Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
With all due respect, perhaps if you stick to one phenomena instead of connecting them all together at once, it might make for better understanding. You seem to go from A to Z in seconds, and then turn around and go backwards, all in one paragraph.
I'm old, but at least that's why it's hard to text you. Sorry.
@ SeniorCitizen007
All you have done is provided anecdotes without any proof.
And for many, including myself, when we hear a strange story, our first action is to verify if it is authentic. Then the second action is to see if it fits into the current world model. If it is outside of our normal existence, then it falls under harsh and critical screening.
You are a fellow atheist, fine, hello. But you are not exempt from that same critical thinking and examination.
You're not offering any credible evidence for what by any standard are some pretty bizarre claims. You can hope to attract like minded people all you want, but this is a debate forum, so you also have to accept people voicing their doubts. These kind of anecdotal testimonies are easy to come by, I'll just never understand why people think not being able to explain something = supernatural, but it most certainly doesn't.
Man atheists are so boring. What more do you want from the guy when these are experiences his family members have had? Shared experiences of telepathy are as common as personal experiences of deja vu. My guess is that twins, having similar experiences, identical genes, and therefore similar brains, are very much capable of experiencing identical thoughts.
But I've never studied it myself, so why would I dismiss it?
What does being atheist have to do with it? Atheism is simply a stance on one point of contention.
Even if I was a believer, I would consider this to be absolutely nonsensical.
But if you like to live in a fantasy land where whatever makes one feel warm and fuzzy must be fact, then go ahead.
I was simply stating to the OP why he may have had a frosty reception.
Again, he makes a claim, not to dissimilar to a god of the gaps argument, with nothing of substance to support it and then wonders why he isn't getting the response he desires.
What substance do you want? The very nature of the situation is substantive; you are free to interpret it as resulting from a thousand different causes. I just find it interesting that you have no logical reason for dismissing it, other than automatically labeling it as "absolutely nonsensical."
You're a scientist; you job is to test claims, not jump to conclusions. So how do you propose testing his claim?
I have plenty of logical rationale for dismissing such claims, Perhaps you should ask for it.
But I have no issue in explaining myself, as well as my thought process on this subject.
My main point of contention is that these sort of claims have been tested and not one of them has been verified.
Let us take the various attempts at the James Randi experiment, all of which failed.
Then we take the years of military testing for telepathy and remote viewing, all provided nothing to go on.
The Ganzfeld experiment, Which has failed every time to provide independent replications of the experiment in question.
And so on, and so fourth!
The list goes on and on!
The only tests that have demonstrated potential to interact via mind to mind requires technological intervention,
that would hardly constitute it to be an amazing supernatural phenomena, would it?! And not telepathy as in the form claimed in the OP.
So I then stand back and ask myself the following,
Is it more logical, rational and sensible to accept the claim of supernatural phenomena, or that what has been experienced by these people can be isolated to the likes of the mind misunderstanding what is truly happening and that there is a perfectly natural explanation.
This is similar to something Christopher Hitchens once said regarding the immaculate conception, "What is more likely... a law of nature was suspended or a Jewish minx told a lie?".
Naturalism offers the more rational and logical explanation.
I wasn't aware that the idea of telepathy wasn't, or couldn't be, a natural phenomenon; as such your naturalism shouldn't interfere. Secondly, if we do assume telepathy is supernatural, then you're asking yourself a loaded question: you've already committed yourself to a naturalistic perspective, so by definition, all supernatural explanations are illogical and irrational. I do not own the statistical rulebook of the universe, to look up the likelihood of two events, and then decide which should be true. I've told you before that you shouldn't use the term supernatural, if you're merely using it as a synonym for the nonexistent.
My naturalism is a consequence of the data received from testing, I would change my view in a heartbeat if a better explanation come to fruition! Alas, thus far nothing appears to be even close to doing so, but we can hope!
I don't (or better said, didn't) view telepathy as either a natural or supernatural phenomena, in fact I viewed it in the same light as quantum entanglement.
At the moment, it doesn't entire make sense and is hard to pin down! But we can assign probability to the causality of said phenomena and that still leads to a naturalistic likely hood.
Simply put, we let the test speak for themselves.
Perhaps you could offer some scenarios, situations or phenomena that are better explained by something else other then naturalism?!
Yes, You may have asked that, but it is not in my nature to do so. I will continue to look at anything proposed, test it (or read the documents on the tests done) and then try to understand how it comes to be.
The fact that almost everything that falls under the umbrella of 'supernaturalism' is either unfalsifiable, untestable or completely proven to be false would lead one to a better understanding of the reality we currently reside in.
If you require a statistical rulebook of the universe to look up what is more likely or a better descriptor to the reality we reside in, then perhaps you should partake in some physics classes, become engrossed in some of the literature or perhaps peruse some of the prevailing papers of our time and see what best explains it.
