Chaos Magic

[AkuManiMani]

There are plenty of people here who question my experiences and I've no problem with them whatsoever. Like I already said, it isn't about whether or not someone agrees with me but in how they approach me for discussion. If you think its petty for me to treat petty people in like manner, thats fine, but don't try to pigeonhole me into the role of some mean fellow who just pokes fun at people for merely disagreeing.

[ETA: I'd very much prefer to sling direct insults but forum guidelines restrict all such behavior to the "passvie-agressive" snide remark variety. If it were up to me I'd much rather punch a mug in the mug and get it over with.]

Oh, I don't think you're particularly mean; you're just a guy who likes to pick a fight, and thus sees potential fights everywhere. You're a bit too sensitive to other people's tones, and when you decide somebody is being rude, you immediately respond with such aggression that if they weren't rude before, they're certainly not going to be nice now.

But what really annoys me is that you've wasted ten pages on your personal attacks, skirting around the rules as you are. There's just no excuse for such behaviour, no matter how slighted you felt by a poster.

I've observed the posting history of some of the people I've 'attacked'. Many of them are not particularly nice to begin with and almost continually fall-back on the passive-aggressive tactics you've expressed a disliking to. But because they mostly reserve such treatment for posters who hold unpopular views it seems most here turn a blind eye to it.

While I realize that my level of vitriol can be excessive at times, my ire has more to do with my dislike of their character than it does any personal slights they may have directed towards me. However, your point is well taken and I'll definitely try to tone my behavior down.

I don't particularly appreciate Limbo's style of vocally ignoring posters for perceived insults, but it's preferable to making a whole thread a place for you to take your vengeance. If a poster annoys you so much, put them on ignore. That way we'll all be spared the annoyance.

Out of respect for posters like you I'll definitely try to tone it down. But FYI, I don't do ignore as I don't like hiding or blocking out something just because its unpleasant. If a poster wants respectful treatment from me then they will approach me with the respect they want in return. Else-wise, they're fair game as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Malerin]

Here is your original claim:

Now you have changed it to:

Which is a different statement entirely.

Unless you are claiming that:

it's impossible to assert the logical impossibility X​

is equivalent to:

X is possibly true​

in which case you are just assuming your conclusion.

Or X is possibly impossible, if the terms are undefined. Like I said, my modal logic is rusty.

ETA: With undefined terms, we're also going to get into epistemic modalities and metaphysical modalities (depending on what the terms are).

 

[Malerin]

Kind of. On Aku's part, yes, arguably. On Malerin's part, it's an attempt to redefine "evidence" to admit anecdotes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence#Types_of_evidence

Types of evidence
Intuition
Personal experience
Testimonial
Anecdotal evidence
Scientific evidence

1. Anecdotal Evidence
Usually very weak 'positive' evidence
Description of one, or a small number of specific instances, presumably of the same type, general nature, or structure. Better used as 'negative' evidence; as counterexamples
http://depts.washington.edu/methods/evidencetypes.html

 

[AkuManiMani]

One of the few strait-forward answers she even bothered to give me was ---

"And, yes. This is real, all of this is real... "

I assume she had her own reasons for not revealing certain information. At some point I quit worrying about it and just rolled with the weirdness of the situation.

You don't seem to be the sort of person just to let things go.

If I had an experience like that I am sure there would have been an initial shock, but if I thought there was even a chance I was talking to a supernatural being I would be dogged in my questioning.

It would be somewhat frustrating to have one chance to talk to a spirit and she turns out to be a flake.

It was clear at the time that I was going to get little in the way of strait answers -- at least with regard to what I was personally curious about. Exactly a week after the incident I took some DMT and the same "voice" gave me a bit of advice and reassurance before the drug took full effect. My curiosity about such things is not abated and I don't think that those will be my last opportunities to speak with a "spirit".

In the mean time, I'm going to do a much reading as I can on abnormal psychological phenomena like schizophrenia, multiple personality disorder, folie à deux and the reports of individuals who've claimed to have OBEs [whether drug induced, via physical trauma, or spontaneous]. I'm getting the impression that theres more to such conditions and episodes than meets the eye.

