Announcement

Collapse

Skeptiko forums moved

The official forums of the Skeptiko podcast have moved to http://skeptiko.com/forum/.
As such, these forums are now closed for posting.
See more
See less

Bernardo's carrying on the ghosts and apparitions discussion at his own blog

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bernardo's carrying on the ghosts and apparitions discussion at his own blog

    Hello everyone,

    For anyone interested in the discussion that Bernardo was having here with Paquart and Anonymous, he's just started a new thread over at his blog here:

    Metaphysical Speculations: Apparitions, ghosts, and mediumistic communications

    It outlines his views on Idealism and how those relate to the issue of ghosts and apparitions. I found very interesting. Maybe I'll see you over there...

  • #2
    Originally posted by Michael Larkin View Post
    Hello everyone,

    For anyone interested in the discussion that Bernardo was having here with Paquart and Anonymous, he's just started a new thread over at his blog here:

    Metaphysical Speculations: Apparitions, ghosts, and mediumistic communications

    It outlines his views on Idealism and how those relate to the issue of ghosts and apparitions. I found very interesting. Maybe I'll see you over there...
    Hmm . .the Inception movie sounds interesting. I've never heard of it.

    Comment


    • #3
      To me, the human body-brain system is the image of the process by means of which an individual conscious being partakes in the collective dream of space-time. Think of it in terms of some analogies: The image of the process of combustion is fire; the image of the process of blood coagulation is a clot; the image of the process of sudden high-energy electrical discharge is lightning. In an analogous way, I think of a live organic body as the image of the process of an individual consciousness partaking in the collective dream of space-time.

      The human body is made of atoms that follow the laws of physics. Are all those atoms controlled by the mind of a dreamer? It is a pretty complex dream. How could the dreamer even understand the big picture of a life of emotions and interpersonal situations when they are busy calculating electron orbits, bond strength, Brownian motion etc?


      The notion that nature would come up with such unfathomably contrived redundancy seems illogical and beyond inelegant to me.
      Regarding spirit bodies: It's not nature, it's technology.

      when mind organizes itself to flow according to the modality we call language, the result of that organization is what we call a human brain.
      For a consciousness to think in terms of sounds, words, order, and syntax it has to dream an unimaginably large number of atoms interacting in an even harder to imagine number ways with each other? The cognition for that is much greater than for using language.

      "It's interesting because there is no language, you don't speak. It's like you just understand; there's just the knowledge."
      With regard the the above comment about an NDE, there's no need for language because both are disembodied.

      He is stating that the apparition events occur in the mind of the perceivers, not in the so-called 'outer world' of consensus space-time
      I have no a priori disagreement with this, I have considered it myself when a spirit is communicating with a person. However it is not a good explanation for situations where the spirit is going about it's own business and is seen by a medium doing things unrelated to the medium.


      Fundamentalist materialist scientists often commit the fallacy of thinking they know better than the witness what was actually witnessed; which is, of course, preposterous.

      But it is also a naive fallacy to believe the witness to be in the best position to interpret what was witnessed. Interpretation requires a capability to model, something that depends on a deep understanding of science and philosophy. It is unreasonable to expect ordinary witnesses to do that.
      Ignoring the opinions of the experiencer also makes it easier for a theorist to ignore experiences, and aspects of experiences that contradict a theory.
      Last edited by anonymous; September 23rd, 2012, 07:26 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        The brain filters consciousness so that in most cases people don't know about their spiritual nature.

        The spirit body does not have this restriction. It is not redundant.

        In my opinion the reports of the spirit world make it more likely to be what Bernardo conceives of as the physical world. Many reports say the spirit world is a subjective environment where spirits can create their environment through thought. Consciousnesses may be imagining the spirit world, and from there they may use technology to create the physical world, and this creates dualism.

