Religion Instinct?!

[Stranger]

Oh...oh.....so many words....so much emotion....but so little understanding!  Painful!!

Yes - emotion and words do seem to be all you can manage, and yes it is rather painful to watch.   

It's actually rather difficult to tell if you seriously believe that you are the one with understanding or if this is just a deliberate distraction from the fact that you have no answers. However, the posts speak for themselves - yours are full of emotion, faith, and empty words while others have tried to explain why you are not being convincing.

Do you seriously believe that somebody with genuine understanding of something that others are no seeing, would post something like you've just done, rather than engage with the logic that has been presented to them?

You could start by addressing the problem of why you accept auras are objectively real without (apparently) any objective evidence that they are. If you are doing so just because of a subjective experience, then how can you rationally justify that? Try to answer without the appeal to many times discredited analogies like blind people and light - when it's been explained to you endless times why that is not a valid comparison and how easy it would be to provide a blind person with objective evidence of light.

So - how about a serious answer, rather than empty words, emotions, faith, and baseless assertions that it's everybody else's problem if they don't agree with you?

[Udayana]

Hi Udayana,

I think you’re overstating it: some people believe they “see auras" – a very different thing.

Why? When people believe things to be real they act accordingly, which has a real world effect (not seeing a doctor for example because you think the alternative will cure you instead). Actually I think the arguments about whether something is real are anything but pointless – without them we have no means to distinguish reality from fantasy.   

But if the answer to “how they came to see them” is the disastrously wrong arguments that Sriram attempts, then there’s no reason to think they came to see them at all. 

Wrong question. Rather the relevant question is “why do you think you see auras?” And when the answers continue to be laughably wrong, then we can safely conclude that there’s no good reason to think he does see auras even though he may think he does.

There’s no cogent reason to think anyone “sees auras”, or that they exist at all in order to be seen. You may as well ask me how many years of four-leaf clover burning on a full moon it took me to see leprechauns.

From an individual's subjective view there is little difference between seeing something and believing that they saw something, but quite a lot between seeing and imagining or fabricating an event.

If someone says they've seen something that has no known physical basis I think it is worth investigating why they are "seeing" it and the neurological or psychological effects involved. I'm not interested in your leprechauns since I expect you've made them up to to make a point

[Spud]

Everybody having a "tendency to sin" would be a design flaw in itself. If people had genuine freedom (leaving aside the logical impossibility for a moment - see below), then at least some would choose to be 'good'.

No - you've missed the point. We, as people, are the products (in some combination) of our nature and nurture. An omniscient and omnipotent creator would, in the very act of creation, be deciding everybody's nature and nurture and would know exactly what that would mean and what our choices would be (unless there is some genuine randomness).

The only notion of "free will" that makes any sense at all is compatibilism - which makes no sense for an omniscient and omnipotent creator, because it would necessarily be making all our choices for us at the moment of creation, unless there is some element of true randomness. We could not be sensibly (or justly) blamed by such a god for the choices we make.

Understood, I think.
I suppose God becoming a man and choosing to obey rather than sin goes some way to justifying his right to punish us for sinning, if compatibilism is true?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Udayana,

From an individual's subjective view there is little difference between seeing something and believing that they saw something, but quite a lot between seeing and imagining or fabricating an event.

Yes, but no-one’s saying that Sriram is fabricating something – what’s actually being said (rightly so) is that the reasons he essays for the thing he thinks he perceives actually being the thing he thinks he perceives are hopeless. He could yet be right nonetheless just as a matter of dumb luck (see also leprechauns), but so far at least he’s offered nothing at all to suggest that he is right.   

If someone says they've seen something that has no known physical basis I think it is worth investigating why they are "seeing" it and the neurological or psychological effects involved.

I agree, and that’s exactly what I’ve asked him to explain – why he thinks he’s right. Asking for details about what he thinks he perceives on the other hand is pointless until and unless he ever manages a valid “why” in the first place. 

I'm not interested in your leprechauns since I expect you've made them up to to make a point 

Ah, but that’s missing the point again. This isn’t about being interested in the object of the belief – whether the object is leprechauns or auras equally. Rather it’s about evaluating the validity of the arguments used to justify the belief "aura" (or the belief leprechauns).

