skeptism is good when applied correctly!

A complete denial or refusal to debate something isn't skepticism, it's pure bloody ignorance but real skeptics have scientific parameters and good arguments to debate something (which is quite right, we should always question as it's part of learning).

Astral travel is difficult to measure, the term itself is invented and is very much a concept as it means different things to different people. It would be very difficult to debunk by the same notion (and I'd like to see a good scientific argument that astral travel is not possible - I doubt I could find one!).

I, personally, like to keep an open mind that anything is possible - it's a big old universe out there and we're not aware of very much on the grand scheme of things

Must say I think that while we all tend to get comfortable with belief systems, and tend to find moving beyond them uncomfortable the scientific/academic establishment (or more precisely it behaviour) is a big issue in this problem.

Most ordinary people tend to rely on the 'experts' opinion to determine what's credible for them to believe - few read or think enough to make their own minds up. And in the case of most of these experts the very necessary scepticism (take nothing as fact without evidence) has migrated to become an institutional closed mindedness.

This driven mostly by the fact that they have created a hierarchy the culture of which is to turn on anybody threatening the orthodox paradigm. Driven by all sorts of fears and egotism, but in the end mostly by the fact that those occupying favoured places in the hierarchy have a lot to lose (fat salaries, prestigious positions, grants, research funding etc) if they threaten the vested interests or fail  to be seen to be arbiters of the last word on the topic.

Same story as life in general really. It's superficially a dog eat dog world where all claim high values (in this case the application of scientific method for the common good), but most don't hesitate to stoop to attacking those whose work threatens their selfish interests, or to adjust research outcomes to suit the needs of the situation. And the ridiculing of people whose output doesn't fit the  paradigm is as good a weapon as any.

It really grows legs when with the help of the media the orthodox paradigm (in even more dumbed down form) is promoted and becomes the public system of belief. It becomes dogma - a dogma protected by public sentiment and a posse of sharks poised to tear apart or sensationalise anybody proposing anything different.

I've just read an interesting book called "The Field' by Lynn McTaggart published by Harper Collins Element. She basically made a survey of the research that was out there in an attempt to figure out if there was a scientific explanation out there for the many paranormal and psychic phenomena that have been widely observed. Especially the interconnectedness of everything.

That's events the likes of what are reported here, or what's described by the spiritual traditions - events not easily explained by conventional Newtonian theories of individual strictly physical and isolated selves interacting by conventional means.

She found that there's in fact lots of serious research based science out there to explain them. (she writes of the zero point energy field which is recognised by but has been written out of conventional quantum physics and which links/provides the building blocks for everything, and via which everything communicates by quantum means - seem to me like it's the fundamental reality some traditions  imply  as being the raw material that mind manipulates to create the apparent reality we experience)

All of which is fine. But the point is that the work has only been done because there are a very few committed researchers out there brave and unselfish enough to plough a lonely furrow. Almost all have suffered suppression and career problems as a consequence.

It's as a result easy to see why it's not mainstream - even though it's so important as a means of helping to get people over blocking belief systems and raise our consciousness....

No question R. True scepticism implies taking nothing on blind trust (building trust progressively from  intellectual logic to trusted teaching ultimately to relying on personal experience) but staying 100% open to new information and insight. Which is healthy and often taught as the only way to approach the spiritual path.

On the other hand you can see how if you'd spent most of your career becoming the pre-eminent expert on a particular theory that you might be tempted to attack anybody threatening this position by advancing a view that renders it mostly irrelevant....

Quote:


Generalization again, how did you come to the conclusion that EVERY SINGLE skeptic would say from the start that it is irreal? There is a wide gap between skepticism and ignorance, it was mentioned before, a skeptic would at least try to verify/falsify it for him/herself.
I understand (clincing to your example) scepticism in the way, "not being able" to imagine it according to ones beliefs/ what he learned/ view on the world, his/her logic tells it is apart from his/her own view. So then questioning it is not to discredit you beliefs (I did not get the point until now, why do you always think that skepticism is there to affront you?) , on the other hand also to maybe enrich the skeptics mind (I wrote maybe, because not everyone would try to falsify/ verify it, those who do not want to try it, mostly have no strong arguments ("it is not real because it is like that" things like this) against sth., but that's ignorance).
If you own experiences are convincing to you, it must not be the case that they convince others as well.
You often read about "multiple realities" in which humanbeings are supposed to live in (first point where I would start would be the subjective view on the world, everyone has his own), same world, different approach.

regards,

pulsar

We need to find some new friends for you, Elite !

If this thread is about skeptics, then yes, all kinds of people can be skeptical, and people are skeptical to various degrees-- except really guillible people.    But really gullible people don't hang around discussion boards because they want and need to believe everything so discussion, to them, is worthless. There are no really gullible people here  .

Elite, you are here in a virtual community of support for astral travel. You can also find communities of support under Eckankar, some kundalini sites, and some sites dealing with ancient spiritual traditions.--Surely some of thse must have discussion group meetings in NYC.
If you want support here you have it, and you'll have more if you share more of your astral travel experience so we know what aspects of AT you experience.  (These terms are so broad, since these fields are just getting started.)

What do you like to do while you are travelling? Do you visit people or places here in C1 or go into other realms?  do you use your astral body or etheric body or some other subtle body? Have you read much that explains to you how adepts from the past and present are using this ability?---Let's have a conversation

Love, Bets

A healthy skeptic with an open mind, I can deal with. I try to avoid the arguments that come up from time to time with a few Religious people. They waste my calories. I can recall the way they looked at me a few years back when I said "We can talk directly to the dead. What's stopping us ?" To them, I had just crawled out from under a rock, and needed a quick "intervention".