An excellent concise and accurate statement of the interactive dualism theory of mind

Well let's compare Dualism with Idealism. Idealism explains the whole of the physical world in terms of consciousness. However, what does that mean in practice? On the face of it a cat can turn into a dog and that could be explained as the consciousness representing the cat's body deciding it would identify as a dog!

What stops this from happening in Dualism? The physical world is built on a foundation of quantum randomness after all...

What stops this from happening in Dualism? The physical world is built on a foundation of quantum randomness after all...

That is a good try, but I suppose the answer is that the incredible combinatorial explosion of quantum processes that would be required makes this impossibly unlikely. However, if matter has a mind, it will surely want to do something, but it only seems to obey the laws of physics!

I mean we want to explain how it is that brains think, and postulating that they are in touch with another realm (Dualism) seems more reasonable (Occam's Razor) than postulating that each tiny bit of the brain is conscious in some ill-defined way, and that that construct operates the brain.

Remember that Occam wasn't saying the simplest answer is always the true answer - only that science goes astray if you don't follow the simplest explanation. Thus for example, Newton would have been making a mistake if he had written down the equations of GR because there are far, far simpler equations that are still used even now for most purposes.

David

That is a good try, but I suppose the answer is that the incredible combinatorial explosion of quantum processes that would be required makes this impossibly unlikely. However, if matter has a mind, it will surely want to do something, but it only seems to obey the laws of physics!

I mean we want to explain how it is that brains think, and postulating that they are in touch with another realm (Dualism) seems more reasonable (Occam's Razor) than postulating that each tiny bit of the brain is conscious in some ill-defined way, and that that construct operates the brain.

Remember that Occam wasn't saying the simplest answer is always the true answer - only that science goes astray if you don't follow the simplest explanation. Thus for example, Newton would have been making a mistake if he had written down the equations of GR because there are far, far simpler equations that are still used even now for most purposes.

David

Where are these "laws of physics" and why does Matter obey them?

And if you're invoking the mathematical precision of physics equations, this leads back to the issue of how mathematics is backed by proofs like the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. So why does matter even behave in accordance with something whose foundations are logical and thus mental?

Additionally, the predictability of Matter versus the unpredictability of Mind seems to be the key argument for Dualism here but it seems to me this disregards the stochasticity of the QM level as well as the fact certain aspects of our mental life are rather constant. We often have schedules and opinions, to give two examples, that can remain quite constant across years if not for one's lifetime.

If we include animals as conscious, then we can observe even more routine in a living being's mental life. So it stands to reason that either our subconscious (in Subjective Idealism) or some greater Ur-Mind (in Objective Idealism) can ensure that cats don't magically change into dogs. In fact the Idealist Scott Roberts talks about this:

- All things are thoughts. What we call objective is simply the subjective thinking of a mind or minds outside of our subjectivity. I can't walk through a brick wall because the mind that is thinking the electro-magnetic force into existence is stronger than my thought of passing through that force.

- Mathematical systems are thoughts. Hence there can be many mathematical systems -- one is a Euclidean structure, another non-Euclidean.

- Physical reality is a language, its words being sense perceptions which, alas, we don't know how to read. Science studies its syntax, but not its semantics.

- There is an Absolute Origin, and it is that which creates systems of thoughts and languages. There is no reality independent of these thoughts and languages. As local subjects, what we do is play around within these systems, perhaps learning to create our own. (Since reference to any Absolute will raise the hackles of a postmodernist, I should state that as I think of it (or It), it is inseparable from its creations. It is its creations, its creations are it. The trick is to learn to think about this without sounding like a pantheist in one's effort to avoid sounding like a theist. My way of doing so is described in the Tetralemmic Polarity essay -- see menu.)

None of this means Idealism has to be true, in fact I think it's possibly false based on the directional for-ness of consciousness. But I also think Dualism is false...though there are many functional dualisms (What is included as my body vs what is not, my perception as a Subject and everything external to that (including my body), etc).

Best guess is some kind of Monism that would challenge our categories of "Mind" & "Matter", "God" & "Creation", "Self" and "Not-Self"...one might even think of this "stuff" as resolving many of the seeming functional dualisms.

