Is All Evidence Empirical?

[current]

Blackmore is still very active.  Check out her website.

 

Why her though ?

[mrg]

Why her though ?

 

I'd explain it to you, but I fear your brain might explode.

[current]

I'd explain it to you, but I fear your brain might explode.

Not going to happen .

 

Explain .

[mrg]

Not going to happen .

 

Ah, I see I'm too late.

Edited May 31, 2017 by mrg

[current]

Ah, I see I'm too late.

Too late for what ?

[mrg]

Too late for what ?

 

Let me think that question over and get back to you.   Maybe I'll think it over.  Maybe I'll get back to you.  If I remember.

 

... Who did you say you were again?   Never mind, not important.

[current]

Let me think that question over and get back to you.   Maybe I'll think it over.  Maybe I'll get back to you.  If I remember.

 

... Who did you say you were again?   Never mind, not important.

Get on with it , mrg .

[exchemist]

Hmm, thought this was deleted, but it appears "current" is playing multiple threads in parallel, and I didn't realize it.

 

From a book I'm writing: 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

* An advocate for the existence of the immortal soul -- a "spiritualist", proposing the existence of intangible spirits and spirit worlds -- will point to the visions of those who have had "out-of-body experiences (OBE)" or "near-death experiences (NDE)" as proof.  However, this is making an extraordinary claim on the basis of thin and arguable evidence.  British cognitive psychologist Susan Blackmore (born 1951), after undergoing an OBE, decided to scientifically investigate OBEs and NDEs and other "psi" phenomena -- but, as she wrote in 2000, her exercise in "parapsychology" came up short:

 

 

 

Research -- good research -- into OBEs show they can be easily induced. [Neurophysiologist Stanislaus] Dehaene describes an OBE as a kind of "dizziness", a misperception of where we think our body is, relative to where it actually is.  NDEs turn out to be similar to the experiences people have when they faint.  For example, the perception of "going into a tunnel" turns out to be due to tunnel vision in a brain starved of oxygen, while the "white light" experienced in reports of NDEs is due to spontaneous widening of the pupils, overlighting the retina.

 

Spiritualists reject all explanations of psi experiences, insisting that the evidence they are "for real" is "irrefutable", even though it is too dodgy and arguable to be persuasive to an impartial skeptic.  As Hume put it, "a weaker evidence can never destroy a stronger" -- or as the modern phrase has it, "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence."

 

In the end, spiritualists can only invert the burden of proof, daring the unconvinced to show spiritualism is in error.  The response, of course, is that spiritualism -- by definition, focused on immaterials that are not and cannot be reliably observed -- is unarguable, since it cannot be tested by material evidence, cannot be shown to be right or wrong.  We may believe it is absolutely right if we like, without fear of effective contradiction, since it is not demonstrably wrong; but we are no wiser in any specific way if we do believe it.  It can be just as easily seen, as the physicists also put it, as "not even wrong."  The two are the same, seen from different sides.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Did you ever read the H G Wells short story, "Under the Knife?". Its subject is an out-of-body experience while anaesthetised for surgery. 

 

It's about the experience rather than the science, but a very good read. 

Edited June 1, 2017 by exchemist

[current]

Did you ever read the H G Wells short story, "Under the Knife?". Its subject is an out-of-body experience while anaesthetised for surgery. 

 

It's about the experience rather than the science, but a very good read.

 

Exchemist , experience is science .

[current]

No it's not.

Give an example that science is not experience .

[current]

 

Posted Today, 02:25 AM

current, on 03 Jun 2017 - 9:13 PM, said:

Give an example that science is not experience .

 

 

No.

Why no ?

[current]

Because.

Go on ....

[Buffy]

I love astrophysics but I really would not want to experience a black hole.

 

 

Experience without theory is blind, :phones:

Buffy

[current]

I love astrophysics but I really would not want to experience a black hole.

 

 

Experience without theory is blind, :phones:

Buffy

So experience needs theory to be real ?

[Buffy]

"Real?" Not sure where that interpretation comes from. But I guess that's a great example of what I'm talking about! :cheer:

 

Experience is always "real."

 

But unfortunately experience is just stuff that happens. It's not terribly useful unless you try to make sense of it, or in other words, develop a theory that makes the experience useful for anything other than sensory stimulation.

 

Which of course can be painful, but without a theory, you'll never understand that, and subject yourself randomly to painful and pleasurable experiences endlessly.

 

 

The masses will reject any theory, however reasonable it may be, if it lays a restriction upon the appetite, :phones:

Buffy

[current]

 

 

Well lets go back to your post # 34 .

 

Experience without theory is blind, :phones:

Buffy

Edited June 4, 2017 by current

[current]

"Real?" Not sure where that interpretation comes from. But I guess that's a great example of what I'm talking about! :cheer:

 

Experience is always "real."

 

But unfortunately experience is just stuff that happens. It's not terribly useful unless you try to make sense of it, or in other words, develop a theory that makes the experience useful for anything other than sensory stimulation.

 

Which of course can be painful, but without a theory, you'll never understand that, and subject yourself randomly to painful and pleasurable experiences endlessly.

 

 

The masses will reject any theory, however reasonable it may be, if it lays a restriction upon the appetite, :phones:

Buffy

If you run into a wall , no senses .

 

You get no where .

Edited June 4, 2017 by current