit of my soul that extends outside of the boundaries of my physical brain. They then go on to say that it is something that can be manipulated, and that its various colors are meaningful. I say horse poop to that.

Materialists would argue that we should assume that auras, or etheric vision, or out-of-body experiences are just self induced hallucinations. Experiments at producing some sort of verifiable evidence to support the existence of auras have all ended in failure. The researchers then say that since these experiments have failed, we should assume that auras are imaginary. I say horse poop to that as well.

We should make no assumptions. There are plenty of explanations that fit the data that would work to either side. Until we get a verifiable explanation that is entirely consistent, then we must simply assume we don't know, and leave it at that.

I can see auras, I can induce out-of-body experiences and I can use etheric vision. None of these things work well enough to be verifiable. In fact, they can be shown not to produce predictable results. You would think at first that would mean they should be dismissed as untrue. However, the imaginary models for explaining these types of phenomena are such that, if you think about it - these phenomena should not produce verifiable results.

I will not make an assumption until I get some sort of verifiable result. I will not assume that the null hypothesis is true, just because the posited hypothesis can be shown to be false.

If we don't have a working explanation - then we assume nothing.

God Fearing Atheist · 06-19-2003, 04:21 PM

From Domhoff, G. W. (1999) Using Hall/Van De Castle Dream Content Analysis to Test New Theories: An Example Using a Theory Proposed by Ernest Hartmann. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Dreams, Santa Cruz, CA:

Quote:

Fourth, there is little or no evidence that dreaming has any adaptive function, including the one ascribed to it by Hartmann. Most people recall less than 1% of their dreams, and even the best recallers are only remembering a few percent of their dreams, so dreams cannot be very important as a source of information. The few that are remembered rarely contain even a hint of a solution to a problem, contrary to the long list of questionable anecdotes relating dreams to artistic achievements. Moreover, there is no evidence that people who recall dreams, or make use of their dreams in some way, are any healthier or happier than those who do not recall dreams.

Despite the lack of evidence for recalled dreams having any function, it still might be argued that the process of dreaming has an adaptive purpose. However, there is no evidence from the sleep laboratory that the process of dreaming has any function in any evolutionary sense (Antrobus, 1993; Flanagan, 2000; Foulkes, 1993; Foulkes, 1999). There is even evidence that there are people who do not dream but suffer no adverse effects--pre-school children (Foulkes, 1999), adults with poor visuospatial skills (Butler & Watson, 1985), people who have suffered various kinds of head injuries (Solms, 1997), and schizophrenics who have been subjected to psychosurgery (Frank, 1946; Frank, 1950).

-GFA

Rider · 06-19-2003, 04:35 PM

AM,

This might be a bit off topic but I did notice in your original post that you were able to have out of body experiences. Now I might not be able to explain things on the same level as everyone else here, plus I just registered to this forum (have been checking it out for awhile). I also have out of body experiences. My first was when I was 21.

It started when I was in my house on my couch starting to fall asleep while I was watching a TV show. My eyes started to droop and then I was asleep. A moment later I found myself floating up from my body, at first I thought it was a dream but it was too clear to be a dream and I could control things and make myself do things in this "reality". Also I could hear people talking, it was familiar sounding talk... it sounded like a lot of people talking at the same time, some of it sounded like a radio station. I "flew" over to the microwave, and then stood. I looked into the microwave door and saw my reflection, my eyes had reversed and looking in the opposite direction... then I woke up.

It was the most disturbing thing I had ever experienced in my life. I didn't tell anyone because I didn't want to have anyone think I was crazy. I was married at the time and I didn't even tell my wife.

A few months later I had another experience...

I was taking a nap on a bed and on the headboard there was a mirror that went the entire length of the headboard. Again I went into subconscious mode and then was in the reality. I looked up at the mirror and my eyes were blood red, then I had fangs. Freaking out I suddenly got pulled backwards on the bed like someone was pulling my legs back and up, then I started floating and being pulled side to side, in the reflection I saw myself fall off the bed but I was still looking into the mirror. This whole time I could FEEL these things happening. I knew when I was seeing and I could actually struggle and almost get away. Also... during that time I KNEW I was asleep... even though I knew I was in danger. This was something new that didn't happen last time. I think because my brain recognized the reality and knew that it was fake.