The arguments Sriram has attempted to justify his belief that there are auras are terrible, but if you choose to accept them nonetheless then you have no choice but to accept the identical arguments when they lead to a different object, eg leprechauns.

Why Sriram will never address the falsifications that undo him is anyone’s guess (a bad case of cognitive dissonance I think) but that doesn’t change the logic of the matter. 

[Udayana]

Udayana,

Yes, but no-one’s saying that Sriram is fabricating something – what’s actually being said (rightly so) is that the reasons he essays for the thing he thinks he perceives actually being the thing he thinks he perceives are hopeless. He could yet be right nonetheless just as a matter of dumb luck (see also leprechauns), but so far at least he’s offered nothing at all to suggest that he is right.   

Yes, I agree.

I agree, and that’s exactly what I’ve asked him to explain – why he thinks he’s right. Asking for details about what he thinks he perceives on the other hand is pointless until and unless he ever manages a valid “why” in the first place. 

Clearly he does not know "why", unless he's decided to keep it secret. But one might be able to work backwards from the "what" and information about the cultural context.

Ah, but that’s missing the point again. This isn’t about being interested in the object of the belief – whether the object is leprechauns or auras equally. Rather it’s about evaluating the validity of the arguments used to justify the belief "aura" (or the belief leprechauns).

The arguments Sriram has attempted to justify his belief that there are auras are terrible, but if you choose to accept them nonetheless then you have no choice but to accept the identical arguments when they lead to a different object, eg leprechauns.

Why Sriram will never address the falsifications that undo him is anyone’s guess (a bad case of cognitive dissonance I think) but that doesn’t change the logic of the matter.

Yes, the arguments don't work. The nature of "reality" and how we decide what is real or exists or not could be discussed (preferably in a philosophy or philosophy of science thread rather than religion) but no valid case has been made for auras.

Nevertheless, there are many people who think they have seen them and I think it is worth trying to understand what is going on in their heads.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Hi Udayana,

Yes, I agree.

Fair enough.

Clearly he does not know "why", unless he's decided to keep it secret. But one might be able to work backwards from the "what" and information about the cultural context.

Kind of. The idiosyncratic characteristics of the supposed causes for subjective experiences I find fairly uninteresting, except perhaps as examples of myth or folklore. More interesting to me is the psychology of our pattern- and explanation-seeking species as a whole. We seem generically to reach for the most proximate answer - the Amazonian tribesman for tree spirits, the Polynesian islander for the volcano god, Sriram for auras etc – that serve as good enough place markers for more rational answers.

Why we cling to them though even when more cogent explanations are available is more puzzling – the sunk cost of the emotional investment perhaps? Sriram for example cannot even conceive that his beliefs are wrong, and so he ties himself in terrible rhetorical knots and outlandish casuistry to protect himself from being shown to be wrong, liberally dosed with ad hom insults for those more capable of reasoning than he is.

It’s an odd (and unedifying) sight, but a common one too I find.             

Yes, the arguments don't work. The nature of "reality" and how we decide what is real or exists or not could be discussed (preferably in a philosophy or philosophy of science thread rather than religion) but no valid case has been made for auras.

Nevertheless, there are many people who think they have seen them and I think it is worth trying to understand what is going on in their heads.

Well, that depends on whether you actually mean the content of their various belief objects or rather their reasoning for thinking them to be real. It seems to me that no matter how much detailed description you give to auras or to leprechauns alike (see the courtier's reply by the way: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Courtier%27s_Reply) that’ll still tell you nothing about why people think they exist in the first place, whereas the tools of psychology and its related disciplines might.   

[ekim]

ekim,

(1)  I haven’t. Sriram attempts a disastrously wrong line of reasoning – “auras are real; other people don’t have my magic aura-detecting ability; therefore auras are real”. It’s a basic common-or-garden fallacy of the premise and the conclusion being the same (called "affirming the consequent"), and I’ve explained it to you by substituting leprechauns for auras and asking whether you’d give the same house room to that argument too. If you don’t want to answer that’s fine, but it’s still what he’s trying.   

