|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
We seemed to stray from the focus of a good forum here: http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/117952#post2488540
So I ask the question that arose there in the context of needing to die in order to reach what many think of as heaven.
I feel it is not necessary. Others think it is dilusional to believe we can exist outside of our physical body. I believe I can travel in my thoughts and that I can shape my reality in those thoughts. Others suggest that is all poppycock.
What say you?
Yes, it is poppycock. Existing "outside" of our physical bodies is just silly, childish nonsense.
What evidence can you provide? What are you using for a definition of "thought" or even "we"? Are you assuming a supernatural undetectable "soul" as a substitute for the electrical pattern of electron motion/neuron formation in your brain?
Until evidence is presented, I'm afraid that I will have to hang with the side that thinks it's poppycock. The side that can't find a "soul" and thus has no made up belief in it's existence and that doesn't find massive electrical activity happening outside the brain tissues.
Just in passing, I might mention that even were you able to "see" around corners or across the world, able to "hear" conversations from a continent away, it still does not point to "travelling outside your body".
I got called into the office early to consult on a danged IP issue. Troublesome that stuff. Copyrights and all. Some morons 100's of years ago suggest that we can own thoughts put down on paper and claim them as our own.
What the heck do they think they are doing --- patenting their minds?
I tell you these guys really think thoughts can exist on paper -- http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf How foolish. They should know that thoughts only exist in our skull and cannot escape!!
That's government for you, all right. Can't get anything else right, why expect them to this one?
A friend of mine is a corporate lawyer. They are just so much fun.
I just came out of our server room where they are working on a glitch. Very strange the amount of static electricity floating around outside the servers --- I am told that is a problem that they are working on. It is not good.
But here all these techies were, trying to contain and I suppose somehow ground the electrical currents where there must be an arch of some sort. Dang these guys still have issues containing electricity inside boxes. And I saw our "power company" hosing down a transformer and heard the crackling from the cables. Man o man they all should hire Rad Man and Wilderness --- those to guys know that electrical impulses and energy cannot escape a brain --- how easy to contain them in a metal box.
Oh, I didn't say electrical current is contained in anything. If one gets struck by lightning it goes in and comes out the other side.
I'm talking about thought though. We were talking about thought right?
Excuse me I thought it was your position that thought was just neural energy contained in the brain -- commonly referred to a electrical impulse between synapses that allow for cognitive thought. If you think thought is more or less, please fill me in. Because as I see your argument that is the only empirical data on thought.
Neural impulses are not technically electrical because communication across synapses is chemical, only the communication along the dendrite within the cell is electrical. More importantly the electrical component is only part of what allows the thought to occur.
The thought is also a product of the hardware itself. It can no more occur outside the brain than software can run outside a computer. Saying thought occurs outside the brain because there are tiny electric fields is like saying digestion occurs outside the body because we poop.
Do I have to explain neurons and electrochemical signalling. One kind of needs neurons to think and if your nerons are outside of your skull your most likely dead.
You are really trapped in the physical Rad Man. Say how did the thoughts in your last post get from your brain into mine --- watch: "Do I have to explain neurons and electrochemical signalling. One kind of needs neurons to think and if your nerons are outside of your skull your most likely dead."
See my brain knew what your brain was thinking --- how did that happen? I also know you do not care about spelling and you did not even write that down.
Now we need to explain to you how humans communicate? I only know what your thoughts are because I see the words on my computer. If you were in the room I could hear your voice and or read your body language.
But I give up. We both have special powers, but mine cancel yours out because I can tell when someone is flinging poppycock.
Are you confusing ionized atoms with electrical currents?
Static electricity is electricity. I am not confused. I used it and meant it. Static electricity is electricity that does not flow in a current, i e not contained.
Static electricity is an excess of electrical charge (electrons) in one location over another. As electrons do not significantly exist outside of atoms, that means that it is composed of ions, either negatively or positively charged.
The common usage of "electricity" on the other hand refers to movement of electrons in or on a conductor.
Lightning, for instance, is a static discharge. The charge accumulates until it overcomes the resistance of air, whereupon it becomes a current, electrons flowing between air and ground, and we call it "electricity".
The brain makes a very small electric field which you need to stick electrodes on the skull to really measure. That saying that field is the thought would be mistaking the bark for the dog.
