Horizon - What is Reality?

[naomi24]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/...2011_What_Is_Reality/

If those who claim the so called 'paranormal' doesn't exist want food for thought, do please watch it - that is if you can bear to think outside your comfort zone.

[naomi24]

Birdie, Ludwig has said it all - and admirably.

[Ankou]

i know. and that is the relevance of birdies post.
one could say it 'is' the same thing,

[naomi24]

I'm missing your point here Ankou. Are you agreeing with Ludwig and me in saying that the 'supernatural' could be attributable to natural causes?

[naomi24]

Good morning Eddie, I thought the the programme offered some fascinating possibilities. There has to be an answer somewhere. As for who made God, that's the ultimate stumbling block for the religious isn't it.

[Old_Geezer]

Saw most of it, didn't keep my full attention all the way through because it seemed to be nothing particularly new, introducing concepts/hypothesis that have been around for a while now. Made an interesting point that when science becomes that theoretical it is borderline philosophy though.

[naomi24]

I find it unsurprising that the people most conspicuous by their absence here are those who have told me over the years that only the deluded, the stupid or the mistaken claim experience of the 'paranormal'. Tucked away safely in their comfort zone? Yes, I think so. LG, before you consider misrepresenting me, or insulting me again, kindly take note.

[Theland1]

Due to the limitations to science set by observations which actively interfere with apparently natural processes, some humility is called for, and an admission that the unknowable exists and will remain a mystery to us, answers to the basic questions of reality only approachable by speculation.
On the other hand, claims of God experiences cannot be simply dismissed by science, when science itself is, and always be, the pursuit of forever incomplete knowledge.
You listening Starman?

[naomi24]

Theland, the problem there is how can you determine that any experience is a 'God' experience when you cannot possibly know precisely what you are experiencing?

[Theland1]

Our reality is a case of not knowing anything precisely, and there are also things that exist but cannot be proven to a third party, in spite of our narrow existence in the medium range of the universe.
That is why revelations cannot be easily dismissed.

[birdie1971]

Naomi - “Tucked away safely in their comfort zone? Yes, I think so. LG, before you consider misrepresenting me, or insulting me again, kindly take note.”

Oh come on... Just because someone hasn't recently posted on a particular thread does not mean they are unwilling or intellectually incapable of providing a response. It just means they haven't. You can't and shouldn't read anything more in to it than that. For all you or I know Mr L. Gun is on holiday.

[birdie1971]

Ludwig – I know what you're saying and I agree with you up to a point. Where we diverge is at sentience. You and others are suggesting that because sub-atomic particles behave in a counter-intuitive manner and seem to defy current logic, that somehow legitimises the belief in ghosts. Quantum physicists are talking about discreet entities that are so small that they barely register on any imaginable scale. What is being suggested is that because this gap in scientific knowledge exists, that legitimises a belief in the afterlife.

When contemplating the afterlife, we're talking about fully sentient lifeforms that are devoid of a physical vessel and yet continue to exist in another dimension (for want of a better description), carrying with them all the knowledge that they acquired whist alive and can now, given a particular set of circumstances, pass their knowledge and experiences on to people alive today.

If you believe that is so then fair enough. But it's quite a leap to suggest that the afterlife has been effectively proven to exist because sub-atomic particles behave peculiarly.

[Theland]

Birdie - Because of uncertainty recognised by science, and the unkowability of the universes' ultimate reality, and because all of our present knowledge i based on the assumption of existing preconditions for the reality that we do know, then as I inferred earlier, our amazement at what we see should be coupled with some humility, given that what is possible is only bounded by our imaginations.
The spiritual dimension is real for many people, and like QM defies measurement and direct observation, but must be experienced diirectly.
True, many experiences can be dismissed or explained away by current scientific knowledge, but that leaves a great deal unexplained that cannot be picked up by an electron microscope or the LHC.
Some atheists are prepared to say, "We simply don't know," regarding the universes' origin, but are prepared to be emphatically dismissive regarding the spiritual dimension, but this one sided attitude is in defiance of their own scientific method for researching the truth.
Revelation remains a factor of truth, alongside more mundane facts that contribute to knowledge and build up a picture of our ultimate although sometimes speculative reality.

[Theland]

By the way, do you like the new outfit? I dropped the "1" and got a new avvy.
Got some kecks to go with it all but they won't fit on here.

[mibn2cweus]

“You listening Starman?”

I read you loud and clear Theland, ‘tucked away safely in the comfort zone’ of my own limited understanding, watching with amazement as back stabbers of conscience slip ever deeper into the twilight zone of their own contempt for reason and anyone ‘arrogant’ enough to suggest that they might actually know anything at all, astonished at your seemingly boundless capacity to grasp at straws as sole proof of your ‘humility’.

As I do not have access to the programme material relevant to this discussion I have thus far resisted the temptation to turn this thread on its head. However, I am accumulating quite a pile of dead wood here with which, as per your suggestion, to burn the heretics of reason who remain steadfast in making themselves martyrs to their own fallacious assumptions, self-blinding preconceptions and fore drawn conclusions. So please, keep piling it on Theland. The taller the heap, the higher and brighter the flames.

Apologies to Naomi, don’t wish to throw your thread off track.

[ludwig]

birdie - I'm pretty sure that I haven't mentioned ghosts or an afterlife at any point in the discussion, let alone assume any connection between the two. - I actually can't be bothered to go back and re-read what I wrote to confirm that - but I'm pretty sure.
What I've said is what I've said - you shouldn't read anything else into it other than what it actually says.

[Theland]

Good morning Stars. There is something quite religious about a huge bonfire and then dancing in the smoke.
That reminds me of a song from the past .....

[Ankou]

savonarola or whickerman ?!

[naomi24]

Birdie, you very clearly haven't read the thread but nevertheless it seems you're another one who's quick to criticise without understanding what's being said. It's becoming a bit of a habit around here lately. Like you, Mr L Gun is quick to criticise unjustly too - however he is not one of the people I'm referring to.

As for your response to Ludwig, again you're jumping to unfounded conclusions. No one has suggested that anything in that programme legitimises the belief in ghosts or in an afterlife or the paranormal, and nor has it been suggested that anything has been 'effectively proven'. The question simply asks whether the contributors here think it might be possible that the phenomena discussed in the programme could be responsible for claims of unexplained occurrences. God! Where do you people get it from?!! Your imaginations are every bit as vivid as those of the religious!

[Theland]

This is for you Starman. A Bonfire Of The Vanities.
The pics are great - can you spot me partying?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9OO7ly4_94