Spiritual Void

[Mr Walker]

On 6/25/2020 at 6:25 AM, XenoFish said:

Kinda iffy on that. Firstly they made a choice to see the psychic or witch. Secondly I do agree in a way. Casting a blessing on someone might create positive motivation or instill false hope. A curse could justify someone's negative feelings towards another, resulting in self validation. Again we fall into the trap of subjectivity. Granted there are those who intentionally wish to sucker someone out of money.

I think you and others have read enough about my perspective to answer any question that might arise.

Belief is powerful.

IMO, from observation, it is most powerful when given  freely and with sincerity, and less powerful when it has to be paid for, or if you doubt the sincerity of the giver.  So if a person gives you a love charm to use on another, and if they and you believe in its effectiveness, it is more likely to "work" 

(it may only work (for example)  because your newfound  belief and confidence enhances your  personality and makes you more attractive to the other )

[Mr Walker]

On 6/25/2020 at 6:49 AM, Desertrat56 said:

Well, I was thinking of the Love potion type or curse type, where the person hiring  a curandera or witch or what ever has intent to either do harm or force someone to something.  For me the intent includes the practitioner if they charge for it and claim to do something.  They could be respectful and say, "No I don't do that kind of thing", but they want the money so they participate in harmful intent (I do consider love potions etc. to be harmful as it goes against free will).

If someone's intent is a blessing I don't see harm in that as long as it is not "Please make sure my son gets job A" instead of give my son a blessing so he will feel confident enough to find a job that he likes, though maybe the son could be an artist that can find a way without a job, so even that is too specific.  I guess I can get pretty nit picky about it, but it really boils down to intent and desire for outcome.  If you pray for your relative to come to jesus because you feel it is the only way for them, you are interfering in free will.  You can pray for them to find what they need to be ok with no expectations.  To me that is different, open ended, and general good wishes.

I kinda agree but I dont believe in "love potions" or "charms" as effective  in physical ways  

To me it is more likely  to enhance a personality and thus the attractiveness of the person using it.  Anyone prepared to go to those lengths must have a deep affection or desire for the recipient  This is often enough to trigger a positive response in the other person.

As to prayer , I strongly  agree that one should never pray for another, without their informed consent 

[Mr Walker]

On 6/26/2020 at 3:07 AM, XenoFish said:

I'm honestly not sure why I started this thread.

imo you are in a transitional stage in your life.

Such stages cause us to think and question.

This was a good topic and a good question.  

[Mr Walker]

On 6/26/2020 at 10:30 AM, psyche101 said:

I thought it was just a stab at posters who challenge beliefs. I don't see that beliefs can be torn down without the subject facing accountability. I just don't see that as ever being a bad thing.

That's exactly where I'm going, our Mr. Walker being a perfect example. His beliefs in God's, Aliens, Science and himself are obviously wildly exaggerated where they aren't straight out imagination. Everybody calls him out. Constantly. Nobody has any reservations regarding tearing down his beliefs, yet for other posters who use the 'right' spiritual terminology there is support rather than challenge. 

Personally I don't see the difference. If a claim is made, it can be challenged. That's the point of this section. If people prefer to simply discuss beliefs, the believers section should be sanctuary for those discussions. Everything has a place except double standards. 

If someone believes something silly, I honestly think it is a favour to show them where they hajv gone wrong. Which is where we get back to horses drinking. If someone doesn't want to challenge a vested interest, they will walk away. 

100% 

Just like PGs belief that breatharinaism is valid when it's really more akin to manslaughter. 

As you brought me up 

I dont have beliefs. i have unusual life experiences 

Ive never exaggerated a single thing on UM 

Unless you accept that you wont really understand or appreciate anything i post (which is ok but to really get my posts you have to believe they are true, and as accurate as i can make them . )

of course some things are just opinions, values, or extrapolations  of present events.

  Those are arguable, but I can give good reasons why i believe I am right 

The reason so many posts become about me is simply because so many people "call me out"

The y have no proofs or evidences that i am wrong, or exaggerating anything i describe,  but believe that i am, based on their own life experiences, and internal views, beliefs, and values.  