At this point I came to the determination that something was amiss. I had sincere feelings of danger and regret. I feel that when these out of body experiences happen you fall into a semi-subconsious state. Your brain knows you are sleeping but plays out something that is current and on your mind in a strange way during this time.

Anyway let me tell one more time and I'll stop rambling. I just find it interesting that someone else has these experiences. Also after the 2nd time I stopped calling it an out-of-body experience. I don't have a name for it anymore but I am an Athiest so I do not believe in your soul leaving your body etc.

Recently I was on a different bed trying to stay awake but I knew I was dead tired. This time was quicker, I didn't realize I was in the dream world until I stood up. When I did I knew I was asleep, instantly knew it. I tested this theory in my little reality. I looked down onto the bed and I wasn't there. I looked at my arm and I started to clench my fist over and over again. I twisted my body around and boom I woke up, clenching my fist and rolled over to the other side of the bed. I went back to sleep as fast as I could. I had to get to the bottom of this. Trying to fall asleep didn't work. I was now awake and was too excited about my new discovery. It took me awhile but I finally got relaxed enough to take a nap.
There I was again. Standing over my bed. This time I took a moment to survey my surroundings. It looked like a low quality videotape on EP mode. Blurry, lacking any kind of depth or color clarity. The room was dark and the only light was through the window. Sunlight sort of. I could hear that radio station again, it sounded familiar but I couldn't place it. I walked out of my room and into the rest of the house which was completely dark. I saw a figure standing near the counter, I went closer and from somewhere a light illuminated his face. It was my brother. He looked kinda strange, a little placid. So being the brave soul I am I asked him "What is this place?"
He looked at me intently then asked me, "What are you doing?"
I said, "What?"
Then some kind of insect leg came crawling over the counter, it was gigantic and then a giant hairy some kind of insect started to crawl towards me.
My brother yelled at me, "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?"
In a panic I clenched my fist and woke myself up.

.... that was a month ago. I haven't had one since.

I honestly think it's some part of the brain that hasn't been explored. Wether you want to "explain" it or not really doesn't matter. It is there and it needs to be examined and tested. I plan on making further attempts when I have another one. I believe that when you fall into this sub-subconscious state your mind still knows that you are asleep that is why you can do more things in this reality. I still haven't figured out the whole radio station thing. I think that has to do with long term memory but I could be mistaken. The next time I'm going to see if I can access some part of my long term memory to see if I can "see" some part of my childhood.

Although my only fear is that I hear that when you are dreaming and you dream that you die you actually do (no Matrix parralells intended). I'm only going to go so far for the interests of scientific research.

Anyway if this post has no part being on this thread I apologize, but I thought this to be the most prudent place to post. Thanks for reading.

JGL53 · 06-19-2003, 08:27 PM

I would recommend Carl Sagan's book (his last book?) "The Demon-Haunted World", specifically chapters four through eight, which offer a well thoughtout skeptical view of all such experiences.

In short, his view is that hallucinations, daymares, alien abductions, visions of the V. Mary, etc., no matter how abnormal they may seem to those who have them, are actually just a normal part of human life and require neither 'supernatural' nor 'psychotic' explanations.

Corona688 · 06-20-2003, 03:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Anti-Materialist
Object recognition is very very difficult. It takes tremendous processing power to recognize an object - far more processing power than it takes to simply generate the image of that object.

The brain is not a computer, and does not resemble a computer in any shape or form. It is analog, chemical, and composed of billions of independent parts comprising a neural net. It performs a very different kind of work than a computer.

Quote:

Our brains are designed to handle high speed object recognition.

That's a very loaded word you've got in there. While it's amazing how complex the brain can be, it's also amazing how much resemblance our brains bear to other mammals, and even lizards. For a thorough demonstration of the lizard brain in all of us, I present The Horror of Blimps.

Quote:

Dream images are generated by the same mechanisms that handle high speed object recognition.

Hm, I beg to differ. It's not reading optical or audio information and interpreting it, it's getting a direct feed from your past experiences. What needs to be generated?

Quote:

This is not just a coincidental byproduct

That we agree on; dreaming certainly has a purpose.

Quote:

In order for the brain to handle object oriented pattern recognition, it must be be able to process objects rapidly.

