The Power of Prayer.

[Pup]

I must be misunderstanding the constant arguing that occurs between some skeptics and some believers as those skeptics are trying to change the way some believers think and visa versa.

My apologies if I got that wrong - I guess the reason for arguing has to do with something else entirely, like for mutual entertainment or whatever.

My bad.

Ooh, sarcasm!

If you want to discuss this seriously, consider the soup kitchen analogy, because I think it gets right to the heart of the matter. Just because people are trying to feed some of the hungry, doesn't mean they believe they can completely eradicate all hunger.

That may be what you're failing to understand, and therefore making inaccurate assumptions about why people are doing what they're doing.

If people are arguing against woo because they believe they can eradicate all woo, I hope they'll correct me.

Me neither. I was just suggesting that it appears that way.

Like when I went on my sojourn without money and how for some reason every day things seemed to work out as if there was a mind behind the whole process.

...

Personal experience trumps.

But it doesn't. I've had those same kinds of things happen, and also felt that things seemed to work out as if there was a mind behind the whole process. It's a fairly common experience, from what people say.

But that didn't make me believe there actually was a mind behind the whole process. I understand it's just a pleasant way that our brains work. You're not special because you had those experiences, and neither am I. We're average.

 

[zeggman]

Well that it appears that way, is that this is how it appears for me Explorer.

Well, is that not special?

The dad asked the guy how the fishing was and a bit of small talk happened then the guy turned to me and asked me what I was up to and I told him I was hitching around and he said to me that if I needed a place to stay that I was more than welcome to stay with him and his missus.

Some years ago, I was vacationing with my in-laws in Hawaii. It was late in the day, and we were scheduled to fly from Kauai to Hawaii, where we had hotel reservations for the night. Our sightseeing and sun-lounging on Kauai had been enjoyable, and time was short as we pulled into the driveway to the airport. I dropped my wife and her family off by the terminal, and went to return the rental car.

As events would have it, we had cut it a bit too close, and I missed the last plane of the day. There were no cell phones in those days, so I had no way of getting in touch with them. I walked to a nearby hotel, but there was no room at the inn. I was faced with the prospect of sleeping outside in mosquito territory. I bought a can of "Off" at the hotel gift shop, and set off into the humid night.

My walk took my by a post office, which happened to have a lobby which was open all night so that people could come in to pick up their mail at their convenience. So I didn't have to sleep outside after all, though I was awakened several times by postal patrons who gave me various looks when they saw me curled up in the brightly lit lobby.

The next morning, my relatives were waiting for me at the Hawaii airport, where it turned out that "yuubinkyoku" was one of the few Japanese words I'd learned. This happened despite the fact that I had not communicated with them in any way, so they really had no way of knowing I'd be on the first flight from Kauai that day.

Such is the incredible power of paying attention.

a great many coinciding interacting circumstances which altogether appear to be more than chance events.

I wouldn’t even consider them to be no more than a schoolboy's casual and fleeting moments of fantasy.
Nor would anyone, should they have experienced the things I have experienced, unless they were in complete denial, which if they were they wouldn’t have even attempted such things in the first place.

I assure you, I would consider them to be chance events, because that is what they are.

Like everyone, your subjective experience places you at the center of the universe. Everything that happens to you, there you are, right in the middle of it. Believe me, everyone else's experience has a similar bias. If you choose to think of yourself as a magic man, whose prayers are answered, you will. As I said at the beginning of this thread, it's nothing more than confirmation bias. You see what you want to see, that your line is longer than the next, but in reality, when objectively measured, both lines are the same length.

You're only fooling yourself.

 

[zeggman]

If people are arguing against woo because they believe they can eradicate all woo, I hope they'll correct me.

I don't like that word, but I consider the arguments of delusional people because there's always the possibility I've overlooked something. The only delusions I expect I can eradicate are my own.

I've satisfied myself that there's nothing here that I've overlooked, and life is short, and time is precious. I've wasted more than enough of it on this thread.

 

[zeggman]

You've capitalized "consciousness" several times, now all these other words. Why?

So his words can be as special as he is.

 

[Cainkane1]

The Power of Prayer.

In a recent thread I made this comment in a post:



http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9349790&postcount=161

Now I was being tongue in cheek as well as realizing that some find the word ‘Prayer’ to be ‘wooish’ and are easily offended by such expressions, so it felt appropriate to use it.

But what I was really saying was that I was hoping that a particular outcome would evolve and when it did, I was grateful for it.

