• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Modern science cannot take into account the larger scope of reality because it is confined to physicality and to the materialist paradigm. This has been enforced for centuries by the various factions that aim to keep humanity in a state of degeneration and anti-evolution. Why? Because a man that can fend for himself and stand upon his two feet doesn't make a very good state-dependent slave. The materialist attitude It is the same reason as why imagination nor thoughts can be proven or explained properly, because we lack the critical understanding of the human psyche. Materialist science will never be able to uncover why and how remote viewing works, because it doesn't use physicality to work. This is all deliberate. The contemporary scientific community is grounded to physicality as we lack the innate senses to assess and perceive subtle energy - which for sake of ease, we'll call the "counterpart" of dense (physical) energy. Here's the thing. Everything is energy, every single part of our universe. Not all of these are either physical, and certain types of energy can pass through physicality with ease. Now here is the catch; not all of these are physically observable to our physically oriented senses. But they very much are to our subtle energy senses. These however, are under constant attack and have been for the past few ages.

Here's an example of the subtle senses. There's a recent study done that demonstrated conclusively that the human body can sense imagery and events before it happens. The participants weren't informed, and momentarily before they were shown a series of images, their body had already responded to types of images that would show up. If memory serves me well, these ranged from sexual images to "begin" images that illicit no natural response.
That studies shows it is testable and observable. But can it be properly explained by the materialist physical paradigm? No, it cannot, because it doesn't take into account the subtle, non-physical counterpart of nature and reality.
Access to these subtle energies used to be a conscious ability of ours. However, because of the thousands of years of spiritual neglect and corruption, this ability has completely watered down and gone dormant. Think about the "dark ages", or how the church systematically murdered those who DID have the ability to interface and manipulate subtle energies. Millions were murdered because of this. Gifted bloodlines needed to be eradicated so that the malevolent established order could continue its reign over the non-spiritual man.
The mentioned study;

Predicting the unpredictable: critical analysis and practical implications of predictive anticipatory activity

This is also a Banned Ted Talk talking about the flaws of modern day science:

 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
I think so much evidence renders materialism an incomplete understanding of reality.

I think Sheldrake is just great and much needed at this time!

@Serpent Child Do you realize the hard-nosed materialist denies all the contrary to materialism evidence you mentioned as being just flawed evidence and flawed experiments?
 

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Modern science cannot take into account the larger scope of reality because it is confined to physicality and to the materialist paradigm.
Science is not materialist and cannot address materialism and recognizes its limitations. Usually Scientists do, too. For example consider Evolution. It begins with observations, not with hopes and dreams. It doesn't speak to materialism, because materialism is something else entirely -- philosophical.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Modern science cannot take into account the larger scope of reality because it is confined to physicality and to the materialist paradigm. This has been enforced for centuries by the various factions that aim to keep humanity in a state of degeneration and anti-evolution. Why? Because a man that can fend for himself and stand upon his two feet doesn't make a very good state-dependent slave.

Contrary to your charmingly unsubstantiated conspiracy theory, the real reason the sciences are "materialistic", as you call it, is because they crucially rest on the principle of inter-subjective verification. Inter-subjective verification is simply the verification of fact and hypotheses by two or more people. And it means that scientists are not looking for "truths" that are privy to only one person, but rather "truths" that can be verified by two or more people, by any qualified observer. As it happens, "material" facts and hypotheses are open to inter-subjective verification in a way that "non-material" facts and hypotheses are not. Hence, science is "materialistic", to use your word for it.

The sciences have been, and still are, humanity's most powerful and reliable means of inquiry.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
By the way, calling the sciences "materialistic" is an inaccurate, intellectually sloppy, misscharacterization of them. Of course, I realize many people are egotistically attached to calling the sciences "materialistic" despite the inaccuracy and sloppiness of doing so.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Modern science cannot take into account the larger scope of reality because it is confined to physicality and to the materialist paradigm. This has been enforced for centuries by the various factions that aim to keep humanity in a state of degeneration and anti-evolution. Why? Because a man that can fend for himself and stand upon his two feet doesn't make a very good state-dependent slave. The materialist attitude It is the same reason as why imagination nor thoughts can be proven or explained properly, because we lack the critical understanding of the human psyche. Materialist science will never be able to uncover why and how remote viewing works, because it doesn't use physicality to work. This is all deliberate. The contemporary scientific community is grounded to physicality as we lack the innate senses to assess and perceive subtle energy - which for sake of ease, we'll call the "counterpart" of dense (physical) energy. Here's the thing. Everything is energy, every single part of our universe. Not all of these are either physical, and certain types of energy can pass through physicality with ease. Now here is the catch; not all of these are physically observable to our physically oriented senses. But they very much are to our subtle energy senses. These however, are under constant attack and have been for the past few ages.