If you would change your view in a heartbeat as a consequence of better explanations, then why form such a heuristic in the first place? Why not simply stay open to possibilities, without drawing a circle around whatever goes under naturalism? As far as the topic of telepathy goes, I don't know the mysteries that nature has hidden from us. We are also limited by the ability of our instruments, and cleverness of our experiments. There are plenty of phenomena that escaped notice, until better tools and procedures came along.
Heuristic? So by implication you believe that naturalism is not logical, optimal and/or rational?
Please explain how you come to this conclusion and how as a model it is clearly so flawed in your opinion.
Perhaps you can offer a model that is superior or a par with it? Or reasonably close would be on great intrigue.
Hey, If you want to deny the preponderance of evidence then be my guest, I don't particularly mind.
It doesn't mean I am drawing a circle around that which falls under naturalism, it's simply saying that is the likely source.
However, it is your good self that is essentially putting his fingers in his ears and yelling it can't be true when told Santa isn't real...... metaphorically speaking.
There we have a modicum of agreement in regards to the tools we have and so fourth.
However, even you must agree that the instruments, the experiments and the people too have all greatly improved over time and with every passing second, minute and year, the evidence grows experientially in favour of the claim that naturalism is by far the best model.
Again, Please provide us with the plethora of phenomena that escaped notice until better tools came, as you put it.
But, Please state those that do not fall under naturalism!
Or do you concede that along with time, as our understanding, tools, testing and accuracy of results have drastically improved, all of the said phenomena that escaped notice can now be explained best by a naturalistic understanding.
@ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐy
"So how do you propose testing his claim?"
The burden of proof is on the claimant. If he provides this story, then it is incumbent on him to provide proof, including a testing method.
I have no reason to believe he is lying about the events; and his interpretation of them isn't invalid. It it is an observation consistent with the idea telepathy, regardless of what the actual underlying cause is.
He isn't required to prove anything.
@Breezy
Aww we are all boring? ☹
Experiencing highly similar or identical thoughts at same time is a far cry difference from being able to project or hear a thought at great distances simply because you shared the womb with another and maybe have 100% identical genes instead of 99.9% identical. I have met plenty of long time couples that were able to finish each others sentences and communicate an entire complex thought with a simple head nod seen across the room.
Do you consider at least that his interpretation of them are highly susceptible to being flawed?
His observation does not sound like telepathy to me, it sounds like having a similar thought regarding someone that was far away. Since we are not investigating the claim at all, (not requiring proof), the theory that it was he was concerned for his brother and by chance had a highly similar thought is just as valid, except that the "random chance" theory is not as near as complicated or radical, so it is likely to be the better theory of what happened.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮ I am an atheist that always likes a good debate. ▮
▮ Please include @LogicFTW in responses directed to me. ▮
▮ Useful list on forum usage. A.R. Member since 2016. ▮
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Thinking is always susceptible to being flawed; but I don't particularly find his family's thinking to be flawed, irrespective of the conclusion.
I mean, the "just because" theory is also as simple and uncomplicated as it gets. It can successfully explain the occurrence of any mystery as happening just because. Random chance works the same way. Flipping straight heads on a million trials could happen by random chance. So my question for you is, is there anything that is impossible for random chance to explain? Because if not, rather than being a better theory, I would argue it is a useless theory.
"is there anything that is impossible for random chance to explain?
Argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy.
it's also an objective fact that random chance exists, whereas there is no objective evidence for telepathy.
Shel, were you in your debate club in high school? I bet you were president. Or University debate club?
"I have no reason to believe he is lying about the events; and his interpretation of them isn't invalid. "
Whether he is being truthful can't be ascertained from these posts, but it is entirely moot anyway as being truthful about what he thinks he saw and heard doesn't come close to evidencing that is what happened. His interpretation is indeed irrelevant as he has provided not one shred of evidence beyond subjective testimony. He might just as well claim he can fly. Flying after all is a natural phenomenon that is objectively evidenced, telepathy is not.
"It it is an observation consistent with the idea telepathy, regardless of what the actual underlying cause is."
Begging the question fallacy, we have no evidence anything can be consistent with telepathy until it is evidenced as a phenomenon, White with a pointy horn is consistent with a unicorn, does that mean claiming those two attributes for something I witnessed and think is a unicorn is a compelling claim to you? As yet no evidence beyond anecdotal claims have been offered to suggest there is any cause for anything, underlying or otherwise.
"He isn't required to prove anything."
If he wishes to validate his claims then he has to demonstrate proper evidence.
Sorry John but every time you post I am less convinced you understand even the most basic scientific principles. No real scientists talks like this, creationists do, but that is why they are considered a joke by the entire scientific world.