So I was wondering about my use of the word in relation to hoping for a certain outcome and this got me thinking more about the ‘Power of Prayer’ in relation to individual Consciousness – that mindful thing – and the mindless environment which individual Consciousness exists within.

Prayer in relation to the individual is itself a ‘personal request’ which involves the manipulation of events outside of ones own ability to effect in a way which ‘makes it happen’.

I have personally used it throughout the greater proportion of my life and have come to recognise the different ways it can be expressed – verbally, in the thoughts, through the emotions, and I have never been disappointed at the results although I can also say that the prayer may not have been answered in any specific way that I may have personally visualised, it does nonetheless show itself to be connected to my request and always shows itself to be a better – more well adjusted and useful – unfolding than any I may have imagined.

In relation to wooism and the Sceptical Atheist Meme which would like to see all forms of wooism dumped from every Human Meme, even for the sake of Humanity, I find it difficult to understand how SAM is going to achieve this dream and make it real, given the Power of Prayer, which to me is perhaps the most significant obstacle to remove from the various Memes which use Prayer...and swear by its authenticity.

This observation is based on the fact that, regardless of what branch of the Religious Meme, from Catholic, to Spiritualist, From Islam to the Gypsy Fortune Teller, all operate with some form of Prayer – making requests and seeing them unfold in reality as if the mindless physical universe has a mind, can hear, understands, is intelligent and able to interact with the individual mind in relation to the outside influences of nature and circumstance to which the mind has no direct control over.

This is Mighty Big Power, and as such might need to be addressed more fully that a viable understandable explanation regarding the Science of Prayer might evolve and prosper.
Now personally I haven’t really analysed it too scientifically. But as I understand it for what it does, and that it works – even be that it is a subjective realisation – it nonetheless is a shared subjective realisation which amounts to millions and maybe billions of individuals using it with varying degrees of perpetual success and in this such Power is more convincing than Scientists, Skeptics, or even Magicians.

What is Prayer, how come it works and is it even necessarily 'wooish'?

I don't think theres any evidence that prayer works. I know people who have prayed for the healing of a beloved relative only to have said relative die. If you lose an arm or a leg or whatever prayer won't bring it back.

If a person prays for a job and gets one one must ask themselves was it the prayer or your personal effort that landed you the job.

I think prayer is a waste of time.

 

[SezMe]

So his words can be as special as he is.

Too true.

 

[JaysonR]

The subconsciouness is in this way, another form of consciousness which the individual Conscious awareness occasionally might be required to pay attention to, but not always?

You have the concept correct, but I wanted to offer corrections for your terminology.

The subconsciousness would be in this way if we had to pay attention to it all the time consciously, so subconsciousness is another form of perception which the individual's conscious processes occasionally might be required to pay attention to.

Is this to say that the Conscious understands subconscious language?

Yes.

Also, would you think it incorrect for me to understand my self identity as being first and foremost ‘Consciousness’ (not just being aware, but being aware I am Consciousness) and that gender, race, culture, etc are considered to be extras – like clothing if you will, but do not actually give me any true sense of self identity?

I would consider this incorrect, yes.
We are going to think consciousness is going to be a big part of our self identity more than any other part of our identity because our critical thinking is done through our consciousness; there's a bias there in our brain.

It is incredibly easy to show how this conclusion that we make in our consciousness is invalid. All we have to do is disrupt a tiny bit of information that we consider to be "less than" our consciousness and yet it will have extreme and dramatic impact on the identity of the individual.
The subjective capgras condition that I spoke of is such a case; people afflicted with this will reshape their understanding of reality entirely to rationalize the shift in their identity. They will claim to be dead, or a robot, or trapped in some altered reality.

Yet, the image of their self is hardly overtly part of their consciousness.

Now, clothes are probably not as large of a part of identity as things as race and gender.

Furthermore, my understanding of self is inclusive of the Subconsciousness, through which I have gained insightful information, by consciously communicating with that aspect of myself and by this have received information pertaining to ‘who I am’ which is inclusive of the Subconsciousness.
Would you agree that this is possible, or would this be considered by neurological reckoning to be erroneous?

That's not errant; that's what I was stating before.
Our identity is a holistic system (holistic: concerned with the whole rather than the constituents).

Obviously ones image in the mirror is normally part of ones self identity – part of their impression of what they consider the self.

When I observe my body’s reflection in the mirror, I do not quite see it as an image of my self.
I understand the concept, and have practiced it as something real and true in the past, but – largely due to the way I have learned to consciously redefine my sense of self, I no longer accept it as ‘who I am’ even as an image.
I don’t necessarily reject it as if it wasn’t part of my experience as a self identifying consciousness, which I think is what you are saying re the amygdale...