Currently our brain's cortex activity is limited to our bodies. Will it develop to manipulate ions outside the body in the future? Who knows...
Thoughts are changes in chemical potentials across cell membranes in the brain. And that is it.
It is what you do based on your thoughts that affects the world.
I think I summed it up rather nicely when I said,
Eric, you my friend have grossly under estimated me. I also have special powers, only mine are much more useful. I have been given the wonderful ability of knowing when someone is full of s%*t and guess what, my special senses are tingling.
Unless of course you can supply evidence.
You DID say that before. I think you need to put a little more effort to staying away from radioactive spiders...
Please you two -- pay attention. Nothing to do radiation. Strictly overdosing on hallucinogens and I promise they are all natural. Too fun!
Hallucinogens can cause subjective changes in perception, thought, emotion and consciousness. They may make you think you are floating, but your not.
Dehydration, sleep deprivation and high altitude combined will effect the same results quickly. And correct the body does not float. Deep meditation can cause the same effects and again the body does not float. Thank you for pointing out that intrinsic necessity for a difference.
The body doesn't float and you do not leave the body, you may feel like you do, but you don't.
Astral projection, levitation, extra sensory perception, living on light, (rather than food,) avatars having no shadows, dead bodies of spiritual masters not decaying for weeks and weeks, ghosts, cats/dogs walking home after being taken across country. Some mysterious things are not explainable. It doesn't mean they are not true. The soul might be so subtle there is nothing man-made that can detect it. For instance who has detected a soul leaving the body at death? Yet souls do leave the body. Just because no one has detected the soul's departure physically, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
All things are explainable, whether we know how to do it at this time or not.
However, Astral projection, levitation, extra sensory perception, living on light, (rather than food,) avatars having no shadows, dead bodies of spiritual masters not decaying for weeks and weeks, ghosts all have zero evidence for them and there is no reason to assume they have ever happened. Because they are unexplained does NOT mean they automatically exist.
So my sources tell me.
Nope, not to me. Great fun taking the grandkids out trick or treating, but even years ago parties with lots of make believe demons, witches, ghosts and other monsters were always fun.
I just know the difference between make believe and reality. Both can be fun, but when the party ends it's time to go back to the real world.
PS: While my avatar doesn't show a shadow, both Jake's and Grace's did. Guess some do, some don't.
(He's not really spidey, but don't tell HIM that!)
But, those are not mysterious things that need explanation, they are things gullible people made up because they want to believe that nonsense.
LOL. You contradict yourself. How do you know souls exist and leave the body if you can't detect it?
ATM because you cannot detect it speaks of you not existence.
True...until we realize that no one can detect such things. At least no one has ever been able to demonstrate such detection - after thousands upon thousands of unsupportable claims to the contrary, it becomes rather obvious they are either lying or able to convince themselves that their imagination as produced reality. Both are well known - the medium giving "conversations" with the dead (and an accomplice in the back room) and the theist kneeling each night.
Saints of all religions were just making it up as they went along?
There is no evidence of anything to the contrary...and religious leaders have a long, long history of liking, as well as using, the power their position gave them. From Shamans to witch doctors to catholic priests, we have seen it.
I mean, really! An old man goes up a mountain out of sight and comes back later with stone tables full of rules that support his "teachings". He claims God made them, but no one but him saw the miraculous work being done. And they grow his power and control over the populace.
Would you believe the same man today, as he takes your chicken or goat for a "necessary" sacrifice?
That's another reason why God sent Jesus: NO MORE Sacrifices.
So much good has been done in the name of Jesus and God. Why? Because people, of all walks of life….not just the saints… have been touched or are in touch with true Spirit, which God and Jesus inspires.
It does seem like God has made mistakes … Is he playing it by ear, along with the rest of us? I actually think so. Look at those dinosaurs! He had to wipe them out when he got tired of them… or after He came up with new and improved life-form models… out there in the metaphysical realm working with His blueprints of light.
Wilderness I am intrigued that you know what I can perceive. It sounds as though you are saying that only things you can perceive are valid. Or maybe that a group of Nobel Laureates get to make that decision for me. And If I disagree and perceive what they cannot I must be a nut job.
Seems like MichaelAngelo, Gallileo, Einstein and Christ fell into the nut case categories as well. Certainly Edison, Franklin and the Wrights.
