Seeking only truth that can be scientifically accepted by others might be missing the point

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
reply to post by Hitoshura

 

I do not wish to attack you. All i say is that scientific approach was "developed" as a way to find truth. And so far it is very competent one. Why using "mind" to reach the truth automatically means you cannot use scientific approach - this i do not understand.

Because for it to be accepted you have to be able to repeat it, right? Or have evidence? What if you can't repeat it and have no evidence apart from your own memories and what you felt at the time? What about what your intuition told you?

And TrueBrit, if you're inspired, what group therapy do you go to? Is there a therapy class that cures you of inspiration? Because if so I'll stay well away thanks.

All I'm basically saying is that if you're in the right state of mind, you can have experiences. It might be Aliens, it might be just another part of our own minds, but things happen that can't be explained. Maybe we can get closer to the truth without having to have our experiences validated by the scientific method, and if that's not good enough for those that demand proof, it might not matter. It's what those of us that have had experiences do with our lives from then onwards that matters. We're changing as a species, and just because what some of us are seeing, hearing and experiencing can't currently be validated with the scientific method, or technology, it doesn't make it false.

There are many pf today and in our past that scientists lable as 'mystics'. These people have spoken of other dimensions and other realities and things and science is slowly catching up with them. Especially the cutting edge scientists.These 'mystics' are way ahead of the scientists.

Originally posted by taoistguy
There are many pf today and in our past that scientists lable as 'mystics'. These people have spoken of other dimensions and other realities and things and science is slowly catching up with them. Especially the cutting edge scientists.These 'mystics' are way ahead of the scientists.

Yup, agreed with that totally. I just left it out because I was hoping people who follow science could open their eyes a bit to what I was trying to say. Talking about mystics, etc, though really sets some of them off so I didn't even try.

reply to post by Hitoshura


I am not suggesting that a positive expirience in of itself , ought to point one toward group therapy. What I am saying , is that when the problem of a total, complete, and awe inspiring LACK of proof, means that everyone around you regards you strangely , you should not complain about it, and continue to call your memory and your feelings proof. They simply are not. If that lack of belief on the part of people, to whom you cannot prove your sincerity is so difficult, it is THAT which might be a cause to get into a group, and talk out your issues with people who have also had that expirience.

Proof is irrefutable and physical, can be recorded by means other than mental, and has effects on the physical world. These proofs are the only ones that are any use for the purpose of showing skeptics the truth and having them see it and accept it for what it is. These are the only proofs that could legitimise the UFOlogy community to the point where we could recruit top level , non government scientists to the cause (all of whom stay well away from UFO and aliens, simply because at the moment, charlatans, mystics and shamans have done all they can to completely remove any legitimacy from our field of research, making it hard for real hard science pioneers to associate with us).

Further to that, I have to re-state, esoteric, etherial incidents just hold a total of ZERO weight with the majority of people. Even worse than that, those that would accept these sorts of incidents, are more likely to attatch some UTTERLY baseless religious significance to them, in order to adapt these incidents into thier culture. That is not acceptable. It was idiocy of that nature that saw the grandfather of astronomy locked in his own house for most of his life, for claiming that the Earth went round the sun, and not the other way around. In short, we should move forward, and away from that sort of nonsense, not back and further into the clutches of the murky world of the mind.

Your thread title claims that restricting ones horizions to those which can be reached with science, might be missing the point.
While you might be all kinds of right, the facts of the matter are these:
Science is an almost globaly accepted measure of reality. It is the toolkit by which we measure, quantify, and observe the physical universe. Across nearly all faiths, and all colours, creeds and races of man, science is a universal language , which involves next to no culture clashes, or foolish bickering over esoteric subjects. It is in short, the binding thought which allows (as far as is possible in a world so full of war) group working across the planet. It is the scalpel by which our species cuts away the skin of reality, and examines layer by layer, organ by organ, and cell by cell, the truth that is contained in the physical universe.
If you wish to prove something to the world, using any other method instantly fails, because using methods of the mind, which are linked to faith, belief, and an almost religious conviction that you know some truth that is unknown to those who have not had the expririence, will automaticaly put your stance in DIRECT conflict with faiths and religions all over the place.