"Sorry John but every time you post I am less convinced you understand even the most basic scientific principles."
When you don't know you're driving the wrong way, you'll think others are.
"you are free to interpret it as resulting from a thousand different causes. "
" you job is to test claims, not jump to conclusions."
Ho hum...
"What does being atheist have to do with it?"
Well quite, or being boring come that. Is Breezy under impression facts have to be exciting before they can be objectively valid.
No one has suggested vapid fantasies can't be exciting either. So his sentence is just plain wrong on multiple levels.
"My guess is"
My guess is telepathy is nonsense, and since no one can demonstrate any objective evidence for it, then my guess has a lot more going for it than yours. I also reject utterly the asinine idea that anyone who isn't a gullible fantasist is boring. There are few things more tedious than gullible fantasist raving they've seen Jesus in a slice of toast.
I knew you were going to say that!
@Cog
And I knew that you were going to say that you knew he was going to say that. Wow! We're BOTH psychotic! Cool!
Yea but I am more psychic because I knew all this was going to happen last week. I wrote it down in a letter and mailed it to myself just for proof. Also I had nothing else to do and all my friends are ignoring me.
@Cog Re: "Also I had nothing else to do and all my friends are ignoring me."
*removing headphone from left ear*... Oh, I'm sorry. Did you say something? I wasn't paying attention.... *looking at previous post*..... Oh, okay.
Well, I have no doubts about your psychotic abilities. But I actually predicted all of this a couple of months ago. Even made a time-stamped notarized video recording of my prediction and filed it away in a safe deposit box at a super-secret government bank facility in front of multiple credible witnesses. The proooooooblem, however, is that I, uh... well.... (gee, this is embarrassing)... I, uh, lost my encrypted pass key and official Super-dooper-extra-top-secret ID badge. To put it mildly, they were not happy about that. Suffice it to say, my prediction will never see the light of day again. But it is there, I swear.... *holding up hand giving Boy Scout sign of honor*....
@ TM and Cog
Pooh...amateur hour, I wrote my accurate prediction down on a scroll in 11th century Tinpotmania, witnessed by the entire population and stored in the locked chest at the Sacred Heart of Mystery monastery on the top of MT Albina.
Unfortunately it was destroyed in the great Fire of Imagination in eleventyseventyseven and the country was invaded by rabid chickens who roasted themselves in the flames and scratched down to the very bedrock so no trace of my illuminated and accurate prediction exits.
You will have to trust me...next sermon at 11am. Bring your money.
Yea yea yea - destroyed! Charlene. I have real proof of my psychic ability because I wrote it in a journal and still have it to this day.
Oh my god! Look at this.....
Journal Entry 2017, March First
Had a dream last night that I met the Tin Man from the Wizzard of OZ. He kept saying "Well, I have no doubts about your psychotic abilities. But I actually predicted all of this a couple of months ago. Even made a time-stamped notarized video recording of my prediction and filed it away in a safe deposit box at a super-secret government bank facility in front of multiple credible witnesses. The proooooooblem, however, is that I, uh... well.... (gee, this is embarrassing)... I, uh, lost my encrypted pass key and official Super-dooper-extra-top-secret ID badge. To put it mildly, they were not happy about that. Suffice it to say, my prediction will never see the light of day again. But it is there, I swear.... *holding up hand giving Boy Scout sign of honor*...." I have no idea why he was saying these things to me. Really weird dream. Perhaps it will mean something some day.
@Cog
Holy shit! Check this out!....
Note scribbled on a paper napkin from a Captain D's restaurant dated 12/31/81. (I was thirteen.)
Was playing in my back yard today when I saw a vision of some strange monkey dude who called himself "Cognostic". He told me that on March 1, 2017 he would have a vision that he..."Had a dream last night that I met the Tin Man from the Wizzard of OZ. He kept saying "Well, I have no doubts about your psychotic abilities. But I actually predicted all of this a couple of months ago. Even made a time-stamped notarized video recording of my prediction and filed it away in a safe deposit box at a super-secret government bank facility in front of multiple credible witnesses. The proooooooblem, however, is that I, uh... well.... (gee, this is embarrassing)... I, uh, lost my encrypted pass key and official Super-dooper-extra-top-secret ID badge. To put it mildly, they were not happy about that. Suffice it to say, my prediction will never see the light of day again. But it is there, I swear.... *holding up hand giving Boy Scout sign of honor*...." I have no idea why he was saying these things to me. Really weird dream. Perhaps it will mean something some day."
All these years I have always wondered what that meant. Now...... today...... I finally know....*deep sigh of relief*....
By the way, Old Man, I already knew you were gonna tell us about your predictions. Just sayin'.....
Pages