Thought broadcasting

Yeah, I wasn't trying to offend you. You said you were done with ESP because it wasn't of any use, did you not?

I think the problem may just be this: that you're trying to sew seeds of doubt -- I'm not assuming you're doing this maliciously -- and what I'm striving for as a matter of purpose is doubtlessness. If you have ESP, it should come as naturally and should be as doubtless as regular speech.

So that the issue has become personal comes as little surprise, but it shouldn't. You just have to allow me my freedom to exist as I please as I allow you yours. This thread isn't yours to maintain in the first place. It seems to me like you're trying to completely control it with your own point of view, which you are certain is right and if anybody disagrees "they just don't understand". I get what you're saying, but you're wrong: I just simply have ESP.

And I reiterate, if you genuinely had ESP in the first place, there's really no excuse for giving it up from my point of view, unless it's too much for you to bear. I mean, the future of humanity may depend upon such a discovery.

 

You have not argued anything substantial or relevant to and for what I presented. You also continue to imply what my intentions are for posting. This post would be useless now, as once a person has made an assumption about your intention, no reasoning can ever seem as it is meant because the perception of the person that has made this assumption will make anything you attempt to convey to seem like the assumption. Ie. Someone assumes you are lying. No words will ever show them that you are not lying, because the perception is set on interpreting all messages from me, words, getures, as lies. This is a prime example of how belief comes before interpretation and the problems that deriving information from experience brings. Abandonment is the only way, at times.

 

I think this is the passage you were asking my opinion of a few days ago - sorry for the delay, I'm falling behind.

I think the distinction you're making between "God" and "processes of the universe" is an arbitrary one. What is "God?" If you define "God" as being something different from or apart from "processes of the universe," then of course your conclusion makes sense. It all hinges on your definitions.

For me personally, I have no problem equating "God" with "processes of the universe." But because I know there are lots of folks, especially on forums like this one, who have escaped from dogmatic religious backgrounds and are separating themselves from a concept of "God" that doesn't feel good to them, I often substitute the term "the universe" for the term "God." This terminology has less of a tendency to raise defenses. However to argue the point, I would say that there are some folks who are throwing out the baby with the bathwater - rather than discarding the concept of "God," maybe they'd be better off expanding or redefining their old paradigm. In a practical sense, the concept of "God" is quite useful for discussing certain..."processes of the universe." But my idea of what "God" is probably differs from yours. And frankly my concept of what "God" is changes as my experiences and knowledge change.

 

Hey

No prob. Its still worth a tassel, even a few days later. However, I never intended on speaking about god. What I was trying to show was that knowledge generated purely through experience, without any preceding thought about how your beliefs are shaping how you interpret what you experience, can mislead you. My example simply was alluding to the experiences of many individuals and how they will be mislead if they do not understand the power that belief has in what we experience. Specifically, I was simply referring to the fact that this occurs to many people who are religious, especially in regards to prayer in so far as the power that prayer has, overlaps identically into the power of intention manifestation thought process known as the secret.

 

Ah, I think I see - the God/prayer thing was meant as an example of the principle you were talking about.

Well I can't find any reason to disagree. And to add to this principle, I would say that you can alter your experience by changing your beliefs, even after experiencing it a certain way. I encountered this repeatedly in my early experiences with the people speaking out loud about my unvoiced thoughts. In those days I was very concerned with trying to come up with an "objective" explanation for all my experiences. So I would continually challenge my beliefs about my experiences. I would come up with competing worldview frameworks to explain the same experiences. And my ability to shift to any one of these competing belief frameworks was so quick that I sometimes changed my entire belief system two or three times in a single day. Needless to say, this resulted in changing my feelings about my experiences dramatically, as well. My ultimate goal was to come up with the single worldview - hopefully the "true," "objective" reality - that made the most sense and had the greatest internal consistency. Basically I was trying as much as possible to apply the scientific method to understanding my psychic/spiritual experiences - devising theoretical frameworks, and then testing these frameworks to see how well they stood up to my evidence.

Of course, as my friend Steve said about 36 years ago, "There are no final truths, so we have to settle for intermediate truths."

 

was just having a talk with a friend about getting into the mind state where people will comment.

I think the prequel to this i believe is an intense period of analysing situations. I believe this to be aggressive in a sense, in that one can feel like a situation is out of your control and will attempt to out think the pattern of events. Perhaps situations are not appreciative of this and you can experience a reflection of observation

 

I have gotten people to comment just by saying to myself, "I'm going to make them say what I want, and they will." And then they did.

Other times they said things I did NOT want them to say. Yet maybe my concentration on what I didn't want them to say influenced them to say what I was concentrating on...?

