Explain this with psychology (challenge)

[an anarchist]

Note: this is in the ”Psychology“ sub-forum.

This challenge has two parts.

First, you have to take me at my word.

Second, try to explain my experiences without explaining using mystical/supernatural explanations. Use psychology or like explanations.

I will partake in the challenge as well.

Let‘s begin.

If one person sees a ”spirit” and a nearby person does not, it is easy to explain the sighting as a hallucination. If both people see the spirit, however, how do you explain that, absent of saying that the spirit was really there?

If one person communicates telepathically one way to another person, it is easy to explain that as delusional thinking on that persons part. If two people have an active two way telepathic conversation with each other, and can confirm the contents of the telepathic conversation verbally after the fact, how do you explain that, absent of saying supernatural abilities?

These scenarios are not hypotheticals, rather, my personal experiences. So, if you partake in this thread that means you are taking my word that these experiences happened. No time for your skepticism here.

Well, let’s be selectively skeptical. How do we explain these experiences in a hypothetical godless and natural world? I think the answer lies in psychology.

The brain is insanely insane and powerful. And it can connect to other brains, somehow. There is a hidden element that enables these scenarios. Though two parties perceived a spirit, that does not mean the spirit was there. So, what then? Just because two parties spoke telepathically does not mean that they have supernatural abilities. What transpired could be perfectly natural.

The answer is that the brain is powerful. But that is all I know.

What about you? Care to take part in this challenge?

 

[Left Coast]

Note: this is in the ”Psychology“ sub-forum.

This challenge has two parts.

First, you have to take me at my word.

Second, try to explain my experiences without explaining using mystical/supernatural explanations. Use psychology or like explanations.

I will partake in the challenge as well.

Let‘s begin.

If one person sees a ”spirit” and a nearby person does not, it is easy to explain the sighting as a hallucination. If both people see the spirit, however, how do you explain that, absent of saying that the spirit was really there?

I'd say they both saw...something. But I doubt we know for a fact it's a "spirit," depending on the definition of the word.

If one person communicates telepathically one way to another person, it is easy to explain that as delusional thinking on that persons part. If two people have an active two way telepathic conversation with each other, and can confirm the contents of the telepathic conversation verbally after the fact, how do you explain that, absent of saying supernatural abilities?

I think I'd agree with you that the only way we could explain it would be to say there's some natural explanation we don't know (yet), possibly related to the brain. I'd also want to interview the two people independently and ask them to transcribe exactly what they believe they communicated with the other person, and then compare notes.

 

[sun rise]

The answer is that the brain is powerful. But that is all I know.

If quantum mechanics are involved as speculated Quantum mechanics in the brain - Nature then telepathy might be explained using the weird physics of quantum mechanics "spooky action at a distance".

There is no reason that something might not survive death in a godless world. There could be an energy field made up of electrical fields that were formed in a brain. What the spirit is capable of is something else but outside the scope of your challenge.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Note: this is in the ”Psychology“ sub-forum.

This challenge has two parts.

First, you have to take me at my word.

Second, try to explain my experiences without explaining using mystical/supernatural explanations. Use psychology or like explanations.

I will partake in the challenge as well.

Let‘s begin.

If one person sees a ”spirit” and a nearby person does not, it is easy to explain the sighting as a hallucination. If both people see the spirit, however, how do you explain that, absent of saying that the spirit was really there?

If one person communicates telepathically one way to another person, it is easy to explain that as delusional thinking on that persons part. If two people have an active two way telepathic conversation with each other, and can confirm the contents of the telepathic conversation verbally after the fact, how do you explain that, absent of saying supernatural abilities?

These scenarios are not hypotheticals, rather, my personal experiences. So, if you partake in this thread that means you are taking my word that these experiences happened. No time for your skepticism here.

Well, let’s be selectively skeptical. How do we explain these experiences in a hypothetical godless and natural world? I think the answer lies in psychology.

The brain is insanely insane and powerful. And it can connect to other brains, somehow. There is a hidden element that enables these scenarios. Though two parties perceived a spirit, that does not mean the spirit was there. So, what then? Just because two parties spoke telepathically does not mean that they have supernatural abilities. What transpired could be perfectly natural.

