Thought broadcasting

This is a pretty interesting discussion, I must say.

And I would have to say: A lot of our psychic experience is not MEANT to be verified. A lot of what has happened between me and my spirit guide Deanna was set up (by her) to happen in a setting where nobody else could witness it, and she sometimes denied to me (later) that it happened. I have concluded that she did this as part of a process that forced me to become more self-reliant, so that I would not require the ego-gratification of having someone else acknowledge the truth and validity of my experience.

And ultimately, unless you participate in my experience, you have no reason to believe it at all. Your choice to accept, reject, or remain uncommitted is based on your own experience and the degree to which you consider me a credible witness.

As it happens, I can tell you more details about my experience looking through my wife's eyes that would make it seem more credible - given your openness to believe that such a thing can actually happen. And ChangeHappens, since you specifically asked, I will give you some more details.

What I saw was that she was in a room that was not well-lit. I later saw this room for the first time in real life and recognized it, however my attention during the psychic experience was only incidentally and peripherally on the room. Mostly what drew my attention was what she was doing. She had the phone on her left ear, and she was pacing and gesturing with her right hand as she talked. I vaguely recall there being a lamp on further in front of her and slightly to the left. She was looking at the floor in front of her as she paced. The carpet was a drab brownish shade.

What happened in our conversation is that I was listening with rapt attention to her voice, and then suddenly found myself looking out through her eyes. I interrupted her to ask, "Are you pacing?" She replied, "Yes." I continued, "And do you have the phone on your left ear, and are you gesturing with your right hand?" She said, "Yes, how did you know?" And then I told her about how I had suddenly found myself looking out through her eyes.

I later came to realize that she ALWAYS puts the phone to her left ear, which feels odd to me, because I always put the phone to my right ear.

I could also give you some confirmations of my spirit guide Deanna being in my head, if you're interested. She made a point to give me some confirmations before she started messing with me.

Of course I'm a weak person, and I needed confirmations. Other people who are stronger might not need that.

What is it Jesus said once - "An adulterous generation asks for a sign." So there you are, just call me an adulterer. To neon's point, these experiences accomplished something for me - they helped give me a firmer belief in the reality beyond the physical reality, and they gave me some cool stories to tell.

One of the things the spirits seem to be making me deal with now is: The experiences of psychotics, though not consensually verified by others, are ummm MAYBE also "valid" in some way...I dunno, I haven't quite figured out yet what I'm supposed to learn about this, but it's obvious the spirits keep pounding me with it for some reason.

 

Thank you for your experiences. It was an interesting thing to bring into questioning. I can see why it is verifiable, considering the experience itself. I cannot say for sure that it is possible for me and also that I will strive for it. It seems unnecessary to some extent, considering that it would take considerable amount of time and effort, for something that can be communicated through words.

What did you think about my post, I hope you liked the example of the synchronicity of the powers behind prayer and the powers behind 'the secret'. It came to me when I was high and meddling in some thought.

 

They may be valid in the way in which, even though, because they are psychotic, what they're seeing isn't real (?)...they still experience the reality of it as though it were. So they gain knowledge from that. Just an idea.

 

A thought came while re-reading the last posts, in blends well with some recent knowledge i gained about psychosis.

Firstly, I think feelings/emotions/empathy is something that people can quickly relate to, with essentially no communication but with enough intuition we can have a sense of what people are feeling. I also think that ones projected feelings will contain everything you are, although the detail will be very subtle as the complexity increases (a sad person is easier to recognise than someone who has been betrayed..)

As I think ChangeHappens commented, we can reflect upon our own life experiences or memories, but also our imagination, to interpret (at some level) what the feelings of someone represent...kind of flesh out the state of mind with detail.

The clearer the emotions, the easier it will be to interpret them as thoughts.

In the case of a psychotic mind state, the emotions are very very avid, infact they are infantile...possibly preceeding awareness and so they become very difficult to deny in those around the psychotic person

 

I know what you mean. Sometimes if i'm in a big group and I don't talk for a few minutes I feel really detached and i'm just really feeling what everyone is thinking.

 

I don't like it much because the more intune I am with a person, the more responsive i am to them. It feels like it cuts down a lot of the social barriers that people put there for personal safety and it leaves either of your exposed to manipulation, something that is inevitable i find

 

Do you seem to have actual conversations with the people through body language? I used to go completely catatonic with fear that I was being exposed and misunderstood. I asked my sister once if she felt that we were having conversations even when no one was speaking, and she said yes. But I didn't want to get into the specifics to verify it because it's always such sensitive stuff.

And it would seem like all of the media around me, whether it be the TV or the radio, would intentionally exacerbate the problem. I can't even remember exactly how awful it was, but it was painful. Like, I couldn't control my thoughts. Some sexual thought would pop into my head and I'd be trying to get it away, and suddenly Barry White would come on the radio and I'd be like, "Nooo! Everyone knows my shame!" Maybe I reached some apex of total paranoia in which I was a pure reflection of the universe or something, somehow.