For a few months, there was someone commenting almost all through my work days, almost every day. Mostly one specific person, also frequently her friend/coworker, and occasionally other of her coworkers. But I was paying attention and listening for it - did my concentration in that case prompt the behavior I was listening for?

This is all very conjectural, and very hard to "prove" one way or another - but lostminty, I respect your intentions and desire to figure this out. It's a lot like what I've tried to do. And maybe we'll have more success by comparing notes. It's the sort of thing that I think requires LOTS of experimentation and paying close attention to the various factors in play.

 

Yea I agree with what you say, lost minty and zengizmo One thing that troubles me most about all this psychic testing is that I cannot yet rule out the possibility that both realities - exist. IE. Hypothetically imagine a situation where psychic powers were genetic. So in this context, bring into it the idea that much like the differing colors of peoples eyes, so does exist the differing psychic abilities. Now - imagine that you use a theoretical framework to test ESP, but have no knowledge of this being a possibility. What then has the potential to occur is that with some people we have the capacity to 'ESP' with and with other we don't. When reflecting this on our current framework that states that ESP either exists or doesn't exist, we would undoubtedly conclude that we have reasonable facts to doubt its existence of, because in the context of our theory, we would conclude that 'if not with all people, circumstance can be the culprit.' Now factor into the theory, hypothetically, that 'ESP' occurs in some people, much like blue eyes in some and not in others. If this could be potentially true we would have to rethink our framework, especially our scientific framework, to analyze this objectively. I'll leave you smarties to conclude the rest of that.

In my own life, ESP and its existence is not really useful considering that most of the 'esp' I experience, is from people i just met on the street. The people i love I hardly have ESP moments with, so its pretty useless, considering that we have words to communicate and they are much better, though imperfect and gets us into alot of arguments that lead to nowhere as they began nowhere, words are just WERDSZZZ - WUURRRD??

 

Everyone is sending energy out and everyone is picking energy up from everyone else.

Everything you do think and say is reflected in your energy and other people pick that up.

This is the intuition that psychotic people have. They are intuitionally aware of the degree to which other people can feel their energy, Where they go astray is where they believe people are percieving there energy the same as them.

Say your thinking "that girl is so hot, I wanna tap that so bad". When you think this, your energy changes. The girl can tell. The girl responds differently to your energy. She has no idea what the words were that were in your head, but if she is in tune enough with perceiving other peoples energy accurately enough, she'll be able to feel your lust for her and her behavior will change because of this. Some people might notice this and believe it's because she read your thoughts. But she didn't, she could just feel the energy your putting out.

People who actually pick up words from other people. I believe what is occurring is that, the person receiving the words is very honed in on the other persons energy and then their brain takes that perception of energy and translates it into words in their own brain. And while the words may be very accurate to the energy they picked up, I do not believe they are ever exactly the same words that was going through the other persons mind. All psychics, a bit of their personality comes out in all their psychic intuitions. The words that get produced are the other persons energy in combination with the idiosyncracies and energy of the psychic themselves.

I do however believe you can hone in on another person energy so exactly, so accurately, that they would believe you can read every thought in their head. But really you don't need to read the actual words. I find it's better to keep perception of psychic energy as just straight psychic energy. Letting your brain produce words off of it abstracts the psychic energy, it dilutes it from it's purest form.

As for projecting thoughts to other people. I've experienced this myself. But I do not believe it's that I projected a thought. But rather, it is synchronicity. A wave of energy came, it hit me first, then it hit the other person second. There is no causal factor involving me. It's simply synchronicity, we felt the same wave of energy.

Thats really where I think psychic begins to turn into psychotic. No one owns psychic ability, no one has psychic powers, no one has some additional brain function. It's rather, just some people are noticing the patterns in the energy flows. Some people are in a position where the waves of energy seem to hit them first, and they try to capitalize on this, develop an ego about it. They say "I think this, this and this, and you too will think this, this and this", then to some degree it happens. But it's not that the person projected that thought onto the person. Rather, there was a flow of energy coming, and they recognized it and described it first. But the flow of energy had absolutely nothing to do with them, their ego, or any special ability they had. There only ability was being able to pay closer attention to the already existing flows of energy that anyone can listen to.

 

I just have psychic ability. Some kind of sixth sense. I don't get how people can make such judgments, as though they know what goes on in the lives of everyone else on the planet, or that they know everything about how the universe works. It's ridiculous.

 

I've been discussing my experiences, and trying to construct a theoretical framework that explains these experiences. What you seem to be doing here is presenting a theoretical framework without presenting any actual experiences as evidence to back it up.