[Mr Walker]

post 97 change cretinism to creationism  Just saw the spelling error   

[eight bits]

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

The y have no proofs or evidences that i am wrong, or exaggerating anything i describe,  but believe that i am, based on their own life experiences, and internal views, beliefs, and values.  

That, and the content of your posts.

[onlookerofmayhem]

8 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Very simply, if the y do no harm and more importantly "make her feel good", then you should just allow her those beliefs without argument  (although you can say you don't share them) 

I disagree.

We don't really "argue" about the topics. We discuss them in a courteous, respectful manner. 

She engages in the conversation.

Just like here, in the Spiritual vs. Skepticism, if someone is willing to discuss their beliefs I think it fair game that both sides get to lay out their points.

8 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

She has said what many people don't realise. Beliefs make you  feel good and, in doing so, improve your mental and physical well being  

Again I disagree. 

I think most people actually do realize that their beliefs make them feel better. It's the fact that most people are unwilling to admit it to others that it is the main reason they believe unevidenced things in the first place. 

For example, how much pressure and stress do people have trying to live a life that is supposedly being watched and judged by an invisible being?

I readily admit, by not believing in god, my life is less stressful and pressured than if I did. But that is not the main reason I don't believe. The personal evidence that I don't have is the main factor. 

There is no evidence, in my mom's case, that her physical and mental health are made better in any significant way because she holds such views. 

I don't contend they have made her any worse though.

I simply don't know. 

She's had mental and physical issues and I don't think there's any way to say they would be better or worse if she held different beliefs. At some point, it is what it is. 

8 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

As a son you would not want endanger that  (IMO)

As I said, if someone is willing to openly discuss their beliefs, they should absolutely know that their ideas might/will be challenged at some point.

She is almost 70 years old. Most of these views about crystals and aliens and the afterlife have only been formed in the last 15 years.

Most of her life she was blissfully ignorant of the subjects in general, as far as I know.

I trace it back to that John Edwards show where he pretends to talk to dead people.

That got the ball rolling and it's been all downhill from there.

[XenoFish]

I was wonder how long it would take before this became just another Walker thread.

[+Sherapy]

9 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

As you brought me up 

I dont have beliefs. i have unusual life experiences 

Ive never exaggerated a single thing on UM 

Unless you accept that you wont really understand or appreciate anything i post (which is ok but to really get my posts you have to believe they are true, and as accurate as i can make them . )

of course some things are just opinions, values, or extrapolations  of present events.

  Those are arguable, but I can give good reasons why i believe I am right 

The reason so many posts become about me is simply because so many people "call me out"

The y have no proofs or evidences that i am wrong, or exaggerating anything i describe,  but believe that i am, based on their own life experiences, and internal views, beliefs, and values.  

Your posts are the evidence that most of your claims are your opinions, values, and extrapolations and a source of entertainment, you are entertained by the things you claim and the conflict you generate.

You seek it out and fuel it.

Please do not respond, it is feedback use it to refine or not.

I will not derail Xeno’s thread any further. 

 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Sherapy

[XenoFish]

1 hour ago, Sherapy said:

I will not derail Xeno’s thread any further. 

 

Don't worry hun. This is probably the beginning of the end for this thread. Used to take anywhere from 10-15 pages, now it's single digits. 

[+Sherapy]

32 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Don't worry hun. This is probably the beginning of the end for this thread. Used to take anywhere from 10-15 pages, now it's single digits. 

Question: are you watching “The Order” on Netflix? It is fun and reminds me of you. 

[XenoFish]

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

Question: are you watching “The Order” on Netflix? It is fun and reminds me of you. 

I got rid of netflix.

[+Sherapy]

7 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

I got rid of netflix.

Gotcha. 

[Stubbly_Dooright]

7 hours ago, XenoFish said:

8 hours ago, Sherapy said:

I will not derail Xeno’s thread any further. 

 

Don't worry hun. This is probably the beginning of the end for this thread. Used to take anywhere from 10-15 pages, now it's single digits. 

I really hope not. Like I keep saying, I think you started a wonderful thought provoking thread. I like it to continue. I think it's a nice reflection on individual's motivations in this area. 