The answer is that the brain is powerful. But that is all I know.

What about you? Care to take part in this challenge?

Let reality itself make the determination and the final word on the matter.

If you think that's the case, then it's fine.

I'm sure it's something that won't apply to the masses.

Just your own standards meant for yourself.

 

[Agent Smith]

I've tried to analyze this more the merrier principle which even the courts seem to endorse and subscribe to (e.g. multiple witnesses do it for the hapless perp). The principle boils down to, in simple mathematical sentence, P(Rx) is directly proportional to n, where P(Rx) is the probability that what was observed, x, is real and n is the number of people who report having observed x. The vague logic seems to be, in as few words as possible, so many people can't be making a mistake. Take note of the definition. It checks out mathematically as the probability that everybody is hallucinating decreases with the number of people reporting a particular observation i.e. at least one of the observers are observing something real is high(er). This is a critical issue that needs to be looked into thoroughly as, I kid you not, lives depend on it (re the courts). I wonder if the US Justice Department has assigned the task of scientifically & mathematically (what else?) studying this principle to any agency capable of doing so. Perhaps I should consult Guru Google.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If one person sees a ”spirit” and a nearby person does not, it is easy to explain the sighting as a hallucination. If both people see the spirit, however, how do you explain that, absent of saying that the spirit was really there?

It's not unusual for multiple people to have shared experiences in common even if the experience isn't as seemed. The Miracle of the Sun, for example, lots of people saw something, but accounts vary and aren't consistent to a reliable degree had the sun actually been doing something. People expect to see things and feel things so they do. Just like during a church service and people "feel the spirit." They do feel something, but it's driven by the social nature of our being and of church.

If one person communicates telepathically one way to another person, it is easy to explain that as delusional thinking on that persons part. If two people have an active two way telepathic conversation with each other, and can confirm the contents of the telepathic conversation verbally after the fact, how do you explain that, absent of saying supernatural abilities?

Request the claimants keep detailed logs and invite them for a controlled study.

 

[Eddi]

Note: this is in the ”Psychology“ sub-forum.

This challenge has two parts.

First, you have to take me at my word.

Second, try to explain my experiences without explaining using mystical/supernatural explanations. Use psychology or like explanations.

I will partake in the challenge as well.

Let‘s begin.

If one person sees a ”spirit” and a nearby person does not, it is easy to explain the sighting as a hallucination. If both people see the spirit, however, how do you explain that, absent of saying that the spirit was really there?

If one person communicates telepathically one way to another person, it is easy to explain that as delusional thinking on that persons part. If two people have an active two way telepathic conversation with each other, and can confirm the contents of the telepathic conversation verbally after the fact, how do you explain that, absent of saying supernatural abilities?

These scenarios are not hypotheticals, rather, my personal experiences. So, if you partake in this thread that means you are taking my word that these experiences happened. No time for your skepticism here.

Well, let’s be selectively skeptical. How do we explain these experiences in a hypothetical godless and natural world? I think the answer lies in psychology.

The brain is insanely insane and powerful. And it can connect to other brains, somehow. There is a hidden element that enables these scenarios. Though two parties perceived a spirit, that does not mean the spirit was there. So, what then? Just because two parties spoke telepathically does not mean that they have supernatural abilities. What transpired could be perfectly natural.

The answer is that the brain is powerful. But that is all I know.

What about you? Care to take part in this challenge?

I don't know

Maybe it's possible for such things to happen in a godless and natural world but it's just that nobody currently understands them

Perhaps science just hasn't caught up with reality yet?

I don't see why spirits and telepathy couldn't have a natural explanation

 

[bobhikes]

Note: this is in the ”Psychology“ sub-forum.

This challenge has two parts.

First, you have to take me at my word.

Second, try to explain my experiences without explaining using mystical/supernatural explanations. Use psychology or like explanations.

I will partake in the challenge as well.

Let‘s begin.

If one person sees a ”spirit” and a nearby person does not, it is easy to explain the sighting as a hallucination. If both people see the spirit, however, how do you explain that, absent of saying that the spirit was really there?

If one person communicates telepathically one way to another person, it is easy to explain that as delusional thinking on that persons part. If two people have an active two way telepathic conversation with each other, and can confirm the contents of the telepathic conversation verbally after the fact, how do you explain that, absent of saying supernatural abilities?

These scenarios are not hypotheticals, rather, my personal experiences. So, if you partake in this thread that means you are taking my word that these experiences happened. No time for your skepticism here.

Well, let’s be selectively skeptical. How do we explain these experiences in a hypothetical godless and natural world? I think the answer lies in psychology.

The brain is insanely insane and powerful. And it can connect to other brains, somehow. There is a hidden element that enables these scenarios. Though two parties perceived a spirit, that does not mean the spirit was there. So, what then? Just because two parties spoke telepathically does not mean that they have supernatural abilities. What transpired could be perfectly natural.

The answer is that the brain is powerful. But that is all I know.

What about you? Care to take part in this challenge?

The spirit one is tough. I would have to interview each separately to determine a cause.

The psychic one is easy because I see it a lot and can give examples. Humans are good at reading other humans if the have interest. We don't just rely on spoken words

My wife had a Vietnamese friend. At their store they would sit and talk for hours Her son came up to me one time telling how amazed he was with their conversation His mom only spoke Vietnamese and my wife was talking in Spanish My best friends mom only spoke Italian and he only spoke English. Not until he visited his cousins in Italy did he realize he couldn't speak a single word. His Dad was American.

 

[wellwisher]

Note: this is in the ”Psychology“ sub-forum.

This challenge has two parts.

First, you have to take me at my word.

Second, try to explain my experiences without explaining using mystical/supernatural explanations. Use psychology or like explanations.

I will partake in the challenge as well.

Let‘s begin.

If one person sees a ”spirit” and a nearby person does not, it is easy to explain the sighting as a hallucination. If both people see the spirit, however, how do you explain that, absent of saying that the spirit was really there?

If one person communicates telepathically one way to another person, it is easy to explain that as delusional thinking on that persons part. If two people have an active two way telepathic conversation with each other, and can confirm the contents of the telepathic conversation verbally after the fact, how do you explain that, absent of saying supernatural abilities?

These scenarios are not hypotheticals, rather, my personal experiences. So, if you partake in this thread that means you are taking my word that these experiences happened. No time for your skepticism here.

Well, let’s be selectively skeptical. How do we explain these experiences in a hypothetical godless and natural world? I think the answer lies in psychology.

The brain is insanely insane and powerful. And it can connect to other brains, somehow. There is a hidden element that enables these scenarios. Though two parties perceived a spirit, that does not mean the spirit was there. So, what then? Just because two parties spoke telepathically does not mean that they have supernatural abilities. What transpired could be perfectly natural.

The answer is that the brain is powerful. But that is all I know.

What about you? Care to take part in this challenge?

When you have a dream you can see the dreamscape, even though your eyes are closed and you are asleep in the dark. The wiring from your eyes into the brain and then distributed through the brain, can be used for both seeing the world and seeing in dreams. The difference is connected to where the signals originate; outside or inside the brain.

The thalamus is the most wired part of the brain. It is the main switching station of the brain that integrates everything; via its central input and output role. It is located in the core of the brain. Signals from the eyes will go through the thalamus and then are distributed all over the brain and brain stem. Some is sent back to various parts of the cerebral for further processing. In dreams, the thalamus is sending signals back though this same circuitry, but it does not use the eyes. We will become consciously aware in the dream like we are awake, albeit, the landscape has other properties connected to unconscious affects.

The bias of western thinking is what comes into brain has to come from the outside; spirits or science data. But hallucinations show these can also start inside the brain. Some can even overlap the outside data, that the eyes see, at the same time; overlay affect of inside and outside, as two signals cross. It is similar to "augmented reality" where you can see the world, with overlays that may have some functional purpose; reality plus computer generated. In the case of the brain, we get reality plus unconsciously generated augmented reality. If we saw a helpful spirit it may serve a function. Augmented reality is a projection of how the brain works. AI is taking one step father with the thalamus leading.

My favorite example of natural augmented reality, to watch, is in a kitten. They will run around the house chasing imaginary game. The inside aspect of their brain is giving the kitten augmented reality training games, so it can practice its hunting and chasing skills. Most adult humans would be freaked out by that. But small children can have fun with their augmented reality overlays; girls and dolls.