        The phenomenology reports of some very observant and thoughtful people who claim to have had contact with disembodied consciousnesses (like dead relatives or friends) seem quite consistent with the view I expressed above. Consider, for instance, Anita Moorjani's very observant and precise commentary on her Near-Death Experience below:
        When an experience supports Bernardo's version of idealism the experiencer is an observant and thoughtful person. Otherwise " it is ... a naive fallacy to believe the witness to be in the best position to interpret what was witnessed"
        Last edited by anonymous; September 23rd, 2012, 07:50 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Candidly, he also acknowledges that reports from this early era are difficult to consider valid, because "later some unscrupulous men managed to produce what appeared to be similar perceptions with tricks alone." (p. 69) My own view is that, if one needs to go back to the turn of the 20th century to find evidence supportive of a certain interpretation of a phenomenon that is supposedly happening all the time, then one simply does not have a case for such an interpretation.
          Charlatans are able to produce phenomena under the conditions they select. There are many cases where conjurers have been unable to produce mediumistic phenomena under the conditions in which the medium did and refused challanges to attempt it.

          You can't ignore the reports of reputable people because they happened in the past. There are many reasons why physical mediumship has become rare. The number of fakers discrediting it is one of them, the advent of TV and radio is another. These days most people are not willing to sit in the dark doing nothing for hours at a time over months and years in order to develop physical mediumship. In past times there was not much else to do.

          http://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8p...allacies_magic
          The following quote is from "Is There an Afterlife" by David Fontana
          Will Goldston, one of Europe's leading professional magicians, author of 40 works on sleight of hand, and founder of the Magicians' Club of London, testified in a national newspaper (the Daily Sketch) that 'I am convinced that what I saw [at a Rudi Schneider séance organized by Harry Price] was not trickery. No group of my fellow- magicians could have produced those effects under such conditions.' Goldston also spoke up for independent voice medium Hazel Ridley and for Helen Duncan (who may have been another who used mixed mediumship) and was sufficiently impressed by physical phenomena actually to become a spiritualist. Both David Abbott and Howard Thurston, contemporaries of Houdini and two of America's best-known magicians, confessed their conviction in the genuineness of physical phenomena (like Goldston, Thurston also became a spiritualist).
          The following quote is from "Magicians Who Endorsed Psychic Phenomena" By George P. Hansen
          http://www.tricksterbook.com/Article...gWhoEndors.htm
          Samuel Bellachini was the Court Conjuror for Emperor William I at Berlin. Bellachini investigated the controversial American medium Henry Slade. The sittings were not only held in darkness, but some were in full daylight. Bellachini was convinced that the results were not due to trickery.

          The famous historical medium, Eusapia Palladino, readily admitted herself that she used trickery when she could. Skeptics have often thus dismissed positive reports of her phenomena. But no less than Howard Thurston [a well known magician] believed in some of her results and said so in the New York Times. Thurston was nevertheless well aware of her trickery.
          Pierre Curie Nobel Prize winner in Physics
          http://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8p...s_pierre_curie
          On July 24, 1905, Pierre Curie reported to his friend Gouy: "We have had a series of séances with Eusapia Palladino at the [Society for Psychical Research]."
          It was very interesting, and really the phenomena that we saw appeared inexplicable as trickery—tables raised from all four legs, movement of objects from a distance, hands that pinch or caress you, luminous apparitions. All in a [setting] prepared by us with a small number of spectators all known to us and without a possible accomplice. The only trick possible is that which could result from an extraordinary facility of the medium as a magician. But how do you explain the phenomena when one is holding her hands and feet and when the light is sufficient so that one can see everything that happens?[13]
          http://www.answers.com/topic/eusapia-palladino

          Comment


          • #6
            But it is also a naive fallacy to believe the witness to be in the best position to interpret what was witnessed.
            A person such as a medium who lives with this every day of her life over decades and who knows intimately all the intricate details of the phenomena will give the most reliable interpretation of the phenomenon.

            The fallacy is that someone engaged in speculation who cherry picks cases and characteristics of cases to justify his theory can understand it better from reading third hand accounts than the person who experiences it first hand.

            Comment


            • #7
              The notion that nature would come up with such unfathomably contrived redundancy seems illogical and beyond inelegant to me.

              I do not think that disembodied consciousnesses (that is, 'discarnate spirits', 'dead people,' whatever term you prefer) can think or communicate in language.
              These criticisms of belief in spirits work both ways. If you believe in Bernardo's version of idealism then you might think they show spirits can't exist. However these seeming absurdities and contradictions that follow from Bernardo's version of idealism may also be indications that Bernardo's beliefs about idealism are wrong. That pretty much sums up my opinion of Bernardo's views, I don't have anything against idealism but if Bernardo's version means spirits can't interact in the physical world, appear in human form, or communicate in language, then that is a flaw in his metaphysical speculation.

              Comment


              • #8
                http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2012/09/z...artheuser.html

                Zeridni's World has a new post about the medium William Cartheuser. It describes a test conducted in a recording studio under controlled conditions where spirits spoke into microphones 20 feet in the air and spoke at frequencies higher and lower than any human voice could produce.
                William Cartheuser

                Posted on September 20, 2012

                SEANCE OF THE CENTURY

                by George Cranley

                One of the most remarkable experimental direct voice séances ever conducted took place in 1933 and was recorded on nine long-playing records. The medium was William Cartheuser who had a severe speech defect, caused by a harelip and a cleft palate yet the spirit voices that spoke at his séances were free of impediment. His sittings remain for many some of the greatest Spiritualism has ever seen.

                Comment


                • #9
                  A person such as a medium who lives with this every day of his life over decades and who knows intimately all the intricate details of the phenomena will give the most reliable interpretation of the phenomenon.



                  http://zerdinisworld.com/?p=49

                  The Daily Telegraph published the following obituary:

                  George Chapman

                  12:01AM BST 12 Aug 2006
                  Chapman’s “surgery” on his patients was carried out on their spirit (or etheric) bodies, from which the benefits were transferred to the subjects’ physical bodies. Sceptics may have scoffed, but Chapman’s supporters point to many astonishing healings achieved. He is credited with curing an inoperable and malignant brain tumour, among other cancers, as well as with improving various eye conditions and even lengthening a patient’s leg. Chapman himself maintained that the purpose of his healing mission was to prove that there was life after death; the healings, he said, were secondary.
                  ...


                  THE MEDIUMSHIP OF HEALER GEORGE CHAPMAN

                  By David Nicholls Ph.D
                  ...
                  Dr Lang advised George that his mediumship would relate to the work of healing, and furthermore, he would have the principal role in George’s activity. The significant feature about Dr Lang was that, unlike many other guides and controls whose pre-mortem existence cannot be verified, he had lived in Britain in the twentieth century, and George therefore went to great lengths to verify this. George argues that verification of identity is of major importance: ‘The spirit communicator should speak as near as possible to the way he spoke on earth, using the same phrases and mannerisms and manifesting personal characteristics. He should be able to give dates, names and details of his earthly experiences that can be verified, and be able to discuss intimate matters with relatives and colleagues still on earth’. And indeed, George reports that, ‘William Lang, however, satisfied all my demands’, and he was able to contact people, both colleagues of Dr Lang and the people whom he had treated, and, ‘they confirmed it was the same Dr Lang they had known’.

                  ...

                  During the spirit operations that were carried out by Dr Lang, it was noticed that he operated with his left hand, while George is right-handed; furthermore, a tremor was observed. On making enquiries, it was ascertained that Dr Lang, before he died, did in fact suffer from tremors, and as this was less of a problem in his left hand, he tended to use this hand when carrying out surgery.

