2020-07-10, 09:18 PM
Since there's been some conversation re: Super-Psi vs Survival, I figured I'd post some notes from Immortal Remains by Stephen Braude. Note that Braude himself leans toward survival at the end of the book, even when one takes in the Super-Psi possibilities into consideration.
I personally reject the Super-Psi hypothesis while accepting that Survival might also be false...though I think there are reasons to take the varied arguments for some kind of survival very seriously in total. I'll sprinkle in some of my thoughts here and there.
I'll start with the basic overview of what is going into the Super-Psi hypothesis within this book. If you have the book and feel I'm missing something crucial posting that would be quite helpful thanks!:
1. Objection to the Term - Braude objects to the term Super-Psi because he feels it sets up the Hypothesis for failure by assuming the kind of Psi necessary has never been observed. Braude notes that not only have there been cases of incredible Psi outside of the lab, [the lab data parallels aspects of Super-Psi in that it is unconsciously motivated]. Though not necessarily at the level of "Super", but it is not clear whether any kind of "Super" Psi is necessary for the hypothesis regardless.
2. After-death communications, even by survived entities, needs Psi. Braude notes that the very kind of communication mechanisms used by the supposed dead would require Psi on the scale of Super-Psi.
3. As we don't know have a mechanism for Psi, or even a set of natural laws to describe its limitations, we cannot even rule out the "Super" part.
4. Survival literature doesn't deal well enough with the literature on disassociation, which would tie into the Super-Psi hypothesis in regards to the dead persons seemingly communicating.
I think that's the relevant bits from the introduction.
I personally reject the Super-Psi hypothesis while accepting that Survival might also be false...though I think there are reasons to take the varied arguments for some kind of survival very seriously in total. I'll sprinkle in some of my thoughts here and there.
I'll start with the basic overview of what is going into the Super-Psi hypothesis within this book. If you have the book and feel I'm missing something crucial posting that would be quite helpful thanks!:
1. Objection to the Term - Braude objects to the term Super-Psi because he feels it sets up the Hypothesis for failure by assuming the kind of Psi necessary has never been observed. Braude notes that not only have there been cases of incredible Psi outside of the lab, [the lab data parallels aspects of Super-Psi in that it is unconsciously motivated]. Though not necessarily at the level of "Super", but it is not clear whether any kind of "Super" Psi is necessary for the hypothesis regardless.
2. After-death communications, even by survived entities, needs Psi. Braude notes that the very kind of communication mechanisms used by the supposed dead would require Psi on the scale of Super-Psi.
3. As we don't know have a mechanism for Psi, or even a set of natural laws to describe its limitations, we cannot even rule out the "Super" part.
4. Survival literature doesn't deal well enough with the literature on disassociation, which would tie into the Super-Psi hypothesis in regards to the dead persons seemingly communicating.
I think that's the relevant bits from the introduction.