[psyche101]

18 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

As you brought me up 

I dont have beliefs. i have unusual life experiences 

Ive never exaggerated a single thing on UM 

Unless you accept that you wont really understand or appreciate anything i post (which is ok but to really get my posts you have to believe they are true, and as accurate as i can make them . )

of course some things are just opinions, values, or extrapolations  of present events.

  Those are arguable, but I can give good reasons why i believe I am right 

The reason so many posts become about me is simply because so many people "call me out"

The y have no proofs or evidences that i am wrong, or exaggerating anything i describe,  but believe that i am, based on their own life experiences, and internal views, beliefs, and values.  

If you can leave your ego at the door for a moment that would be great. I'm already entertaining your nonsense in another thread. Buck up little man and hold on.

What I actually asked is why are your crazy beliefs more outstanding than another's spiritual or religious belief. Most might be less obnoxious in their approach, but at a base level the information is the same. Some thrust beliefs forward as stringently as you thrust your ego upon others but escape scrutiny. 

Is it your regularity combined with a distasteful level of self love that makes the source information more acceptable from others? Why is it OK for posters to rip your beliefs apart, but not those of a meeker and more humble poster? 

[Mr Walker]

3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

If you can leave your ego at the door for a moment that would be great. I'm already entertaining your nonsense in another thread. Buck up little man and hold on.

What I actually asked is why are your crazy beliefs more outstanding than another's spiritual or religious belief. Most might be less obnoxious in their approach, but at a base level the information is the same. Some thrust beliefs forward as stringently as you thrust your ego upon others but escape scrutiny. 

Is it your regularity combined with a distasteful level of self love that makes the source information more acceptable from others? Why is it OK for posters to rip your beliefs apart, but not those of a meeker and more humble poster? 

Like i said the problem is not with me but with your total inability/refusal to accept some  things which are a real (if relatively minor)  part of my Life That is your problem not mine 

I have a good, strong, healthy ego.

Thus i dont need to bolster it with attention seeking or tall tales.

I am respected and loved in my family and community,  and don't seek or need approval from the internet 

This site is SUPPOSED to be a place where people can present unexplained mysteries for discussion, not a site where people  are scared off by antagonism and personal attack  While i can understand it, I am disappointed that this forum has basically become a place to attack spiritual/religious and paranormal experiences rather than discuss them 

i repeat i dont have beliefs thus I dont have crazy ones  

I have somewhat  unusual and hard to explain real life experiences 

What actual problems do you  have with "my approach"   and how much of that is actually a deep bias against all such things?  Obnoxious is a strong word and entirely subjective. What do you find obnoxious and why  ? 

Ah; you find self  love distasteful. That explains a lot .

Self love is the first essential of a sound ego and mind Only when one loves oneself can one love others. 

I love myself(and indeed really like the person  i am)  and that allows me to love  almost every other person i know, and to like the great majority .  

The less a person loves  themself,  the less they are able to love others, and the more the y are likely to suffer from  other serious problems of  depression, anger, hate, fear etc. 

it is legitimate to debate and attempt  to dissect ideas  and this can be done vigorously.

It is not acceptable to attack anyone for posting ideas you don't like, don't believe, or find distasteful,  or even distressing. 

Edited June 28, 2020 by Mr Walker

[Mr Walker]

12 hours ago, Sherapy said:

Your posts are the evidence that most of your claims are your opinions, values, and extrapolations and a source of entertainment, you are entertained by the things you claim and the conflict you generate.

You seek it out and fuel it.

Please do not respond, it is feedback use it to refine or not.

I will not derail Xeno’s thread any further. 

 

Again you are entitled to your beliefs no matter how erroneous and unfounded the y are.

These claims are assumptions perhaps based on the sort of person you are and how you perceive others to be. 

I hate conflict but i wont walk away from it  

yes i am entertained by this site but also it has serious purpose and most of the debates involve important matters  

ps when i use sources to back up my opinions claims etc you dont like it  yet those sources provide the evidences for my facts /opinions /arguments etc. If you disagree with them, find the sources which support your own views (if you can) 

[Mr Walker]

18 hours ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

I disagree.

We don't really "argue" about the topics. We discuss them in a courteous, respectful manner. 