                  ...
                  Surely one of the most important statements concerning Dr Lang’s continuing activity through George, is the one made by his own daughter, Marie Lyndon Lang: ‘an active and very well-educated woman with a level-headed approach to life and death’ . After meeting George, and seeing him regularly for many years, and speaking with Dr Lang while George was entranced, she was only too willing to make the following crucial statement: ‘I can truthfully say the William Lang who operates via the body of George Chapman is, without a doubt, my father’. In addition to speaking with her father through George’s mediumship, she was also able to do this with her mother and Basil. George regularly met Dr Lang’s daughter together with a group of friends and medical contemporaries of Basil Lang, who also knew William Lang, and they ‘questioned and tested’ both George and Dr Lang. Of these occasions, Dr Lang’s daughter stated: ‘We could only come to one conclusion: that the person who speaks through George Chapman and claims to be William Lang is, without a doubt, my father…It is a fact that William Lang, my father, is as much alive today’. Noteworthy is the fact that it was Dr Lang’s daughter and this group of persons who encouraged George to take up healing full-time, which he did in 1957.
                  ...
                  Confidence is also expressed by the Revd Allan Barham, a experienced member of the SPR and Churches’ Fellowship for Psychical and Spiritual Studies. On meeting George, he observed that the man with whom he spoke when George was entranced, ‘had the appearance, voice and mannerisms of an elderly doctor of a generation earlier. He was obviously a cultured man with an extensive vocabulary’. Moreover, Barham remarked on how he understood, ‘that a number of William Lang’s former colleagues recognised him in George Chapman when the latter was in trance, and would meet him regularly…Sometimes they would even bring their patients for consultation and treatment’.
                  ...
                  Hutton then details how Dr Lang explained what he was about to do and said that he would operate with the assistance of Basil and other colleagues: ‘He came across to the edge of the couch and then lifted his hands and started to move them, and flick his fingers just above my eyes. His own eyes stayed tightly closed. The fingers of his hands opened and shut as though taking and using instruments’. Hutton comments that after Dr Lang had explained what he had done, that: ‘Incredible as it may seem, I began to experience the physical sensation of incisions bring made. They were painless, but none the less capable of being felt. The man’s eyes never opened, and he did not touch me’. Further surgery was carried out, at this point for the virus, and yet again, Hutton could feel instruments being used, albeit painless.

                  ...
                  He continues by recounting how further surprises were in store when undressing that night, and he noticed ‘a long mark, a thick line about five inches long’, that ‘looked exactly like the scar of a surgical incision just as if I had had an operation on my liver’.

                  ...
                  Interview with Dr Lang – Guide of George Chapman

                  By George Cranley – January 1999

                  On a recent visit to George Chapman, while in the treatment room, I seized the opportunity to question Dr Lang about his method of entrancement. Here are his tape-recorded answers:

                  Q: Dr Lang, for over fifty years you have been working through George Chapman - how do you take control of the medium?

                  A: Quite simply, George spends a little time relaxing before he starts really working. He starves himself for the weekend. So he just has tea and water and maybe a small sandwich in the evening. He prepares his body and all that happens is that he is here half an hour before the patients to get himself into a relaxed state and then I start to move towards him and take over the physical body as his own spirit starts to move out.

                  Q: Is this a very complicated process?

                  A:What happens is, as George sees me moving towards him, it is as though he is being suffocated and starts to doze off and then from behind the eyes a pressure is exerted from the rod and cones to the bulbar part of the brain so the brain is deadened.

                  For instance, if you look at the light and you move your hand you pick up light reflections which are transmitted through to the brain so you don’t actually feel that the eyes are light vibrations. So I exert pressure here (indicating the back of the head) so that his own spirit gradually moves out until the end of the healing session because he has to stay in trance this way for the whole period of time.

                  Q: What exactly can you see?

                  For instance, I can’t see your machine, can’t see the couch, I can’t see anything that is of the material. I can only see the spirit of the object or person.

                  I can move around the room but I like everything fixed in a way that suits me. Where George is right-handed I operate left-handed so the couch must be for left- handed persons (the couch is flush with the wall so it can only be used by a left-handed person). At the end of today when I suppose I should have about thirty-odd patients and tomorrow there is a coach with about forty, I understand, from Holland, it will be trance throughout. I control George’s body today till about 3.30 pm (approx. five hours) I suppose.