Isn't that how it has worked for thousands of generations? When you claim you see pink elephants that no one else can see everyone looks rather strangely at you? When you claim you can "detect" something defined as undetectable, using only your imagination to do so, they will look at you a little oddly.
Edison "perceived" a light bulb, the Wrights "perceived" a plane. They both showed their "perception" to everyone else and everyone saw the same thing. So we should call them nuts because you can't show your perception? You've totally lost me here.
Ahh, I think all those guys were dealing with reality and could provide evidence. You are claiming you can make a flying machine without making one. They were all able to supply evidence. Where is yours?
The things that you can perceive are no different than the things anyone else can perceive, you are not special, you are human, like the rest of us.
That is a matter of education and understanding the world around us, not perception.
Are you actually putting yourself in the same category as them?
Wilderness you are speaking of them with hindsight after they showed. Had you been around before they did, you would have claimed them nuts because you could not have perceived what they did. Yes you are missing something. For some reason we call them visionaries and you close minded. "prove it to me or you are crazy". So be it. your loss not mine.
Anyone who says the can detect it are lying or insane. So, are you saying you can?
This post is from the same person that actually told me not to post again because he said I was off topic? I was simply trying to put your question into relate-able terms... what is your point here?
Ahh, he said his thoughts can exist outside his body and I told him he is full of poppycock unless he can supply evidence.
On topic, I didn't mention the time of day or how nice it is outside.
Now please stay on topic. Yours is the first here to go off topic, once again.
Unless Ive misunderstood your question, that makes very little sense to me.
I, of course, believe in a human soul... but your thoughts departing from you and taking on a life of their own? Is that what you're proposing? Is this a teaching of some kind or just a personal belief?
Beth as usual you cut right to the heart of it. "thoughts taking on a life of their own". Very cool perspective. Like the child going off to college and separating herself from the embodiment of the family unit. Yes in a sense yes. Freedom from the body and the restrictions imposed thereby. Is in essence the notion.
Im sorry if I missed it, only skimming. Do you feel you've experienced this? And we're not talking about a NDE, dealing with the soul and the body... we're talking solely of thoughts separating from the thinker?
It would seem more that if you are experiencing thoughts not from the thinker that ESP is at work; that you are picking up thoughts originating in someone else.
Because they come from someone else? To claim them as yours would be plagiarizing, just as copying a hub would.
But... if they dwell in my own head, I'm going to claim them as my own. If I can't claim my own thoughts, I quit.
If you claim everything you see, hear or experience as your own, please stay far away from my hubs.
No, we're talking about thoughts that originated outside your skull. Presumably in someone else's skull.
Or at least I thought we were - it's kind of confusing.
Yes, Im confused. Im trying to clarify Eric's meaning.
I'm trying to understand why he thinks the thoughts in my head are actually thoughts that originated in someone else's head. If he means there is no original thought, I might be inclined to agree, but to say that the actual thought itself was a thought that transferred from someone else's brain to mine, I need more info as to what he's actually thinking.
I am confused, too. Eric seems to be confusing thoughts with words on paper, like saying a plastic circle is music, in order to indicate that thoughts can be outside the skull. Doesn't work for me; thoughts are not ink on paper any more than a plastic disk is harmonious vibrations in air.
He is also confusing imagination with reality. Not a good sign,
You always have to throw an insult in there. Does it make you feel good about yourself?
No, it was not an insult. He seems to be saying that what he imagines is real. It's more of a concern.
Your concern always comes out this way. Maybe you should email it privately.
So it's okay for you to say you are wondering why he think this thoughts don't come from himself and Wilderness is confused as to why he thinks he is confusing thoughts with writing, but I can't express my concerns that he seems to be confusing reality with imagination?
I think it was the "Not a good sign" jibe at the end... but if you feel good about it... keep at it.
You got me wilderness --- if a poem written down is not a thought outside of your head then you are saying it is just words???
No it's not a thought and it's not a thought if you articulate your thought, it's a communication of a thought.
There is information about astral projection. But, for the average person the ability to think is dependent on our being alive in the first place, awake in the second place and on proper nerve functioning in the the brain in the third place and a sound brain in the fourth place. Can we think after we die? We won't know till then. Meanwhile all we can really do is go by the reports from others about their ability to astral project. I have tried it and could easily imagine that I was above my body looking down at it.