She engages in the conversation.

Just like here, in the Spiritual vs. Skepticism, if someone is willing to discuss their beliefs I think it fair game that both sides get to lay out their points.

Again I disagree. 

I think most people actually do realize that their beliefs make them feel better. It's the fact that most people are unwilling to admit it to others that it is the main reason they believe unevidenced things in the first place. 

For example, how much pressure and stress do people have trying to live a life that is supposedly being watched and judged by an invisible being?

I readily admit, by not believing in god, my life is less stressful and pressured than if I did. But that is not the main reason I don't believe. The personal evidence that I don't have is the main factor. 

There is no evidence, in my mom's case, that her physical and mental health are made better in any significant way because she holds such views. 

I don't contend they have made her any worse though.

I simply don't know. 

She's had mental and physical issues and I don't think there's any way to say they would be better or worse if she held different beliefs. At some point, it is what it is. 

As I said, if someone is willing to openly discuss their beliefs, they should absolutely know that their ideas might/will be challenged at some point.

She is almost 70 years old. Most of these views about crystals and aliens and the afterlife have only been formed in the last 15 years.

Most of her life she was blissfully ignorant of the subjects in general, as far as I know.

I trace it back to that John Edwards show where he pretends to talk to dead people.

That got the ball rolling and it's been all downhill from there.

Thanks for the feedback and extra explanation

if it as you describe, then I think you are correct, but then you are NOT attacking her beliefs  or trying to dissuade her of them, simply giving your own opinions 

A very basic question for you.

is it better for a person to be factually correct, or to be happy, and if you  can only have one, which would you chose?.

You said, she said the y make her happy.

That suggests her life IS better for holding her beliefs/views,  and she is consciously self  aware of this 

Edited June 28, 2020 by Mr Walker

[Mr Walker]

19 hours ago, eight bits said:

That, and the content of your posts.

and how can the contents of any post provide evidence that the posts are wrong, or that  i am in error? 

The experiences  discussed might be uncommon or unexplained, but that does not  make them untrue.

You may never have experienced similar, but others may have 

In most cases it is impossible to prove anything in my posts to be untrue    because i am NOT in error  (although I am open to discussion of how i perceive things, and why)  One can only disbelieve me, not prove I am wrong. 

This is a fairly classic example of how beliefs /disbeliefs can blind a person to possibilities. 

eg  "Oh ghosts don't exist, thus you could not possibly have encountered one" 

The belief that ghosts do not exist blinds the person  to the possibility that another person  encountered a ghost,  and yet it is ONLY a belief, without factual foundation or evidences/proofs . 

Any actual encounter with a ghost, on the other hand,  provides SOME evidences that ghosts DO exist, whatever they may turn out to be . 

Edited June 28, 2020 by Mr Walker

[eight bits]

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

The experiences  discussed might be uncommon or unexplained, but that does not  make them untrue.

Actually, I'd say your typical pattern is that a common or explicable event is presented as a major mystery of cosmic importance, discussion ensues, the claim contracts, facts get realigned, and eventually the event is widely recognized as the nothingburger it was all along.

For example, when all the dust settled in the whale matter, it came down to you had a dream about a whale, and then you and the missus saw a story about a whale on TV soon afterward. You magically knew that the whale on television would be all right, which very probably reflected the tone of the news presenter and reporter when introducing and narrating the story as much as any dream revelation beforehand.

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

In most cases it is impossible to prove anything in my posts to be untrue  

We do spend a lot of time scraping down your posts, cleaning up the exaggerations and straightening out what you perceived from what you "interpreted." Occasionally, we need to regroup and compare notes on what's the latest version of whatever story. Generally, the reader doesn't "disprove" things, rather, you shift ground until what's left is so garbled and inconsequential, it really doesn't matter whether it's "true" or not.

At which point, you declare victory.

3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Any actual encounter with a ghost, on the other hand,  provides SOME evidences that ghosts DO exist, whatever they may turn out to be

That's a tautology, and irrelevant to our actual situation as readers. What we get are anecdotes, and for each one, we seek likely explanations for what actually happened in that case. Only rarely is the ghost hypothesis even competitive as a likely explanation. Far from being blind to anything, many of us look carefully, paying special attention to whatever might prove out beliefs wrong.

