Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
From: shaman@cix.compulink.co.uk (Leo Smith)
Subject: Re: What a joke etc.
Reply-To: shaman@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 23:22:00 +0000

drwho@wpi.WPI.EDU (Eric Ant Von Laudermann) writes..

Me: >..And then 'reason' takes over and starts looking for explanations,
    >and finally along comes some smart little know-all who will try to
    >tell you that the explanation he learnt at PhD school is the 'truth'.

>Hey, wait a minute! I never said what was real and what wasn't. I'm
>just as far from the truth as everyone else, probably more so. My
>point was that the people who learn how to use their psychic powers
>do so through experimentation and deduction (they have *said* so on
>this newsgroup), so they have no right to put down the scientific
>method, because that's what it *is*. It doesn't matter whether the
>phenomenon involved is normal, paranormal, or imaginary. (Note the
>"or".) I wasn't trying to start a debate about what was real and what
>wasn't.
[stuff about the paranormal rules.. ...]

>Your definition of reason is good too, but why should the world of
>the paranormal be exempt from making sense?

You are using a lot of terms here that are not synonomous. Reason is
not making sense and neither of them are scientific method or
explanation.

I merely wanted to point out that if I see - say - a ghost, and you
don't, we cannot have a reasoned discussion about it.

And what about an experience that dissapears if you think about it -
as most parnormal ones do.  You can't be having a dream and be awake
at the same time, even if your name is Ronald Reagan :-)

>Are you suggesting that it is impossible to "come to some kind of
>explanation as to how one" *paranormal* "phenomenon is associated
>with another"?

You can come to any amount of explanations for anything: but they
won't be true like physics is true. In thie realm of the paranormal
what you think is happening affects at the very least the way you see
what is happening, and may very well affect what is ACTUALLY
happening.  So your explanations will modify the reality. Tricky
stuff eh?

> If so, that would mean it is impossible for a psychic to hone
> his/her abilities.

Not at all: Read Castaneda on 'not thinking' and 'not doing'. Or try
various Eastern texts on 'cultivating emptiness' and 'stilling the
unquiet mind'. Having the experiences is one thing: Building
explanations is a completeley different one. Even if you come to a
set of explanations for YOU it will very likely have no validity
beyond you, as others will not see the experieneces in the same way.,


>Once again, I *believe in the paranormal*. But if you can't make
>sense out of it, you go insane.

'And quite apart from what one hears,
I've been like that for years and years'

Well I thought I might go mad a long time ago. Now I realise that we
all are anyway so it doesn't bother me. I agree: Without the
necessary discipline a would be psychic adventurer may very well go
insane. However I would say that it is better to develop the
discipline to face such experiences without seeking explanations.
That is the way.

You may disagree.

>You need to *look* at it, and *think* about it. For example, if you
>see a ghost, you shouldn't go "but that's impossible!" and have a
>seizure. You should go "is there a real reason for me to think it's
>impossible?"

No you shouldn't. You should say 'Oh my - a ghost. More tea Vicar?'
and ignore the stupid thing. You will never know what you really saw
anyway. Certainly not if you start _thinking_ about it.

If you were _really_ smart you would stop thinking, carry on talking
as if notheing had happened, and try and watch what the ghost was up
to without trying to bend the expereinec to fit in with your
worldview.





Xref: sparky alt.paranormal:2279 sci.skeptic:16455 alt.astrology:1689