Well let's compare Dualism with Idealism. Idealism explains the whole of the physical world in terms of consciousness. However, what does that mean in practice? On the face of it a cat can turn into a dog and that could be explained as the consciousness representing the cat's body deciding it would identify as a dog!

Idealism does not say or imply any of this. This is first time I've heard such a confusing concept. Cats are "cats" because they have a clear set of qualities that we associate with the idea of the "cat".

So, in practice, nothing changes but the label and definition ~ the form as perceived with all of its qualities does not change. The cat still remains a cat.

Dualism at its simplest says that there is a mental realm and a physical realm and they only interact weakly.

It doesn't try to explain what mind is, it just separates it fairly cleanly from matter. There is also a very good candidate that explains what the interaction between mental stuff and physical stuff consists of - devised by the physicist Henry Stapp.

Then such a definition of Dualism becomes a very artificial and arbitrary separation, then. The physical realm is perceived purely and fully through sensory experience, which is a fully mental experience. That is to say, we perceive phenomena we call "physical" due to the shared qualities all physical phenomena have.

If we separate the physical from the mental, we cannot begin to describe how they interact. But if we accept what we know ~ that the physical is apprehended through the mental, interaction isn't an issue. The physical is just noumena interpreted by the senses as physical phenomena.

And that again is where Dualism falls apart as any sort of explanation of a theory of mind ~ it cannot explain matter or why mind can interact with it, because it states that they are distinct base substances. There is a sort of category error going on here.

If matter and physics are just a spiritual constructs, then there is no problem with interaction, as mind is just spirit contained with a physical form, perceiving through limited and narrowed senses that allow for a particular experience ~ human, tiger, spider, oak tree, beetle, water dragon, amoeba, etc.

Actually that isn't fair. There is excellent evidence that selected mediums can extract information from dead people. Also Dean Radin's presentiment experiments have been replicated and repeated ad nauseam. There is a wealth of evidence that paranormal phenomena happen, but because science doesn't have a way of explaining the results they fall back on endlessly finding fault with the work.

Science could be done and is done on these phenomena - ask Rupert Sheldrake for example.

David

Sure, but none of this changes the fact that science is inherently limited in how it can meaningfully explore the paranormal, given its methodology. It's a very limited methodology for exploring the non-material and non-physical, as the very nature of the scientific methodology is about repeatable, independently reproducible phenomena, and paranormal phenomena are the complete opposite of that ~ they are extremely difficult to reproduce reliably, hence very hard to repeat.

Only matter and physics fit these definitions, as they are not subject to the whims of the mind, as sensing of the paranormal is.

We need a methodology that is properly geared towards understanding the paranormal and spiritual. And science, I feel more and more, just isn't the right fit. We need not force squares through triangular holes.

...
And that again is where Dualism falls apart as any sort of explanation of a theory of mind ~ it cannot explain matter or why mind can interact with it, because it states that they are distinct base substances. There is a sort of category error going on here.
...

We need a methodology that is properly geared towards understanding the paranormal and spiritual. And science, I feel more and more, just isn't the right fit. We need not force squares through triangular holes.

I'm still unsure about the Interaction Problem, though my reasons for questioning it are probably still problematic for Dualism. My issues are as follows:

1. What makes a substance?
2. What explains how stuff of same substance interacts causally?

The challenge here is it seems the way we would demarcate substances is by causal interaction. After all if we had extensionless particles we would still consider them "physical", whereas an apparition of a human body seems to fall into "spirit".

So Dualism could be saved if interaction simply requires Laws that support parallelism, though any other way for interaction to work seems to suggest there is a commonality between substances. For example if we liken the mind to a field effect, then we are saying the mind is something akin to the fields of physics.

But parallelism isn't really interaction, and it's hard to see how parallelism occurs without some Designer(s)...but then it would seem the Designer(s) are interacting with both the physical and mental realms...so then are the Designers a new substance onto themselves, that has some interaction with the other two substances?

In any case, given the paranormal evidence largely points to a Monism with a Functional Dualism, I'd say Monism wins out. And if not Monism then we have to bypass Dualism for a Pluralism of substances that somehow interact...which arguably compounds the problem...