There you go again. 'Process'. The brain is NOT a computer, but a neural net. The two handle information in very different ways - one could argue that a neural net is not really processing at all, but stimulus-response on a grand scale.

Quote:

Part of this process results in dreaming - in which already stored objects are integrated into already stored backgrounds.

And this perfectly designed brain doesn't process this while it's awake, why?

Quote:

Yes - I must admit this makes perfect sense. This would provide a perfectly valid explanation for why dreaming, and other internal virtual reality experiences such as out-of-body experiences or drug induced "trips" is possible.

You're closing in on a similar branch of neuroscience theory about dreams...

During sleep, the brain seems to randomly trigger recent memories, and unconciously tries to interpret them with respect to older memories. Certainly, dreaming has a very significant connection with memory. Beyond that, it's difficult to say.

Quote:

I very much appreciate your helping me think this through. Now I am at least a little less skeptical of the current materialistic worldview.

No problem.

Quote:

However - I've got like about 10 million of these sorts of arguments to throw up

Too easy. Just too easy.

Quote:

and if even one of them holds up under scrutiny, then the materialistic world view will still seem foolish to me.

I sense a little backwards thinking here... you are the one that is making the positive claim. Do we really need to get into the invisible pink unicorn argument again? It is impossible to DISprove ANYTHING, because in the absence of evidence you can assume whatever you want.

I for one prefer my feet on the ground, with arguments based on logic instead of "it might be this, dare you to show me I'm wrong", and reality that is real by virtue of it actually being so.

The brain really doesn't look to me like the sort of thing that was 'designed'. Why would there be all the successive layers laid down on top of each other, from the lizard-brain brainstem to the higher levels that mammals use for complex emotions and reasoning, all affecting each other. The brain is a real MESS of hormones, chemicals, neurotransmitters, and the imprints of past experiences.

Too complex to understand at once means it's designed? Hogwash. It's the very hallmark of design that it *IS* comprehensible. Peel back the outside of something designed and you see frameworks, modules, straight lines. Only the random processes of evolution and natural selection could feasibly have produced something so convoluted and rube-goldbergian as the brain. Or maybye god was drunk at the time.

Jinto · 06-20-2003, 06:43 AM

Quote:

The brain is not a computer, and does not resemble a computer in any shape or form. It is analog, chemical, and composed of billions of independent parts comprising a neural net. It performs a very different kind of work than a computer.

Techically, the brain does not fit the definition of a computer, in that it does not assembles, stores, correlates, or otherwise process information by numerical methods. But this technicality does not mean that it does not assemble, store, correlate, and otherwise process information, which is the relevant pert of the analogy.

Quote:

That's a very loaded word you've got in there. While it's amazing how complex the brain can be, it's also amazing how much resemblance our brains bear to other mammals, and even lizards. For a thorough demonstration of the lizard brain in all of us, I present The Horror of Blimps.

He's not TRYING to say that the human brain is different from that of other mammals. Jeez...

Quote:

Hm, I beg to differ. It's not reading optical or audio information and interpreting it, it's getting a direct feed from your past experiences. What needs to be generated?

Okay, if the brain doesn't get optical or audio information nad process it, then just what DOES it do with the signals from our eyes and ears, hmmm?

Quote:

That we agree on; dreaming certainly has a purpose

If you think dreaming has a purpose, then you are in direct contradiction of just about every scientific study ever done on sleep. Provide some evidence for this assertion or shut the hell up.

Quote:

There you go again. 'Process'. The brain is NOT a computer, but a neural net. The two handle information in very different ways - one could argue that a neural net is not really processing at all, but stimulus-response on a grand scale.

Would you like to tell me what the brain does with the information it recieves from the information it recieves from all the other neurons in the body if it does not process it?

Quote:

And this perfectly designed brain doesn't process this while it's awake, why?

What assertion was ever made of perfect design? Given that some people hallucinate while they are awake, your premise is also falsified. Why do you insist on making strawmen?

[quote]You're closing in on a similar branch of neuroscience theory about dreams...

During sleep, the brain seems to randomly trigger recent memories, and unconciously tries to interpret them with respect to older memories. Certainly, dreaming has a very significant connection with memory. Beyond that, it's difficult to say.[/qutoe]

And the only debate here was why those momories should be possible to view lucidly instead of abstractly - which has been solved. What IS your problem?