(2) You think logic is a straight jacket? Well, as philosophy, technology, medicine and pretty much anything else I can think of that enables you to “live a little” relies on it, we’ll have to disagree about that.

The question though was why anyone would invest time in practices that allegedly lead to un-evidenced outcome A rather than to un-evidenced outcome B. And if even if you did have an answer to that, the a priori question is why you’d even begin without first establishing some basis to determine whether you’d actually experienced that outcome rather than just reached for it as a conveniently persuasive but wrong answer.   
 
(3) What instruments?

(4) No-one said that you did. Try again – you were defending Sriram’s mistakes by saying that perhaps he was right. No-one says otherwise, but it’s a vacuous point – perhaps anything at all is right. You cannot though defend his practice of jumping straight from a perhaps to an is.
You were defending him remember, albeit wrongly (see above).

(5) Oh dear. By all means go back and re-read to see where you’ve gone wrong. Or don’t. It’s up to you, but the arguments are the same either way.

(1) Yes you have and you've done it again.  Firstly you confuse what I say with what Sriram has said, then you add a bit of loaded language with the word 'magic' just to bias the statement.  If you want me to answer your question you will first need to define 'aura' (which as I said to you before, nobody has done so far) and then define 'real'.

(2) Yes we will have to disagree.  I can live quite joyfully without the need to logically analyse it.
      As regards the second paragraph, I 'm not quite sure what you are asking but if un-evidence outcome A is to win an Olympic gold medal in the 100 metres and B to win a crossword competition a person might invest the appropriate time, training and energy to achieve that end.  There is no guaranteed outcome as success or failure could result.  The motive for doing so is probably varied from parental pressure/encouragement, financial reward, ego trip or it might even be driven by what this thread indicated ... Newberg's postulate of a 'self transcendence basic function of the brain (“How do we continue to evolve and change ourselves as people?”)'

(3)I think they use a variety of electronic imaging and recording equipment.  There may be something here if you are really interested ...... https://www.parapsych.org/articles/34/39/united_kingdom.aspx

(4)Jumping to conclusions again.  I think you have a Sriram obsession.  I was not defending him, that is your inference.  I said this at the beginning 'I may be mistaken over what Sriram means but I see what he is saying differently. '  I can't defend what I am not clear about and in any case Sriram doesn't need defending even though there is 5 to 1 balance of attack against him.

(5) ...ditto.

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,

Frankly, I don't know what this discussion is about anymore.....

Let me clarify my point.

ippy had raised the matter about how he moves into a house after identifying how he 'feels' about it.  That is a very common occurrence, perhaps in all countries. Almost everyone does that. 

While most of you would dismiss it as just a feeling (based on external conditions that we sense), I and most people like me would attribute it to the Aura that exists in and around us (in addition to normal sensory matters. They have their contribution too). 

Now...what is this aura?

1. It is not a religious belief.  Let us get that clear.  Nor is it anything 'supernatural' or something connected to God or Jesus or angels..... It is a natural part of our being.

2. The Aura is a energy system that exists everywhere connecting all objects, similar to the magnetic field.  It also has its individual component just as individual magnets have their own magnetism, which is our individual aura.

3. This energy system keeps moving about in and around us all the time and is the principle component of what we call the Mind. It connects to the brain and other organs and influences physiological reactions. The Mind is not just brain generated.  The Aura is deeply connected with the body also (Mind - body connection).

4. The movement of the energies in the Aura decides our health and mental makeup at any point of time.

5. What is the Aura and what is its chemical composition, specific gravity etc. etc.?  No Idea. No one knows any great detail about it. We only know that it exists all around us and influences us in various ways, as part of our mind.

6.  How do I know it exists? I can feel it around me all the time and sometimes even see it visually. So can many others. Nothing extraordinary or 'supernatural'about all this.  No need to go all 'Ooh..haa' about it. Just as I can feel my body, I can feel the Aura also. I can feel it expanding and depleting at various times.  I have always felt it from as far back as I can remember. I learnt about it much later and started working on it. 

7. The Aura obviously (mind - body) influences the body and generates chemical changes that make the body behave in certain ways. The body in turn influences the Aura and any changes in the health or chemical balance of the body can change the aura. Besides normal medication, working on the chakras and energizing them can add to health benefits.

8. How can anyone know about it? Well...if you can't feel it around you, you can learn about it in Yoga (or Pranic healing) classes. Its easy.

9. Why don't people know about it normally? We don't know about our brain, liver, kidneys and lungs also...till we learn about them.  Its the same. 

10. Why hasn't science found out anything about it? Science did not find gravity waves till very recently.  Does not mean they didn't exist all along.  X-rays and Gamma rays have always existed but we did not know about them till recent centuries. Even now we don't know anything about Dark Matter or Dark Energy....and many other things.

You people can keep battering on and on about evidence, proof, logic and so on and so forth.....but the Aura is not going to go away.  It is there around you as you read this.  Every time you feel joyful about something, it is the heart chakra expanding . Every time you feel  fear or envy in the pit of your stomach, it is the solar plexus chakra  depleting.  Every time you feel a strong sexual urge towards someone, it is your sex chakra expanding. Every time you have a eureka moment, it is the forehead chakra expanding.

Nothing to get alarmed about. The aura is part of the same mind that you have been having all along. It is not some ghost from external sources that is suddenly taking over your personality.  It is just a deeper understanding of the mind without confining ourselves only to the workings of the brain.

Cheers.

Sriram

[torridon]

Very nice, but, as with Mr Burns, it is all assertion without evidence.  Things don't become real by force of assertion. We know gravity is real because we can measure it with a gravity meter. We know light is real because we can measure it with a light meter. We know the Earth has a magnetic field because we can find North with a simple hand held compass. When we can measure something, reliably and consistently, then we are entitled to claim that the something is real, until that time it is just an unevidenced claim, like so many others. 

Go build us an aura meter, surely it should be child's play to measure something so ubiquitous.  You'd find fame and fortune, and your claims would then be taken seriously.

[Sriram]

Very nice, but, as with Mr Burns, it is all assertion without evidence.  Things don't become real by force of assertion. We know gravity is real because we can measure it with a gravity meter. We know light is real because we can measure it with a light meter. We know the Earth has a magnetic field because we can find North with a simple hand held compass. When we can measure something, reliably and consistently, then we are entitled to claim that the something is real, until that time it is just an unevidenced claim, like so many others. 

Go build us an aura meter, surely it should be child's play to measure something so ubiquitous.  You'd find fame and fortune, and your claims would then be taken seriously.

You need a gravity meter to know that gravity exists and a light meter to know that light exists??!!    Really??!!   Ooh...You are taking dependence on instruments to another level altogether.

Well...since you seem to need meters to even identify and measure your own emotions, you just have to wait till someone invents a Aura meter, I suppose. 

[torridon]

You need a gravity meter to know that gravity exists and a light meter to know that light exists??!!    Really??!!   Ooh...You are taking dependence on instruments to another level altogether.

Well...since you seem to need meters to even identify and measure your own emotions, you just have to wait till someone invents a Aura meter, I suppose. 

It's an aspect of the precautionary principle, we don't take claims seriously without good reason.  A meter would be a good enough reason in most cases.

[Gordon]

6.  How do I know it exists? I can feel it around me all the time and sometimes even see it visually. So can many others. Nothing extraordinary or 'supernatural'about all this.  No need to go all 'Ooh..haa' about it. Just as I can feel my body, I can feel the Aura also. I can feel it expanding and depleting at various times.  I have always felt it from as far back as I can remember. I learnt about it much later and started working on it. 

This is an example that highlights the need for some kind of objective method of confirming these 'auras'.

One one hand you say they are visible, since you and others can see them, but on the other hand other people can't see them: assuming that; a) the 'aura' is something that manifests from people, and b) we exclude people observing 'aura' who have known visual problems, then this it makes no immediate sense that an 'auras' wouldn't be visible to all whose vision was within the normal range of sensitivity.

The implication is, presumably, that some people must have extra or more sensitive visual attributes that can detect 'auras' but since the visual system is a physical one (eyes, retina, optic nerve, brain etc) then anyone claiming to 'see' an 'aura' could only do so via this biology - yes? 