 

[Robin]

That's not logically consistent. The terms are well-defined. You're omitting a crucial step:

X is a giraffe iff X is Giraffa camelopardalis.
No Zebras are Giraffa camelopardalis
All zebras are Giraffa camelopardalis
therefore all zebra are giraffes

Umm no.

You cannot say that "P is logically inconsistent because it would be logically inconsistent if I added another statement to P"

That makes no sense at all.

P= "X is a giraffe iff X is Giraffa camelopardalis AND All zebras are Giraffa camelopardalis
THEREFORE all zebra are giraffes"

P is logically consistent,

The conclusion of P is false.

But something can be false and possibly true. But not in this case.

But that does not make P logically inconsistent - P is clearly consistent.

It makes the statement "The conclusion of P is possible" false.

 

[Robin]

Or X is possibly impossible, if the terms are undefined. Like I said, my modal logic is rusty.

So "X is undefined implies possibly not possibly x"

Firstly, that is an assertion, not a fact.

Secondly possibly not possibly x means not possibly x

So if it were true you would be saying that "X is undefined implies possibly X and not possibly X"

Which can't be true.

 

[Zanders]

It was clear at the time that I was going to get little in the way of strait answers -- at least with regard to what I was personally curious about. Exactly a week after the incident I took some DMT and the same "voice" gave me a bit of advice and reassurance before the drug took full effect. My curiosity about such things is not abated and I don't think that those will be my last opportunities to speak with a "spirit".

In the mean time, I'm going to do a much reading as I can on abnormal psychological phenomena like schizophrenia, multiple personality disorder, folie à deux and the reports of individuals who've claimed to have OBEs [whether drug induced, via physical trauma, or spontaneous]. I'm getting the impression that theres more to such conditions and episodes than meets the eye.

Very interesting, and best of luck with that.

Let's just leave it at that and agree to let whoever think whatever they want about what has been said, there is no need to argue any further.

 

[Halfcentaur]

I've observed the posting history of some of the people I've 'attacked'. Many of them are not particularly nice to begin with and almost continually fall-back on the passive-aggressive tactics you've expressed a disliking to. But because they mostly reserve such treatment for posters who don't have popular views it seems most here turn a blind eye to it.

While I realize that my level of vitriol can be excessive at times, my ire has more to do with my dislike of their character than it does any personal slights they may have directed towards me. However, your point is well taken and I'll definitely try to tone my behavior down.



Out of respect for posters like you I'll definitely try to tone it down. But FYI, I don't do ignore as I don't like hiding or blocking out something just because its unpleasant. If a poster wants respectful treatment from me then they will approach me with the respect they want in return. Else-wise, they're fair game as far as I'm concerned.

Fair game for what? You seem to be getting off on this.
Your ire? You think there is some kind of power in acting ignorant and baiting people into arguing with a point you're only pretending to be defending? Anyone can lie just to get a response from another person, you seem to be acting as if wasting their time was some kind of righteous vengeance they pushed you into delivering. How do you draw the line between your own wasted time in baiting these people and the time they wasted responding to you? I've never understood how a person takes satisfaction in baiting people for a response. Anyone can do that if they are feeling petty, can't they?

It was clear at the time that I was going to get little in the way of strait answers -- at least with regard to what I was personally curious about. Exactly a week after the incident I took some DMT and the same "voice" gave me a bit of advice and reassurance before the drug took full effect. My curiosity about such things is not abated and I don't think that those will be my last opportunities to speak with a "spirit".

In the mean time, I'm going to do a much reading as I can on abnormal psychological phenomena like schizophrenia, multiple personality disorder, folie à deux and the reports of individuals who've claimed to have OBEs [whether drug induced, via physical trauma, or spontaneous]. I'm getting the impression that theres more to such conditions and episodes than meets the eye.

Was this orally ingested DMT again without an MAOI?