Here's an example of the subtle senses. There's a recent study done that demonstrated conclusively that the human body can sense imagery and events before it happens. The participants weren't informed, and momentarily before they were shown a series of images, their body had already responded to types of images that would show up. If memory serves me well, these ranged from sexual images to "begin" images that illicit no natural response.
That studies shows it is testable and observable. But can it be properly explained by the materialist physical paradigm? No, it cannot, because it doesn't take into account the subtle, non-physical counterpart of nature and reality.
Access to these subtle energies used to be a conscious ability of ours. However, because of the thousands of years of spiritual neglect and corruption, this ability has completely watered down and gone dormant. Think about the "dark ages", or how the church systematically murdered those who DID have the ability to interface and manipulate subtle energies. Millions were murdered because of this. Gifted bloodlines needed to be eradicated so that the malevolent established order could continue its reign over the non-spiritual man.
The mentioned study;

Predicting the unpredictable: critical analysis and practical implications of predictive anticipatory activity

This is also a Banned Ted Talk talking about the flaws of modern day science:

I'll have to think about the OP.
Some bold claims there to ponder.
But until I'm ready, I'll give only this comment.
"Rupert Sheldrake" sounds like the name of a teacher at Hogwart's.
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
Contrary to your charmingly unsubstantiated conspiracy theory, the real reason the sciences are "materialistic", as you call it, is because they crucially rest on the principle of inter-subjective verification. Inter-subjective verification is simply the verification of fact and hypotheses by two or more people. And it means that scientists are not looking for "truths" that are privy to only one person, but rather "truths" that can be verified by two or more people, by any qualified observer. As it happens, "material" facts and hypotheses are open to inter-subjective verification in a way that "non-material" facts and hypotheses are not. Hence, science is "materialistic", to use your word for it.

The sciences have been, and still are, humanity's most powerful and reliable means of inquiry.
Well, that and contemplating chicken entrails. Jus' sayin' ...
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Modern science cannot take into account the larger scope of reality because it is confined to physicality and to the materialist paradigm.
For this statement to be accurate, you first must demonstrate that there necessarily is something in reality beyond material or physical existence. Can you do that?

This has been enforced for centuries by the various factions that aim to keep humanity in a state of degeneration and anti-evolution. Why? Because a man that can fend for himself and stand upon his two feet doesn't make a very good state-dependent slave.
Ridiculous conspiracy mongering isn't an argument.

The materialist attitude It is the same reason as why imagination nor thoughts can be proven or explained properly, because we lack the critical understanding of the human psyche. Materialist science will never be able to uncover
why and how remote viewing works, because it doesn't use physicality to work.
Please demonstrate:
1 - that remote viewing actually works.

2 - that science will NEVER be able to explain it.
3 - that remote viewing doesn't use physicality.
4 - that there is a method other than science through which we can better understand remote viewing.

This is all deliberate. The contemporary scientific community is grounded to physicality as we lack the innate senses to assess and perceive
subtle energy - which for sake of ease, we'll call the "counterpart" of dense (physical) energy.
If we cannot assess or perceive it, how can you assert it exists?

Here's the thing. Everything is energy, every single part of our universe. Not all of these are either physical, and certain types of energy can pass through physicality with ease. Now here is the catch; not all of these are physically observable to our physically oriented senses. But they very much are to our
subtle energy senses. These however, are under constant attack and have been for the past few ages.
Similar question: if you cannot "sense" this supposed form of energy, how can you possibly ascertain its existence? What method do you rely on to differentiate "detectable" energy versus "undetectable" energy?