Or WAS I imagining it?
Sure, I can't understand his thinking without him communicating it to me. Therefore it is the communication of a thought that I understand. Did I communicate my thought properly?
No evidence needed here, except perhaps that from Webster.
This is a matter of definition, not philosophy or religion. Not something supernatural and not merely an undetectable concept. We can, after all, see "thoughts" via cat scans, MRI's and even the old set of electrodes stuck to the head. We just can understand them.
Eric, I don't see that it is, but also fully admit this is a matter of definition.
I see a written poem vs the thought that created that poem much the same as a photo of a person; the photo is NOT the person.
Or the words on paper might be like a CD disk; a CD that is NOT beautiful music floating through the air but only "instructions" on how to make the music. Neither are thoughts within the mind or brain tissue.
If that makes any sense.
One is a thought and the other is an attempted communication of the thought.
Pretty much, although that might actually bring up the concept that "communication" IS a "thought". If I am successful communicating, you will have the same thought as I do; communication "creates" a thought according to the wishes of the communicator.
It is, alas, all about definition.
But because the thought has been communicated and interpreted it's no longer the same thought. Just a communicated and interpreted thought.
Ah, but a well done communication needs no interpretation - the receiver has the same thought as the giver.
This is right. Astral projection is a very advanced spiritual ability. It is not based on imagination, or thinking. If you look it up, the dictionary refers to the astral body traveling outside the physical body.
What is the astral body? See Dictionary.
The astral body is fictitious. No one has yet to supply evidence of anything they couldn't have already known. All studies of NDE's have come up empty as well. Just more wishful thinking.
"Astral projection is a very advanced spiritual ability."
It is, is it?
"It is not based on imagination, or thinking."
If true, then an astral projection is detectable in some manner, and is repeatable at all. Unfortunately, neither statement is factual - astral projection is therefore based on imagination or thinking. Not on actual fact. This is reinforced by understanding that NO "spiritual ability" has ever been successfully tested and proven to exist.
Yes Beth. Perhaps with the addition of joining them in our consciousness. But more about the idea that ideas can exist outside our brains. Even though they started there. And if these thoughts can exist outside of our skull why cannot our consciousness follow that. Why can't my thoughts be totally on a rose and my consciousness follow that? And what if they are totally on heaven? Why not that?
Could you walk me thru this with an example perchance? Im not following.
Beth, I am visualizing and concentrating on a rose. When done correctly all other thoughts are gone. It takes a lot of work and practice at first. But like this morning all my thoughts were on the rose. I mean almost all. My thoughts were out of me and on the rose. Nothing more complicated or stargazing or metaphysical than that.
I understand. So you are concentrating on a rose. At what point do your thoughts leave your mind and take on a life of their own? Where do they go? For what purpose? Who is orchestrating this, you? Is this beneficial, could it be detrimental and if so, in what ways?
When my thoughts are shared or released. Or when I choose to "step aside and view things from another perspective. Certainly there are degrees. They do not go someplace like you going to a store. Thoughts are not things.
Right here, right now -- when you read this, my thoughts are part of your thoughts. Communication is the act of exchanging thoughts.
Why is that so difficult?
I can get behind that statement. That is something different than thoughts taking on a life of their own. I think you meant the title of this hub to mean something somewhat poetic and not so much literal.
Beth, you are right. But the problem comes two fold. Some just insist that thoughts cannot leave our body.
And if we accept as Rad Man just did that they can if they are communicated. Then what is to stop our conscious from following them. Not particles but energy? Even power lines let some energy escape.
By sharing/conveying thoughts, I would conceded that they do in a sense "leave our bodies." We can burn actual energy by exerting it, we know this is a fact as well. As far as our souls, I already believe that our souls leave our bodies when we die. There is much to a human being including mind, body and spirit. You don't have to convince me of this, but you might want to keep your posts on point to avoid farcical bunny trails that detract from your actual msg.
Beth, perhaps I should try and think more like you. But as it is I am not opposed to bunnies at all. I am not a evangelist or advocate. I like sharing my thoughts. I really hope I have not changed yours. I like your thoughts also.
Now if we start talking about changing "things" and taking action. Well then I would change my stripes.
If we are to have any credibility Eric, we have to be able to prove things. How can the reality of our "subtle bodies" be proven? I would say ghosts, levitation, which Jesus did when He walked on the water, and the performing of miracles, which he demonstrated over and over… Oh, wait "Jesus didn't exist." So, we really need Him to return. Wouldn't that be so cool if he returned in our life-time?
Kathryn, please take this as it is meant, kindly. I do not desire or want credibility. Nope that is too heavy a burden. I like a thought to have all that stuff.
I am a preacher and I never want someone taking my word for something -- ever. How to think, what to think, when to think, these are not my areas. All I can do is think and give to others my thoughts. But nobody has a right to "believe" me. And therefor who I am should not be a focus.
Pretty heavy huh!? But it fits into what I am saying about thoughts.
I think there is a contradiction in there somewhere.
From what I understand of the person making the statement, I doubt it.
For 99.99% of the preachers of the world, absolutely. From this one, no.
But, *preacher* is the self proclaimed title... *instigator of self-thought* might be more accurate.
If he's preaching, he attempting to convince someone of something without evidence. Today he's attempting to convince us his thoughts can follow his communications beyond his body.
He said he wants you to think for yourself. This is a very common msg. A good pastor will not tell you to take his word for anything... he will tell you to pursue a relationship with God and read the Bible and form your own beliefs.
Our writing styles reflect our almost opposing ways of thinking/operating. I apologize. I am trying to prove God. I thought you were too. Sorry to try to advise. I like yer style. - did not mean to intrude.
Most Christians don't go for astrology, But it makes sense that there is some kind of a system as to when we're born. It can't be random chance, as nothing in the world seems to be. Actually, astrology is based on the seasons. Did you know that if the earth's axis were not tipped just so, we would not have seasons? It is part of God's perfect blue-print.
I was wondering if you'd ever seen any of these verses before... there are quite a few of them. The Bible is not supportive of astrology.
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bib … Astrology/
By most observation most of the people reading horoscopes and asking me what my star sign is are in fact Christian.
LOL. Not to me. Superstition is superstition. If one is willing to buy into the blind faith thing without question, they may be willing to belief other stuff without question. Why do you think people write and sell books about NDE experiences. Taking in advantage of the gullible. Someone posted a video of a guy selling his book about the evidence for God where he was selling at a Church of believers. Good marketing.
Rad Man -- I definitely think there are dichotomies. When jumping back and forth between speaking of empiricism and spiritualism or metaphysics we are bound to have contradictions.
Kathryn, I work much of each day in the area of "forensic proof" especially documentation of facts. I have a copy of the US FRE (federal rules of evidence) on my desk. Proving God is like proving innocence. We do not even have a theory on it. Oh we can qualify evidence like "witness testimony", "expert testimony" "circumstantial evidence". Or we can even go all accepted science testimony and evidence by logic -- "it is all wet outside it must have rained". And these things are in fact proof. But do they "prove" something?
I know and could swear to it that God is real to you. Isn't that proof enough for you?
Rad man look up the word evidence. You are misusing it. Evidence is only that which tends to prove or disprove a fact to the observer. Scientific evidence has some rules as does legal evidence. But in life -- we walk upon a pile of Bobcat poop, to you it is only evidence of poop. To me it is evidence of the size, direction of travel, what is being eaten and if there is enough water around. It can also be evidence of what is ripe and edible and if the Bobcat is travelling or living nearby.
Try not to use evidence myopically. And please avoid MD's that can only find evidence of sickness from blood work-ups.
We went over this already. Thoughts are not just energy. If they were we our brains wouldn't have mass and chemistry. So extracting the brain would compromise the skull and cause damage and the thought wouldn't be readable.
This precisely why humans communicate our thoughts.
There you go, your thoughts are contained in your brain unless you communicate them to others.
Okay Eric, demonstate please. Bring your consciousness to me and tell me what I'm wearing. Are you about to tell me it doesn't work that way?
Those would not be my thoughts. I know you are wearing clothes of some sort or are naked --- can you imagine me wanting to have those thoughts?
So no I will not try to have your thoughts unless you give them to me. Here are some of mine. It is raining outside, but I am inside but I can see myself standing out in the rain and feel the wetness. It smells great and cold. I can visualize some of my work today. I have a vision of success, but I am ready for any obstacles or changes. I must be careful of projecting too much.
