Do spiritual things exist?

Post Reply New Topic

Umm...please expound...or have I taken a bit of harmless trolling too seriously?

Its been a weird and uncomfortable transition as I spent the last couple years pretty confident in my supposition that there was no God, no afterlife, and no human soul and recently I had to rethink the the whole web of relationships I'd mapped out in my head.

I was actually on here if I'm not mistaken, in a debate that had something to do with this topic. I was starting to lecture about how things don't seem 'fair' simply because the universe has all the sentience of a tennis racket, that things simply happen because they happen and that they were set in stone to happen exactly the way they happen at the big bang or even earlier, etc. etc. and they had a counterpoint, pretty much telling me to take a proper look at NDE (near death experience). I'd already assumed that it was just the brain panicking as the lights go out but I started finding out a lot about what their presumed anecdote is and I have to say they're making pretty strong circumstantial case.

The challenge with making these into 'scientific' claims is that they need a theory and right now there is no measurable/falsifiable theory available yet. What's actually known about it is still superficial/cursory, but the anecdote is loaded with people in coma for hours, days, and weeks coming back and describing all kinds of wild things all while telling the doctors what they saw them doing, things doctors were doing at the opposite end of or in a different building altogether, seeing dead relatives who no one knew had died yet; all kinds of things that get trippy enough to where I really felt like I'd need to plug my ears and put willful blinders on to say that the case I've seen made (for me at least) isn't persuasive. What these people are coming up with essentially though, in a way oversimplified form, is what I said earlier along with a self-deprecating use of the term 'ghost'. I'm still pretty strong on determinism, I don't think there's much out there to really shake that, but materialism - unless something really grandiose swings back the other way I have my doubts that I'll be returning to that paradigm.

I spent about five months living on next to nothing and going almost entirely without adequate shelter, and I was living on cheap off-brand nutritional supplements kept in my knapsack and cheap off-brand oatmeal...not the instant flavored stuff in the neat little packets, couldn't afford it. One of the consequences of this was a nasty run-in with gum disease. It also did some pretty bizarre things to my mind.

Look, having experiences you can't explain or don't properly understand is not serviceable as evidence that the world is governed by magic. If something happens that you don't have an explanation for, it means exactly that: you can't rationalize or explain everything that happens to you. You have to cope with the fact that there will be times that you are at a loss to explain what is going on.

Now, do you have a specific event in mind that you would like to propose as part of your case?

Well, its like that until patterns start emerging, and when that happens you tend to wonder if there isn't some type of opportunity that can't be exploited in the makeup of that additional info to make the world a better place, create better/greener technology, etc. etc.


I'd have to say that in terms of good speeches, strong books or youtube presentations/recordings, they're out there and I can think of several. Then again I kinda have to ask first do you actually want links to watch them? Even if some of them are a bit longer? Conversely, and speaking to your point, if you find that its even more proven to you to be BS than before it means you end up with a worldview that even has fewer internal inconsistencies, at the same time people tend to pick and chose which of those they'll spend energy on.

I think that, aside from seemingly nonlocally attained knowledge being confirmed/verified outside of the experience, the other part of what's convincing is that many of these same people talking about going through epic experiences were themselves reductive materialists, even doctors. To me that's both verification/validation of events that, with all materialistic factors removed, shouldn't be happening. Also there's the credibility that top ranking world renowned neurologists and physicians are jumping sides; people who typically aren't the most neurotic or emotional decision makers. Even with doctors who haven't been through these things themselves, what's being stated is that as we're able to push the boundaries of life with superhuman implements or have people come closer and closer to dying without having it literally be a person's end, that the numbers of doctors who witness these things rises as well as the number of people experiencing them.