Here's an example of the subtle senses. There's a recent study done that demonstrated conclusively that the human body can sense imagery and events
before it happens. The participants weren't informed, and momentarily before they were shown a series of images, their body had already responded to types of images that would show up. If memory serves me well, these ranged from sexual images to "begin" images that illicit no natural response.
That studies shows it is testable and observable. But can it be properly explained by the materialist physical paradigm? No, it cannot, because it doesn't take into account the subtle, non-physical counterpart of nature and reality.
Pointing out a phenomenon we don't yet understand doesn't mean that science never WILL understand it - that's a fallacious argument. It simply means that we don't understand it yet. There is a world of difference between saying "Science doesn't have an explanation for x" and "Science will NEVER have an explanation for x". The latter is a claim that you actually have to demonstrate.

Access to these subtle energies used to be a conscious ability of ours. However, because of the thousands of years of spiritual neglect and corruption, this ability has completely watered down and gone dormant.
Please demonstrate that this is the case.

Think about the "dark ages", or how the church systematically murdered those who DID have the ability to interface and manipulate subtle energies.
What are you talking about?

Millions were murdered because of this. Gifted bloodlines needed to be eradicated so that the malevolent established order could continue its reign over the non-spiritual man.
Are you serious?


This is also a Banned Ted Talk talking about the flaws of modern day science:

This talk wasn't "banned" - Tedtalk simply moved it from their YouTube page to their blog, because they felt it needed accompanying language due to Sheldrake's poor reputation in the scientific community and how many believe his talk was misleading and ill-informed.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
I think so much evidence renders materialism an incomplete understanding of reality.
Evidence that is curiously absent from any serious talk on the subject.

But if you wish to revolutionize human history, please be the first to present it.

I think Sheldrake is just great and much needed at this time!
Sheldrake is a renowned hack whose ideas are largely discredited.

@Serpent Child Do you realize the hard-nosed materialist denies all the contrary to materialism evidence you mentioned as being just flawed evidence and flawed experiments?
He mentioned one study that says absolutely nothing about materialism.

You need to stop jumping on every bandwagon that panders to your preconceptions and start showing some honest skepticism.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
You need to stop jumping on every bandwagon that panders to your preconceptions and start showing some honest skepticism.
That is what I would say back to you too. 'Honest' skepticism is indeed what is needed.

I feel I am fair and objective in my considerations. All of the studies and experiments done by highly qualified parapsychologists (like Sheldrake) and many others showing results that don't make sense in a materialist worldview are wrong you say?? As well as all the anecdotal evidence?? To each their own 'honest' judgment.
 
Last edited:

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
That is what I would say back to you too. 'Honest' skepticism is indeed what is needed.
When have I not been honest?

I feel I am fair and objective in my considerations. All of the studies and experiments done by highly qualified parapsychologists (like Sheldrake) and many others showing results that don't make sense in a materialist worldview are wrong you say??
Nope, I didn't say that. I just said that if you actually DID have such studies, and you actually had the courage of your convictions, you would easily earn yourself global influence and change the course of human history. Do you honestly not think that demonstrating the existence of the supernatural would not be a world-shattering event, especially with literally billions of people already desperately wanting to believe in it?

As well as all the anecdotal evidence??
You can find anecdotal evidence for literally ANY claim.

To each their own 'honest' judgment.
So when you read the OP, did you bother to read up or question anything that they said? Nope. You just agreed with it. No research, no effort, no real honest consideration.

You're not honest, George. You'll believe anything that you feel confirms what you already believe.
 

Corvus

Feathered eyeball connoisseur
Science is supported by the scientific method, which can only deal with the obervable measureable and inferable. This is not a weakness. This is the strength of science. Without that strength, science would be as lost in a sea of esoteric uncertainty as every other belief system is. Science is a sword, it cuts away the superflous and the false. Empirical evidence is the highest form of evidence, all other evidences are virtually worthless by comparison.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
When have I not been honest?
When you overstate things like saying 'Sheldrake is a renowned hack whose ideas are largely discredited.'
Nope, I didn't say that. I just said that if you actually DID have such studies, and you actually had the courage of your convictions, you would easily earn yourself global influence and change the course of human history. Do you honestly not think that demonstrating the existence of the supernatural would not be a world-shattering event, especially with literally billions of people already desperately wanting to believe in it?
I believe there is enough evidence already that shows the so-called paranormal exists beyond reasonable doubt. But some with an obvious emotional dislike of such things can easily mire the information in controversy. Where your argument above about a 'World Shaking Discovery' goes wrong is that there is no official determiner that all will accept. We each have to be our own determiner.

You can find anecdotal evidence for literally ANY claim.
Now, that may be close to correct, but an honest investigator considers the quantity, quality and consistency of the evidence before forming his position on the evidence.
So when you read the OP, did you bother to read up or question anything that they said? Nope. You just agreed with it. No research, no effort, no real honest consideration.
The OP (which I fully read) dealt with a topic I have been considering for decades; the problem with materialist science.
You're not honest, George. You'll believe anything that you feel confirms what you already believe.
I am the only judge of my honesty that I am concerned with.
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
The issue with modern day science is that there are too many people who don't know what science is, but still try to practice it, and ape real science. For example, by inventing "open access" journals to try to mimic actual peer-reviewed journals, in order to appear legitimate scientifically. This "borrowing" of vocabulary, concepts, affectations, and presentation is a hallmark of the modern, fantasy science field. Sadly, hordes of credulous people don't have the faculties and/or experience to be able to differentiate legitimate information from information pretending to be legitimate through mimicry.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Science is supported by the scientific method, which can only deal with the obervable measureable and inferable. This is not a weakness. This is the strength of science. Without that strength, science would be as lost in a sea of esoteric uncertainty as every other belief system is. Science is a sword, it cuts away the superflous and the false. Empirical evidence is the highest form of evidence, all other evidences are virtually worthless by comparison.
I was sort of agreeing with you until that final clause: all other evidences are virtually worthless by comparison

That sounds too much like Scientism which I do not agree with. From Wikipedia:
Scientism
Scientism is belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that empirical science constitutes the most "authoritative" worldview or the most valuable part of human learning-to the exclusion of other viewpoints.

My study of paranormal phenomena and spirituality has told me that the questions that really matter to me are outside of science's domain at this time. I have learned much for example from the masters and teachers of the Vedic/Indian traditions whose knowledge and experience I have come to respect as valid and beyond science at this time.
 

Corvus

Feathered eyeball connoisseur
Scientism is belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that empirical science constitutes the most "authoritative" worldview or the most valuable part of human learning......

I completely agree, without reservation.

Wouldn't necessarily exclude other viewpoints. Just give them less credit. Comparatively. Which is only logical.
 
Last edited:

Corvus

Feathered eyeball connoisseur
My study of paranormal phenomena and spirituality has told me that the questions that really matter to me are outside of science's domain at this time. I have learned much for example from the masters and teachers of the Vedic/Indian traditions whose knowledge and experience I have come to respect as valid and beyond science at this time.
An interesting area, one that deserves proper scientific investigation and the scrutiny of conservative skepticism.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
An interesting area, one that deserves proper scientific investigation and the scrutiny of conservative skepticism.
Well, as these things are claimed to be beyond the matter and energy within the physical range of current science, the problem becomes how does current science investigate? Just like Dark Matter (95% of the matter in the universe), science can not directly detect this stuff.

The spiritual teachers are telling us that there are realms outside of our familiar three-dimensional physical universe. This postulates that humans have psychic senses (some more gifted than others) that can detect things our physical senses and instruments can not detect. By the paranormal evidence, I believe such realms do indeed exist.
 

Corvus

Feathered eyeball connoisseur
Just like Dark Matter (95% of the matter in the universe), science can not directly detect this stuff.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...o-be-killed-by-emergent-gravity/#3d14c4185359

Having trouble copy pasting from the page. Essentially emergent gravity is a new theory in the making which may well do away with dark matter.


We can investigate with instrumentation and perhaps develop new instrumentation, to look into the supernatural world. Should any scientist wish to risk his/her professional reputation.
 
Last edited:

Corvus

Feathered eyeball connoisseur
The spiritual teachers are telling us that there are realms outside of our familiar three-dimensional physical universe.
I believe we live in an 11 dimensional universe (10 spatial + 1 time). If as I believe M theory is closest to producing a GUT.
 
Last edited:
Top