Now regarding scientific study, I actually agree with @David001 that scientific investigation has its place. While I think many proponents may - after having their own experiences - conclude Science is too limited a discipline to properly capture the paranormal, I do think the first steps are aided by the history of Psi and Survival research. It's good to know someone like Parnia - among other NDE advocates in medicine - can go from doubting Survival to greater openness if not acceptance.

Sure, but none of this changes the fact that science is inherently limited in how it can meaningfully explore the paranormal, given its methodology. It's a very limited methodology for exploring the non-material and non-physical, as the very nature of the scientific methodology is about repeatable, independently reproducible phenomena, and paranormal phenomena are the complete opposite of that ~ they are extremely difficult to reproduce reliably, hence very hard to repeat.

Science can handle such issues using statistics! If it couldn't it would be impossible to test drugs that don't work well on everybody.

David

I'm still unsure about the Interaction Problem, though my reasons for questioning it are probably still problematic for Dualism. My issues are as follows:

1. What makes a substance?
2. What explains how stuff of same substance interacts causally?

1. is a rather interesting question, because it's unintuitive how apparently different things can be reduced down to the same substance.

As a place to start... frankly, it's not even entirely clear how matter and physical forces interact with each other, despite being able to witness it. Don't get me started on the weirdness of how the quantum doesn't appear to cleanly result in classical macro-physics... never the subatomic world which is inbetween and has its own set of weirdness...

And yet, it appears to make sense, somehow, if we start from the quantum, and work our way up. All of the potentials for subatomic and classical macro-physics appear to be built-in to the quantum.

2. is equally interesting... thinking about it... if I start from a foundation that everything is essentially spirit, and that spirit can have infinite potential in its manifestations of form, then it makes little difference what form that takes, whether matter or mind ~ it's still just entirely spirit, despite having a particular subset of qualities.

What is perhaps more interesting is what limits interactions between the level at which the physical and incarnate spirit / mind operate, and the higher levels. Like... I can be in a good state of mind, and be interacting with my spirit guides quite casually. I might eat some sausage or something else that interferes with my gut, and then I'm feeling bloated, fatigued and mildly depressed, suddenly also unable to clearly sense my guides until that passes... but then the gut issues can also come in waves, so the... connections wavers in and out, depending on that particular moment.

The challenge here is it seems the way we would demarcate substances is by causal interaction. After all if we had extensionless particles we would still consider them "physical", whereas an apparition of a human body seems to fall into "spirit".

So Dualism could be saved if interaction simply requires Laws that support parallelism, though any other way for interaction to work seems to suggest there is a commonality between substances. For example if we liken the mind to a field effect, then we are saying the mind is something akin to the fields of physics.

Some believe just that. Federico Faggin believes that the mind is a quantum field, I noted from that Youtube discussion involving Penrose and Kastrup.

But parallelism isn't really interaction, and it's hard to see how parallelism occurs without some Designer(s)...but then it would seem the Designer(s) are interacting with both the physical and mental realms...so then are the Designers a new substance onto themselves, that has some interaction with the other two substances?

In any case, given the paranormal evidence largely points to a Monism with a Functional Dualism, I'd say Monism wins out. And if not Monism then we have to bypass Dualism for a Pluralism of substances that somehow interact...which arguably compounds the problem...

Indeed ~ a Functional Dualism is intuitive and logical, considering that we observe pure matter and physics that lack all mental character, and we can also observe our inner world, which lack all physical quality and quantity. And if we stop there, we start requiring ad hoc solution after ad hoc solution... including the problem of how to categorize the weirdness of experiences that are neither physical nor easily defined as mental, such as, well, any of the entities reported to exist in DMT's hyperspace, or the Bird God entity that still exceeds my comprehension.

The problems are solvable if we regard there as being a single fundamental substance that can take on any number of qualities, being infinite in potential, the apex of which would be mystical experiences of unity with the godhead, perhaps.

Now regarding scientific study, I actually agree with @David001 that scientific investigation has its place. While I think many proponents may - after having their own experiences - conclude Science is too limited a discipline to properly capture the paranormal, I do think the first steps are aided by the history of Psi and Survival research. It's good to know someone like Parnia - among other NDE advocates in medicine - can go from doubting Survival to greater openness if not acceptance.