You do accept it.
You may not value it in a meaningful manner consciously, but you definitely still accept it.
It's a vital self recognition system; you actually can't neurologically function as a human properly without accepting your image as you.

This does ring true in relation to what I know from my Conscious communion with the Subconsciousness – one very smart cookie worth listening to.

I would like to add also that when I first started communicating with subconsciousness (through the ideomotor effect system) I was not aware that it was an aspect of my self. I considered it separate and communed with it as if it were a separate individual.
Indeed, it was more than able even to act the part different entities.

Through time and perseverance I learned from it, that it was part of me, it considered itself to be me – it understood the necessity of my thinking of it as a separate Conscious Entity, but eventually it was able to convey the information that I was and had always been essentially speaking with myself, albeit a part of myself I did not know about.

I was also informed through this process that due to my Conscious self identity and subsequent extra ‘clothing’ attached to that sense of self, that my subconscious aspect had to work within the parameters of those beliefs, and succeeded in part because of my willingness to learn and change my thinking according to rational information.
Another thing which I learned is that the subconscious aspect knows things my consciousness cannot possibly know and can also cause apparitions, and other things in order to (hopefully) teach me and bring me up to speed as to my true identity (which is more than but inclusive of my Consciousness.)

It was also responsible for prompting and propelling me in my life’s decisions, including being that thing which ‘answered’ my prayers, or more accurately, played a part in that process.

Now obviously this is not the way neurological science observes ‘how and what’ the subconsciousness is, as it has to do with observing the brain during different states etc.

Nonetheless, what I am talking about is not unscientific, or magic. Anyone can do it.

Indeed, I consider the process to be one of those many forms of prayer.

What you are speaking of is found in some cases of schizophrenia.

There is a part of your brain called the Corpus Collosum.
Its primary function is to pass information back and forth between the right and left hemispheres in your brain.

In schizophrenia affected brains, the corpus collosum is more thin than in a typical brain.
The decreased gradient between the right and left hemisphere may very easily cause alterations in perception of one's own thought.
The thought may appear as if the thought is from a different agency than one's own self.

It may seem that a decrease in the wall between the left and right hemispheres would increase connectivity, but the smaller corpus collosum actually means there's fewer synapses available on the "bridge" (the corpus collosum) than in a typical brain with a larger collosum.

Due to the reduced level of synapses, the thinking to one's self subconsciously can appear to the brain as if it were a separate identity since the information will still permeate, but the information will be inhibited in the volume of (what I call) metadata (borrowing a term from the internet that refers to the tracking information that tells you the source and configuration of the information being trafficked).

The introduction of the phenomenon, in both monkeys and humans, typically only becomes evident to the individual sometime during adolescence (which is a wide range actually that continues up to what we consider an adult of around the early 20's).
This timeline reason is related to brain development.

Here's a publication on this:
http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v8/n3/full/4001205a.html


I'm not diagnosing you as schizophrenic, because I don't have a means of accomplishing that, nor the license to do so.

That said, you may want to at least have it tested (and I truly mean no offense in that).


There's also a theory, called Bicameralism, that earlier humans had a more divided left and right hemisphere and heard their own thought more as a separate agency than modern humans.
It is not proven to date, but the theory essentially is along the lines of something like a reduced collosum in earlier humans than modern humans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicameralism_(psychology)

If this were ever to be proven (an incredibly difficult task considering the fact that we don't have ancient brains on hand to examine), then this would radically alter our perception of many things regarding ancient humans.

Currently, the possibility of this theory is proposed by examining the evolution of "I" in textual analysis over time across cultures. It has been pointed out that "I" forms were not always used, and that the concept of "I" evolved into existing over time; that it was more common to write in the second and third person when referring to one's self.

This matter is not conclusive, however, nor strongly convincing.
We need a bunch of actual ancient brains on hand to examine, or a technique developed to reverse engineer the model of an individual ancient brain from the skull.

 

[Navigator]

I went to the store today, to buy some blank DVDs. I found packs of 100 for $12.00 each, and carried two to the checkout counter. At the register, the cashier rang them up at $24.95 each.

"That's not right", I said.

"They're $24.95 each" she said.

"That's not the price that's marked on the shelf" I said.

"Do you want me to go do a price check?" she asked.

"Yes, please," I said.

So instead of paying almost $50 plus tax, I paid less than half of that.