That's called communication and imagination. It doesn't mean something exists when you think imagine it, I does however mean the imagined thing exists in your imagination. Imagining being outside doesn't bring you out side, it does give you the imagination of being outside. I too can imagine heaven.
If the fullness of the I, which is me is this body, then I am death for the body is subjected to the things of which it consist and that which encompasses it.
But if the fullness of the I which is me, is not my body, then what am I?
You can not be more than that perspective which draws it own conclusions, neither can you be more than that conclusion.
!'m sure I have been here before..............................
The saints of all religions can verify that thoughts have a reality outside the physical body. Jesus appears ( has appeared to some) and speaks without a physical body. How many will agree? All those who have heard him within their own minds. I have. For instance with this concussion, I heard Jesus tell me to "stop worrying." (It was exactly the advice I needed, as calmness is vital to the nervous system for healing a concussion.) This answer came right after I asked Him for help. Some might say they were my thoughts but, It was not advice coming from myself!
Many understand what I say here. How many have had dreams of their loved ones right before they passed away? How many "know " things before they happen. Intuition is the receiving of metaphysical realities which occur outside of the body. Therefore, thoughts do exist and can even be projected into that realm.
So you are saying there is no way you would ever tell yourself to not worry so it must have come from elsewhere and that elsewhere much have been Jesus?
Sure, that makes perfect sense.
(As everyone knows it is very hard to tell yourself to stop worrying while you are frantically worrying. When I heard those words I was able to instantly calm down.)
You've NEVER had a moment when you perceived something intuitively? How about when you perceived the numbers of the lottery ticket?
I lied about that to see just how gullible the gullible can be. Hook, line, and sinker.
Intuition is part of your own thought process, take credit for your own thought process.
Eastern mysticism is all about this topic. Why is the west so closed? Because their evidence comes from personal, ( yet common to all) experience. The west accepts only scientific evidence. However, I have participated in ESP tests where I scored over 50% right answers. I know, you will say guesses. With me at this point it is hit and miss, darn it. But others know how to develop this skill by practicing and working with it.
We could do it here... How many can intuit the color of my oldest dog? Close you eyes and let yourself be open to incoming perceptions.... I am sending out the color ....
I am thinking that Rad Man will come up with it ... Try, Rad man! You have to redeem yourself from lying to us. Maybe you did intuitively perceive those numbers... or was the whole story made up?
You are so cute when you get all flusstery. You could have edited it leaving me with egg on my face.
Did anyone guess...
How about the breed?
Who's dog are trying to guess? Mine is not white and not a Jack Russel.
No… I am conducting an ESP experiment. What is the color of my dog? Now what is the breed... what is her age... her name?
If you perceive all the correct answers you are indeed psychic.
Yet, I still believe in ESP.
Even though ESP is pure nonsense, you still believe in it?
How about another experiment, to find out why folks believe in complete nonsense?
Because it gives them hope. Anything wrong with that, ATM?
Lies and delusions only create false hopes, Kathryn. Or, do you prefer living a life of lies and fantasy because reality is too hard?
Reality includes the astral plane and the "heaven within" of which Jesus speaks.
Maybe it's time to look up the word Reality in a dictionary.
At the very least, Kathryn, if you're going to keep making up nonsense as you go along, try to make it not so puerile. It's as if you're trying to convince a bunch of five year old children of some fairy tale.
Okay then, what street did I live on back in 1980? I could ask about my dog, but you could find that answer. I'll wait as I've done for sometime now. This is where I'm usually told it doesn't work that way.
You have a black lab, ten years old, named Charlie.
Am I psychic yet?
My darn imagination keeps getting in the way. Gotta step up my meditating on God, and keep focused on ultimate Reality.
That's right Kathryn, spend some time focusing on me and it'll help if you use your imagination.
Hmmmm... something coming through… something about you seeming like Elvis… oh no... thats just my memory of you keyboarding you looked like Elvis, but without the hair...!
Waterfront or riverside (?) and Chestnut comes to mind.
Dang Rad Man. Somehow you put your thoughts down on your profile and hubs. Somehow your thoughts came into my skull. So I guess because I have some answers about you that would be cheating. But somehow you sent your skull bound thoughts into my skull. Hmm almost like they had a life of their own.
Very close Rad Man --- but really "All thought .... No Action".