In the case of ghosts, so far, nothing here. Fortunately, in the meantime, there's often puzzle value in identifying the likely explanations, and a heightened appreciation of how interesting the natural world and our interaction with it can be.

We are not your problem, Mr W.

[XenoFish]

7 hours ago, Stubbly_Dooright said:

I really hope not. Like I keep saying, I think you started a wonderful thought provoking thread. I like it to continue. I think it's a nice reflection on individual's motivations in this area. 

Thank you. However, since Walker is here I know the pattern. And I know I'm done. Because whatever amount of pages after this post will be arguments. I'm going to let it burn out. 

[eight bits]

14 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

I know I'm done.

If it's time for closing statements on topic:

I think I'm a traditionalist. All ideas are fair game for examination, IMO. I get it that people fall in love with some of their ideas, and that an unsympathetic inquiry into the idea is taken as an attack on the person holding the idea.

Which is just too bad. It's not a reason for anybody to refrain from giving ideas the scrutiny they need. It's a reason for people not to fall so hard for their ideas, or at least to be selective with their affections.

If for some reason that's not doable, then the idea-besotted poster needs to read the label on this sub-forum before wading in. And if having read the label, the person comes here to preach, then their message will be peeled like a grape, so that we stay in practice.

I don't think anybody here aspires to injure anybody else, as many posters have agreed. On the other hand, nobody here controls what anybody else here exposes themselves to, either. There's a sheltered workshop one floor up from here - if that's what somebody's ideas need to flourish, then somebody really ought to go play there.

[Mr Walker]

51 minutes ago, eight bits said:

Actually, I'd say your typical pattern is that a common or explicable event is presented as a major mystery of cosmic importance, discussion ensues, the claim contracts, facts get realigned, and eventually the event is widely recognized as the nothingburger it was all along.

For example, when all the dust settled in the whale matter, it came down to you had a dream about a whale, and then you and the missus saw a story about a whale on TV soon afterward. You magically knew that the whale on television would be all right, which very probably reflected the tone of the news presenter and reporter when introducing and narrating the story as much as any dream revelation beforehand.

We do spend a lot of time scraping down your posts, cleaning up the exaggerations and straightening out what you perceived from what you "interpreted." Occasionally, we need to regroup and compare notes on what's the latest version of whatever story. Generally, the reader doesn't "disprove" things, rather, you shift ground until what's left is so garbled and inconsequential, it really doesn't matter whether it's "true" or not.

At which point, you declare victory.

That's a tautology, and irrelevant to our actual situation as readers. What we get are anecdotes, and for each one, we seek likely explanations for what actually happened in that case. Only rarely is the ghost hypothesis even competitive as a likely explanation. Far from being blind to anything, many of us look carefully, paying special attention to whatever might prove out beliefs wrong.

In the case of ghosts, so far, nothing here. Fortunately, in the meantime, there's often puzzle value in identifying the likely explanations, and a heightened appreciation of how interesting the natural world and our interaction with it can be.

We are not your problem, Mr W.

lol So its "common " for me to dream of a whale caught in a tuna farm then getting free the night before the event happened Come on As far as i know no whale had ever been caught like that before and its rare even now  so why have that dream? 

I dreamed it and the next night the news  footage was identical to the dream( in the same location /farm and and from  the same perspective I was able to tell my wife (who was very concerned ) that the whale would get free.

Of cosmic importance ? I wouldn't say so But very interesting and just the sort of material UM is designed for  I have answers to some of my experiences thanks to context and further history. Some i do not   Some peole seem to get unreasonably upset by what are true simple stories from  mylife I can only suspect that these stories challenge the way they need  to  think their world is  Most of them seem to lack ANY real encounter with the unexplained and inexplicable making them naturally and understandably skeptical 

You dont do anything to or with my posts You offer alternative hypotheses based on your own beliefs or disbeliefs   This may set your mind a t rest but it does not alter the actual events . 