I think I wanted it to be that way, too, which was part of the dilemma. You want to know, you know? But knowing isn't thinking. You just know. There's nothing to be afraid of.

 

Thats a similar experience I had. Not sure what you mean about the end part of your thread. Can you explain that, you know and want to know part.

In fact this is a similar type of experience I have with people and the second meanings they have with their words. I found that most and now I question if all of the stuff I thought they were broadcasting as thoughts from their brain (ESP) came in this type of thinking. This is why I hardly got anything of this nature when I traveled the world. I simply realized that I was living in a fantasy/nightmare and the perpetrator was irrational suspicion and paranoia.

I also had a similar experience with music and coincidental evens. However, like the ESP experiences I was having, it seems to arise when in that suspicious mind state, where my mind hyper analyzes the events going on around me and imagines that they have the answer to my personal suspicions about my sexuality for instance. Ie. One time I was questioning if I was gay or straight. I got to the point where I was so confused that I simply asked god for the answer. Well, as I looked at the T.V. after asking god, I say a persons name on a little sub-heading in the news that read 'something something, gay'. This type of conclusion came about out of coincidence and suspicion because my question was arbitrary, as it did not have in the fundamental reality that I could really be both, which years later, turns out to be true, I like both almost equally and I can be aroused to the highest extent by both.

This is why a lot of these experiences we have are difficult to comprehend, especially when we draw on experience for knowledge; the way we interpret what we see, depends completely on what we think we CAN see.

Its all for fun anyways and presently I just gotta keep telepathy out of the loop for a while, especially with my closer relationships. Today I fell back into habit though because I got drunk after such a long time and just enjoyed it all without bringing new ideas into my interpretations.

I do however have experiences where I must admit, something more needs to be understood in order to have a greater understanding and more control over the direction of my life.

 

I hope I dont sound like im trying to be an inspiration to anyone and now that I am not assuming my words are hyper intellectual. Haha, thats another interesting dilemma I was having a while ago, i was trying to be the savior of the world. I guesse that what you get when you raise a kid catholic and he strays away, does alot of drugs and thinks he has superpowers like his hero jesus...it sux a lot dudin' it?

 

I mean, you want to have proof that the universe works this way. But you can't live in fear of losing that when you've found it. I just let go and trust in the universe.

Yeah, I've had too many experiences with meaningful coincidence to believe that it is coincidence. I think we ought to operate as if that's the way in which the world really works, even though I don't know what conclusions to draw from it -- is there some kind of universal mind, or is the universe simply a reflection of mind or what? Are there big invisible monsters moving us all around?! Because operating as if it's true may be what produces proof. Personally, I believe in a God, but It could be all of the above.

 

"Because operating as if it's true may be what produces proof."

I must disagree - usually its the opposite, you believe its true on behalf of proof or verification. I believe that true in this discussion means something that is objective. That it is meaningful beyond, the need to acknowledge it. Ie. The sun will rise tomorrow, whether someone acknowledges this or not. If you were using the encryption 'true' with another meaning then my disagreement would be arbitrary.

Moving onwards with it anyways, I believe this is the main problem with many supernaturally categorized experiences; they easily suffer from interpretation. If you would like an example of what I mean, then read my post where I speak about religious prayer and the secret, in the context of interpretation and how it leads us towards conclusions. Ie. Prayer and the secret utilize an overidding dynamic of intention and mantra's(words repeated over and over) to bring something into existence that was not already there. However, since we can only interpret the meaning behind events to the highest extent of our knowledge, then proof about GOD or some other thing that cannot be verified through the five senses, can only be trully found if all belief is suspended and we open ourselves completely, otherwise we may mistaken the interpretation of the even as truth and proof, instead of the more concrete verifiable ones. Take interpretation for example, this mental phenomenum can only occur when you have either a belief of what is true or a suspicioun of what is true. Ie. religious people will see a kid survive a debilitating event that kills the majority of people and interpret it as a miracle and a person who suspects that there might be a god or may not, may be drawn to that conclusion as well. Both here will use it as a proof for gods existence.

Key points
- interpretation is best not taken as proof for what is true, because your ideas and the suspicions that arise from them, are what molds your interpretation and your perception, showing that what you believe may or may not be true, precedes your interpretation and thus cannot be used to prove an objective truth. Ie. A person growing up in a religious family may pray and receive against all odds something important and use it as proof for gods existence. However, his lack of awareness about the mechanisms that exist in the universe to manifest thing, is potentially what that person used to manifest that thing, unknowingly. However, since he lacks this awareness and the idea we have debated, then the chance to be fooled into a false reality is much higher, because he does not yet see how interpretation of an event is preceded by truth and thus cannot be used to provide proof for it.