Oh, it's very nice as a starting point, I agree. But the more one seeks to understand the paranormal and spiritual through the purely scientific, the more and more the limits of science become sadly apparent. Pure science sounds nice in theory... but either we must eventually leave science behind, or expand it to include concepts, ideas and methods that the old school would have mental breakdowns over. But, even at that point, we need to question if that's the right thing to do, because eventually we might lose what it means to do "science" properly... it's nice to have distinct methodologies and tools that are suited for certain sets of tasks... hammers are good for nails ~ but do we really need to extend their purpose beyond that?

1. is a rather interesting question, because it's unintuitive how apparently different things can be reduced down to the same substance.
As a place to start... frankly, it's not even entirely clear how matter and physical forces interact with each other, despite being able to witness it. Don't get me started on the weirdness of how the quantum doesn't appear to cleanly result in classical macro-physics... never the subatomic world which is inbetween and has its own set of weirdness...
And yet, it appears to make sense, somehow, if we start from the quantum, and work our way up. All of the potentials for subatomic and classical macro-physics appear to be built-in to the quantum.

Yeah, people often act as if physical causation is perfectly solved, forgetting the issues that were had w/ the "occult" power of gravity that were only "resolved" by mathematical accuracy rather than actual explanation.

There are a variety of unsolved problems and at least seeming paradoxes that should make us question the picture of the world science is showing us.

2. is equally interesting... thinking about it... if I start from a foundation that everything is essentially spirit, and that spirit can have infinite potential in its manifestations of form, then it makes little difference what form that takes, whether matter or mind ~ it's still just entirely spirit, despite having a particular subset of qualities.

What is perhaps more interesting is what limits interactions between the level at which the physical and incarnate spirit / mind operate, and the higher levels. Like... I can be in a good state of mind, and be interacting with my spirit guides quite casually. I might eat some sausage or something else that interferes with my gut, and then I'm feeling bloated, fatigued and mildly depressed, suddenly also unable to clearly sense my guides until that passes... but then the gut issues can also come in waves, so the... connections wavers in and out, depending on that particular moment.

I would lean toward the idea of Spirit as a fundamental "stuff" as well, that or a Spectrum that extends from mundane visible to invisible to levels that we identify with Spirit. Perhaps the Spectrum itself has a duality between Darkness & Light that resolves into Spirit.

Agreed on the oddity of the mental/physical relationship. Physicalism is a silly atheist-materialist pipe dream but nevertheless there are dependencies on the body - at least while we're incarnated as embodies beings - that can limit our senses or enhance them. DMT itself seems to point to a different place than NDEs for the most part, though I do at times wonder how we get only a selective portion of NDEs that give a nice picture for book sales & fundraising because they leave out oddities.

Some believe just that. Federico Faggin believes that the mind is a quantum field, I noted from that Youtube discussion involving Penrose and Kastrup.

Faggin's view in his book feels a bit different to me than how Essentia Foundation tries to spin it. He actually starts with the One and its generation of the Many, but it seems to me he feels the Many are not dissolved back into the One but rather are immortal individuals with their own volition.

Indeed ~ a Functional Dualism is intuitive and logical, considering that we observe pure matter and physics that lack all mental character, and we can also observe our inner world, which lack all physical quality and quantity. And if we stop there, we start requiring ad hoc solution after ad hoc solution... including the problem of how to categorize the weirdness of experiences that are neither physical nor easily defined as mental, such as, well, any of the entities reported to exist in DMT's hyperspace, or the Bird God entity that still exceeds my comprehension.

The problems are solvable if we regard there as being a single fundamental substance that can take on any number of qualities, being infinite in potential, the apex of which would be mystical experiences of unity with the godhead, perhaps.

I think part of the challenge is that the outer world is contained in our inner world of experience. Why some feel without qualia even our sense of space-time has nothing to buttress itself on.

Agreed on how there seem to be entities - apparitions & spirits & OOBE "subtle bodies" - that have a place in our seeming "physical" world yet are not considered to be part of physics. Why I think the paranormal evidence points to Monism at large with a Functional Dualism.