Quote:

The brain really doesn't look to me like the sort of thing that was 'designed'. Why would there be all the successive layers laid down on top of each other, from the lizard-brain brainstem to the higher levels that mammals use for complex emotions and reasoning, all affecting each other. The brain is a real MESS of hormones, chemicals, neurotransmitters, and the imprints of past experiences.

Too complex to understand at once means it's designed? Hogwash. It's the very hallmark of design that it *IS* comprehensible. Peel back the outside of something designed and you see frameworks, modules, straight lines. Only the random processes of evolution and natural selection could feasibly have produced something so convoluted and rube-goldbergian as the brain. Or maybye god was drunk at the time

Honestly, this kind of strawman is simply absurd. If you are too stupid to actually READ your opponent's argument, if you are too STUPID to pay attention when he ADMITS he is wrong, if you are too prejudiced to think that maybe someone can disagree with you and NOT be desrving of condescension, then you have no place on this forum. Please switch to defending the non-materialist viewpoint, because I don't want to have to act as an apologist for this kind of asinine behavior.

ps418 · 06-20-2003, 08:00 AM

One thing that I don't think has been mentioned yet is that dreaming and REM sleep can be completely abolished by certain types of brain injury and by some drugs, and such people do not have any obvious cognitive problems. So it may well be a simple byproduct of structures and functions selected for very different purposes. Regarding MAOI-induced REM inhibition:

Quote:

Of the antidepressants, the MAOIs have the strongest suppressive action on REM sleep. A number of early reports using normal and patient populations showed that MAOIs virtually completely (or completely) suppressed REM sleep for weeks to several months. In an initial study, Wyatt et al. (1969) reported that the MAOIs, isocarboxazid, pargyline hydrochloride, and mebanazine, reduced REM from about 20-25% of TST to 9.7%, 8.6% and 0.4% of TST, respectively, and that in one subject REM was virtually eliminated for two weeks.

In a subsequent report in anxious-depressed patients, Wyatt and co-workers (1971a) described the remarkable findings that the MAOI, phenelzine (Nardil), given at therapeutic doses, completely abolished REM sleep in six patients for periods of 14 to 40 days. There was a gradual decline in amounts of REM sleep for the first two weeks on the drug and a total loss of REM after 3-4 weeks. In a complementary study with narcoleptic patients, Wyatt et al. (1971b) reported that phenelzine completely abolished REM in 5 of 7 patients for the following lengths of time: 14, 19, 93, 102 and 226 days. They stated that: "The complete drug-induced suppression of REM sleep in these patients is longer and more profound than any previously described"; and further that "No adverse psychological effects were noted during the period of total rapid-eye-movement suppression".

Several other studies have similarly shown that MAOIs essentially abolish REM sleep. Akindele et al. (1970) reported that phenelzine completely eliminated REM sleep in four subjects (one normal and 3 depressed) for 2 to 8 weeks, and addressing possible behavioral consequences stated that "Far from this leading to disastrous effects on mental functions, as some might have proposed, clinical improvement began". Kupfer and Bowers (1972) showed that phenelzine abolished REM in 7 of 9 patients, and drastically suppressed it in remaining patients from pre-drug values of 23.1% and 24.8% of TST to 1.4% and 0.5% of TST, respectively. Finally, Dunleavy and Oswald (1973) reported that phenelzine eliminated REM in 22 depressed patients.

If REM sleep were involved in memory consolidation, it would seem that the total loss of REM with MAOIs for periods of several months to a year (Wyatt et al. 1969, 1971a, 1971b; Kupfer & Bowers 1972; Dunleavy & Oswald 1973) would affect memory. As indicated above, the loss of REM did not appear to be associated with any noticeable decline in cognitive functions in these largely patient populations. These studies, however, made no systematic attempt to assess the effects of MAOIs on cognition.

Other reports, however, have examined the actions of MAOIs, primarily phenelzine, on cognition/memory and described an essential lack of impairment (Rothman et al. 1962; Raskin et al. 1983; Georgotas et al. 1983, 1989). For example, Raskin et al. (1983) observed no adverse effects of phenelzine on a battery of 13 psychomotor and cognitive tasks in a heterogeneous population of 29 depressed patients. Similarly, Georgotas and colleagues (Georgotas et al. 1983, 1989) reported that elderly depressed patients given phenelzine for 2 to 7 weeks showed no alteration in several measures of cognitive function, and concluded that the lack of adverse effects with phenelzine suggests that it is preferable to TCAs (see below) in the treatment of depression in the geriatric population.