Such is the power of paying attention.

Yes – I defiantly support that power – it gives one quite an advantage in relation to those who are not particularly attentive.
There are a variety of ways in which one can hone this ability.

I could share dozens of such stories. Life is incredibly exciting when you don't waste it beaming empty wishes into the ether, and simply attend to the reality which surrounds you.

I agree.

The single story which you have shared, in which you prayed for a job, and applied for a job, and were offered a job, how exactly did your prayer contribute to the outcome? You've said that you don't think prayer can affect the external physical world. What then is the benefit you believe it confers?

I could speculate how my prayer contributed to the outcome. Indeed, the more it happens within the framework of my personal experience, the more I can join the dots and come up with reasonable speculation as to ‘how’ it happened.

However, speculation has to remain open to additional information or it risks transforming into belief.

So ‘how’ it happens, while interesting as an ongoing study which is fruitful by degree, is something of a process which there are no absolute certain conclusions which transform speculation into truth.

So ‘why’ it happens has to do with personal interaction with the process.

That it happens is just a matter of fact.

You've said that you don't think prayer can affect the external physical world. What then is the benefit you believe it confers?

Yes – but I did say that I think prayer is part of why it happens, and even the example you gave in your story about the DVDs – has similar connections with the way prayer works – the kind of prayer I am specifically talking about, which does not necessitate actually having to pray to some god concept, or invisible friend in order for the process to work.
These things are just props, and can be understood and accepted as such – part of how Human Consciousness (as a whole specie) evolved in its journey into self discovery.

Remove the prop and the process changes very little.

In fact, removal of the props is a sure sign the individual is learning to be more observant, attentive, within the process.

Like I said, there are a variety of ways in which someone can learn to be more attentive, and not just for the purpose of saving a few $ either, but for a great many other things.

 

[Navigator]

I have to say sorry yet again Navigator. Your experience narrated above is ordinary, not extraordinary. It is a heart-warming story, yes indeed, but as something profound, it isn't.

However, a very good example of the kindness of strangers. Well, at least some strangers.

Explorer,

I am not sure where you get the idea that the process of the Power of Prayer is supposed to be ‘extra-ordinary’.

The word itself to me seems to belong with those other words such as Paranormal and Supernatural.

They actually don’t exist and everything which happens in the Universe is quite natural.

The only thing I can understand about the expression is that it infers something which is so rare that it is not ‘ordinary’.

Like I recently stated in Conjurers corner forum that if there was anything that might be regarded as ‘Real Magic’ it would be the advent of and subsequent evolution of the Universe.

While this happening couldn’t really be regarded as ‘extra-ordinary’ due to the fact that there is nothing greater or different to compare it with, the fact that it is, and we can say so is ‘Real Magic’ and the product of ‘Real Magic’ – but the term itself is only used to express awe and the recognition of something wonderful which exists.

Human Consciousness may be seen as ‘extra-ordinary’ in relation to Earth and the Brain and Invention due to our relative aloneness, but in terms of the sheer size of the Galaxy, and the mathematical likelihood of their being other similar species as our own, thriving in various stages of their particular evolution into Conscious awareness and Self identification, Human Consciousness would have to been seen as ‘ordinary’ – but it is still extra ordinary because we are alone right now, and only have ourselves as company, and as the main thing which determines this ongoing journey into self identity as a species alone.

So I can understand and appreciate that my stories would appear to be no more or less extraordinary than anyone else’s, and for that matter I have never claimed otherwise.

However, for me, who started out as nothing and grew into an identity (which was largely an inherited identity involving gender, race, class, culture etc...) and then moved through that to explore more attentively who I am, this process is by its very nature, extraordinary in that ‘I once was not, and now I am – how extraordinary!’

So that I think my unfolding life to be extraordinary, is okay.
That you do not is okay too.

If it all gives you a warm feeling inside, then good luck to you, but does it warrant promoting and dissecting through a thread on a skeptic's website? I don't think so.

Why not? Are sceptics beyond feeling warm inside or communicating love to the world or looking for ways in which to exhibit genuine concern to each other and even toward those who are not considered by them to be like them?

I don’t think so.

 

[Navigator]

You've capitalized "consciousness" several times, now all these other words. Why?

I like to capitalize words which I think are important.

It brings an emphasis to them which is similar to SHOUTING only it isn’t necessary to shout in order to emphasis.

You seem to think you know a lot about it for someone who admits to never having tried it...

