PSIENCE

[Joshpantera]

Dean Radin's brand of science: PSI-ence. 

 

 

[midniterider]

O.M.G., you dih-unt just spell science like that!

[Joshpantera]

On 11/29/2018 at 12:23 AM, midniterider said:

O.M.G., you dih-unt just spell science like that!

 

PSI-cology! 

[Tsathoggua9]

Radin is a pretty fascinating fellow!

[Joshpantera]

22 hours ago, Tsathoggua9 said:

Radin is a pretty fascinating fellow!

 

Here's an interesting story from Radin that I was listening to recently. I have shit like this happen all the time. It's hard to say whether you're just more aware of things when you focus your consciousness on very specific things or what. Or if you're literally attracting people, happenstances, information, etc. But it's pretty interesting whatever the case my be: 

 

 

The Psience of synchronicity.......

[Tsathoggua9]

17 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

Here's an interesting story from Radin that I was listening to recently. I have shit like this happen all the time. It's hard to say whether you're just more aware of things when you focus your consciousness on very specific things or what. Or if you're literally attracting people, happenstances, information, etc. But it's pretty interesting whatever the case my be: 

 

 

The Psience of synchronicity.......

 

Fascinating!

[Ellinas]

I suppose the question is whether synchronicity is just a coincidence, if you see what I mean...

[Joshpantera]

I'm going through the Synchronicity book by Kirby Surprise. It's certainly coincidence. But it's when coincidence's line up in abundance, and it starts seeming out of the ordinary. That's where Surprise sees people looking for supernatural explanations and conclusions. But he looks beyond those explanations. It's very interesting. Ultimately it's about identifying synchronicity and then toying around with it consciously, purposefully - something like when you're lucid dreaming. And he's going over why it probably happens (from a naturalist and evolution oriented explanation) and how to focus in and get conscious results back from it. 

 

Dean Radin's example is a small example of what Surprise covers in the book. I'm guessing that Radin is aware of Surprises work. 

[Joshpantera]

It took a while, but I got through Synchronicity on audible. There are some strange sections that come off a little bizarre. But all in all I liked the book. It explains a lot. 

 

I also went through Dean Radin's book, "Real Magic," on audible as well. It's about perspective more so than anything else. I understand what he's getting at about modern science and technology being the exoteric branches of what was once considered natural magic. And in a lot of ways modern technology IS real magic. Rewind to the bronze age and flash any of this technology at the old biblical writers, and they'd have a new book of the bible written about it. lol

 

But seriously, though, I thought both books were fun and provoke a lot of thought. And can bring some changes in perspective if you understand what they're referring to. 

[♦ Fuego ♦]

8 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

And in a lot of ways modern technology IS real magic

 

I was surprised when I researched our understanding of electricity. Just 200 years ago all we knew about was static electricity and Leyden jars, and no idea what it meant. Someone figured out that they could connect certain materials (conductors like metals and char cloth) and extend the effect for quite a distance. What an exponential growth of tech since then! Communication was one of the biggest byproducts, initially boosted by the Transcontinental Railroad that brought news and cultural trends from one coast to the other WAY faster than it ever had traveled, and telegraph cables accompanied the tracks for even faster communication. 

[pantheory]

Interesting and intelligent guy. But those that believe in psychic phenomena, magic, non-physical mental activities, telepathy, are self-deluded IMO, similar to well-intentioned religious folk.

 

That being said, I agree with him about how science works. There are two major types of scientists. Those shooting for breakthrough science involving totally new insights, and those that must follow the pack looking for small improvements to get anywhere in their field. The first group are often not mainstream scientists, while the second group are nearly all mainstream scientists.

 

We live in a tech society that involves a third type of science. These are experimentalists and engineers like Thomas Edison. They  are searching for new technologies. Many ignore or don't even know fundamental theory related to their investigations.

 

Many think science is the backbone of discovery, but instead it is the engineer that usually is the backbone of our technology.

 

As to the subject Psience, I ain't too fond of magic or most conclusions of parapsychologists -- even if the research has a science basis. Unfortunately these types of "woo" conclusions also exist in mainstream science as well, IMO.