 

Ooo I like that,

I've often thought of belief being the base of logic if you will that we build and in order for miracles to occur we need to make a leap of faith.

In your context, it is that belief structure that blinds us from the true reality. And this is true from my perspective because once we start believing one truth against another then we will more often ignore the new truth once it comes along, however we can allow that truth to almost tunnel to a point where it fits better with our belief system.

It will never fit perfectly, and so theres this question of how we treat this imperfection. We can either re-arrange our belief, or we can pretend that it fits...this is akin to believing a lie...but it works for now.

Keeping the belief structure analogy going...all structures are imperfect, but some are more stable than others, the less stable ones may well increase in height much faster but they may not stay up that long.

For the person, a tall tall structure allows them to reach some pipe dream and gives the impression that ones throne if you will is very tall, and they see all that is around...thus in some manner have achieved far more.

A neat thing about structures is resonance, given the structure there will be a frequency that it will become greatly unstable with only a small amount of effort imparted. And the less stable the structure, the easier this frequency will be able to be achieved...so with or without intent something could come along and destroy an unstable structure very quickly.

 

It's really not something you can disagree with, because it's just a possibility. You might not perform the experiment, but that doesn't make it any less of one.

 

Well you maybe able to, it sounds a bit like the ontological arguments for god. If you can conceive him, he exists. I don't understand the criticisms of that idea nor if this is a similar thing...i just like this thread and can't stop posting in it

 

Not really... I'm just saying you can believe in something and scientifically try to gauge what occurs because you believe in it, if anything. (Hopefully something that can be validated by others.) Whether this says something about the nature of belief or the nature of the thing you believe in is up in the air.

 

Hey man, we all want to believe what we believe, its the same drive that keeps us believing in it, even when it is not challenged by some new belief.

I never assumed the premises that made you conclude that science is the inevitable way to prove or disprove. I have a criticism of science in the context of ESP, in so far as science makes a short-sighted assumption about how many 'senses' we have and thus closes any objective way of understanding this issue. This is sort of the same time of criticism I have about being open - if your not open to What 'open minded' means and a belief that someone shows you may or may not have the capacity to change it, then you are not being open minded because you have 'closed' on a set of principles and open mindedness opens these principles up, offers them to others and to changes. Science in this sense is being closed minded.

Can you re-iterate the last message, I do not think I will give you a response that understood that. Possibly use some examples.

Lostminty - yea this thread is like spice in my life. It gives those things with a rough texture soft and palatable. What other topics interest you guys, in these contexts?

 

Especially in psychiatry I think science disregards completely the possibility that there is any validity to the experiences patients describe. But like I said before, I'm not sure if I can blame them when there are crazy people who go completely off the handle. But the tendency is to put all people into the same boat, stigmatizing this kind of discussion.

I mean, yes, it's possible to believe in things that aren't true, but it's also possible that ESP just exists in some sense and certain people are open to it. I don't see why you'd turn back if you're hearing others' thoughts just because you don't, at the moment, have enough conclusive proof. Unless it really just makes things that difficult for you.

 

I went through that phase but I’ve given it up on “thought broadcasting” since it serves no purpose (beyond feeding my own ego) and it has no practical application


Hotwater

 

I dont think you understand anything I say. You just keep assuming disposition after disposition, without elaborating or asking me.

Ie. "I don't see why you'd turn back if you're hearing others' thoughts just because you don't, at the moment, have enough conclusive proof. Unless it really just makes things that difficult for you.

There is no need for this in an open communicative environment, which I am trying to keep maintained.

I care little for your elaboration on this, I have explained my experience with ESP and my reasoning behind it.

 

I used to goto a public science talk series called cafe scientific. One night they talked about things like legitimacy of studies.

I really wish I remembered what they said about ESP,PK etc. But the essence I took from it I felt was quite valid, that all these things are phenomena and by their nature a subjective experience. For example, to re-create the events that would create a spirit that is trapped in a building is not something that is examinable. Those conditions are natural, not repeatable...at least not at this time. We only have our emotions and behaviour to work with when it comes to meta-physics of the soul. To force emotion and behaviour goes against free will and maybe impossible, sure we could create terror, hallucinations, conspiracy. But this is such a limited scope to approuch something experimentally

Again I come back to the fact that these experiences are a phenomena and are above reproach. So you cannot blame science for not acknowledging something that does not want to be observed in the manner that is fundemental to the scientific method.

Something that I've been drawn to through esp type experiences is one of the dilation of awareness across time. I enjoy the idea that our mind has expanded awareness enough to preminiss where it would need to be in order to experience a particular reality.

This is great for creating the richest possible experience...if your mind decides to, or is in the right frame (of time?) of mind to set up the experience. However, since the mind has such scope for machinating your immediate destiny, it is very difficult for another individual to be involved in your particular reality...the more distance between the two of you the less cross over there will be...until you are strangers in the night exchanging glances