Regarding brain lesions that abolish REM:

Quote:

Although sizeable lesions at rostral, mesencephalic levels of the brainstem often result in persistent coma or death (Cairns 1952), those located more caudally within the pons are less severe and have been shown to give rise to a condition termed the "locked-in" syndrome. As originally described by Plum and Posner (1966), patients with this syndrome are fully conscious, alert, and responsive, but are quadriplegic and mute. Most of the patients retain the ability to make eye movements and very limited facial/head movements and some can communicate by small facial gestures. For instance, Feldman (1971) described a case of a woman with this syndrome who learned to communicate by Morse code using eye blinks and jaw movements.

A number of reports have examined sleep-wake profiles of these patients, and probably not surprisingly, have shown that most of them (or at least those with bilateral pontine lesions) completely lack REM sleep (Chase et al. 1968; Markand & Dyken 1976; Cummings & Greenberg 1977). For instance, Markand and Dyken (1976) reported that REM sleep was entirely absent in five of seven patients with the "locked-in" syndrome; SWS was present in essentially normal amounts. From case reports, the mental capacities of these patients, including memory for events and people, appear to be intact.

Although rare, there have been a few reports of patients with bilateral pontine lesions who are conscious, ambulatory and verbally communicative (Osorio & Daroff 1980; Lavie et al. 1984; Valldeoriola et al. 1993). It appears that the lesions in these patients are less extensive than those with the locked-in syndrome. Nonetheless, like patients with the locked-in syndrome, they lack REM sleep (Osorio & Daroff, 1980; Valldeoriola et al., 1993). Osorio and Daroff (1980) described two such patients. Both of them showed similar sleep deficiencies, the most prominent of which was a complete loss of REM sleep. It was further pointed out that aside from minor neurological deficits, the patients led normal lives. The authors stated: "Our two patients are the first awake and ambulatory humans in whom total absence of REM sleep has been demonstrated. These REM deprived patients behaved entirely appropriately and were by no means psychotic." The "psychotic" reference alludes to the early notion, subsequently dispelled (Vogel 1975), that long term REM deprivation produces psychosis.

Lavie et al. (1984) described the interesting case of a man who at the age of twenty suffered damage to the pontine region of the brainstem from shrapnel fragments from a gunshot wound. Following the injury, the man was comatose for 10 days, remained in critical condition for another two weeks and then recovered. An examination of his patterns of sleep at the age of 33 revealed that he essentially lacked REM sleep; that is, REM was absent on most nights and averaged 2.25% of TST on the other nights. Similar to the study by Osorio and Daroff (1980), Lavie et al. (1984) reported that despite the virtually total loss of REM sleep, the man led a normal life. For instance, following the injury the man completed college, then law school and at the time of the study was a practicing attorney.

Although no systematic attempt was made to examine the cognitive capacities of these patients, the virtual total loss of REM sleep did not seem to result in any apparent cognitive deficits.

Vertes, Robert P. and Eastman, K. E. (2000), The case against memory consolidation in REM sleep, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (6)

Patrick

ps418 · 06-20-2003, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Rider:
I honestly think it's some part of the brain that hasn't been explored. Wether you want to "explain" it or not really doesn't matter. It is there and it needs to be examined and tested. I plan on making further attempts when I have another one. I believe that when you fall into this sub-subconscious state your mind still knows that you are asleep that is why you can do more things in this reality. I still haven't figured out the whole radio station thing. I think that has to do with long term memory but I could be mistaken. The next time I'm going to see if I can access some part of my long term memory to see if I can "see" some part of my childhood.

I've had numerous experiences very similar to the ones you described, and I agree that they are interesting phenomena. I started having them when I was about 10 years old, in near-sleep states, and subsequently was able to induce them by other means. Although I wouldn't recommend this, you can induce very similar experiences pretty reliably with a drug called ketamine, a dissociative anesthetic.