I didn’t say I hadn’t ever tried it dlorde, I said you can get similar results through less traditional rituals usually associated with the practice of meditation.

But how does that post in any way address your claim to see no difference between meditation and prayer, or my suggestion that appealing to supernatural intercession is not the same as a technique for refining attention and mindfulness ?

It depends upon your interpretation of ‘what prayer is’ and ‘what meditation is’.

Your interpretation of prayer is based upon what religion and other woo organisations say it is.
It is similar to how some people interpret ‘what being spiritual’ is.

I wrote in this thread yesterday explaining this popular need to adopt woo interpretations of ‘what___________is’ as if somehow wooism is the authority on such subjects as spirituality, prayer, ideomotor effect etc, and then arguing from that point of view. It is convenient but misleading. You can be sure, wooism is a form of mis-information and should not be trusted as any kind of authority on such subjects.

Prayer is not about appealing to supernatural intercession. It has nothing to do with supernatural (apart from woos saying it does – and what of that?) and the reason it has nothing to do with supernatural stuff is because there is no such thing as ‘supernatural’ – it does not exist.

Prayer does exist and does have results for the ones who use it, even that they believe it is somehow supernatural because things can make that appear to be the case – most notably by how it seems to affect that which is outside the direct influence and control of the individual.

It is because of this aspect that religion/wooism has been able to claim ownership of the concept and twist it in a way which explains that there is indeed a supernatural force at work and most people quite naturally fall for such an explanation because there are no other explanations and they don’t bother or cannot for some other reason make an effort to find out for themselves – that is how religion/wooism has become such a big influential entity.

 

[Navigator]

Synchronicity, serendipity, coincidence, etc., are just terms for what we experience when probabilistic events are processed through the distorting filter of our perception. In other words, they are artefacts of our cognitive processing (due to biases, simplifications, and omissions, etc).

They are naming words for a process which is real, but not well understood.
If you remove the biases, simplifications, and put back what is omitted, do synchronicity, serendipity, coincidence etc disappear?

From what I have learned and am still learning, these processes are part of the same thing and are real whether I agree that they are or not.
Interpretation regarding them might be faulty, but the actuality that they are real can’t be so easily dismissed. They can be ignored or marginalised, but that is not the same thing.

Ooh, sarcasm!

Or maybe it just appears to be.

If you want to discuss this seriously, consider the soup kitchen analogy, because I think it gets right to the heart of the matter. Just because people are trying to feed some of the hungry, doesn't mean they believe they can completely eradicate allhunger.

That may be what you're failing to understand, and therefore making inaccurate assumptions about why people are doing what they're doing.

Well that might be the case, but then one would expect a certain type of person in the kitchen trying to do what they can, and being attentive to providing nourishing well prepared and healthy food which won’t cause food poisoning.

Good healthy interaction which is consistently looking for ways to build bridges rather than walls is great fare.

Bearing in mind that the soup kitchen analogy brings with it a certain attitude that those who are involved on the kitchen side of things are providing a service for those who require their food, and the risk is that if you don’t like the food then you don’t get the service – the assumption being that the service provided is what is required.

In some cases this will be true, but not in all.

The point being that if the food is scepticism, and the servers are sceptics, then the street folk rag and tags ragamuffin homeless are the woos.

If people are arguing against woo because they believe they can eradicate all woo, I hope they'll correct me.

Probably not likely anyone would put their hand up for that. But the underlying agenda is the same. An individual might not think of course that they personally can eradicate all woo, but this does not imply that they wouldn’t give of their energy, time and resources to contribute to a larger thing that might think it has a chance in doing so.

 

[Navigator]

I assure you, I would consider them to be chance events, because that is what they are.

Yes perhaps, but that could also be your own bias, as of necessity the argument goes both ways, so your assurance is itself subjective and thus subject to the same possible biases.

Like everyone, your subjective experience places you at the center of the universe. Everything that happens to you, there you are, right in the middle of it. Believe me, everyone else's experience has a similar bias. If you choose to think of yourself as a magic man, whose prayers are answered, you will. As I said at the beginning of this thread, it's nothing more than confirmation bias. You see what you want to see, that your line is longer than the next, but in reality, when objectively measured, both lines are the same length.

That everyone is the centre of the universe has only to do with their experience as an individual, and while it is good to recognise for practical purposes, it is not really practical as a lever for argument.

The reason for that is because – while there is a danger that one might think of themselves as special in the sense they are more special than anyone else, which is what you appear to be implying about me, this is not necessarily the only outcome of understanding ones specialness, being the centre of the universe etc...