[Stranger]

Frankly, I don't know what this discussion is about anymore.....

Let me help you out. You keep on making evidence- and reasoning-free assertions and then being unable to back them up when asked to do so.

While most of you would dismiss it as just a feeling (based on external conditions that we sense), I and most people like me would attribute it to the Aura that exists in and around us (in addition to normal sensory matters. They have their contribution too). 

We know this but the question is why? What objective evidence do you have that supports the idea that it is the aura and not just feelings?

1. It is not a religious belief.  Let us get that clear.  Nor is it anything 'supernatural' or something connected to God or Jesus or angels..... It is a natural part of our being.

I'm not sure why you keep on about this - it doesn't matter. You have a claim about the objective world and you either have evidence or reasoning to back it up or not. Whether it carries the label "religion" or not is irrelevant.

2. The Aura is a energy system that exists everywhere connecting all objects, similar to the magnetic field.  It also has its individual component just as individual magnets have their own magnetism, which is our individual aura.

3. This energy system keeps moving about in and around us all the time and is the principle component of what we call the Mind. It connects to the brain and other organs and influences physiological reactions. The Mind is not just brain generated.  The Aura is deeply connected with the body also (Mind - body connection).

4. The movement of the energies in the Aura decides our health and mental makeup at any point of time.

5. What is the Aura and what is its chemical composition, specific gravity etc. etc.?  No Idea. No one knows any great detail about it. We only know that it exists all around us and influences us in various ways, as part of our mind.

...

7. The Aura obviously (mind - body) influences the body and generates chemical changes that make the body behave in certain ways. The body in turn influences the Aura and any changes in the health or chemical balance of the body can change the aura. Besides normal medication, working on the chakras and energizing them can add to health benefits.

Evidence- and reasoning-free assertions.

6.  How do I know it exists? I can feel it around me all the time and sometimes even see it visually. So can many others. Nothing extraordinary or 'supernatural'about all this.  No need to go all 'Ooh..haa' about it. Just as I can feel my body, I can feel the Aura also. I can feel it expanding and depleting at various times.  I have always felt it from as far back as I can remember. I learnt about it much later and started working on it. 

So, you are basing a conclusion about the objective world based on something you feel. That is irrational. As has been suggested, there could be ways to test if it's a real objective phenomena but you don't seem interested in that.

As an example, about 4% of the general population are synesthete (more amongst artists), how do you know it isn't something similar? Alternatively, how would you react to someone who was a synesthete insisting they were perceiving something objectively real?

9. Why don't people know about it normally? We don't know about our brain, liver, kidneys and lungs also...till we learn about them.  Its the same. 

10. Why hasn't science found out anything about it? Science did not find gravity waves till very recently.  Does not mean they didn't exist all along.  X-rays and Gamma rays have always existed but we did not know about them till recent centuries.

Why don't people know about leprechauns normally? We don't know about our brain, liver, kidneys and lungs also...till we learn about them.  Its the same. 

Why hasn't science found out anything about leprechauns? Science did not find gravity waves till very recently.  Does not mean they didn't exist all along.  X-rays and Gamma rays have always existed but we did not know about them till recent centuries.

As Blue keeps on pointing out, you can tell something is a terrible argument if it "works" just as well for anything at all.

Even now we don't know anything about Dark Matter or Dark Energy....and many other things.

You really should try to learn something from all the times you've been corrected. You don't have to take people here's word, you could go look it up. It makes your accusations of other people not wanting to learn incredibly hypocritical.

You people can keep battering on and on about evidence, proof, logic and so on and so forth.....but the Aura is not going to go away.

There you go again - nobody is asking for proof. What is the problem with wanting evidence? If we don't try to check claims about the objective world with evidence, it means people feel free to believe any nonsense they want. Sometimes it's harmless but not always.

It is there around you as you read this.  Every time you feel joyful about something, it is the heart chakra expanding . Every time you feel  fear or envy in the pit of your stomach, it is the solar plexus chakra  depleting.  Every time you feel a strong sexual urge towards someone, it is your sex chakra expanding. Every time you have a eureka moment, it is the forehead chakra expanding.