Brain stimulation experiments have induced similar phenomena in a normal waking state. Wilder Penfield for instance conducted many electrical stimulation experiments, and induced many phenomena, such as vivid visual memories, music, tastes, and so on. One patient exclaimed "Oh god, I am leaving my body" following stimulation of a point on her temporal lobe (Journal of Mental Science 101 451-465, 1955, p. 458).

Recently a similar phenomenon was reproduced, briefly but repeatedly, in a 43 year old woman, by electrical stimulation of her right angular gyrus. The woman reported seeing herself from above. The stimulation also produced strong vestibular/somatosensory hallucinations -- feelings of falling from a great height, lightness, or floating/levitation. (kind of like when you wake up with a start, feeling as if you're falling out of bed)

Quote:

'Out-of-body' experiences (OBEs) are curious, usually brief sensations in which a person's consciousness seems to become detached from the body and take up a remote viewing position. Here we describe the repeated induction of this experience by focal electrical stimulation of the brain's right angular gyrus in a patient who was undergoing evaluation for epilepsy treatment. Stimulation at this site also elicited illusory transformations of the patient's arm and legs (complex somatosensory responses) and whole-body displacements (vestibular responses), indicating that out-of-body experiences may reflect a failure by the brain to integrate complex somatosensory and vestibular information.

Blanke et al., 2002. Neuropsychology: Stimulating illusory own-body perceptions. Nature 419, 269 - 270.

Patrick

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-19-2003, 10:00 AM	#31
JGL53 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Outer Mongolia Posts: 4,091	I'm having trouble following your line of reasoning, Anti-Materialist. Perhaps you are talking over my head This (your) thread's title is "Dreams are not generated in the brain." So, in simple terms that even I can understand , where originally, specifically, do you suspect dreams, including yours, mine, and the dog's, are in fact being generated?

06-19-2003, 02:34 PM	#33
Anti-Materialist Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Georgia Posts: 87	Tarot cards are horse poop... that comment was made more in the way of humor... But, to answer the general thrust of your question - yes, if a concept fails under analysis, then that concept should be rejected. My dreams-not-originating-in-the-brain concept has failed under analysis. Specifically, Jinto gave an excellent explanation as to why the brain would in fact possess the ability to generate a virtual reality environment. His explanation makes the most sense, and thus should be adopted as the most likely explanation - until a better one comes along. As to where else dreams could have come from, the answer is simple - the could come from your etheric brain. That would be the data processing center of your etheric body. You know - your soul. Arguments about whether or not we have a soul could go round and round forever. I can see my own aura. According to new agers that aura is the bit of my soul that extends outside of the boundaries of my physical brain. They then go on to say that it is something that can be manipulated, and that its various colors are meaningful. I say horse poop to that. Materialists would argue that we should assume that auras, or etheric vision, or out-of-body experiences are just self induced hallucinations. Experiments at producing some sort of verifiable evidence to support the existence of auras have all ended in failure. The researchers then say that since these experiments have failed, we should assume that auras are imaginary. I say horse poop to that as well. We should make no assumptions. There are plenty of explanations that fit the data that would work to either side. Until we get a verifiable explanation that is entirely consistent, then we must simply assume we don't know, and leave it at that. I can see auras, I can induce out-of-body experiences and I can use etheric vision. None of these things work well enough to be verifiable. In fact, they can be shown not to produce predictable results. You would think at first that would mean they should be dismissed as untrue. However, the imaginary models for explaining these types of phenomena are such that, if you think about it - these phenomena should not produce verifiable results. I will not make an assumption until I get some sort of verifiable result. I will not assume that the null hypothesis is true, just because the posited hypothesis can be shown to be false. If we don't have a working explanation - then we assume nothing.