Well now you just argue semantics. Imagination does not exist without thought. But ok I will go with imagination. I heard that Edison imagined a city filled with lights. I heard that the Red Sox are imagined winning the series.
And again NO I will not imagine what you are wearing ;-)
Yes, because that is exactly what it is, guesses. ESP would have you score 100% every single time.
You seem to be possibly unwilling to make your point clear? If so, what is the point of posting it? Either you are wanting to bring something to our collective attention or you are simply wanting to play a game?
We have astral bodies which are subtle bodies. The online dictionary just communicated this to me! when I highlighted astral bodies, subtle bodies came up! pretty mysterious glitch if you ask me!
Back to my question. Yes thoughts can exists outside of our skull. Intellectual properties are one such example. A poem is a further example.
However I raised the issue in context of going someplace with out thoughts. Clearly not like jumping around the world. But a space that exists in our thoughts. Like a perceived heaven.
Even though this is not an empirical notion some demand proof of it as though it were like proof of an object or physical action.
This must be an acceptable position for us to understand. Like wise a position that recognizes that the notion is not a physical manifestation or an empirical one should be respected.
Some stand on the concept that the notion is a belief because it cannot, in a traditional scientific sense, be proven. Many think that a belief is not a valid thought process. That a belief must be belittled.
I have not seen a matter where someone of belief thinks scientific thought must be belittled but I do see very defensive postures regarding empirical scientific thought. It would seem that is natural. Most the debate is clouded in negative past experiences, which seem to be embedded.
So I tell people what is true for me. I can consciously only exist in a thought.. (no I did not say I can only exist in a thought). I think cogito ergo sum, is also true in the sense that I am because I think. If I did not think I would not exist. Yes that would include a brain dead body -- the tissue remains but there is no human within.
There is an argument going around that a belief is not a truth. Somewhere people have decided that just what they accept as proof and truth is valid. Well that is fine, but they must accept that that kind of proof and truth is "to them and for them". It is perfectly normal and legitimate if I choose to accept an eye witness testimony as proof. That notion of proof predates Hammurabi and is in fact universal. But some just refute it. In fact witness testimony has been around as proof long before any structure of scientific thought.
Now it is not my intention to prove the notion of thoughts leaving our skull. For this is a conceptual matter and if we rested solely on proof we would fall short of the truth. Electricity captured and used, man flying with a machine, nuclear energy, penicillin, scuba diving, and heart implants were not proven first they were imagined first. I do not trust proof, in that it limits us to what we already have proof of. I understand about building blocks and that is fine as far as it goes. But it does not go to invention.
We say "he is lost in thought". Well that really captures something, like most sayings like that do. It means he is not present with us and paying attention through his senses. He is elsewhere in thought. We use these terms because they mean something that witnesses have seen and described for at least two millennium.
I do not think that now we should come along and say it is not true -- without proof. The burden should be on those that defy hundreds of years of man's observation and millions of witnesses.
Eric, perhaps you're just ignoring everyone, but that has already been explained to you. Yes, you can write down your thoughts for others to see, like on this forum, for example, but that is pretty much the extent of thoughts existing outside your skull. Do you understand?
Of course, people believe in all kinds of ridiculous things, this thread is overwhelming proof of that.
You can accept whatever you want, but that doesn't make it true.
Sorry, but those things are based on facts and evidence, not irrational beliefs.
You have made evidently clear, but it is part of the problem, not the solution.
Sorry, but the burden is on those who make the positive claim.
Hi ATM, and I have explained to you. That you can live in your rule world. And clearly your brain is limited by those self imposed rules. And I can know as much about logic and proof as you, and as much about science as you. But you have an inability to know as much as I do in other areas. Because you have restrained your mind by your rules. Be happy in your mental prison. I wish you well. I am not so imprisoned.
But, it is painfully clear you don't, nor would you ever even consider that.
No, you are not special, Eric, you have no special powers over and above the rest of us, that is just childish immaturity on your part.
Im not picking on you... I just have a curiosity about you.
What does it hurt you to allow him to say something that you don't agree with?
I know we all come here and discuss at great lengths the things we agree and do not agree with, but what harm does it do you for him to share these kinds of whimsies or thoughts?
Says the one who just told me I should be careful I don't insult Gold.