[midniterider]

On 11/6/2021 at 8:28 AM, pantheory said:

 

 

As to the subject Psience, I ain't too fond of magic or most conclusions of parapsychologists -- even if the research has a science basis. Unfortunately these types of "woo" conclusions also exist in mainstream science as well, IMO.

 

 

So you ignore scientific research and facts that dont coincide with your personal ideology? Or is it just the conclusion you dont like? 

 

 

 

[pantheory]

2 hours ago, midniterider said:

 

So you ignore scientific research and facts that dont coincide with your personal ideology? Or is it just the conclusion you dont like? 

 

 

No, there are almost countless other studies that deny the existence of the para-normal, psychic phenomena, telepathy etc. as pseudo-science -- meaning such studies skirt the scientific method and have never been proven by more extensive studies.  It's too much like religion in that it requires belief IMO rather than science -- hence Psience.

 

As you may know by now, I think a lot of what the mainstream calls science today also does not follow the scientific method either, as explained in the second and third links below.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parapsychology

 

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-psychology/chapter/the-scientific-method/

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hide-and-seek/201903/the-problems-science

[midniterider]

comment withdrawn

 

 

 

[Joshpantera]

On 11/7/2021 at 1:53 PM, pantheory said:

No, there are almost countless other studies that deny the existence of the para-normal, psychic phenomena, telepathy etc. as pseudo-science -- meaning such studies skirt the scientific method and have never been proven by more extensive studies.  It's too much like religion in that it requires belief IMO rather than science -- hence Psience.

 

I don't know the details of these tests. I'd have to look into it more. But the main thing is that Radin has 5 and 6 sigma results that he discusses. The over arching view of all of it, has to do with Consciousness more so than anything else. Even with the theurgy issues. They claim to have results that show that something beyond chance is taking place in some cases. Meaning that those who claim that there's nothing to any of it, are basically wrong. He's claiming results. But those results basically amount to things that people can appear to do with their minds and consciousness more so than anything else. The evidence doesn't point to spooky spirits or anything like that. Certainly not god. 

 

So, in the event, let's say, a christian or someone else thinks that any of this proves god via theurgy tests and studies or anything else, that's not exactly true.

 

And the big issue is that getting closer to realizing Consciousness with a capital "C" is entirely pantheistic in scope and depth, not monotheistic at all. I've noticed that some christians like to claim a win for judeo-christianity by cited Consciousness studies. When in reality it points to pantheistic conclusions that basically steam roll the bible and christianity, not bolster it. 

 

This is why I prefer to keep abreast on every front. Including the spiritual and mystical. 

 

The materialistic science fronts. Second guessing the accepting theories front. Looking at the history of esoteric traditions and the ancient mystery school's front. Understanding the findings of secular based archaeology front. Even this history of magical practice front - which is a sub section of esoteric traditions. 

 

It's all relevant to counter apologetics in their own ways. 

 

[pantheory]

16 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

I don't know the details of these tests. I'd have to look into it more. But the main thing is that Radin has 5 and 6 sigma results that he discusses. The over arching view of all of it, has to do with Consciousness more so than anything else. Even with the theurgy issues. They claim to have results that show that something beyond chance is taking place in some cases. Meaning that those who claim that there's nothing to any of it, are basically wrong. He's claiming results. But those results basically amount to things that people can appear to do with their minds and consciousness more so than anything else. The evidence doesn't point to spooky spirits or anything like that. Certainly not god. 

 

So in the event, let's say, a christian or someone else thinks that any of this proves god via theurgy tests and studies or anything else, that's not exactly true.

 

And the big issue is that getting closer to realizing Consciousness with a capital "C" is entirely pantheistic in scope and depth, not monotheistic at all. I've noticed that some christians like to claim a win for judeo-christianity by cited Consciousness studies. When in reality it points to pantheistic conclusions that basically steam roll the bible and christianity, not bolster it. Much like the idiot who thought that the particle - wave duality proves god. If it goes in any direction at all, it's a pantheistic direction as opposed to a monotheistic direction. What a moron. 