In order for this to be understood, one would not only have to acknowledge ones own uniqueness but also every other persons uniqueness and this does not conclude that one thus has to abandon the fact that one is unique and therefore special in order for one to thus be able to include everyone else as equally special and unique.

From the same process - just because one understands ones uniqueness AND everyone else’s, does not mean that anyone else HAS to see it that way, even that it is a truthful helpful and preferable way of seeing things.

One can still treat others as special and see that they like you are the centre of the universe but one only has to zoom out a little to understand that the whole ‘centre of the universe shifts and becomes a planet called Earth, which then altogether is the centre of the universe.

We can zoom out further to see the Earth as a pale blue dot – as Carl Sagan did and understand that the vastness of our environment give another perspective and that we really are not the centre of the universe BUT, as Carl also says in his way, this should not prevent us from treating each other with loving kindness and support and working together to preserve this only home we have known because we do actually exist and are special for it and can if we want to, see it that way.

Obviously it is a personal decision based on how observant one is and how well one uses ones incredible power of paying attention.

You're only fooling yourself.

Or you are only fooling yourself.

 

[Navigator]

I'm not diagnosing you as schizophrenic, because I don't have a means of accomplishing that, nor the license to do so.

That said, you may want to at least have it tested (and I truly mean no offense in that).

Hi JasonR

On the use of ideomotor effect as a means to communicate with the subconscious aspect of the self I should clarify:

When I said I did not know at first that it was the Subconciousness I was communicating with, I was saying that this information eventually got through to me.
Up until then I was under the impression of my belief systems to do with that particular communications process and by degree the Subconscious had to work with my Conscious identity basically peeling away the layers of those beliefs in order to get my Conscious Identity to a place where the Subconsciousness was then able to identify itself to me and I could accept that data.

This process took some time, and there were many hurdles but nonetheless I was able to preserver.

Now that I know what I know, if someone were to ask me about the ideomotor effect communication process - say – to use as a tool to contact the dead, I would be able to say to them from personal experience that the only thing they will contact is that unknown aspect of themselves called Subconsciousness and I would encourage them to use it for that purpose, or not to use it at all.

What you are speaking of is found in some cases of schizophrenia.

I have worked with people diagnosed with schizophrenia but I don’t see the connection you have made, even in what I shared regarding my use of ideomotor effect.

Are you saying that those in communion with subconsciousness are schizophrenic or are you saying those who use the ideomotor effect process to commune with subconsciousness are schizophrenic or both or neither?

I am not sure.

You do accept it.
You may not value it in a meaningful manner consciously, but you definitely still accept it.
It's a vital self recognition system; you actually can't neurologically function as a human properly without accepting your image as you.

Yes – I did say that I understood the mirror image as being part of my identity. I was also saying that I don’t consider it a very major part of who I am, as far as self identity goes.

I also said that I consider the subconscious to be part of that identity, and as you say, the Holistic – which to me is the representation of a person’s total and therefore true identity.

This is why I also shared about communing with the subconscious as part of the process of self identity – a way of removing the mystery and how the ideomotor process is a great tool for such a purpose because it offers a two way interaction between Consciousness and Subconsciousness with the potential to merge the two aspects into One, on the Conscious level.

 

[JaysonR]

Yes – I did say that I understood the mirror image as being part of my identity. I was also saying that I don’t consider it a very major part of who I am, as far as self identity goes.

I also said that I consider the subconscious to be part of that identity, and as you say, the Holistic – which to me is the representation of a person’s total and therefore true identity.

This is why I also shared about communing with the subconscious as part of the process of self identity – a way of removing the mystery and how the ideomotor process is a great tool for such a purpose because it offers a two way interaction between Consciousness and Subconsciousness with the potential to merge the two aspects into One, on the Conscious level.

To be clear, I understood this to be the case.
I was just clarifying that whether or not we (in our cognitive conscious state) hold, for example, our image in the mirror to be a very major part of who we are, that it is yet still a critical and incredibly major part of our identity neurologically.

On the use of ideomotor effect as a means to communicate with the subconscious aspect of the self I should clarify:

When I said I did not know at first that it was the Subconciousness I was communicating with, I was saying that this information eventually got through to me.
Up until then I was under the impression of my belief systems to do with that particular communications process and by degree the Subconscious had to work with my Conscious identity basically peeling away the layers of those beliefs in order to get my Conscious Identity to a place where the Subconsciousness was then able to identify itself to me and I could accept that data.

This process took some time, and there were many hurdles but nonetheless I was able to preserver.