As far as debating these things - if you want to see videos or links (again, let me know), I can post them but past that I don't know how good of a debate we could actually have. I'd be a liar to say that I don't completely empathize with where you're coming from on the reality of deity, etc. and at the same time it seems like its only been in the last 40 years that this stuff started getting attention, then really heating up after 1990 or so, and in the last 5 or 10 years it seems like it hit another even bigger jump. As far as Christopher Hitchen's challenge that to suggest that a deity could watch us for 100,000 years battle, rape, and murder each other and just 5,000 years ago say "You know what - I'll give them souls" that you can believe pretty much anything; I agree with him, thinking about that, the Mongols, Assyrians, WWI and WWII, Nazis, the mass daily slaughter in Africa - the existence of a God would imply that such things are being 'allowed' (much like you're brush with starvation and taking likely permanent damage to your health). The thing I can't emphasize enough though - if any of this is true (which again, room for killing-blow evidence really seems to be diminishing quickly) its a *vast* - multiverse - size of a realm and logic and physical laws to explore and I'm sure it'll mean that some things will be found to have a meaning while other things perhaps simply are. I realize the best I can do is just take a deep breath and try to roll with the punches for the moment rather than worrying about the seeming disconnects.

Yeah, I don't see where evidence is mounting. I believe that's true, but that's my belief, and I have experienced things that provide me with personal and not repeatable evidence, but nothing I could present as evidence I expect others to believe. Is there some source you'd like to cite for this mounting evidence, techstepgenr8tion? I'm not trying to be picky, but I'd be interested.

There was a research program at University of Arizona for some years, where they tested mediums in order to learn more about the possibility of life after death. It was a fascinating study to read about, but I was interested in psychic phenomena to begin with. They went on to see if they could find evidence for the existence of "God" but I haven't read the book that came out of that study.

There have also been some studies of NDE experiences to find similarities. Even some experiments at hospitals where they placed objects on top of cabinets that no one in the room could see from a standing position, and had reports from NDE patients of what was on top of the cabinets. But I don't know where to find a link or reference for those experiments or their results. This one might help: http://iands.org/home.html

The CIA experimented in Remote Viewing for years as well, with some success. But I'm not sure if that applies here, or how "spirit" might be involved.

And again it seems as if we're grasping for a clarification of what exactly the OP intended to ask....

Edited to add: Here's an article about one study I had heard of: http://iands.org/research/important-res ... ?task=view

I'm still not following you.

You are talking to someone who doesn't give an opinion on a senate bill until having read through all 500 pages...and doesn't trust any damn journalist's summary of it.

The thing is, I think that religious people can be and often are perfectly or even extraordinarily intelligent. I am perfectly capable of handling the idea of a religious person who is considerably smarter, more knowledgeable and more educated than I am. I am not likely to be moved by hearing a scientist claiming that he had a NDE.

I understand that you are less likely to die drowning in icewater than you are to die drowning in warm water.

It might be just because I'm a little past tipsy, but...you're not coming through to me clearly. You are talking about us getting a bit better at reviving people from "near-death," but I don't really get how you are piecing your ideas together here.

Debate...mmmmh. Can I just have a good, clear explanation of how you are putting your ideas and thoughts together?

Ah, there is an issue. You see, I don't listen to mainstream "TV atheists." In fact, most of my reading material pertaining to this would probably bore you.

You failed to show that the processes involved is not a servant to some, I dunno, background force (or "soul," "spirit," or otherwise). I mean, is there a supernatural catalyst for subsequent observable processes or not? We're both making assumptions here. You're assuming that there isn't any such "force" or "energy." I'm assuming that there is. Your assumption is based on what seems to me a purely materialist worldview. My assumption is based on observations from intuition--moreover, the observed experiences in question are often shared experiences. It's almost "common sense." We both have at least a rudimentary understanding of how the physical side works. I just happen to be a little bit more open-minded as to additional possibilities.

Now, as to the actual PHYSICS of it, you do have the "many-worlds" interpretation in which it MIGHT be possible that there could be, given the possibility of, I dunno, maybe, some kind of "trans-dimensional plane to our level of existence that could behave and interact in the kinds of ways it seems what we call "God" has done. However, that being would be subject to the physical laws that Nexus mentioned. In a nutshell, what would happen is "God" would eventually have to die due to entropy and there would be no such thing as an immortal being save for the universe (or metaverse) itself. Now, maybe the time scale could behave differently relative to our own timeline, but "God" would be still be operating on the same fixed timeline. A "realtime" interaction comprehensible to human beings would be impossible because we'd move too fast for God, so it would appear that God moves extremely slowly. Or if God's timeline is faster than our own, we'd have the problem of God running out of steam to get things done. To make it work, we're talking about an IMMENSE amount of energy. To, um, "make God real" the way we understand him, there'd be so many physical laws that would have to be broken that it is extremely unlikely that such a being could even exist.