Its all very well you making a song and dance, and like I say, I believe you have had an expirience that cannot be explained by science. But making a stand on it puts you in conflict with more than two thirds of the planet, and until we can use the universal language of science to prove the existance of aliens, the majority of people will NEVER believe that your conclusions about what you have seen, what you have felt, are correct. The religious among us will call you a deamon worshiper (seriously, weird people out there) the skeptics will merely scoff at your lack of tangible data, and those who believe that aliens do exist, but have a grounding and a respect for science, will be left dissapointed, and unable to accept your claims due to the fact that you are using a method to "prove" your point that cannot be measured, counted, or be held up to serious scrutiny.

I am not trying to be confrontational here, like I said, for all I know you could have been some damned strange places, and seen some awesome things up in that head of yours. Lord knows I have been some amazing places when left to wander the mindscape. But the mind is a place full of much confusion, and trusting it alone, rather than backing any thought with physical proof is like leaving your front door open in a high crime area. You might be lucky and avoid getting your tv stolen, but you might not.

reply to post by TrueBrit



I can understand 90% of your point, but I think it's partly missing the reality of how the scientific community often refuses to tackle an issue that's important to so many people, and also how useful and important it is for people to share experiences, and not just in a group therapy setting!

The whole point of what I posted as far as I can remember was that if you're looking for truth, and at the point where you're even prepared to leave behind the hope of being able to prove what you experience, if only for restoring your own hope and being inspired, it's possible that you can leave the chances of being able to use the scientific method to show others behind and go further. You can use your intuition, or go into a type of awareness, where you can at least get more information.

This isn't saying that science is wrong, just that at the moment it's not got the tools to back up what some of us are experiencing, and also that it's got big problems with tackling the area of the paranormal. It's easier for something to be labelled as pseudoscience for instance than it is to be open to the idea, especially if it risks finding out further down the line that our whole understanding of science needs redefining.

And at the same time, saying that because it's personal to me makes it useless to everyone else is wrong if there's others that have had similar experiences, because it helps those people realise they're not alone and can help to inspire them. Just because it can't be scientifically verified it doesn't mean it's useless, and in fact it could mean that (note that I said it could not does.) we're beginning to uncover new levels of awareness that science hasn't been able to catch up to yet.

Basically our current level of science and technology can't be wired up to my brain to sift through my memories of the last few nights and go back to the moment where I saw what I did, or what so many other people have seen and experienced either. We know the memories are there somewhere, but not where they are or how to get at them. And there's no way of being able to confirm if what I saw was a real place, because there's no place beyond this planet where we even know of a civilisation. So we can't check other places to try and find matches, and we don't have the ability in the firstplace to get the data out of my head and into a medium where others can clearly see it.

And like I also said, I wasn't trying to push that actual experience onto others, it was just there to help make a point. It's not some literal truth to me, it's just some more data, and data that's now fading as time passes into an even more blurry memory.

Science in some ways is probably beyond being at fault in its purest form. But unfortunately we're human and with many faults, our science isn't as exact as it should be, and we're not using it properly. From Dimensions by Jacques Vallee :

It is sad that, as the twentieth century draws to an end and as new discoveries become possible, the
minds of many scientists remain closed to this problem. In its June 1987 issue the popular astrologymagazine Sky & Telescope noted with sneering, fashionable skepticism that:

Unidentified Flying Objects have faded from popularity in recent years, perhaps as the news
media become more aware how little is behind every UFO tale that has ever been well
investigated.

Ironically, during the same month, two books climbed the popularity charts to the top of the New
York Times bestseller list. Communion and Intruders contained sensational first-person accounts of
encounters with UFOs and confrontation or spiritual contact with their alleged occupants.

This coincidence between scientific arrogance and a new social trend illustrates an important fact in
our society: while science consistently refuses to consider phenomena that lie outside the safe
regions of its current understanding, the public is eagerly reaching for explanations that fit its
experience.