If not, I am curious how you think you can tell the difference between a chemical hallucination and an actual message from an entity, especially under the influence of something that causes one to hear and see things. I've sensed presences and similar things on different hallucinogens, but with DMT I vividly encountered what seemed like a council of over a dozen entities arrayed before me on steppes. They seemed to be wearing pottery masks of Mesoamerican style with 2 simple circles for eyes and a circle where the mouth would be, with all the colors of the rainbow dripping down their mask in streams of what looked like overlapping bands of wet paint. As it dribbled down the mask, the streams were arranging themselves into different Mesoamerican styled glyphs or runes of some sort. The hyperspace "chamber' my head seemed to have burst through the floor of was a mandala of infinitely morphing and contracting glyphs that also looked like Mexican or South American ancient glyphs which spun about clockwise, as they rotated they turned into different hieroglyphs, like a kaleidoscopic.

I had the distinct impression people had just visited this chamber from hundreds of years in the past, but it had only been minutes before in the warped time dilation of this dimension I was in.

All the while I was experiencing the most intense torrent of emotions imaginable, terror and ecstasy and complete astonishment.

My personal theory is that the symmetrical nature of what seemed to be a part of every fractal chamber and mask I saw was connected with misfirings in the brain in the regions that are responsible for facial recognition. Sort of a crosswiring of language and facial recognition and other more specialized areas of the brain involved with interacting with other people and sensing the presence of a person standing with you, a grand concoction of very specific and sophisticated synesthesia.

 

[Zanders]

Fair game for what? You seem to be getting off on this.
Your ire? You think there is some kind of power in acting ignorant and baiting people into arguing with a point you're only pretending to be defending? Anyone can lie just to get a response from another person, you seem to be acting as if wasting their time was some kind of righteous vengeance they pushed you into delivering. How do you draw the line between your own wasted time in baiting these people and the time they wasted responding to you? I've never understood how a person takes satisfaction in baiting people for a response. Anyone can do that if they are feeling petty, can't they?

Well, I visited his Myspace and "Intelligent debates" was listed as one of his interests. He seems to have a bit of an ego on him. (Sorry, and I mean no offense, it just seriously seems that way to me)

Fair game for what? You seem to be getting

Was this orally ingested DMT again without an MAOI?

If not, I am curious how you think you can tell the difference between a chemical hallucination and an actual message from an entity, especially under the influence of something that causes one to hear and see things. I've sensed presences and similar things on different hallucinogens, but with DMT I vividly encountered what seemed like a council of over a dozen entities arrayed before me on steppes. They seemed to be wearing pottery masks of Mesoamerican style with 2 simple circles for eyes and a circle where the mouth would be, with all the colors of the rainbow dripping down their mask in streams of what looked like overlapping bands of wet paint. As it dribbled down the mask, the streams were arranging themselves into different Mesoamerican styled glyphs or runes of some sort. The hyperspace "chamber' my head seemed to have burst through the floor of was a mandala of infinitely morphing and contracting glyphs that also looked like Mexican or South American ancient glyphs which spun about clockwise, as they rotated they turned into different hieroglyphs, like a kaleidoscopic.

I had the distinct impression people had just visited this chamber from hundreds of years in the past, but it had only been minutes before in the warped time dilation of this dimension I was in.

All the while I was experiencing the most intense torrent of emotions imaginable, terror and ecstasy and complete astonishment.

My personal theory is that the symmetrical nature of what seemed to be a part of every fractal chamber and mask I saw was connected with misfirings in the brain in the regions that are responsible for facial recognition. Sort of a crosswiring of language and facial recognition and other more specialized areas of the brain involved with interacting with other people and sensing the presence of a person standing with you, a grand concoction of very specific and sophisticated synesthesia.

Some people would say that there was more to that experience than just a mere hallucination. It is also possible that he might, since he theorizes that schizophrenia and multiple personality disorder are more than meets the eye.

 

[AkuManiMani]

Well, I visited his Myspace and "Intelligent debates" was listed as one of his interests. He seems to have a bit of an ego on him. (Sorry, and I mean no offense, it just seriously seems that way to me)

LOL!

None taken. I debate and discuss a lot of things with close friends of mine IRL. We often disagree on a range of issues but its all in good fun

Some people would say that there was more to that experience than just a mere hallucination. It is also possible that he might, since he theorizes that schizophrenia and multiple personality disorder are more than meets the eye.

Especially based on accounts given by people like the OP of the thread the ExMinister linked earlier. At the very least, it seems that the "voices" are autonomous entities distinct from the consciousness of the subjects.