To conceive of such a being as God being real, the best explanation is that He exists above and apart from the natural creation. That doesn't mean He can't come in and out of it at will or that He doesn't interact with it. It just means that if you're going to assume that God is real, you can't limit God to existing ONLY within the natural, physical realm. That's a tight box to fit someone or something that is supposed to be infinite.

NDE's have uniformity well past cultural pollution. The consistency seems to be setting some general 'soft' rules (ie. early sketches of what we at least believe to be the scenarios and how they work).


Fair and I'd commend you on that. I suppose the question is do you have the endurance, interest, or time to do that with everything? Is it a motivational structure that you can shift from topic to topic at will? I only say that because, if I really do have your interest, books of this sort are out there. If not - my point is that most people have specific areas of life that they have the energy to put their all into but no one can really do that on everything and most people seem like they'll tl:dr or tl:dw anything that generally doesn't agree with their precepts at the moment. I think the only way I wasn't in that frame of mind is that I've bounced back and forth enough in the past that I didn't have the degree of connection to either materialism or religion that bound me too much over the facts to stop me from shifting gears. Maybe you're up for that kind of reading, maybe you're not, but if you are I'll at least indulge you (albeit I may be recommending some books on my list that I haven't read yet - typically key points and anecdotes, as long as they work out and have real world verification, will cut it for me).


It gets interesting when atheists or complete don't know don't care's are consistently becoming former atheists and its people who are systemic/analytic and not as given to thinking emotionally. Clearly that on its own wouldn't do it for me but impossible observations for hallucinated out-of-body experience, and plenty of them, seems persuasive on its own - seeing people who work in the fields of logic/reason having that is more or less icing on the cake.


I just mean medical technology getting better to where more people hit the threshold of death and live to tell about it than ever, which is why we're hearing that much more about it these days.


It's a little tricky as I'm still getting my head around these thing and how they work or don't work. Its still a nascent interest of mine and I'm grabbing as much info as I can on it.


That's great on your part but the only thing I'm not sure of is how much more clarification reductionist determinism needs in the epistemological or ontological departments once you understand the precepts of what the implications are (no God, no life hereafter, no human soul, ??). I mean yes, there's still plenty to drill into philosophically about the nature of consciousness, learning, and what dynamics shape culture under a materialist rubric but they don't change the major trinity that I mentioned earlier and if you're doing deep reading on atheism I would figure that they're mostly elaborating on their take for epistemic/ontological issues. If you have no belief in a God but believe in a human soul or a life hereafter, that's most often self described as Buddhist rather than atheist. To believe in a God but no life hereafter is a bit like certain ancient beliefs but they're still what we'd classify as beliefs rather than nonbeliefs.

Pretty much it seems like the main circle of researchers includes Raymond Moody, Pin Van Lommel, and Bruce Greyson. As far as some of the major documented NDE's - of thousands, a few standouts have been of course Pam Reynolds (now rinsed of course), Mellen Thomas Benedict, Eben Alexander III, and there are a lot of other people as well with similarly poignant experience but not perhaps quite as deep, detailed, or always as outwardly verifiable (ie. taking things back to reality that they could not have known without at least some aspect of their non-locality of consciousness during their brains laps into 'near death' being correct).

Magic itself is hard to test, but with photos things are a bit easier. I know there are very few photos of personal rituals, but mine seem to show demons in most of the pictures. You need to open your mind to the point your brains are falling out for these beings to be attracted to you. After that play with a Ouija Board and ask for Satan to appear. I actually didn't do that, but I might as well since my life is 90% weird stuff.