While our scientists remain unaware of important data that could stimulate new theories of the
universe, the rest of us miss an opportunity to make serious progress in what should be an important
spiritual quest.

And you can also have the agenda driven influence of people in power at play here. Those who would rather fund areas of science that are in opposition to researching fields like Ufology, and making them into more credible areas, maybe even their own branches of science. Also those organisations and groups of scientists with influence, that are part of the reason why scientists are in fear of having their careers destroyed if they even decide to have an open mind on the subject.

That last paragraph I get can be argued against and made to look like a load of over the top crap, but it's clear that people wanting funding for areas like Ufology have big problems, and that it's almost as if a scientist had turned into an alien him/herself if they were to speak openly about the subject and try to lend it credibility. It's a type of argument that could go on and on, and around and around in circles, but it's clear that we've got several problems that need sorting out, and until that's possible we might have to find ourselves just going it alone sometimes and hoping for the best.

reply to post by Hitoshura


I think rather than avoiding the subject because science CANNOT prove or disprove the point, scientists avoid the question because involving themselves in it would invalidate thier entire legitimacy, AND any conclusions they come to. Its not a financial issue either. There are plenty of filthy rich people who would fork over some money to prove the existance of aliens after all. Robbie Williams isnt short of cash and hes MENTAL for aliens!

The point I am trying to make is that the ONLY reason they avoid the subject,is because thier validity as scientists revolves around not what they investigate,but HOW they investigate the subject matter.If they come into contact with researchers KNOWN to use illegitimate methods to get results, then that lays a serious turd on the lawn of thier work, rightly or wrongly.

Personaly speaking, I have a faith of my own. I have belief. However, as serious as I am about my belief in God, and Jesus, I realise that to reference either in a serious investigation is completely foolish and has no merit, because it detracts from the impartiality of my results. My belief does not invalidate any result I get from my research, but placing references to them throughout any work, or any thought I publish certainly does.

Hitoshura,

Totally understand where your going with this.. My whole life I used to be 100% about finding proof on a scientific level and kept everything else aside. I had a despise for thoses claiming they made contact in other ways and had all kinds of claims that no one could verify or prove.


One day a friend of mine got me into buddhism, at first I was skeptic as I never had much spiritual experiences but the more I got to read and experience it the more it surprises me. I'll spare all the details but let's say buddhism pictures everything as inter-connected and part of a whole in which you can access higher steps of conciousness.

The reason im saying this is that it did a lot of good in my life, it was definitely a life changing experience and I regret having frowned upon spiritual experiences in the past but it also got me to ask the question....

If there are beings that are hundreds of millions if not billions of years ahead of us could they have evolved into entities that transcend space-time and are actually able to communicate by "spiritual" means... I'd say definitely.

So I'd say that in this case the most important behavior we can have is to stay open minded and the whole issue of science vs mysticism..

On a similar topic, I'm not sure if there's many cases like this but Wilbert B Smith is the living story of a very serious and respected scientist who's gone and said he had contacts through unusual channels (in his mind I think?) with "other people" aka aliens.

In one of his audio lectures he mentions that science (I think he refered specifically to math) is only one of the many ways of exploring the universe. That part struck me because I've always been asking myself if one day we will invent other tools like literature and math that can not only change us but be used as foundations to explore the world around us just like Math is.

Originally posted by TrueBrit
The point I am trying to make is that the ONLY reason they avoid the subject,is because thier validity as scientists revolves around not what they investigate,but HOW they investigate the subject matter.If they come into contact with researchers KNOWN to use illegitimate methods to get results, then that lays a serious turd on the lawn of thier work, rightly or wrongly.

So why don't they get in touch with someone like Jacques Vallee or Leslie Kean than? Why don't a group of scientists try working with them seriously on the subject and try to get some decent data? I've not actually checked what they've been doing lately so maybe that's happening? And if not, what's the problem with Vallee or Kean?