Now that I know what I know, if someone were to ask me about the ideomotor effect communication process - say – to use as a tool to contact the dead, I would be able to say to them from personal experience that the only thing they will contact is that unknown aspect of themselves called Subconsciousness and I would encourage them to use it for that purpose, or not to use it at all.

I see, in that case; OK.
Also, what exactly was this "ideometer effect" that you employed?
The term means a specific set of things neurologically, so I wanted to make sure I had your meaning correctly.

I have worked with people diagnosed with schizophrenia but I don’t see the connection you have made, even in what I shared regarding my use of ideomotor effect.

Are you saying that those in communion with subconsciousness are schizophrenic or are you saying those who use the ideomotor effect process to commune with subconsciousness are schizophrenic or both or neither?

I am not sure.

Neither.
I was stating that in some cases of schizophrenia (not all, as schizophrenia is a rather large umbrella), the individual hears secondary agencies, and that those secondary agencies are more than likely their own subconscious thoughts, due to the corpus callosum being thinner (partly).

This is not an all-inclusive statement, but would be the middle point between three venn circles; one circle being 'those with schizophrenia', the second being 'those who hear secondary agencies in their head', and the third being 'those with a thin corpus callosum'.

 

[Navigator]

I see, in that case; OK.
Also, what exactly was this "ideometer effect" that you employed?
The term means a specific set of things neurologically, so I wanted to make sure I had your meaning correctly.

I think we are speaking about the same thing.
It is the effect itself I employed, but of course this required some form of medium or tool in order for communication to take place.
Over the course of many months I created a number of these tools for the job, encouraged by the Subconscious (through the medium tool which provided the way to communicate effectively) to make them more complex in order that the communication could become more in depth and I also received help with suggestions regarding the designs, again, from the Subconscious through the communication device.

The ideomotor effect requires some form of medium in order to be useful as a communications device.
For example, a computer can be used in a particular way to serve the same effect.

I was stating that in some cases of schizophrenia (not all, as schizophrenia is a rather large umbrella), the individual hears secondary agencies, and that those secondary agencies are more than likely their own subconscious thoughts, due to the corpus callosum being thinner (partly).

OIC

Okay – I see what you are saying. I would say that the secondary agencies can only be sourced with their Subconscious. Where else could it come from?

 

[arthwollipot]

One time for example, in my travels I was hitching and a car stopped and I was offered a ride.
The father and son in the vehicle were heading up the way to do some fishing and in the course of conversation they asked me what I did etc...so I told them that I was on a sort of pilgrimage which involved stopping at various towns and cities and praying for the people of those places, and that I had been doing this for a while without money and was always provided for ( as per providence).

Eventually we arrived in the area they were heading for and the driver decided to stop and ask a guy fishing at the rivers edge as to how the fishing was.

We all got out and walked to the guy fishing.
The dad asked the guy how the fishing was and a bit of small talk happened then the guy turned to me and asked me what I was up to and I told him I was hitching around and he said to me that if I needed a place to stay that I was more than welcome to stay with him and his missus.

The father and son looked at me, obviously remembering our recent conversation, and I could see that they saw the obvious confirmation in regards to being looked after in my travels.

This story has a very large RCIS. For example:

How many people offered you a place to stay?
How many people offered to buy you a meal?
How many people offered you a ride to your next destination?
How many people donated cash to your cause?

All these can be considered "success" if your goal is "being looked after in my travels".

How many people did you meet in your travels who did not offer you a place to stay?

 

[Frozenwolf150]

I prayed that all my enemies would die and God answered. Problem is, I didn't specify a time, so it could take years.

 

[Explorer]

Explorer,

I am not sure where you get the idea that the process of the Power of Prayer is supposed to be ‘extra-ordinary’.

If I have to tell you where that idea comes from, then I can only assume you are either not well read or willfully ignorant of common attitudes.

The word itself to me seems to belong with those other words such as Paranormal and Supernatural.

They actually don’t exist and everything which happens in the Universe is quite natural.

Those latter two terms are exclusively used for unprovable or untestable claims, in the current state of knowledge. They are not appropriate for "prayer" or the "power of prayer" as this has ialready been tested using scientific methodology, and has failed the test. The links to the research has already been provided by others earlier in this thread.

The only thing I can understand about the expression is that it infers something which is so rare that it is not ‘ordinary’.

Rarity of evidence for its veracity, yes.

Like I recently stated in Conjurers corner forum that if there was anything that might be regarded as ‘Real Magic’ it would be the advent of and subsequent evolution of the Universe.