 

[PixyMisa]

Not possible by definition. X is a giraffe iff X is Giraffa camelopardalis. A zebra is not Giraffa camelopardalis, therefore a zebra is not a giraffe.

But how do you know that?

Pixy, are you dodging me on the other thread?

Not ignoring you. That thread burned down, fell over, and sank into the swamp.

 

[Zanders]

Some things just need to end.

 

[PixyMisa]

I've observed the posting history of some of the people I've 'attacked'. Many of them are not particularly nice to begin with and almost continually fall-back on the passive-aggressive tactics you've expressed a disliking to. But because they mostly reserve such treatment for posters who hold unpopular views it seems most here turn a blind eye to it.

Yes, you respond to people who attack your argument with ad hominems and other logical fallacies. We noticed.

 

[PixyMisa]

Some things just need to end.

Rage, rage, against the dying of the thread!

Or not, as the case may be.

 

[PixyMisa]

Some people would say that there was more to that experience than just a mere hallucination. It is also possible that he might, since he theorizes that schizophrenia and multiple personality disorder are more than meets the eye.

It's the return of the invisible bigfoot fallacy:

Where did my pancakes go?
You ate them.
I don't remember eating them. Maybe bigfoot stole them.
Bigfoot... Walked right in here and took your pancakes and no-one noticed?
My God, you're right! Bigfoot's invisible!

 

[AkuManiMani]

I've observed the posting history of some of the people I've 'attacked'. Many of them are not particularly nice to begin with and almost continually fall-back on the passive-aggressive tactics you've expressed a disliking to. But because they mostly reserve such treatment for posters who don't have popular views it seems most here turn a blind eye to it.
While I realize that my level of vitriol can be excessive at times, my ire has more to do with my dislike of their character than it does any personal slights they may have directed towards me. However, your point is well taken and I'll definitely try to tone my behavior down.


Out of respect for posters like you I'll definitely try to tone it down. But FYI, I don't do ignore as I don't like hiding or blocking out something just because its unpleasant. If a poster wants respectful treatment from me then they will approach me with the respect they want in return. Else-wise, they're fair game as far as I'm concerned.

Fair game for what? You seem to be getting off on this.
Your ire? You think there is some kind of power in acting ignorant and baiting people into arguing with a point you're only pretending to be defending? Anyone can lie just to get a response from another person, you seem to be acting as if wasting their time was some kind of righteous vengeance they pushed you into delivering. How do you draw the line between your own wasted time in baiting these people and the time they wasted responding to you? I've never understood how a person takes satisfaction in baiting people for a response.

While I'd much prefer the productive conversations many have provided here, atleast as many are just looking to play "stomp the woo-woo". As far as I can tell from their general posting history and their conduct in this thread, the people I've focused my mockery on are nothing but cowardly bullies deserving of ill treatment. IMO, if they are going to attempt to waste my time in pretending they're looking for an honest discussion the least I can do is derive some amusement from them. Besides, like I mentioned earlier, no one can get trolled without their willing participation.

Anyone can do that if they are feeling petty, can't they?

Depends. Do you consider genuine outrage and contempt at the poor character and behavior of another to be a petty motivation?

 

[AkuManiMani]

Yes, you respond to people who attack your argument with ad hominems and other logical fallacies. We noticed.

I respond to -you- by treating -you- with mockery and contempt -- I've already explained to you why. Your arguments have nothing to do with it.

 

[AkuManiMani]

It was clear at the time that I was going to get little in the way of strait answers -- at least with regard to what I was personally curious about. Exactly a week after the incident I took some DMT and the same "voice" gave me a bit of advice and reassurance before the drug took full effect. My curiosity about such things is not abated and I don't think that those will be my last opportunities to speak with a "spirit".

In the mean time, I'm going to do a much reading as I can on abnormal psychological phenomena like schizophrenia, multiple personality disorder, folie à deux and the reports of individuals who've claimed to have OBEs [whether drug induced, via physical trauma, or spontaneous]. I'm getting the impression that theres more to such conditions and episodes than meets the eye.

Was this orally ingested DMT again without an MAOI?

