• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

SPR Study Day - The Psychology of the Sceptic

maatorc said:
Am having a little problem with your exact meaning.
Visualizing can lead to psychic remote viewing.
You seem to be saying someone who visualizes and succeeds in remotely viewing a place is not experiencing a psychic event, whereas I would say they are; but I am uncertain of your meaning.
Click to expand...

How do you establish that someone is remote viewing as opposed to simply visualising?
 
zooterkin said:
How do you establish that someone is remote viewing as opposed to simply visualising?
Click to expand...

Ooh, let me have a try at remote viewing. I can see Maatorc at his computer. It's in the centre of an old-fashioned desk (not a computer table). There are a number of disks scattered around. Some contain computer data, others are CDs. There's a pad of paper to the left of the keyboard, leading me to think Maatorc is left handed.

How'd I do? If you could provide evidence for my success or failure without recourse to phenomenal data, that'd be great.
 
maatorc said:
Am having a little problem with your exact meaning.
Visualizing can lead to psychic remote viewing.
You seem to be saying someone who visualizes and succeeds in remotely viewing a place is not experiencing a psychic event, whereas I would say they are; but I am uncertain of your meaning.
Click to expand...

As Zooterkin asked, how do you know that their visualizing represents "remotely viewing a place" and is not just visualizing?

Linda
 
zooterkin said:
How do you establish that someone is remote viewing as opposed to simply visualising?
Click to expand...

All my comments on remote viewing refer exclusively to the mystical tradition of 'psychic projection', not the military intelligence experiments at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing, and many other links, which may be somewhat confusing to some vis-a-vis the subject of psychic reality generally.

In psychic projection the practitioner experiences the location seen as a place in which one is actually present.

It must be noted that this does not mean, and the mystical tradition does not claim, that the practitioner actually goes anywhere in space or time, but rather that the mind-consciousness of the practitioner attunes with the location or condition which is the focus of attention through visualization.

The traditional mystical explanation of this technique is that we have two bodies, a mental body unrestricted in its' functioning by time and space, and a physical vehicle subject to time and space in its' perceptions.

Naturally, there are huge variances in the power and realizations of novices and masters of this technique as is the case with all human practices and procedures.

As material-physical consciousness cannot measure exclusively mental events, the proof of psychic projection lies exclusively with those who have experienced it.
 
maatorc said:
All my comments on remote viewing refer exclusively to the mystical tradition of 'psychic projection', not the military intelligence experiments at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing, and many other links, which may be somewhat confusing to some vis-a-vis the subject of psychic reality generally.

In psychic projection the practitioner experiences the location seen as a place in which one is actually present.

It must be noted that this does not mean, and the mystical tradition does not claim, that the practitioner actually goes anywhere in space or time, but rather that the mind-consciousness of the practitioner attunes with the location or condition which is the focus of attention through visualization.

The traditional mystical explanation of this technique is that we have two bodies, a mental body unrestricted in its' functioning by time and space, and a physical vehicle subject to time and space in its' perceptions.

Naturally, there are huge variances in the power and realizations of novices and masters of this technique as is the case with all human practices and procedures.

As material-physical consciousness cannot measure exclusively mental events, the proof of psychic projection lies exclusively with those who have experienced it.
Click to expand...

How do you decide which particular mental states are called psychic experiences and which are not? For example, do you call hypnagogic hallucinations 'psychic'? If not, why not? If you do, what additional information does the use of the word 'psychic' impart to the description?

Linda
 
maatorc said:
In psychic projection the practitioner experiences the location seen as a place in which one is actually present.
Click to expand...
Right. And how do you tell the difference between this remote viewing, or psychic projection, or whatever you want to call it, and just imagining you are there?
 
Limbo said:
So? Watch the damn thing anyway.
Click to expand...

Sorry, can't watch the damn thing.


"The video you are trying to view cannot be watched from your current location or country."

How about you summarise what it's about, and why it's relevant?
 
Limbo said:
So? Watch the damn thing anyway.
Click to expand...

I can't watch it here, but I'm not avoiding it or anything. I am already familiar with the SRI stuff (assuming that's what it's about).

I'm just saying that it doesn't answer my question, even though you posted it as though it would be a response to my question. And I'm sincerely trying to understand what Maatorc is saying, so I didn't want you to sidetrack that particular discussion (although I realize that you are the Boss of this thread).

Linda
 
maatorc said:
Seeing or hearing at or from a distance.
Click to expand...

That is not an example by any definition of noumenal of which I am aware. Specifically because it appears to be an interaction with real-world sound.

This falls under the category referred by psi researchers a "psi-k": interaction with the physical world, and I don't consider this is noumenal at all.
 
maatorc said:
And who invented you and with what justification?
Click to expand...

I'm really not getting the impression that you're interested in an actual discussion at this point. I really feel like you're deliberately wasting our time, and have decided to stop.
 
Limbo said:
So? Watch the damn thing anyway.
Click to expand...

Limbo, I've noticed that the majority of your posts here have been very grumpy and combative. Granted, this is your thread. But don't you think it that in light of your OP the hostile posture you've taken is a bit counter productive?
 
It is , in fact, not his thread. In no way does he own it. You are allowed to point out his silly assertions at any time. As other posters have pointed out "pseudo skeptics" are just people who don't swallow his BS.
 
zooterkin said:
Right. And how do you tell the difference between this remote viewing, or psychic projection, or whatever you want to call it, and just imagining you are there?
Click to expand...

If you are just imagining you are there and you are conscious you are just imagining it you will also be conscious that you are not mentally actually there because you are not mentally experiencing the place as you would if you actually were mentally there, even allowing for the fact you do not actually 'go' anywhere.
 
Last edited:
You want Italian, French or Ranch dressing with that word salad? Bleu cheese will cost extra,
 
maatorc said:
If you are just imagining you are there and you are conscious you are just imagining it you will also be conscious that you are not mentally actually there because you are not mentally experiencing the place as you would if you actually were mentally there, even allowing for the fact you do not actually 'go' anywhere.
Click to expand...

Erm..'Torc, could you, maybe, rephrase that a lil?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom