Spiritual pebbles.
Probably the oddest idea I know of is how an ancient piece of coloured glass can improve your health. The experts use long and overly complicated terms to suggest they know how things work, and the believers who don't yet have this the spiritual lexicon will only say 'I don't know how it works, but it does.' In this kind of case, I don't know what's worst, the people saying they know because they can make poorly supported arguments sound smart, or the sad cases who accept the bad arguments and cannot explain why they get a kick out of crystals.
It doesn't have to be old and natural, just fused glass with a beautiful colour works great on people who don't know better. Such as blue obsidian, commonly this is just light blue glass and is quite popular as a polished pebble, which means many people are buying a machine smoothed piece of glass because it's a lovely colour. Traditional shapes for such items include pyramids and spheres, that pseudo-experts claim help energises an environment, help with channelling and cosmic energy, etc. There is nothing to the science-like claims other than the placebo built up by a new age mystics and salespeople. Even if they refer to ancient cultures liking fancy looking pieces of old glass, such as the long historical use of jade in the Far-East or ancient cultures having rituals which included them. The ancient Jewish high priest breastplate which is said to of had twelve gems in it to represent the twelve tribes of Israel, so the new ager with an Israelite fetish might buy each of these stones to get closer to spirit.
Pointing out where other cultures use gemstones doesn't confirm that since they had them, they must have thought of them as you think of them now. Even if they did, how does that prove anything real unless it is something demonstrable? To an Eastern mystic, a crystal may be a helpful thing to focus on, but if it is the centre alone then what does it matter if you carry a pebble or a piece of wood or bone? If a symbol in mind is enough for people to have engaging experiences in meditation then what use is a stone that is only as useful as a mental tool, and maybe that is what it truly is, a psychological tool.
Often the creation of a false history takes place, in which the selected stories and facts of the past are expressed as if we have lost a great secret. For decoration and superstition a gem encrusted crown, in the 12th century Europe, may convey a sense of power, but can we find anything near the magical ideas of the modern new age movement? If we find enough examples that we can rewrite as evidence in a pseudo-history when is that somehow real? The fact that you need to change things to make it fly says a lot about the honesty of the new age spiritualist' search for knowledge.
In essence, the practices of meditation and devotion with stones is a throwback belief, grounded more in thought-reform rather than practicality. The practice offers self-induced states of delusion, not real mindstates that would be far more attractive to critics. It's just collecting pebbles and carvings with the hope that they have magical properties.
Maybe the best thing you can say about the properties of crystals and minerals is that the spiritual/psychic claims cannot be utterly refuted. It's not unlike fairies and gods, they cannot be totally debunked in the minds of the faithful, but as science continues, there are fewer places for them to hide. One day science may shine some light on such topics, even if modern psychology and neurology explain the experience basis for spirituality.
Showing posts with label spirituality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label spirituality. Show all posts
Saturday, 25 March 2017
Personal Spirituality and Irrationality without Religion
Personal Spirituality, irrationality without religion
The best you can gain from spirituality without religion may be a delusional view of reality, minus the traditional culture of indoctrination, you have another style, if still the voodoo of faith. Escaping the bastion of traditional religious organisations, with their rules and conformity, so you have free choice, exploration, and the ability to disagree massively, even if you cling to the mystical and experiential as critical for a serious view of reality. Religion minus the church, minus the priesthood, and without a holy book, it sounds superior to religion indoctrination, even though you still have groups and organisations, experts and officials, and, you have many books that offer spiritual knowledge. You may have broken free in some ways, yet you are still very much caged in others, the limits of an orthodox religion have been surpassed, but you cling to fun ideas that religious thinking can offer. 'Spirituality' is often just a term used to say personal religion, you mix and match based on what you wish, not what's traditional, nor what's evident, and commonly, its bias to own desires and the arguments you use to support your views.
The removal of Hell is an example of this with moderate Christians. Liberal Christians may rethink the concept, making it philosophical, non-literal, we see this process being watered down even more, which isn't a bad thing. Although most religions like to select texts, in new age spiritualism almost anything goes, and any nonsense will do. Such as the idea that Jesus spent time in India learning from great masters, at the feet of gurus, or even travelled to Tibet. Even though there is no serious evidence to confirm this idea in the least, you may as well suggest he moved to China while you're at it. This kind of thinking and that of moderates means the books are a starting point, how they proceed to include ideas depends on common sense. You can quickly dismiss a pet theory that is true but unknown and call a thing the true while not knowing that this is the case.
Many suggest a foundation to spirituality, so they kind God in all religions with a few wild interpretations. It's all selection, and who says what is the foundation and the errors created afterwards? Fundamentalists say their belief is right and the rest became corrupted, the spiritualists claim the cute stuff and then claim the unpleasant things are to do with negativity and materialism.
Even if many possibilities are used to say that the things you hold dear are correct, selection for fundamentalist Christians is to select stories about great floods in ancient times. Searching the history books and ancient legends to find anything that suggests that the biblical stories are true, and often finding a flood myth is enough for them to say that the global flood is reported in every culture.
To pose the idea that a global flood took place, even if their flood story is Atlantis, is simple enough. The way they prove the faith is by poor connections, so a spiritual person selects data to fit it into a lost global civilisation belief, and then without question will accept reincarnation stories as evidence, just because they have a bias the idea that one can reincarnate, as well as spirit channelling, and other mystic ideas.