Ok now for the real deal. I do use black magic and I use it for personal gain, revenge and anything not so nice when physical action isn't possible. Anyway, I have pictures to prove that my rituals have caused weird things to appear in the fire and remain long enough for my photographer to capture demons on film. When I knew I was about to move, I decided to curse my old apartment to the point the next tenant would run out screaming. The building was a slum, so I decided to curse it with everything I had at the time. I summoned all sorts of evil spirits and told them to bring the place down. Anyway the building caught fire and it seems by miracle that I got everything I wanted plus a huge apartment near good bus lines and transportation.

Here's the good stuff, the demon photos. Some of these were done outside at parks. If this isn't proof of spiritual things; then what is?

[img][800:576]http://i1134.photobucket.com/albums/m608/darkseed2012/WalkingAway.jpg[/img]
[img][800:576]http://i1134.photobucket.com/albums/m608/darkseed2012/SmokeEyes.jpg[/img]

[img][800:576]http://i1134.photobucket.com/albums/m608/darkseed2012/ADealWithTheDevil.jpg[/img]

I just presented to you the mechanical forces that these phenomena actually are subject to. If you want more detail than that, I would have to go farther into biophysics than I am prepared to discuss intelligently. Even if I could provide you with an intelligent and thorough discussion on biophysics, I am assuming that I would have to get you through four years of undergraduate mathematics that I doubt you have studied and seriously doubt you would want to invest any energy in learning.

You watch too much television.

Just say that you believe it's thoroughly unfalsifiable. If you want to believe that some cosmic miracle-worker is behind everything that happens in the universe, I can't stop you. I really wouldn't wish to.

I don't think you are prepared to discuss this at the level that I like to discuss things. Be at peace.

Last edited by WilliamWDelaney on 07 Jun 2012, 7:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

I am not going to buy a book, and I really shouldn't be spending as much time on the computer as I do. I have an active personal life. However, if I thought you were serious, I would gladly watch your videos.

I don't develop emotional attachments to ideas or beliefs, though. I find it a little perverted that some people will actually do so.

The thing is, I'm not impressed enough with myself to think that being an atheist makes me immune to becoming a religious person. I don't see the structure of my reasoning as so thoroughly infallible that it couldn't be shaken apart by some jarring experience or other. Therefore, I am already thoroughly convinced that there are plenty of people who used to think every bit as I do who are convinced of some magical explanation for the cosmos.

Look, what I am trying to tell you, here, is that you are preaching to the converted. I'm not one of those dim-wits who think that "only brainwashed stupid people believe in fairies." I understand the error in this thinking, and I acknowledge that it is arrogant.

I'm not seeing how you are working out in your head that this feeds into the validity of these people's experiences.

Okay, so just try to give me a few basic ideas you are working with.

Actually, what I do my deep reading on lately is religion, ancient, medieval and modern. I have actually gotten a little bit out-of-rhythm with my more frantic hunting-and-gathering because I have been trying my best to labor through the Latin version of the Codex Theodosianus. However, I am afraid that some of the material I tend toward is incredibly dry. I question whether you would really want to go to that depth with me.

Anyway, I'll be out for the weekend, and I look forward to trying to get...a little depth here, perhaps.

Last edited by WilliamWDelaney on 07 Jun 2012, 7:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

Yes, very obviously, spiritual things exist.

I don't know what spiritual things are but I know they exist.

I want a demonstration that the processes are definitively NOT subject to an extra-physical, "spiritual" causation. You have demonstrated how mental processes manifest themselves in physical form. You haven't shown where they come from.

Uhh, yeah I did. The "velcro" that helps the communicative appendages of our neurons cling to each other is derived from calcium. Besides a torrent of sodium ion, calcium ion is also admitted into the cell by the opening of the receptor I lately spent a while discussing.

Do you want me to explain to you how a receptor actually works? How far am I going to have to go into remedial cellular biology with you? If you need a refresher course in undergraduate biology, you'll have to wait until next week. However, I don't know what in God's world has compelled me to devote this much time to you.

Yes, and that is the point: