I have made a slew of posts lately, and I just realized that they all point to the fact that I am having difficulty defining objective proof.

As an example, I have been working with remote viewing. I have experienced some good hits, as well as some bold misses. Is there objective proof in these hits? And if so what is it?

I have been having lucid dreams in which I have tested the realness of the dream scape. I can say that the dream world has the same level of realness as waking life. Again though, what does this mean in terms of objective proof?

I have had several "OOBEs" in the past. The level of realness in these cases actually felt more real or perhaps more dynamic as compared to waking life. It doesn't seem logical to say that this is objective proof of other realities. In the same way that I am perhaps fooled into thinking that this (PMR) is real and not virtual, it could be that I am being fooled into thinking that the OOB experiences are more real by means of the human brain (in terms of biological evolution).

While I was visiting my grandmother in hospice care, I spent some time visualizing myself walking along a beach (she took me to the beach often as a child). I spent around 3 hours doing this over the course of a few days. To my surprise, I overhead my mom talking to aunt, "she keeps talking about being with a man on the beach." Later, mostly out of it from the various drugs and her current state, my grandmother was talking about the man, "I don't know who he is, but he doesn't frighten me." Though this was amazing, I find myself forced to remain skeptical. After all, she lived by the beach for many years.

I have a metal washer hanging from some fishing line near my computer. I am beginning some work with telekinesis. If at some point, the washer moves via my intent alone... there could be a large number of reasons. Maybe it didn't even move at all, perhaps I only perceived it to be moving. Maybe it did move, but that seems to only prove that I can move a washer.

I could easily explain these experiences in the context of MBT, but that would seem to be a leap of faith.

I like the idea of using a probability filter. As time and experience continues, some theories and ideas accumulate in the filter as probable truths. There seems to always be some level of doubt though, but this is the only way that I can seem to find some sort of direction in which to venture.

It seems that the path of the truly open-minded skeptic is a long and lonely road where only uncertainty is certain.

I would love some input from you all. The path is a bit bumpy right now :)

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"

Below is from another thread admittedly started by me as well. It seems to apply more here. I again apologize for the mess I've made on the board. I'm truly trying to sort this all out.

from: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=5370

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"

Uncertainty is what makes life unboring.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

A few items from MBT:

Book 1, Section 2, Chapter 19 (page 129 of trilogy):






Ted, to agree with what you are saying, I would have to make several assumptions about the nature of reality. That isn't to say that I do not think that what you have said is likely or logical.

Without some sort of objective results or a least some level of objective proof, how can truth ever be uncovered? My concern at the moment is not with how Tom's model functions (as amazing and life changing as it is). Attempting to fit my experiences within the context of MBT would be no different than trying to fit a lucid dream within the context of Buddhism or Christianity. Perhaps the problem is that I am an artist and not a scientist. One thing that I can fully embrace is the notion of being open-minded and skeptical. To truly do this, I have to read your response and say, maybe?

You seem confident with MBT as a functional theory of reality. Would it be too personal to ask how you found truth in it? I ask this respectfully and with honesty curiosity.

From Book 1, Section 2, Chapter 4 (page 55 of the trilogy)


From Book 1, Section 2, Chapter 19 (page 131 of trilogy)



From Book 1, Section 2, Chapter 19 (page 133 of trilogy)



From Book 1, Section 2, Chapter 19 (page 134 of trilogy)


I quote all of this because perhaps I am confused by the idea of objective results through subjective experience. Tom mentions the shared experience in MBT as being the event that caused him to realize that his experiences were real. Would this be an example of objective proof (that his experiences were in fact real)? I honestly can't think of very many other solid examples.

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"

Well, at the moment life is very, very unboring.

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"

Just two, Consciousness exists as nonphysical digital information (oh yeah, information, another reminder), and Evolution happens, right.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

This would be true if I accepted the MBT model at face value (if I just believed it). I cannot do this though as it would be as limiting as accepting a Christian model (for example) at face value.

The several assumptions that I was referring to in my earlier post are: virtual reality, digital data stream, CS, TBC, IUOC, etc. These are all part of a very solid model and theory, but a theory for which I have no solid proof. From what I have seen, I do not think that Tom is some nut just leading us on :) But to assume truth in his model would seem to be the very thing that he warns not to do.

Is this a virtual reality? I would say that it is most probable, but that is based on logic and not necessarily experience. I could say that my lucid dreams and (limited) OOB experiences prove that this is a VR, but that would be a huge leap. All I can currently say with certainty is that I (self) can exist within other settings, planes, or states of mind that contain the same level of "realness" as my current state (PMR). This same approach holds true for the other items mentioned above. They make sense logically, but I have no proof that they are truth.

By the way, I find the notion of evolution toward love to be very probable. The is partly based on logic and partly based on good ol' PMR experience. I am actually willing to make at least a small leap of assumption (dare I say faith?) in support of the idea that we are evolving toward love... learning how to love... learning to be love perhaps.

I am not seeking to prove or disprove Tom's model. My goal is first to find out if in fact my purpose is to evolve toward love (the hypothesis). If the hypothesis is true, then my next goal would be to find the most efficient or correct way to accomplish this. In the meantime, I plan to act as though the hypothesis is true and do my best with what little I have. If I die tomorrow having made this assumption incorrectly, then fine. I will vanish having tried to be more loving for no reason other than it seemed like the right thing to do.

The problem I am currently having is knowing what tests to do and what to look for. Again, I am an artist not a scientist. When does subjective experience become an objective result? Would it be a matter of say... being told 15 times by 15 different beings in NPMR, "the purpose of life is X, and to accomplish this you need to do Y"? Or perhaps a shared NPMR experience? Hopefully, I'm being somewhat clear. In my experience, truth normally comes with a bang, so maybe I just need to keep on keepin' on. I don't know.

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"

Hi Justin:

At some point I was in a similar situation where you are right now. Even though I had experiences before my father died in 1996, I wanted more proof about his existence beyond PMR. I was thinking a lot about this, and I received proofs after proofs. Among those, came some objective proofs like premonitions, etc., etc. I reached a point where I said thank you and I was pleased. After that I got more, but those were just redundant. Still, I think that somebody else receiving similar data would remain with a feeling that it's not enough. Everybody is different, but there are some common denominators. Some of the common denominators are what you mentioned. We build a model, we find a better model, we change our model. Every time some new experience comes up we see how can it fit in the model, we change it a bit, keep this, disregard that, and so on. You can say it has a "faith" component that fills gaps or extrapolate from your experiences and logic. Well, what's wrong with that?

In my case, the joy of helping others and the joy of experiencing and expanding models is natural. I don't need to challenge that, I just enjoy it. One thing though in my approach is that I know there is so much yet that I don't know that I think it would be good to know more to make better judgements in the future. In the meantime, I keep enjoying life and experiencing. It is clear that the system thinks that you have what you need to work on what you need to work on, so they won't give you more unless may be you insist and look for that with passion. If you try and try you may get something, and you may get more if you don't mind if you don't get something.

Find out if there is some fear component in your search. I noticed you mentioned the possibility of death without any future after that. Are you afraid of it? Are you afraid about somebody else that may die? Did you have dreams that somebody close to you dies or something happens? Well, here, the common denominator is fear. If you cease to exist tomorrow, so be it. Why fear it? You can control what you can control, whatever you can't control, let it be without fear, like how you act in NPMR.

If you are looking for proof, try to find the highest thing you'd like to know. In my case, it was my father. There has to be something that you can say this is what I want to know. Keep asking and some answer will arrive. Keep the faith this will happen, with the best courage and the minimum fear.

Claudio

_________________
"Every moment can be as good as you want it to be."
"Experience is the ultimate teacher."

> http://soprano.com <

I suppose nothing is wrong with it so long as open minded skepticism is maintained... or an openness to change.


I'm quit certain that there is fear in my search at some level. It would seem unwise for me to think that there is not any. I am okay with having fear, as long as my courage is greater. It does not seem that one can simply shew away fear. I could pacify any fear by embracing a dogma (or MBT for that matter), but that of course would be limiting in terms of my goal and venture. I don't fear death as I sit here. However, if somebody had a loaded gun pointed at my head, I think it would be a stretch to think that I would be absolutely fearless. I do think that I would have the courage to face the fear though (at least I like to think so). I will say that I do have some fear when it comes to the safely and well being of my wife and kids. That is what it is, the honest truth. I just have to deal with that the best that I can until I stumble upon some truth that has the potential to relieve that fear. To seek something out or to embrace a belief in hopes of relieving that fear would seem to be a pathway into a belief trap.

I think that it is unlikely that there is noting after death, but if it is so, then as you have said, there is little that I can do about it. The point in my earlier post is that I am willing to work toward love without fully knowing if that is in fact the point of my (our) existence. It is a hypothesis and something that I hold as a probable truth. Because it is only a hypothesis, there is a chance that it is wrong. Again though, as you said, there is nothing that I can do about it if that is the case.

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"

Justin,

Like you, I'm not from a science/technology background. I majored in Education.

You've had a lot more personal experiences in the way of OOB, lucid dreaming etc. than I have. But I've had a lot of other psi experiences that I would find it very hard to explain away as mere coincidence.

I think the experience that sticks out as most convincing to me is one where I had a dream and then several days later the dream "happened" in my waking life. It was just like watching a "rerun" of my dream. I was a young teenager when it happened, and didn't think about it too much at the time. I know this has happened to other people too.

More than any other type of phenomemon, I think this kind defies a "natural" explanation. There seems to be no way a "brain" gets information from several days in the future and "plays" it for you in a dream. I think this is what Tom means by a subjective experience which provides objective proof.

I would like to have another dream like this, now that I'm an adult. I tend to think that deja vu experiences that I have may be barely recalled dreams playing out in my waking like, but I'm not sure. The deja vu experiences always leave room for doubt.

As far as I can tell, the only way to "debunk" this, is just to deny the claim that it actually happened. I've noticed that with experiences like NDE's and OOBE's the skeptics try to come up with elaborate brain-based explanations, but they don't deny that the experiencer is having the experience.

However, when someone reports something that would clearly have to indicate a separation of consciousness from the brain, like seeing the future, debunkers challenge the claim that it even happened. They never try to give an elaborate "scientific" explanation of how the brain accesses information clearly not available to it. It just gets attributed to faulty memory, coincidence, attentional bias, exaggeration or even lying.

Jeanne

Jeanne,

Good points. I am defiantly not out to debunk such experiences. In fact, before reading MBT and being presented with the idea of being open minded and skeptical, I was overly open to everything. I would read about something that I liked or that seemed logical (for example reincarnation) and take it on as a belief. When the notion of belief traps and open minded skepticism were introduced to me in MBT (thanks Tom), it totally changed my perspective. No more floating around and hand picking ideas and theories to believe... no more warm fuzzies based on hope or belief alone... instead a "spiritual warrior's" path of evidence and truth seeking. I really like this approach. It is not as comforting, but it would seem to be the most efficient in terms of seeking truth.



The question might be "convincing" of what?

In terms of psi experiences, I have had enough to say that it is true that there is more to this life than meets the eye. Is there a chance that it is just a process of the brain? I would say that it is very slim (and your dream is a good case in point), but I think that it is important to be open to the idea. It would seem that if we are at least open to the idea that our probable truth might be wrong, then we are less likely to embrace something without enough facts... just to give us the warm fuzzies about life. So, I can say that it is true that there is something to the fact that I can sit in front of the computer and predict or somehow see the image that I will be shown at a later time (remote viewing practice at dojopsi.com). Does it prove that Tom's theory is correct? No. Does it prove that Jesus existed? Nope. God? Nope. No God? Nope. It just proves that the act itself is possible and provides some evidence that there is more going on beyond what I understand.

Consider this: We are just avatars of some sick alien multilayer game gone wrong. We are constantly being led in circles so that we do not uncover the truth. Now, I do not think that this is likely. The point is that we (as we exist right now) have no clear way of knowing or understanding the true explanation behind these psi experiences, or our existence in general for the matter. Remote viewing, precognitive dreams, OOBEs, etc could (again, not likely) be the result of an alien sham. Didn't Monroe talk about loosh harvesting or something along those lines? I would be willing to bet that there are books dedicated to this topic of alien gaming. The point I'm trying to make is that an idea such as this (though it might be able to also explain psi experiences) gets quickly tossed because it creates some fear... and quit frankly it would suck.

When I was a teenager, a friend and I saw a UFO (unidentified flying object... not necessarily space aliens) Well, it was more like a UFL (unidentified flying light). The details of the event are such that it is near impossible that it was natural (physical/earthly) or man made. It could have been a "spark" from the CS to light the fire that is currently my search for truth, or it could have been aliens. I don't know. To make a leap in either direction without more evidence would be erroneous. I don't mean to focus so much on aliens and UFOs; I'm just using the topic as an example.

There will always be some uncertainty as we exist currently (maybe it is a constant... I don't know). There are perhaps exceptions such as Tom or Bob Monroe... Buddha, Jesus?, etc. It is a bit interesting that the details of the various theories from those in the know are all a bit different. The one concept that seems to be a constant across the board is love, being more loving, becoming love, etc.

I am not so much concerned with the details of how all that is works at this point. I just want to find out if in fact it is all about love. If it is, then I want to know the best or most efficient way to proceed. Details are always nice and certainly helpful along the way, but if love is the goal, I'm pretty sure that the details are less important at this point (for me anyway). In the meantime, I'm good with working toward love without yet fully knowing if this is the point. If it turns out that I am nothing more than a loosh harvester, then that will be a bummer. C'est la vie. I don't see much harm in hoping that this is all about love, as long as I remain open to the notion that it may not be.

I'm meditating daily, working with lucid dreams, remote viewing, healing, telekinesis, love-based choices, etc and plan to continue to do so as part of my search. Honestly, it is all very exciting.



I think this is a good idea for me Claudio. I know that in the past, I have been annoying enough in begging and repeating my questions that somebody or somebeing has thrown me a bone. Maybe I will get annoying enough that CS, the aliens, myself?, or whomever will just give up and show me the blueprints ;)

Great discussion. I truly appreciate the input and insight.

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"

Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDO8DoGPUHs

Michio Kaku and UFOs. current, like yesterday.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

I always enjoy listening to him speak. Maybe it is because he always comes across as open-minded and skeptical ;)

His comments support the notion that others have also experienced something that cannot be explained by physics, or man made objects. What is/was it then? Who knows. Not me, not yet.

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"

I stumbled upon this just now:

from: http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/krishnamur ... 100820.php



This is an interesting thought. Even the idea that I have never actually been to say... Australia, yet I believe it exists without verification.



I find so much truth in this. If I were to erase everything that I believe or even hold as a probable truth, the only thing that remains is thought and experience... if even that! I remember getting in to a debate with friends in high school. I said that there is no way to prove that this chair exists. I can see it, touch it, feel it, sit in it, but I still have not proven the that chair exists, only that I (we) can experience chair.

This is along the same lines of my current spinning mind in terms of objective results. I can have a lucid dream, OOBE, etc, but all that I have proven is that I can experience those things, not that they are real or that any information within them is real or accurate.






more...

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"

Sorry to keep posting this quoted text, but it is forcing me to rethink a few things:

from: http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/krishnamur ... 58&w=truth

There is a great deal more from the page above, but I am only 1/6 of the way through and my brain is smoking.



This honestly blows my mind. I'm pretty certain that this falls in line to some degree with being open minded and skeptical, but maybe not exactly.

This causes me to rethink my approach. Meditating with the notion (even if only at some subconscious level) that I will eventually be able to have OOBEs at will, or exist in two states at once, or experience NPMR, meet guides, etc... this assumes that these things are real, truth (arg, language is somewhat limiting). In reality though they are only assumptions and expectations. So, if one of these things does occur, is it real or is it created/projected? That fact that I did have an OOB experience (10 years before I had ever heard of them) that correlates with the experiences of many others is interesting, but if I really take a close look, it also correlates with my expectations. For example, I had read Raymond Moody's book Life After Life (among others of a similar nature) and was carrying much of that information somewhere in my brain (ie: tunnel, lightness, etc). One could call such things facts or real because X number of people have had similar experiences, but I'm not so sure that this is the correct approach in seeking Truth. I suppose this is the question then: what experiences have not been tainted by expectations or self-projected from the information already residing in my brain or from my thoughts? It would seem that they all have been. This is where I find it difficult to see Truth as something that is attainable (from my current perspective).



This is truly something that must be considered. If I wiped all such knowledge from my brain, understanding the process of my thinking would in fact seem to be the place to start. It seems that the fact that I think and have thought is the one thing that I can call real. As Descartes noted, "I think, therefore I am." Starting there, with that one thing, would seem to be the approach toward truth. The problem is of course doing a data dump of the brain. I'm pretty sure Tom, at some point, mentioned having no expectations in regards to meditation, right? Perhaps the only way to experience/find/know Truth is to fully shut down the one thing that can be called real, thought. That would seem to be the only way to have a clear, untainted view (again, language...) of Truth. (it is no wonder spiritual leaders talk in proverbs, metaphors and models! Even "spiritual leaders" does not seem like the right phrase. Anyway...)

Shutting off the brain/thoughts is no easy task, but certainly a theme within many forms of meditation.

Stating, "take me to my guides", in a lucid dream seems somewhat appropriate. But the idea that the resultant experience is a projection of my thoughts and expectations and maybe not just an interpretation of data (no offense fellow MBTers) makes me wonder if I should just close my lucid dream eyes and try to shut off all thought. In reality, I will probably be giddy as usual and say to myself, "wow, this is amazing! Fly!" Something to work on I suppose :)

Truth seeking seems to be a sticky business. The brain (VR or not) and our thoughts are powerful things that are not easily controlled. I, being a seeker, having both brain and thoughts, am not so sure that I can be fully trusted.

When does experience fully precede thought? When is it not tainted by expectations, information, and our collective past?

P.S. Please understand that I am attempting to challenge MBT in all of this. That is not my goal. Off the record, my hunch is still that the core purpose or importance of MBT is not so much related to the model, but instead in the notion of finding out for ourselves with an attitude of open minded skepticism. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure this dose not imply going out and proving the model right or wrong. It seems to serve as a spark to lite the fire under our backsides to seek Truth. That's just my humble opinion though. Thanks to Tom and MBT, my biscuits are burnin'!

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"