Data selection based on bias includes the acceptance of hearsay and supportive ideas, which are held together by a unifying hypothesis, or series of hypotheses, and from the shaky ground the unsound idea is constructed. This can including the unaccounted years of Jesus meaning that he must have been in India learning from gurus, just as ignoring the periods of floods reported in various cultures and myths can seem to support a biblical view of a global event, well, if you are fine with selecting what you want, not that which is in full context and backed by solid evidence. And you may even say the great flood was evidence of the planetary shift that sank Atlantis, or even that it was the result of a near miss, as a planet X passed close to the earth, but you would still be trying to support beliefs with unsubstantiated legends.
The issue is how we rationalise things based on limited information, even using hearsay as evidence, so beyond myths, the concern is poor reasoning based on belief, a poor comprehension of terms and concepts, and this ignorance, and a kind of arrogance has a knock-on effect on society. Moderate people, whether religious or spiritual, are often very vulnerable to such leaps.
The best you can gain from spirituality without religion may be a delusional view of reality, minus the traditional culture of indoctrination, you have another style, if still the voodoo of faith. Escaping the bastion of traditional religious organisations, with their rules and conformity, so you have free choice, exploration, and the ability to disagree massively, even if you cling to the mystical and experiential as critical for a serious view of reality. Religion minus the church, minus the priesthood, and without a holy book, it sounds superior to religion indoctrination, even though you still have groups and organisations, experts and officials, and, you have many books that offer spiritual knowledge. You may have broken free in some ways, yet you are still very much caged in others, the limits of an orthodox religion have been surpassed, but you cling to fun ideas that religious thinking can offer. 'Spirituality' is often just a term used to say personal religion, you mix and match based on what you wish, not what's traditional, nor what's evident, and commonly, its bias to own desires and the arguments you use to support your views.
The removal of Hell is an example of this with moderate Christians. Liberal Christians may rethink the concept, making it philosophical, non-literal, we see this process being watered down even more, which isn't a bad thing. Although most religions like to select texts, in new age spiritualism almost anything goes, and any nonsense will do. Such as the idea that Jesus spent time in India learning from great masters, at the feet of gurus, or even travelled to Tibet. Even though there is no serious evidence to confirm this idea in the least, you may as well suggest he moved to China while you're at it. This kind of thinking and that of moderates means the books are a starting point, how they proceed to include ideas depends on common sense. You can quickly dismiss a pet theory that is true but unknown and call a thing the true while not knowing that this is the case.
Many suggest a foundation to spirituality, so they kind God in all religions with a few wild interpretations. It's all selection, and who says what is the foundation and the errors created afterwards? Fundamentalists say their belief is right and the rest became corrupted, the spiritualists claim the cute stuff and then claim the unpleasant things are to do with negativity and materialism.
Even if many possibilities are used to say that the things you hold dear are correct, selection for fundamentalist Christians is to select stories about great floods in ancient times. Searching the history books and ancient legends to find anything that suggests that the biblical stories are true, and often finding a flood myth is enough for them to say that the global flood is reported in every culture.
To pose the idea that a global flood took place, even if their flood story is Atlantis, is simple enough. The way they prove the faith is by poor connections, so a spiritual person selects data to fit it into a lost global civilisation belief, and then without question will accept reincarnation stories as evidence, just because they have a bias the idea that one can reincarnate, as well as spirit channelling, and other mystic ideas.
Data selection based on bias includes the acceptance of hearsay and supportive ideas, which are held together by a unifying hypothesis, or series of hypotheses, and from the shaky ground the unsound idea is constructed. This can including the unaccounted years of Jesus meaning that he must have been in India learning from gurus, just as ignoring the periods of floods reported in various cultures and myths can seem to support a biblical view of a global event, well, if you are fine with selecting what you want, not that which is in full context and backed by solid evidence. And you may even say the great flood was evidence of the planetary shift that sank Atlantis, or even that it was the result of a near miss, as a planet X passed close to the earth, but you would still be trying to support beliefs with unsubstantiated legends.
The issue is how we rationalise things based on limited information, even using hearsay as evidence, so beyond myths, the concern is poor reasoning based on belief, a poor comprehension of terms and concepts, and this ignorance, and a kind of arrogance has a knock-on effect on society. Moderate people, whether religious or spiritual, are often very vulnerable to such leaps.
Thursday, 4 February 2016
Skeptic vs. Spirituality group on facebook
New Age Sceptic
enough said, the group has been up for months, over a hundred people on it, a dozen or so regulars, and about half a dozen admins, and I have one rule, well two by technicality; don't spam, keep the posts relevant.
enough said, the group has been up for months, over a hundred people on it, a dozen or so regulars, and about half a dozen admins, and I have one rule, well two by technicality; don't spam, keep the posts relevant.
Saturday, 1 November 2014
Ghost Box ? Demon Box ?
well as you may know my youtube channel, robertwlester, has been turning towards testing pychics, with the most recent plot it is to get a so-called haunted box or an old object for various psychics to do a reading upon and see if they get ANYTHING at all of interest. I doubt they will.
for interest please watch these videos.
p1
p2
p3
sorry to be brief, but I am busy editing another project, will update soon.
for interest please watch these videos.
p1
p2
p3
sorry to be brief, but I am busy editing another project, will update soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)