 

This is why I prefer to keep abreast on every front. 

 

The materialistic science front. Second guessing the accepting theories front. Looking at the history of esoteric traditions and the ancient mystery schools front. Understanding the findings of secular based archaeology front. Even this history of magical practice front which is a sub section of esoteric traditions. 

 

It's all relevant to counter apologetics in their own ways. 

 

 

Hi Josh,

 

I've heard Radin talk and believe he is an honest guy. That being said however, statistics via a 5-6 sigma result can be totally wrong with a false conclusion when the experiment has not been properly designed. If you can find a link to one of his experiments where such a statistical claim has been made (more than 3 sigma), and one that explains the experiment's design in detail, I expect that I could explain to anyone what is wrong with the experiment,  its design, and its conclusion.

 

https://anthempress.com/religion-supernaturalism-the-paranormal-and-pseudoscience-hb

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Million_Dollar_Paranormal_Challenge

 

https://theconversation.com/hearing-ghost-voices-relies-on-pseudoscience-and-fallibility-of-human-perception-48160

 

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00488452

 

http://www.mnsu.edu/astro/skipp/Honors201.04.syllabus.S07.pdf

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5727372/

 

 

 

 

 

[Joshpantera]

On 11/12/2021 at 10:59 AM, pantheory said:

I've heard Radin talk and believe he is an honest guy. That being said however, statistics via a 5-6 sigma result can be totally wrong with a false conclusion when the experiment has not been properly designed. If you can find a link to one of his experiments where such a statistical claim has been made (more than 3 sigma), and one that explains the experiment's design in detail, I expect that I could explain to anyone what is wrong with the experiment,  its design, and its conclusion.

 

I have the audio book, "Real Magic." 

 

He describes the experiments in the book, but I listened to it. I wasn't reading it and checking the citation. You can probably get a copy of the book and find all of his citation for the experiments he describes. The verbal descriptions sound pretty interesting with some of them. But you'll have to get a copy of the book to try and analyze the details of the experiments. 

[pantheory]

19 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

I have the audio book, "Real Magic." 

 

He describes the experiments in the book, but I listened to it. I wasn't reading it and checking the citation. You can probably get a copy of the book and find all of his citation for the experiments he describes. The verbal descriptions sound pretty interesting with some of them. But you'll have to get a copy of the book to try and analyze the details of the experiments.

 

"Real Magic" certainly sounds mystical. I'm not a fan of magic other than the slight-of-hand variety, nor do I believe in the higher consciousness of man or of the universe. I believe based upon my research and studies, that everything in reality is very simple, no spirits of gods, contrary to ideas of most lay  people and many scientists. Remember that roughly half of the scientists in the western world are either spiritual or religious.

 

But as a philosophy, I see nothing wrong with ideas such as higher consciousness. A philosophy is simply a perspective of reality, a way of looking at reality.  A philosophy can never be tested, proved or disproved. On the other hand, a science proposal, hypothesis or theory, must be both testable and be able to be disproved or it cannot rightfully be called science.

 

https://sci.waikato.ac.nz/evolution/Theories.shtml

 

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/philosophy

 

[Joshpantera]

9 minutes ago, pantheory said:

But as a philosophy, I see nothing wrong with ideas such as higher consciousness. A philosophy is simply a perspective of reality,.  A philosophy can never be tested, proved or disproved. A science hypothesis or theory must be both testable and be able to be disproved or it cannot be called science.

 

That's why I see this as a potentially productive direction to look into where ex christian spirituality is concerned. Maybe there is something to a lot of the unexplained mysteries coming from the psi research. But the path doesn't lead back to either christianity or to gods in any literal sense. It leads to potentials of the human mind against ideas like fundamental consciousness, which, isn't even necessarily theistic. But it does constitute a spiritual outlook of sorts along with a philosophical view. And is altogether pretty harmless. 

 

 

[midniterider]

Accepting consciousness as primary probably won't change lives much. Not mine anyway.