If you remember the Russian Collision Coup and Hoax, clever but shady people, used psychological tricks to plant suggestions. What was placed inside, appeared to overlap what was outside, until many people became confused which is which; bias or truth, or facts or fiction. In this case, hundreds of people, expose to the same mental virus, same augmented reality trip down the rabbit holes, could all be in the same room, and all on the same imaginary page. Until the reality check. But even now, the affects linger.

 

[jes-us]

Note: this is in the ”Psychology“ sub-forum.

This challenge has two parts.

First, you have to take me at my word.

Second, try to explain my experiences without explaining using mystical/supernatural explanations. Use psychology or like explanations.

I will partake in the challenge as well.

Let‘s begin.

If one person sees a ”spirit” and a nearby person does not, it is easy to explain the sighting as a hallucination. If both people see the spirit, however, how do you explain that, absent of saying that the spirit was really there?

If one person communicates telepathically one way to another person, it is easy to explain that as delusional thinking on that persons part. If two people have an active two way telepathic conversation with each other, and can confirm the contents of the telepathic conversation verbally after the fact, how do you explain that, absent of saying supernatural abilities?

These scenarios are not hypotheticals, rather, my personal experiences. So, if you partake in this thread that means you are taking my word that these experiences happened. No time for your skepticism here.

Well, let’s be selectively skeptical. How do we explain these experiences in a hypothetical godless and natural world? I think the answer lies in psychology.

The brain is insanely insane and powerful. And it can connect to other brains, somehow. There is a hidden element that enables these scenarios. Though two parties perceived a spirit, that does not mean the spirit was there. So, what then? Just because two parties spoke telepathically does not mean that they have supernatural abilities. What transpired could be perfectly natural.

The answer is that the brain is powerful. But that is all I know.

What about you? Care to take part in this challenge?

The answer is , yourself expected more to life .

 

[PureX]

The way a mind interprets an experience and fits it into it's conception of reality is not the equivalent of reality, itself. And although it's more rare, two minds can misinterpret their shared experience to create a misconception of reality just the same as one mind can.

 

[Dao Hao Now]

First, you have to take me at my word.

Here’s the first flaw for any rational test.

 

[Brickjectivity]

If one person sees a ”spirit” and a nearby person does not, it is easy to explain the sighting as a hallucination. If both people see the spirit, however, how do you explain that, absent of saying that the spirit was really there?

It can be explained. I do not know the specific reason, but there is more than one way it could happen without the supernatural. The physical cannot be ruled out. At least it cannot be ruled out, yet.

If one person communicates telepathically one way to another person, it is easy to explain that as delusional thinking on that persons part. If two people have an active two way telepathic conversation with each other, and can confirm the contents of the telepathic conversation verbally after the fact, how do you explain that, absent of saying supernatural abilities?

It can be explained. I do not know the explanation, however it can be explained once the underlying principles have been determined. Lots of things seem supernatural, until we find out the underlying principles behind them. It doesn't have to be "Delusional thinking" either. I don't rule out delusional anything, but it doesn't have to be that. There is more than one way it could happen without the supernatural or delusion. Also our existence seems to depend upon order in reality, not upon supernatural things. For example 1 + 1 always equals 2. It never equals 3; because addition and subtraction are part of reality which is ordered. It has an order to it. Things which take up space, they take a fixed amount of space. Rocks stack. Water fills. Things which can be measured retain they measure unless something is taken from or added to. If you leave something in one place: it remains there unless something moves it.

Take deja vu experiences: Psychologists have an explanation for why it is a common occurrence. Often deja vu is delusion, however is it always delusion? I don't know that it is always delusion. I do know that either delusion or physical reality will likely explain it.

The brain is insanely insane and powerful. And it can connect to other brains, somehow. There is a hidden element that enables these scenarios. Though two parties perceived a spirit, that does not mean the spirit was there. So, what then? Just because two parties spoke telepathically does not mean that they have supernatural abilities. What transpired could be perfectly natural.

Maybe! Leave it at 'Maybe' until more information becomes available. Don't sell tickets.