I lean toward agreement that the ultimate Source is the One, though I am wary of this claim because it starts to get into questions about the Ground of Being which in turn leads to questions about - and IMO issues with - the Classical Theist version of God: Is God Simple? Is God Eternal, as in outside of Time?

OTOH it it difficult to make sense of the world without either assuming disparate brute facts or trying to provide a unified accounting that can explain the intelligible nature of the world. And, at least in my experience, this continually leads us back to assuming the One exists in some form...

Oh, it's very nice as a starting point, I agree. But the more one seeks to understand the paranormal and spiritual through the purely scientific, the more and more the limits of science become sadly apparent. Pure science sounds nice in theory... but either we must eventually leave science behind, or expand it to include concepts, ideas and methods that the old school would have mental breakdowns over. But, even at that point, we need to question if that's the right thing to do, because eventually we might lose what it means to do "science" properly... it's nice to have distinct methodologies and tools that are suited for certain sets of tasks... hammers are good for nails ~ but do we really need to extend their purpose beyond that?

I think Parapsychology as a discipline will serve as an entry point, but a radically different global society may find it less important. If we lived in a way that did not sever our connection to the spiritual we might have more paranormal events taking place, to the point it seems obvious that there is more to reality than what physics and the other sciences could show.

Unfortunately I suspect that greater confidence in Psi would lead to people seeking to weaponize it. Greater confidence that there are spirits would drive people into evil occult practices. Sri Aurobindo expressed that the Age of Skepticism was necessary due to issues such as these, and humanity not being ready for the greater spiritual reality beyond the physical universe...I have heard of potential dangers of trying to have an OOBE, that there are entities lying in wait though this doesn't seem to be a universal problem...

Yeah, people often act as if physical causation is perfectly solved, forgetting the issues that were had w/ the "occult" power of gravity that were only "resolved" by mathematical accuracy rather than actual explanation.

There are a variety of unsolved problems and at least seeming paradoxes that should make us question the picture of the world science is showing us.

Indeed... perhaps it is Materialism that has been holding science back, but Materialists will never admit, considering that they believe science to be Materialism.

I would lean toward the idea of Spirit as a fundamental "stuff" as well, that or a Spectrum that extends from mundane visible to invisible to levels that we identify with Spirit. Perhaps the Spectrum itself has a duality between Darkness & Light that resolves into Spirit.

What would Darkness and Light be in this analogy?

Agreed on the oddity of the mental/physical relationship. Physicalism is a silly atheist-materialist pipe dream but nevertheless there are dependencies on the body - at least while we're incarnated as embodies beings - that can limit our senses or enhance them. DMT itself seems to point to a different place than NDEs for the most part, though I do at times wonder how we get only a selective portion of NDEs that give a nice picture for book sales & fundraising because they leave out oddities.

DMT is... very strange, yeah. The Tibetan Buddhists called the state it grants access to the Bardo, that it was the furtherest reaches one can travel to while still incarnate. That's what they told Terence McKenna when he took DMT to them. The place NDEs point to... are indeed different to DMT. But also much clearer in nature. DMT is just... well, beyond weird.

Faggin's view in his book feels a bit different to me than how Essentia Foundation tries to spin it. He actually starts with the One and its generation of the Many, but it seems to me he feels the Many are not dissolved back into the One but rather are immortal individuals with their own volition.

Yeah, he struck as being a type who believed in the immortality and eternality of the Many. The Many are One in nature, so returning to the One is redundant.

I think part of the challenge is that the outer world is contained in our inner world of experience. Why some feel without qualia even our sense of space-time has nothing to buttress itself on.

The Physicalist just takes a naive realist view of the world, which has a bizarre set of issues...

Agreed on how there seem to be entities - apparitions & spirits & OOBE "subtle bodies" - that have a place in our seeming "physical" world yet are not considered to be part of physics. Why I think the paranormal evidence points to Monism at large with a Functional Dualism.

That's where my own paranormal experiences lead also ~ though through a much more Daoist lens.

I lean toward agreement that the ultimate Source is the One, though I am wary of this claim because it starts to get into questions about the Ground of Being which in turn leads to questions about - and IMO issues with - the Classical Theist version of God: Is God Simple? Is God Eternal, as in outside of Time?