I cant comment on other ghost stories But i stand by my own experiences  Personal experience in anything does, i admit, make a person less skeptical of other accounts than someone with no experience themself .

iI dont have a problem That's your perception  its not a problem (to/for me  that i am disbelieved  If there is one it is the failure of others to even contemplate the things i post might be true and thus to miss out on several significant truths about the human world and the nature of reality 

I suspect you BEGIN with an assumption that there are no ghosts  (etc) and then look for other explanations. That is not good methodology. .

   I repeat; every encounter with a ghost, real or perceived, provides some evidences for evaluation / comparison/analysis etc 

Edited June 28, 2020 by Mr Walker

[Mr Walker]

Its a pity some people are so linear in thinking  

IMO most of this discussion/debate has ranged over the nature of spiritual (and other)  beliefs and disbeliefs.

The beliefs and disbeliefs we hold, bias and prejudice our views on everything we encounter, and how we respond.  

As i said earlier, it is a good topic, and a good question, but it is much wider than you seem to think.

Human spirituality goes far beyond religion, to our beliefs ethics moralities and world views. Our self  aware nature makes us inevitably spiritual and aware that we are.   Not necessarily religious, but even the most ardent atheist is a spiritual being,  if they appreciate music, art, poetry, or even sport   can love and hate  etc.  

Edited June 28, 2020 by Mr Walker

[psyche101]

5 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Like i said the problem is not with me but with your total inability/refusal to accept some  things which are a real (if relatively minor)  part of my Life That is your problem not mine 

I have a good, strong, healthy ego.

Thus i dont need to bolster it with attention seeking or tall tales.

I am respected and loved in my family and community,  and don't seek or need approval from the internet 

This site is SUPPOSED to be a place where people can present unexplained mysteries for discussion, not a site where people  are scared off by antagonism and personal attack  While i can understand it, I am disappointed that this forum has basically become a place to attack spiritual/religious and paranormal experiences rather than discuss them 

i repeat i dont have beliefs thus I dont have crazy ones  

I have somewhat  unusual and hard to explain real life experiences 

What actual problems do you  have with "my approach"   and how much of that is actually a deep bias against all such things?  Obnoxious is a strong word and entirely subjective. What do you find obnoxious and why  ? 

Ah; you find self  love distasteful. That explains a lot .

Self love is the first essential of a sound ego and mind Only when one loves oneself can one love others. 

I love myself(and indeed really like the person  i am)  and that allows me to love  almost every other person i know, and to like the great majority .  

The less a person loves  themself,  the less they are able to love others, and the more the y are likely to suffer from  other serious problems of  depression, anger, hate, fear etc. 

it is legitimate to debate and attempt  to dissect ideas  and this can be done vigorously.

It is not acceptable to attack anyone for posting ideas you don't like, don't believe, or find distasteful,  or even distressing. 

Thank you for completing the example Walks old fella.

I now turn this across to the forum.

As you can see, our colleague here cannot see past his beliefs to discuss the topic. Completely absorbed in his fantasies, any discussion becomes a defence of those beliefs. Larryp is another example. His beliefs are obnoxious to say the least, constantly bursting into threads with the same offensive fire and brimstone approach regardless of the title. The Westboro people use laws that protect beliefs to act obnoxiously and make a public nuisance of themselves. Isn't belief a little overprotected due to it's generalised and ambiguous nature?

These beliefs aren't actually hurting anyone, but they aren't amicably accepted by the larger community. Groups like Westboro toxically pollute the community. What people really object to is a a belief coupled with an exhibitionist and extroverted personality. Sure there's harmful beliefs like Wahhabism and head hunting. That's outside the scope of this thread, but education and perhaps therapy I'm sure many would agree would benefit the more outward belief systems mentioned earlier, but how is that different to destroying a spiritual or religious belief in general? It's the same 'regardless of the title' isn't it? Just quieter. So isn't the thread title suggesting 'people who keep their beliefs to themselves' should be left alone?

And the only real way a belief can be overturned is by being open minded and learning more things. The Ricky Gervais quote that our aforementioned colleague has objected to in the past (what sensible logical approach does lol)

Beliefs do not change facts. Facts, if one is rational, should change beliefs.

Comes to mind.

How is that a bad thing? Everything should be challenged. Including belief. It's how we grow.