I can accept your definition in the spirit of Dawkins's "Magic of Reality". A good read by the way. The term is used there, rightly, in a poetic sense.

While this happening couldn’t really be regarded as ‘extra-ordinary’ due to the fact that there is nothing greater or different to compare it with, the fact that it is, and we can say so is ‘Real Magic’ and the product of ‘Real Magic’ – but the term itself is only used to express awe and the recognition of something wonderful which exists.

Exactly! However, claims for prayer actually working to one's advantage are not proven, and therefore remain extraordinary claims in the true "magical" and non-poetic sense.

Human Consciousness may be seen as ‘extra-ordinary’ in relation to Earth and the Brain and Invention due to our relative aloneness, but in terms of the sheer size of the Galaxy, and the mathematical likelihood of their being other similar species as our own, thriving in various stages of their particular evolution into Conscious awareness and Self identification, Human Consciousness would have to been seen as ‘ordinary’ – but it is still extra ordinary because we are alone right now, and only have ourselves as company, and as the main thing which determines this ongoing journey into self identity as a species alone.

The jury is still out on the source of consciousness. Current evidence seems to suggest that it is not dualistic, but a product of brain function, and nothing more, so ordinary and expected in that sense. I don't see how this makes any difference to your arguments.

So I can understand and appreciate that my stories would appear to be no more or less extraordinary than anyone else’s, and for that matter I have never claimed otherwise.

So what was the point of this thread?

However, for me, who started out as nothing and grew into an identity (which was largely an inherited identity involving gender, race, class, culture etc...) and then moved through that to explore more attentively who I am, this process is by its very nature, extraordinary in that ‘I once was not, and now I am – how extraordinary!’

So that I think my unfolding life to be extraordinary, is okay.
That you do not is okay too.

Yes, in the "Magic of Reality" spirit, as I have already explained.

Are sceptics beyond feeling warm inside or communicating love to the world or looking for ways in which to exhibit genuine concern to each other and even toward those who are not considered by them to be like them?

I don’t think so.

Sceptics are human beings, as you are, so the answer to your question is no, they are not beyond this. However, if I am allowed to speak for them, they have their heart-warming experiences and enjoy and relish them as you do, but see fit not to post them under a "paranormal" section of a James Randi website. You will probably find their stories on Facebook, where they fit far better, and are received much more sympathetically as ordinary, normal, and self affirming daily experiences.

 

[JaysonR]

I think we are speaking about the same thing.
It is the effect itself I employed, but of course this required some form of medium or tool in order for communication to take place.
Over the course of many months I created a number of these tools for the job, encouraged by the Subconscious (through the medium tool which provided the way to communicate effectively) to make them more complex in order that the communication could become more in depth and I also received help with suggestions regarding the designs, again, from the Subconscious through the communication device.

The ideomotor effect requires some form of medium in order to be useful as a communications device.
For example, a computer can be used in a particular way to serve the same effect.

Even if it's in a private message, I'd be rather interested in the mediums that you have used.

OIC

Okay – I see what you are saying. I would say that the secondary agencies can only be sourced with their Subconscious. Where else could it come from?

Quite so; though sating, "subconsciousness", I admit, is rather incomplete, as we discussed previously, "subconscious", is merely a state of the brain and not much of identification of location.

That said, it's probably more accurate to leave it declared as a state rather than a location since the amount of data trafficked in the brain is 1.5 pflops (peta floating-point operations per second) parallel, with each individual "relay" capable of up to 20 separate elements involved in the sequential pattern of the information.

As such, it's almost erroneous to attempt to point to a specific location for "thoughts" or "concepts".

 

[JaysonR]

There seems to be many comments about how prayers don't work by showing how there's confirmation bias, but as far as I'm aware (and Navigator has confirmed this), Navigator isn't actually talking about external interaction in supernatural manners.

He's referring to the power it has over the mind, and how that power can bring the individual to whatever they were hoping for, and he attributes this effect to the consciousness using prayer to yield solutions from the subconscious; admitting that to the adherent, this will appear to be supernatural even though it can be accounted for as coming from their own mind and not a supernatural source.

This is a reasonable theory as neurological knowledge does support this kind of interaction in the brain.

Is this still confirmation bias?
Absolutely (in part anyway).

Does this mean prayer hasn't any power?
Not at all; it has incredible power unto the individual praying.
I don't mean the individual believes it has power, even though that is also true.
What I mean is that it has power upon the individual's brain.