OTOH it it difficult to make sense of the world without either assuming disparate brute facts or trying to provide a unified accounting that can explain the intelligible nature of the world. And, at least in my experience, this continually leads us back to assuming the One exists in some form...

Only if we presume that the Classical Theist version of God even exists. It is simply metaphor we have become blinded by... as is the case, far too often.

God as infinite in every sense places God far outside any comprehensibility, I think. Thus... God is Simple and Complex, inside and outside of Time, being the origin for all such concepts.

The One has no form... or rather to say, it is no form and all forms, non-existence and existence, all in One. A rather tricky concept to wrap one's head around. And it's not even a paradox if one considers the One to be the Source.

I think Parapsychology as a discipline will serve as an entry point, but a radically different global society may find it less important. If we lived in a way that did not sever our connection to the spiritual we might have more paranormal events taking place, to the point it seems obvious that there is more to reality than what physics and the other sciences could show.

Myth and legend from various cultures do seem to hint at paranormal events once being more common, perhaps because people used to be more attuned to the spiritual, allowing their minds to be open to perceiving the spiritual, and so, allowing the spiritual to interact with the physical through that bridge of perception.

Unfortunately I suspect that greater confidence in Psi would lead to people seeking to weaponize it. Greater confidence that there are spirits would drive people into evil occult practices. Sri Aurobindo expressed that the Age of Skepticism was necessary due to issues such as these, and humanity not being ready for the greater spiritual reality beyond the physical universe...I have heard of potential dangers of trying to have an OOBE, that there are entities lying in wait though this doesn't seem to be a universal problem...

Oh yes, there is a great possible danger in the weaponization of Psi... but I think the US military is already far ahead of the curve there. They have no problems utilizing remote viewing or the like, if it gives them a military advantage. They apparently have access to alien technologies. And so much more.

It's the greed, the monopolization and the shutting down of revolutionary ideas that has stagnated us ~ like the military classifying Tesla's technologies, which he had demonstrated to be perfectly workable. They stole all of his research.

There are human groups who monopolize these technologies and ideas for themselves, so they can control humanity, because they're power-mad, and dare I say, as evil as any human can come.

We don't need external forces or soul-traps when we have enough evil within individuals of our own nature...

Indeed... perhaps it is Materialism that has been holding science back, but Materialists will never admit, considering that they believe science to be Materialism.

I think the original Materialism was based in qualia, in the sense that we should only take as given what we perceive in this world. Of course, as a matter of necessity, this conception of the material had to give way to Physicalism. Yet now Physicalists have accepted a variety of oddities as live possibilities, and this in turn has led to a distancing from the experienced world.

What is Tegmark's idea that Everything is really Math but a strange Platonism, if not a bizzare almost-Idealism?

Even if one doesn't go that far we still have ideas like Space-Time is emergent, that other universes are out there and/or this universe has more than three spatial dimensions, and of course all the challenges to Physicalism that physics brings via the mysterious of the quantum level.

When we try to measure the macro-scale we find Finely Tuned constants, and we try to explore the quantum level we find the live possibility that Consciousness has some causal role to play.

What would Darkness and Light be in this analogy?

Well both Light and Darkness figure into mystic visions, and Myers posited a spectrum that would extend from the visible illumination into higher realities. And as the alchemical text Hermetic Recreations notes:

“Life, such as we wish to consider it, is but a struggle between two substances, or a continual exchange of light and darkness. One of these substances alternatively takes the place of the other, sometimes taking the male function and sometimes the female. And in a manner pleasing to the divine author, everything either changes into a pure light, or returns to the Cimmerian darkness, which shows that light and darkness are but one and the same thing, changing in form and value by the expansion or contraction of the substance”

DMT is... very strange, yeah. The Tibetan Buddhists called the state it grants access to the Bardo, that it was the furtherest reaches one can travel to while still incarnate. That's what they told Terence McKenna when he took DMT to them. The place NDEs point to... are indeed different to DMT. But also much clearer in nature. DMT is just... well, beyond weird.

There are some odd NDEs, but yes it seems that perhaps NDEs show places our type of spirits would go to, whereas DMT - based solely on reading for me! - seem to at times point to realms that are more "alien".