06-19-2003, 04:35 PM	#35
Rider Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 580	AM, This might be a bit off topic but I did notice in your original post that you were able to have out of body experiences. Now I might not be able to explain things on the same level as everyone else here, plus I just registered to this forum (have been checking it out for awhile). I also have out of body experiences. My first was when I was 21. It started when I was in my house on my couch starting to fall asleep while I was watching a TV show. My eyes started to droop and then I was asleep. A moment later I found myself floating up from my body, at first I thought it was a dream but it was too clear to be a dream and I could control things and make myself do things in this "reality". Also I could hear people talking, it was familiar sounding talk... it sounded like a lot of people talking at the same time, some of it sounded like a radio station. I "flew" over to the microwave, and then stood. I looked into the microwave door and saw my reflection, my eyes had reversed and looking in the opposite direction... then I woke up. It was the most disturbing thing I had ever experienced in my life. I didn't tell anyone because I didn't want to have anyone think I was crazy. I was married at the time and I didn't even tell my wife. A few months later I had another experience... I was taking a nap on a bed and on the headboard there was a mirror that went the entire length of the headboard. Again I went into subconscious mode and then was in the reality. I looked up at the mirror and my eyes were blood red, then I had fangs. Freaking out I suddenly got pulled backwards on the bed like someone was pulling my legs back and up, then I started floating and being pulled side to side, in the reflection I saw myself fall off the bed but I was still looking into the mirror. This whole time I could FEEL these things happening. I knew when I was seeing and I could actually struggle and almost get away. Also... during that time I KNEW I was asleep... even though I knew I was in danger. This was something new that didn't happen last time. I think because my brain recognized the reality and knew that it was fake. At this point I came to the determination that something was amiss. I had sincere feelings of danger and regret. I feel that when these out of body experiences happen you fall into a semi-subconsious state. Your brain knows you are sleeping but plays out something that is current and on your mind in a strange way during this time. Anyway let me tell one more time and I'll stop rambling. I just find it interesting that someone else has these experiences. Also after the 2nd time I stopped calling it an out-of-body experience. I don't have a name for it anymore but I am an Athiest so I do not believe in your soul leaving your body etc. Recently I was on a different bed trying to stay awake but I knew I was dead tired. This time was quicker, I didn't realize I was in the dream world until I stood up. When I did I knew I was asleep, instantly knew it. I tested this theory in my little reality. I looked down onto the bed and I wasn't there. I looked at my arm and I started to clench my fist over and over again. I twisted my body around and boom I woke up, clenching my fist and rolled over to the other side of the bed. I went back to sleep as fast as I could. I had to get to the bottom of this. Trying to fall asleep didn't work. I was now awake and was too excited about my new discovery. It took me awhile but I finally got relaxed enough to take a nap. There I was again. Standing over my bed. This time I took a moment to survey my surroundings. It looked like a low quality videotape on EP mode. Blurry, lacking any kind of depth or color clarity. The room was dark and the only light was through the window. Sunlight sort of. I could hear that radio station again, it sounded familiar but I couldn't place it. I walked out of my room and into the rest of the house which was completely dark. I saw a figure standing near the counter, I went closer and from somewhere a light illuminated his face. It was my brother. He looked kinda strange, a little placid. So being the brave soul I am I asked him "What is this place?" He looked at me intently then asked me, "What are you doing?" I said, "What?" Then some kind of insect leg came crawling over the counter, it was gigantic and then a giant hairy some kind of insect started to crawl towards me. My brother yelled at me, "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?" In a panic I clenched my fist and woke myself up. .... that was a month ago. I haven't had one since. I honestly think it's some part of the brain that hasn't been explored. Wether you want to "explain" it or not really doesn't matter. It is there and it needs to be examined and tested. I plan on making further attempts when I have another one. I believe that when you fall into this sub-subconscious state your mind still knows that you are asleep that is why you can do more things in this reality. I still haven't figured out the whole radio station thing. I think that has to do with long term memory but I could be mistaken. The next time I'm going to see if I can access some part of my long term memory to see if I can "see" some part of my childhood. Although my only fear is that I hear that when you are dreaming and you dream that you die you actually do (no Matrix parralells intended). I'm only going to go so far for the interests of scientific research. Anyway if this post has no part being on this thread I apologize, but I thought this to be the most prudent place to post. Thanks for reading.

06-19-2003, 08:27 PM	#36
JGL53 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Outer Mongolia Posts: 4,091	I would recommend Carl Sagan's book (his last book?) "The Demon-Haunted World", specifically chapters four through eight, which offer a well thoughtout skeptical view of all such experiences. In short, his view is that hallucinations, daymares, alien abductions, visions of the V. Mary, etc., no matter how abnormal they may seem to those who have them, are actually just a normal part of human life and require neither 'supernatural' nor 'psychotic' explanations.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.