Gee Beth, you still haven't figured out what public forums are all about. Maybe, some day.
Beth, ATM is a "just is". He just is that way. I find it near endearing. Some people are just grumpy old men. When comments are so predictably negative. They kind of lose their juice. Like an old man. (of course I am not saying ATM is a grumpy old man, he may be young and vibrant)
With all that said I think he adds a great deal to our reflections and thoughts about what we believe. And that is a good thing. Yes I do mean that as a compliment.
ATM it is good you insult me. It is important that others see the disdain you hold for me. It is right that they should see me attacked for my views.
ATM wake up, I do not hold special powers ---- well yes I do along with about 2 billion others that believe in things that you cannot understand.
So if just believe I'll get special powers as well?
Egg and Chicken question probably Rad Man -- If am not sure one always comes before the other. Remember "special powers" is ATM's condescending term not mine. I think it beneath your understanding. Your love for family is a "special power". You clearly have what many others do not. The sad, mad, lonely and unloved of which there are many. Not everybody gets to have hope and dreams and belief in something greater than themselves. You clearly do. And yes though it may be common it is still very special, like a snowflake where no two are exactly alike.
Buddy Rad Man, I just read your great piece on dyslexia. In my mind people born with that a given special powers. This may be hard for people to grasp. And then to be given a child with such a similar attribute creates a second special power.
People who are blind that can hear, develop outrageously acute hearing and smell and touch senses. Indeed special powers. I have found as my hearing gets worse I look right at people more and pay more attention.
These powers are indeed special and should be cherished.
And to make you feel better you could come by and my son will give you special Spidey powers to protect against all robots. I have to bribe him to share them with me, but guests get special treatment.
The special power of dyslexia. Growing up with a learning disability in an era when reading was thought to be a measure of intelligence. 3 hours of studying for my grade eight spelling test gives me 2 right out of 15. Understanding my limitations.
Thanks for reading.
On the positive side learning to read and spell with a different part of the brain (other than Broca's area) develops more connections in the part that handles creativity and conceptual understanding. That's why, while I may not be able to read/write and spell as well as you I can see right through smoke and mirrors.
Aye, I believe you. My youngest daughter had dyslexia and ADD. Much hard work. Great specialists. And an hour a day in Super Duper Pooper time with dad and mom. And held her back a year.
This gal sees and knows things I can hardly grasp. Graduated Berekely with two degrees and nannies "special" children.
I tell you true you people have special gifts.
And lest we forget, so does ATM. His focus is amazing. I have never met someone as adroit at staying in the box. I just cannot set boundaries like that. That is special.
Dyslexia and ADD seem to go hand in hand. Trying to make the kid focus on reading is no easy task.
Ah, I see, you believe that anyone who can use their brains has special powers. Sorry Eric, that is just being a normal human.
Sorry Eric, but delusion is not a special power.
My sense is that the answer to this question is a clear "yes".
Our thoughts when transferred to some substrate---whether it be paper or digital, exist outside of our "skulls".
Humans are much more than their physical bodies---and this statement should NOT be taken as a suggestion of some supernatural existence, but of the fact of how we exist and how our having existed persists.
by jirel4 years ago
Well ,I believe in metaphysical things.I have heard of various stories of witchcraft and other supernatural powers.Some get power from spirits, some through angels, genies, etc.They use these supernatural methods for...
by Elijah76 years ago
This question, ONCE properly answered and understood, will FOREVER change your opinions regarding the Time Honoured Subject of LIFE AFTER DEATH.The challenge is for YOU to PROVE you have NO soul, no spirit, and...
by Brandon Martin5 years ago
Are you born with your soul looking the way you do when you die?Or, when you die old do you grow young in the afterlife, and die young you grow old? Is there an age limit after death?
by Troy Wilkerson7 years ago
Let's start with something we can all agree on, we're alive, we have a mind but we are also physical beings and one day the physical being will cease to exist. Now class, this is not a philosophical question it's a...
by LewSethics6 years ago
Believers minds would probably melt and they would turn into a useless mass of fawning glee.Sinners would poop themselves and try to be good, honest.Non-believers would not believe it. Would they?
by augustine726 years ago
The definition of Atheism was discussed -"Lack of belief in God". The reason was discussed. Though many claimed that there are various reasons for atheism, all seemed to have only one reason - "lack of...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.