Yeah, he struck as being a type who believed in the immortality and eternality of the Many. The Many are One in nature, so returning to the One is redundant.

I have to admit I'm a bit perturbed by Absolute Idealists who seem to want Faggin to agree with their ideas of illusory selves and lack of individual volition. There's enough room for different kinds of Idealism, and Faggin seems to be much more aligned with someone like Edward Kelly who believes in Personal Survival.

I know Kelly even got into an argument with Kastrup, noting the latter was choosing a philosophical belief contrary to the vast amount of Survival evidence.

The Physicalist just takes a naive realist view of the world, which has a bizarre set of issues...

Not sure about Physicalists being naive realists, as noted above it seems they are leaning toward our observed reality being born from some other processes that underlie space-time....though this IMO will only lead people back to outlets such as Physics to God...

That's where my own paranormal experiences lead also ~ though through a much more Daoist lens.

Yeah, even the NDEr sees the physical world & and is sometimes seen having in their OOBE body. Which suggest causal continuity between the physical world and the spiritual...and this seems best resolved by saying the physical is an odd corner of the vaster spiritual continuum.

Only if we presume that the Classical Theist version of God even exists. It is simply metaphor we have become blinded by... as is the case, far too often.

Well I think there are problems with the idea, but some of the arguments do have merit. I think the Classical Theists are ultimately wrong, but the Proofs of God do lead to metaphysical issues that I am not sure are easily addressed without some "God".

God as infinite in every sense places God far outside any comprehensibility, I think. Thus... God is Simple and Complex, inside and outside of Time, being the origin for all such concepts.

I think this kind of description runs into similar issues that the Classical Theist God does. What does it mean to be both Simple *and* Complex, or "outside of Time"?

The One has no form... or rather to say, it is no form and all forms, non-existence and existence, all in One. A rather tricky concept to wrap one's head around. And it's not even a paradox if one considers the One to be the Source.

I'm more comfortable with the relation between Form and Formlessness than God, as per Scott Robert's Nondual Logic site:

"...Having seen all four horns of the tetralemma fail, what next? The way forward, as I see it, is to treat the unresolvability of the polarity from being a problem to being the solution. That is, to describe fundamental reality as this never-resolving opposition of the two poles. The way to do this is to think of the two poles as forces (what makes things happen) rather than states of being, or as partial descriptions of reality. Reality is not fundamentally just formless, or form, or both, or neither, rather it is formlessness and form in action, constituting each other as they work against each other. To say that experiencing is the tetralemmic polarity of formlessness and form provides a basis for developing a complete and coherent metaphysics -- given the idealist stance that there is nothing outside of experiencing. No more is needed, and any less cannot produce an explanation of awareness of forms..."

Myth and legend from various cultures do seem to hint at paranormal events once being more common, perhaps because people used to be more attuned to the spiritual, allowing their minds to be open to perceiving the spiritual, and so, allowing the spiritual to interact with the physical through that bridge of perception.

Yeah I've long wondered about this, even as a child having "weird" experiences - some of which that if my memory is correct were undoubtedly paranormal and also suggesting the divide between the realm of dreams and this reality is not as distinct as the Physicalists might want.

Eric Weiss has suggested reality itself actually changed, taking us from the Mythic to the Modern. I am not sure this is absolutely correct, it might instead be the case that there were more paranormal incidents in the past but not to the point dragons & unicorns were around...

(Sadly Weiss passed away and his website is gone. Wanted to link to his work.)

Oh yes, there is a great possible danger in the weaponization of Psi... but I think the US military is already far ahead of the curve there. They have no problems utilizing remote viewing or the like, if it gives them a military advantage. They apparently have access to alien technologies. And so much more.

It's the greed, the monopolization and the shutting down of revolutionary ideas that has stagnated us ~ like the military classifying Tesla's technologies, which he had demonstrated to be perfectly workable. They stole all of his research.

There are human groups who monopolize these technologies and ideas for themselves, so they can control humanity, because they're power-mad, and dare I say, as evil as any human can come.

We don't need external forces or soul-traps when we have enough evil within individuals of our own nature...

Sadly in agreement. There is enough Evil in humanity to feed all of Hell's demons...if there is a Hell or demons...

[I should note I don't think any government has alien technologies.]