TBH, I don't know if the substance I ingested contained any MAOIs but I did make a point to swallow it with some alkaline water before going to sleep. Whatever the substance's composition, it had very strong effects; I took the drug in the afternoon and woke up the next day at a neuropsychiatric ward

If not, I am curious how you think you can tell the difference between a chemical hallucination and an actual message from an entity, especially under the influence of something that causes one to hear and see things. I've sensed presences and similar things on different hallucinogens, but with DMT I vividly encountered what seemed like a council of over a dozen entities arrayed before me on steppes. They seemed to be wearing pottery masks of Mesoamerican style with 2 simple circles for eyes and a circle where the mouth would be, with all the colors of the rainbow dripping down their mask in streams of what looked like overlapping bands of wet paint. As it dribbled down the mask, the streams were arranging themselves into different Mesoamerican styled glyphs or runes of some sort. The hyperspace "chamber' my head seemed to have burst through the floor of was a mandala of infinitely morphing and contracting glyphs that also looked like Mexican or South American ancient glyphs which spun about clockwise, as they rotated they turned into different hieroglyphs, like a kaleidoscopic.

I had the distinct impression people had just visited this chamber from hundreds of years in the past, but it had only been minutes before in the warped time dilation of this dimension I was in.

All the while I was experiencing the most intense torrent of emotions imaginable, terror and ecstasy and complete astonishment.

My personal theory is that the symmetrical nature of what seemed to be a part of every fractal chamber and mask I saw was connected with misfirings in the brain in the regions that are responsible for facial recognition. Sort of a crosswiring of language and facial recognition and other more specialized areas of the brain involved with interacting with other people and sensing the presence of a person standing with you, a grand concoction of very specific and sophisticated synesthesia.

Before the full onset of my own hallucinogenic experience the "voice" told me "The dream is what you make it".

I'm really not sure exactly how to interpret such hallucinogenic "trips" but I'm of the impression that they are not necessarily products of one's imagination. In some instances the experiences appear to be manifestations of the subject's own psyche; in others it really seems as if the subjects awareness is projected into some otherworld inhabited by it's own intelligences and following it's own physics. Many reports of such 'otherworlds' appear to indicate that they are pre-existing VR environments of some kind, with their own contiguous timelines. Generally, there seems to be a lot of overlap between such experiences and OBE reports. For the most part, I find the usual explanations of such phenomena [i.e. simply chalking it all up to 'braindidit'] to be a bit too hand-wavey for my tastes.

 

[Zanders]

It's the return of the invisible bigfoot fallacy:

Where did my pancakes go?
You ate them.
I don't remember eating them. Maybe bigfoot stole them.
Bigfoot... Walked right in here and took your pancakes and no-one noticed?
My God, you're right! Bigfoot's invisible!

There are many scientific explanations and a lot we actually know causes these conditions, so with most of them there is little to no room for paranormal reasons.

Many reports of such 'otherworlds' appear to indicate that they are pre-existing VR environments of some kind, with their own contiguous timelines. Generally, there seems to be a lot of overlap between such experiences and OBE reports. For the most part, I find the usual explanations of such phenomena [i.e. simply chalking it all up to 'braindidit'] to be a bit too hand-wavey for my tastes.

I actually sort of agree with this part. I am very curious about the consistency and patterns in such experiences.

 

[PixyMisa]

There are many scientific explanations and a lot we actually know causes these conditions, so with most of them there is little to no room for paranormal reasons.

Yep. What I call the "invisible bigfoot fallacy" is when you start to invent paranormal explanations to cover over the reasons why your existing paranormal explanations don't make sense.

I actually sort of agree with this part. I am very curious about the consistency and patterns in such experiences.

AkuManiMani's position here is pure invisible bigfoot.

We have reports of strange experiences.

We find out that certain psychoactive drugs cause similar experiences.

The logical conclusion here is that the original experiences were caused by some similar brain misfunction to that caused by the drug.

The invisible bigfoot conclusion is that psychoactive drugs give us access to the same parallel universe that the original experiences were accessing.

When we note that physical lesions and electrical stimulation to the appropriate regions of the brain also induce simular experiences, the invisible bigfoots swarm and multiply.