Is all this stuff real? or not? The skeptic vs believer within ourselves

Thanks for the post and discussion. Before considering the aspects specific to the topics we consider on this forum, I think it is interesting and important to think about the aspects I've included in this quote.

It's important to me because I understand these feelings, I have a lot of them myself, go through the same turmoil...

There should be a forum for the reflective/emotional or psychological aspect of all this...

. . . . .

I have a recurring obsessive and compulsive thought and behavior to poke any and all holes , to the extreme, on how something could be incorrect. In other words, I'll read something, emotionally "believe" or "I feel filled with hope/happiness" but then I mentally become doubtful, skeptical , poking holes in it.

. . . . .

So, I obsessively read blogs, articles, books, watch and listen to all these topics, then feel good about everything, only to go back to doubt, skepticism and disbelief.

The thing is, I recognise and relate to all these things - but not on the current topic. I'm (to begin with) not talking about parapsychology, survival of death and so on.

What I'm talking about is much more down-to-earth. The everyday solid stuff which happens all the time. I might say ordinary life though I'm not sure any of life is really ordinary.

And it is here that I recognise the alternating between hope and happiness and whatever is the opposite of that. We can call this a psychological activity or refer to it in different language as light and dark or even good and evil.

The reason I'm talking about this is that it doesn't seem to be a problem with the subject matter of this forum, but simply part of the human condition. We tend to struggle, some may be more fortunate than others but troubles as well as we hope, joys are part of most lives.

Which leads me to comment simply, having doubts is not in itself an argument against parapsychology. It is more a matter of the human condition.

 
That consensus view is now incorrect, though, so they are going to have to change it, whether they like it or are reluctant to or not. The findings of the relevant clinical research are that NDE's are not hallucinations, illusions, delusions or tricks of the brain. 

Yet whether we like it or not, nor whether they are correct or not, is not the issue. The perception is the issue and the consensus view is based on that perception. It is a really, really uphill battle to change the perception that parapsychology in general and the reality of existence beyond this limited physical domain is any more than wishful thinking at best and some kind of dangerous occult superstition at worst.

We can quote the more open-minded scientists and philosophers all we like but the vast majority of educational and intellectual influencers are dyed-in-the-wool materialists who see it as their duty to confront and vilify dissenters from the consensus. What makes it more difficult - and this is what I encounter quite a lot in listening to people who identify with that consensus - is that it is commonplace to list a string of fringe ideas such as bigfoot, reptilian world leaders, Daytime TV ghost-hunters and any number of conspiracy theories and add on "the paranormal" as just another example of this irrational thinking. If you search for "paranormal" on Amazon or Netflix you will most likely be presented with a list of books and shows about zombies and warewolves.

We might take all this seriously and have all the best evidence to hand but it cuts no ice with those who made up their minds in their teens and will not change. I was told by someone I love dearly to stop wasting my time sending links to such evidence. We see it here - and especially saw it while participating on the Skeptiko forum - that skeptics will reject all evidence, no matter how strong, because they believe they have the truth already.

I have long toyed with the idea of making a YouTube video presenting the serious side of the paranormal. The science, the philosophy, a list of eminent people in various disciplines who have been convinced by the evidence ... but I usually end up thinking, "what's the point?" - I would just be dismissed as another YouTube loony. This forum is a bubble and it is one of the few places on the internet where such matters are discussed seriously. Compare our little enclave with the vast number of atheist blogs, forums, YouTube channels, etc.

The perception is the issue and the consensus view is based on that perception.

I think we have to define the denominator here.

Among the vocal, scientific community you're probably right.  That group is, what, 0.00001% of the population at large?  (A tiny denominator)

I think the consensus view among the entire population is much more open.  I'd wager its a minority group that holds a scientific materialist reductionist worldview.

I still don't get how any father (I'm a proud one of three!) can witness the birth of their children and come away believing its all random, purposeless mutations.  Its almost a comical position actually.

Yet whether we like it or not, nor whether they are correct or not, is not the issue. The perception is the issue and the consensus view is based on that perception. It is a really, really uphill battle to change the perception that parapsychology in general and the reality of existence beyond this limited physical domain is any more than wishful thinking at best and some kind of dangerous occult superstition at worst.

We can quote the more open-minded scientists and philosophers all we like but the vast majority of educational and intellectual influencers are dyed-in-the-wool materialists who see it as their duty to confront and vilify dissenters from the consensus. What makes it more difficult - and this is what I encounter quite a lot in listening to people who identify with that consensus - is that it is commonplace to list a string of fringe ideas such as bigfoot, reptilian world leaders, Daytime TV ghost-hunters and any number of conspiracy theories and add on "the paranormal" as just another example of this irrational thinking. If you search for "paranormal" on Amazon or Netflix you will most likely be presented with a list of books and shows about zombies and warewolves.

We might take all this seriously and have all the best evidence to hand but it cuts no ice with those who made up their minds in their teens and will not change. I was told by someone I love dearly to stop wasting my time sending links to such evidence. We see it here - and especially saw it while participating on the Skeptiko forum - that skeptics will reject all evidence, no matter how strong, because they believe they have the truth already.