I'm not getting at you either, and thanks for this conversation, I'm just hoping you can see what I'm trying to say. I can see where you're coming from too in a sense, but the part I quoted there was one sided, it didn't factor in genuine researchers, only the hoaxers. And if that's really how the issue is, it's basically showing that fear of getting in touch with the wrong people is why science doesn't research and investigate Ufology.

Originally posted by TrueBrit
Personaly speaking, I have a faith of my own. I have belief. However, as serious as I am about my belief in God, and Jesus, I realise that to reference either in a serious investigation is completely foolish and has no merit, because it detracts from the impartiality of my results. My belief does not invalidate any result I get from my research, but placing references to them throughout any work, or any thought I publish certainly does.

Agreed with that, and even though I believe in UFO's and pretty much believe in Aliens, I don't see how my own beliefs are clouding the issue of what I'm saying. The scientific community has to stop hiding and try investigating this area. And yeah I've brought up hope and inspiration quite a bit over the course of the thread, but when there's no scientific community researching the issue is it surprising? What other route do I have to go down? Maybe some of us should spend years getting degrees, become a scientists ourselves and risk downing off our own careers before we can speak any further?

And if so, what does that say about almost all of the current scientists all over the planet? They haven't got the bottle or heart to risk their own careers so the world has to wait until a bunch of us get things sorted and do their jobs for them? These people have a responsibility, and I just don't see them living up to it so far.

Sorry if that seems overly bad on scientists, I just have to try and put my own thoughts as clearly as I can now, because I'm spending 30-60mins responding to each of these posts and have got to get other stuff done.

I'm going to be bringing this stuff up over the course of the next year or so hopefully anyway, and trying to get in touch with some scientists myself to see what their take on this is. If I do that will ask for permission to paste their responses up here.

Originally posted by Alkolyk
One day a friend of mine got me into buddhism, at first I was skeptic as I never had much spiritual experiences but the more I got to read and experience it the more it surprises me. I'll spare all the details but let's say buddhism pictures everything as inter-connected and part of a whole in which you can access higher steps of conciousness.

The reason im saying this is that it did a lot of good in my life, it was definitely a life changing experience and I regret having frowned upon spiritual experiences in the past but it also got me to ask the question....

If there are beings that are hundreds of millions if not billions of years ahead of us could they have evolved into entities that transcend space-time and are actually able to communicate by "spiritual" means... I'd say definitely.

So I'd say that in this case the most important behavior we can have is to stay open minded and the whole issue of science vs mysticism..

Hi there, and I know totally where you're coming from with the Buddhism, have been into it myself for years as I've tried to learn meditation. And yeah, it definitely paints a pretty different picture of how things are than a lot of other things around, agreed!

As for Science vs Mysticism, I'm really hoping that both sides can find some middle ground in the future, because it might be one of our only ways forward.

Originally posted by Alkolyk
On a similar topic, I'm not sure if there's many cases like this but Wilbert B Smith is the living story of a very serious and respected scientist who's gone and said he had contacts through unusual channels (in his mind I think?) with "other people" aka aliens.

In one of his audio lectures he mentions that science (I think he refered specifically to math) is only one of the many ways of exploring the universe. That part struck me because I've always been asking myself if one day we will invent other tools like literature and math that can not only change us but be used as foundations to explore the world around us just like Math is.

Awesome, thanks for mentioning him! Will look him up on the net shortly, sounds interesting.

reply to post by Hitoshura


Ok, I'm not entirely sure I understand what you are saying.... but from what I percieve... it seems to me that you share some of the same beliefs that I do...

Namely, that the "Soul" as it were, or consciousness.. is an actual Scientifically observable part of reality, that our current understanding of science is incapable of "Perceiving" and that all "Supernatural" phenomenon is merely representative of a deeper fundamental nature of the cosmos than our current scientific understanding is capable of dealing with.

And in this, I would have to agree.... I believe that our dreams touch upon a method of subconscious telepathy that we are not currently "Technologically" sophisticated enough to observe.

Is this what you are speaking of?

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


Pretty much, yep! Good to know we're not as far apart in what we're thinking as I first thought. And thanks again for getting me to alter the OP back there, it helped quite a bit.