Based on my experiences, my evidence, I would have to disagree with a lot of what you said. Telepathy does, in fact, happen in actual words that are the same in both people's minds, in my experience. And in my experience, there are varying levels of psychic perception from one person to another and even from one time to another within the same person. The levels of psychic ability vary from almost nothing to profoundly deep. You may not like it, or you may think it shouldn't be this way but: In my experience, that's the way it is. Have you had experiences that would suggest otherwise?

And of course we can't discount the possibility that the universe may give you and me different kinds of experiences that are tailored for our individual spiritual paths. But if so, I would expect to find evidence of that as well.

 

Its not that I doubt anyones experience in the slightest. It's just that the causative factor in projecting thoughts is is suspect to me. Because any time any event happened where it seemed like I projected out a thought and then other people picked it up, it just sort of happened. It was in the moment. So it seems odd to think that I did it, that I was the causative force in it. Because it didn't seem like I caused anything. Rather it seemed like a flow of energy came, I percieved it first, and then other people percieved it second. So it might seem like I caused this flow of energy to occur since I percieved and described it first, but really, I was just as much a reciever as anyone else, its just that it got to me first.

 

Ah, I see. So you are talking about experiences, and this post kind of narrows down to how you perceived these events.

This is a tricky one...I've had lots of experiences where I had a thought that didn't seem to come from me - but this begs the question: Where do ANY thoughts come from? Some "seem" to come from me, others seem to come from somewhere else. But what is "me"? The line sometimes seems blurry. It's a slippery slope, this line of thinking. But it's a valid point, it just raises a lot of questions I personally don't have enough experience, or maybe the right KIND of experience, to answer.

However I would still maintain that there is a wide variation in people's ability to "receive." Some might have received it while others missed it - any thoughts on this?

 

I had a fun thought earlier about the origin of our thoughts...i think its very hard to think for youself...

1. more often than not you think for other people
2. ???
3. Magic

It kind of reminds me of a story by paul jennings about a scientist who hides his daughter, teaches her language with practically all the meanings reversed (yes=no etc) and yet lets her watch tv as much as she wants. In the story the tv had no effect on her trained language skills. I think the idea was that without human interaction then knowledge is pretty much useless.

What good is an idea if you cannot share it?

 

Ooh that subject is interesting too. Thoughts...WTF is the point?

I believe to a certain yet uncertain extent that thoughts are all an outcome of a goal. Without goals, thoughts have no meaning and you can test this. Grab any thought and imagine that you are goalless and have no goals.

 

I agree that most of my thoughts revolve around goals. And lots of my thoughts are "for others," which I take to mean that they're for the purpose of communicating with someone. But I occasionally have some thoughts that are for neither of these purposes. I think usually these kinds of thought arise when I'm not self-conscious, and I'm only aware of them as thoughts in retrospect, after I become self-conscious again.

And it seems like most of my thoughts involve language in some way - but not all. And often thoughts seem to come to me in flashes, much faster than language can sequentially sort them out. In these cases the thoughts are very subtle, and almost seem insubstantial until I use language to describe them to myself.

I think psychic impressions fall into this last category, and this is one of the reasons they're so easy to miss or dismiss.

I wonder about what kinds of thoughts people like these have:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_child

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_jungle_girl

 

That reminds me

There are 3 forms of belief...as i understand it

there is seeing
hearing
and feeling

A thought will work its way up in to reality by

you feel it
you "think" or describe or "say" it
you create it

This is what i picked up when i looked into eye movement as a body language...i also use this with reality too, if i hear something from above and to the left of me, i will tend to believe what ever thought i just had more avidly

 

in that respect, you can argue that feeling precedes thought precedes reality

 

anyway, the idea of not really having a shared thought would be that a group of people may start to think like you, but before they realise it you may realise it (or vice versa).

I am rather partial to quantum entanglement...and an emotion (a feeling? a force?) seems to be most appropriate (as everything else seems to be a projection of emotional states).

So, if an emotion is unbound by time, then the feeling that you have now can travel to when someone has a similar feeling...and by reconstruction there may well be enough resemblence for it to seem that they are your own thoughts

 

Lostminty, I think you experience a lot of what I do.

Yes. Emotions are the #1 message from the spirits, I do believe. I have told my spirit guide Deanna and her ilk telepathically that they are the Masters of emotion, because they are untouched by human emotion and are able to induct any emotion they desire into my experience at any given moment.

Lostminty, I believe emotions/feelings are given to us by the spirits for the purpose of directing our desires and our goals in this life.

I could be wrong, of course...

but I don't think so.

The spirits are constantly manipulating our emotions and desires in order to teach us the lessons they want us to learn in this life.

I believe. Am I wrong?