I have long toyed with the idea of making a YouTube video presenting the serious side of the paranormal. The science, the philosophy, a list of eminent people in various disciplines who have been convinced by the evidence ... but I usually end up thinking, "what's the point?" - I would just be dismissed as another YouTube loony. This forum is a bubble and it is one of the few places on the internet where such matters are discussed seriously. Compare our little enclave with the vast number of atheist blogs, forums, YouTube channels, etc.

That pseudo-skeptics have possibly cornered the market for ranting on the internet isn't necessary an indication of where the public or even academia lies. Though I do think there's at least a decade or two before we see the paranormal allowed to come out of the shadows and join mainstream science.

I remain optimistic, which doesn't mean that suddenly everyone will accept the paranormal. It just won't be academic suicide to assert one's acceptance of paranormal data.

Perhaps I am mixing with the wrong people or the results of my internet searches are skewed but I seem to be confronted by a determined and considerable resistance to anything leaning towards a more open-minded view of the paranormal and related (spiritual) matters.

Admittedly, when I talk of the consensus I do mean a significant but not large, in absolute population-percentage terms, group of intellectuals, scientists, materialist philosophers and, especially, media opinion influencers. I have said in other posts that a clear majority of the general public seem to be more at ease with these subjects than those opinionated intellectuals would care to admit. Even when they do admit it, they dismiss the majority view as being due to the lack of proper education and/or intelligence.

I would really like to share your optimism, Sci, but I'm afraid that I did have such optimism some 50 years ago and have become increasinlgy divested of such hopes as the years go by. One of the main problems that I see is the association of spirtuality with religion. Religious institutions are trying hard to retain sole claim to matters of a spiritual nature despite the growth of a demographic that has become known as "Spritual but not Religious". They - the religious heirarchy - seem to be supported in this by none other than the atheist vanguard who, probably correctly, see outdated religious beliefs and practices as easy targets. Richard Dawkins, some years ago, made a TV series precisely targeting religion in this way. If spiritual matters can be aggregated with traditional religious beliefs, then they can be dismissed in the same breath.

It is a really, really uphill battle to change the perception that parapsychology in general and the reality of existence beyond this limited physical domain is any more than wishful thinking at best and some kind of dangerous occult superstition at worst.

In academia, yes. With the public at large, it's quite different and has changed some. I've noticed the difference recently, yes you get the same old idiotic comments from many but the word is getting out that NDE's can't be explained by Susan Blackmore's book. 

We can quote the more open-minded scientists and philosophers all we like but the vast majority of educational and intellectual influencers are dyed-in-the-wool materialists who see it as their duty to confront and vilify dissenters from the consensus.

Yes they are publicly, but behind the scenes I think many of them realise that it is indeed the beginning of the end (of materialism), but of course the people at the top of the institutions will have to die out, I do agree. They won't admit they were wrong, like old communists, they'll keep their faith right up to their deaths and they'll do that proudly, accusing everyone else of being irrational and unscientific.
 

it is commonplace to list a string of fringe ideas such as bigfoot, reptilian world leaders, Daytime TV ghost-hunters and any number of conspiracy theories and add on "the paranormal" as just another example of this irrational thinking.

I agree, and this list is usually read out in the "sermons" they deliver to their student faithful (who have little choice but to clap just like the members of the various politburos).  

skeptics will reject all evidence, no matter how strong, because they believe they have the truth already.

Of course, how can there be evidence for something that can't happen, that is impossible. When you're dead, you're dead. But New York University (in the most recent study) has just finished collecting data of the highest standard possible. 

Patient's have memories from their period of cardiac arrest and not just CPRIC (CPR induced consciousness). These patients weren't 'quick shocks', they were in cardiac arrest (dead) for at least 5 minutes and much longer. There shouldn't be any memories of anything. Listening to some sceptics, you'd think they were studying people that were waking up from an afternoon nap.

The memories are clearly related to something else, other than the brain.

I have long toyed with the idea of making a YouTube video presenting the serious side of the paranormal. The science, the philosophy, a list of eminent people in various disciplines who have been convinced by the evidence ... but I usually end up thinking, "what's the point?" - I would just be dismissed as another YouTube loony.

I don't think you would be dismissed as loony, Dave. Your compositions are far too good. I'm not saying do it, though.

I confess that calling me a proponent would be doubtful.
It has to do with being raised by pratically atheist parents, and even then, my materialism was less because of "logic"/hatred of other views. It's the simple idea that I did not see it, so it doesn't exist.
Sometimes I still consider myself a naturalist, but I admit that most of the things documented transcend it so far, yet instead of science being the light in the dark, it degenerates into scientism and refuses to even consider mistakes in the models.

I confess that calling me a proponent would be doubtful.
It has to do with being raised by pratically atheist parents, and even then, my materialism was less because of "logic"/hatred of other views. It's the simple idea that I did not see it, so it doesn't exist.
Sometimes I still consider myself a naturalist, but I admit that most of the things documented transcend it so far, yet instead of science being the light in the dark, it degenerates into scientism and refuses to even consider mistakes in the models.

For me it feels almost certain that we survive death. This is partly due to philosophy + parapsychology, but mostly tied to my own experiences and just a gut feeling.

I don't claim this is enough to make *others* believe it though.

My greater concern is whether or not to go "all in", and really try to engage with what seems to be an "other side" to existence beyond the mundane.

There should be a forum for the reflective/emotional or psychological aspect of all this... so , without knowing exactly where to put this or if anyone cares to participate (please feel free to move this to a more ideal forum)..

Does it seem interesting to you that more people don't seem to be interested or at least concerned about the topics we explore here. Specifically, the soul or life after death, meaning ,purpose, etc. Maybe some are not interested in aliens or bigfoot, but we are all gonna die and those we love, will too. Maybe more people do wonder about this stuff and one may never know, just as most wouldn't know my feelings on these topics, except a close few... but there is "thinking about it" and "dwelling on it." I dwell on it. I have a unique psychology on it as well. Despite a strong bias and emotional need to believe in life after death and many things considered "new agey," I have a recurring obsessive and compulsive thought and behavior to poke any and all holes , to the extreme, on how something could be incorrect. In other words, I'll read something, emotionally "believe" or "I feel filled with hope/happiness" but then I mentally become doubtful, skeptical , poking holes in it. It's like I'd almost rather convince myself these things arent real, because If i believe and feel they are real, and at some point learn it is not real and I was wrong, would be more painful than not believing to begin with. "Losing" the belief or feeling, is more painful than never feeling it or believing it at all, i guess. 

Weird huh?

So, I obsessively read blogs, articles, books, watch and listen to all these topics, then feel good about everything, only to go back to doubt, skepticism and disbelief.

If this thread gets going, I'll share some of the types of "skeptical" thoughts and "doubts" that constantly creep up

**Edit.. I dont know why I made it seem like I would wait., I will share one of those thoughts now..

Why are so many experiences similar to the experiences one has in an NDE but people dont typically think of a literal soul leaving the body. For example, someone who is being sexually assaulted. Or someone who is being physically attacked, someone experience a PTSD type of "flashback or moment," or perhaps someone who suffers from de-realization or de-personalization disorder. What if one who is close to death, (or thinks they are), has various forms of disassociation. Maybe in less extremes, someone has their vision or hearing distorted, things seem far away or shrink down, etc.. and maybe in more extreme versions, people feel or perceive themselves as "out of body." I know I have read that one book about 100 verified experiences , the self does not die, i think it was called, i have read bruce greyson's book and his experience with the sauce on his tie, the alleged "mary's shoe," all of that. I get it. Thats my point. I have thoughts, and feelings on both sides and they battle with each other all the time. There are stories of people allegedly being out of body and verifying something they saw while out of body, but then other stories of people going to check on what they saw while out of body and they were incorrect about what they saw. It makes no sense!

Hmmm....what to say. I think people have as much interest in parapsychology as they have in any other avenue of science. Regular people don't really care about the realities of existence, other than to look into it every so often and go "Well that's interesting". In parapsychology's case it's a lot harder to do that because there's a long history of criticism against it, so people just find the most available source with says there's nothing to think about or here's some random independent stuff and leave it at that. In regards to dying, and how it's such an important thing, there are religious people who don't give any mind to what happens when they die and what evidence there is for things that come after, let alone spiritual people or atheists. People are generally happy to dip their toes and come to their own conclusions.

As for your obsession with reading blogs, articles, books, whatever, my simple piece of advice is: Stop. 

I use to be exactly like you, obsessively going over info all the time. Skeptics, proponents, arguments and counter arguments whatever I could get my hands on. It's a terrible way to live. Humans CRAVE certainty and the reaction you're having is the same as people have in other professions. People obsess over reading physics, over biology, geology, whatever. These are incredibly devisive topics where opinions and evidence for theories are changing every day so it absolutely rattles the mind of people OUTSIDE of the field looking in, who don't have all the context and experience to take a step back. And that's exactly my advice for this, take a step back and relax, stop reading and just dip your toes in every so often. Keep that skepticism, for something as crazy as parapsychology it's good to be doubtful, I certainly don't believe everything I read, but don't let it take you over. It's what I've done and it's substantially increased my well being. 

As for what other people were saying about the reception of parapsychology subjects in the public at large, all one has to do is look at things like Skeptic organizations to see where the public's attention has gone. Once upon a time Skeptics were rockstars, riding on a wave of anti-organized religous sentiment that swept across the western world and all the anti-woo ideas that came with it. Once that died out and atheism became less of a hit thing for the general public, when people settled into it or moved onto spiritual but not religous ideas, all of a sudden these big Skeptic groups stopped being a thing you heard about all the time, became niche circles and the big famous Skeptics moved onto silly political or gender ideas critiques. I feel like that should give a good enough picture as any as the way the public's perception towards these kinda ideas have changed over time. A big cycle of interest, critique and slow critique in interest again.