Evidence- and reasoning-free assertion.

The bottom line is: why should anybody believe you if you have no objective evidence?

[ippy]

Hi everyone,

Frankly, I don't know what this discussion is about anymore.....

Let me clarify my point.

ippy had raised the matter about how he moves into a house after identifying how he 'feels' about it.  That is a very common occurrence, perhaps in all countries. Almost everyone does that. 

While most of you would dismiss it as just a feeling (based on external conditions that we sense), I and most people like me would attribute it to the Aura that exists in and around us (in addition to normal sensory matters. They have their contribution too). 

Now...what is this aura?

1. It is not a religious belief.  Let us get that clear.  Nor is it anything 'supernatural' or something connected to God or Jesus or angels..... It is a natural part of our being.

2. The Aura is a energy system that exists everywhere connecting all objects, similar to the magnetic field.  It also has its individual component just as individual magnets have their own magnetism, which is our individual aura.

3. This energy system keeps moving about in and around us all the time and is the principle component of what we call the Mind. It connects to the brain and other organs and influences physiological reactions. The Mind is not just brain generated.  The Aura is deeply connected with the body also (Mind - body connection).

4. The movement of the energies in the Aura decides our health and mental makeup at any point of time.

5. What is the Aura and what is its chemical composition, specific gravity etc. etc.?  No Idea. No one knows any great detail about it. We only know that it exists all around us and influences us in various ways, as part of our mind.

6.  How do I know it exists? I can feel it around me all the time and sometimes even see it visually. So can many others. Nothing extraordinary or 'supernatural'about all this.  No need to go all 'Ooh..haa' about it. Just as I can feel my body, I can feel the Aura also. I can feel it expanding and depleting at various times.  I have always felt it from as far back as I can remember. I learnt about it much later and started working on it. 

7. The Aura obviously (mind - body) influences the body and generates chemical changes that make the body behave in certain ways. The body in turn influences the Aura and any changes in the health or chemical balance of the body can change the aura. Besides normal medication, working on the chakras and energizing them can add to health benefits.

8. How can anyone know about it? Well...if you can't feel it around you, you can learn about it in Yoga (or Pranic healing) classes. Its easy.

9. Why don't people know about it normally? We don't know about our brain, liver, kidneys and lungs also...till we learn about them.  Its the same. 

10. Why hasn't science found out anything about it? Science did not find gravity waves till very recently.  Does not mean they didn't exist all along.  X-rays and Gamma rays have always existed but we did not know about them till recent centuries. Even now we don't know anything about Dark Matter or Dark Energy....and many other things.

You people can keep battering on and on about evidence, proof, logic and so on and so forth.....but the Aura is not going to go away.  It is there around you as you read this.  Every time you feel joyful about something, it is the heart chakra expanding . Every time you feel  fear or envy in the pit of your stomach, it is the solar plexus chakra  depleting.  Every time you feel a strong sexual urge towards someone, it is your sex chakra expanding. Every time you have a eureka moment, it is the forehead chakra expanding.

Nothing to get alarmed about. The aura is part of the same mind that you have been having all along. It is not some ghost from external sources that is suddenly taking over your personality.  It is just a deeper understanding of the mind without confining ourselves only to the workings of the brain.

Cheers.

Sriram

At least I didn't try to make up excuses for how I have either good or bad feelings about houses, come on Sriram you're a grown man, Biofields? Auras?

How about I'm always under Mr Blobby's guidance when I'm looking at or for potential new homes?

Hang on a minute I did try to 'woo' the seller of this latest home of mine into lowering his price for the place? Makes as much sense as any 'woo' you come up with.

Cheers Sriram

[Sriram]

This is an example that highlights the need for some kind of objective method of confirming these 'auras'.

One one hand you say they are visible, since you and others can see them, but on the other hand other people can't see them: assuming that; a) the 'aura' is something that manifests from people, and b) we exclude people observing 'aura' who have known visual problems, then this it makes no immediate sense that an 'auras' wouldn't be visible to all whose vision was within the normal range of sensitivity.