                  With patients I am rather quick to perform my operations but at the end of the trance Michael (George Chapman’s son) will first come in talk with me, say it is all finished, he may ask me a few questions and then I gradually withdraw from George’s body. His own spirit then will move strongly with the raised vibration from the Spirit World back into his own body and he starts to become at one with himself. It could take him two hours or more to recover.

                  Q: When you take control are there a group of people helping you to take control?

                  A: I have the team. Outside you see a brass plate with various names on it and these medical gentlemen, contemporaries of my son Basil most of them, and they, of course, made a contract for George going back to 1947 but they first met up with him in 1946 to talk with me in a general way. George used to travel to London each Thursday in the month for them to carry out various studies of George when in trance. There was Sir Alexander Cannon who used to try to get across from the Isle of Man and those people have now passed into this life, medical men who worked with me at London, The Middlesex, are still practising with me today. We are a team and so, if I have a patient with say an eye problem, I will call upon one of the oculists.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Trying to boost up your post count anonymous?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      My own view is that, if one needs to go back to the turn of the 20th century to find evidence supportive of a certain interpretation of a phenomenon that is supposedly happening all the time, then one simply does not have a case for such an interpretation.
                      George Chapman 1921–2006

                      Leslie Flint 1911–1994

                      Alec Harris 1897 - 1974

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Interesting Ian View Post
                        Hmm . .the Inception movie sounds interesting. I've never heard of it.
                        The art direction was nice, but the weird (mechanistic) portrayal of dreaming turned me off quite a bit.

                        AP

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by paqart View Post
                          The art direction was nice, but the weird (mechanistic) portrayal of dreaming turned me off quite a bit.

                          AP
                          It doesn't sound sufficiently interesting to me to bother buying the DVD. I've bought a few DVDs in the past couple of years which I've yet to watch! But will watch it when it's shown on TV.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            From the other thread by mszlazak...

                            http://forum.mind-energy.net/skeptik...n-dualism.html

                            The article is here:

                            http://www.systemsphilosophy.org/pub...29_399-435.pdf

                            This paper makes a strong argument for naturalistic substance dualism. It relates to this thread because dualism is not idealism.

                            “Cognitive resource management” is an established concept in psychology
                            and well known in phenomena such as attentional blindness,
                            but in the present context it carries a special implication. No one is
                            (or should be) surprised to learn that the brain/body has limited capacity
                            and that its operations are subject to conservation laws. However,
                            the implication here is that the soul has limited capacities, too,
                            and its operations are likewise subject to conservation laws. This implication
                            is interesting because having limited capacities and being
                            subject to conservations laws are hallmarks of natural systems. This
                            phenomenon suggests that souls are natural rather than supernatural
                            and, hence, that they are not only accessible to study by the methods
                            of science but that their addition to the ontological catalogue will
                            not subvert the scientific enterprise. By implication, the dualism suggested
                            by NDEs is, in fact, a Naturalistic Substance Dualism—that
                            is, a naturalistic dualism of the sort involving structural dualism and
                            not just property dualism.

                            A confirmation of this suggestion is found in the interplay between
                            submergence and emergence of properties as the interaction between
                            the soul and the body is modulated. An analogy for the example given
                            above is the interplay between the stability and mass defect of the
                            chemical atom. The exchange of one kind of property for another in
                            a proportional way is well known in natural systems and, again, is
                            rooted in energy conservation laws. This phenomenon suggests that
                            the human being is a natural system in toto; that is, its parts (body
                            and soul) are natural things, and the way in which they work together
                            is natural as well.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Alchemical Monocular
                              Bernado needs to stick with his Idealism. Paranormal activists with decades of real experiences find his observations regarding language, commo with "ghosts" and his philosophical waxing on about the same as laughable.

                              He desperately needs to get out from behind his blog.
                              I don't like it when Christian fundamentalists follow people around and try to convert them. I think that type of behavior is wrong. That's one reason I replied to Bernardo's blog post in this thread rather than chasing after him over to his blog. But I do agree with you that he is wrong and that people who live with this phenomena every day of their lives and know intimately all the intricate details of the phenomena are going to have a more accurate understanding and interpretation of the phenomena.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X