The implication is, presumably, that some people must have extra or more sensitive visual attributes that can detect 'auras' but since the visual system is a physical one (eyes, retina, optic nerve, brain etc) then anyone claiming to 'see' an 'aura' could only do so via this biology - yes?

It is probably something to do with conscious awareness, focus and concentration. Its not just about biology.

When we are children we are not even conscious of our heart beat or breathing....until someone told us.  Even as adults we are not conscious of our many bodily functions including breathing and heartbeat until something goes amiss.  Lot of things including our own thoughts, that we have to learn to focus on, it doesn't happen automatically.

Our awareness of our own self, our emotions and behavior is not automatic. It has to be learnt. Similarly with the Aura. Much of Yoga and meditation is about learning to get rid of mental clutter and to focus.

[ekim]

Three well reasoned critical replies to Sriram and so far only one ad hominem reply.  Things are looking up.

[Gordon]

It is probably something to do with conscious awareness, focus and concentration. Its not just about biology.

All of which involve biology.

When we are children we are not even conscious of our heart beat or breathing....until someone told us.  Even as adults we are not conscious of our many bodily functions including breathing and heartbeat until something goes amiss.  Lot of things including our own thoughts, that we have to learn to focus on, it doesn't happen automatically.

Our awareness of our own self, our emotions and behavior is not automatic. It has to be learnt. Similarly with the Aura. Much of Yoga and meditation is about learning to get rid of mental clutter and to focus.

That there are aspects of our biology such as the autonomic nervous system that we are usual unaware of, though we may become aware of its consequences, is irrelevant to the point of these 'auras' being described as being a visual experience. You haven't dealt with the point I was making: which was on what basis 'auras' can be seen, where 'seen' implies a visual experience.

It sounds to me like you are using 'seen' to imply something non-visual (not involving eyes, retina, optic nerve, brain), and it is a source of confusion when you use 'seen' in a way that doesn't accord with being a visual experience.

[Sriram]

All of which involve biology.

That there are aspects of our biology such as the autonomic nervous system that we are usual unaware of, though we may become aware of its consequences, is irrelevant to the point of these 'auras' being described as being a visual experience. You haven't dealt with the point I was making: which was on what basis 'auras' can be seen, where 'seen' implies a visual experience.

It sounds to me like you are using 'seen' to imply something non-visual (not involving eyes, retina, optic nerve, brain), and it is a source of confusion when you use 'seen' in a way that doesn't accord with being a visual experience.

As I have said....visual seeing is not automatic.  It happens only sometimes when I am particularly focused. I see it as a fuzzy moving thing like one sees steam rising.  Otherwise I normally feel it around me like a thin shawl. It is normal to me and I cannot unfeel it.

The Aura and the body are interconnected. They work together (mind-body). But lot of concentration is required for such matters because the conscious mind is otherwise engaged.

Cheers.

[SusanDoris]

It occurs to me that, as I certainly would not be able to see any aura even if I was illogical enough to believe it  existed, perhaps Sriram could try telling me what kind of meter he could invent or use to demonstrate that he was right.

No, there's not much chance of that, is there?!

[Stranger]

I see Sriram is still studiously ignoring how we can know if auras are real. What is needed is real-world tests...

One test involved placing people in a dark room and asking the psychic to state how many auras she could observe. Only chance results were obtained.

Recognition of auras has occasionally been tested on television. One test involved an aura reader standing on one side of a room with an opaque partition separating her from a number of slots which might contain either actual people or mannequins. The aura reader failed to identify the slots containing people, incorrectly stating that all contained people.

In another televised test another aura reader was placed before a partition where five people were standing. He claimed that he could see their auras from behind the partition. As each person moved out, the reader was asked to identify where that person was standing behind the slot. He identified 2 out of 5 correctly.

Attempts to prove the existence of auras scientifically have repeatedly met with failure; for example people are unable to see auras in complete darkness, and auras have never been successfully used to identify people when their identifying features are otherwise obscured in controlled tests. A 1999 study concluded that conventional sensory cues such as radiated body heat might be mistaken for evidence of a metaphysical phenomenon.

Wikipedia - Aura (paranormal) - Tests

So, Sriram, why can't anybody find any actual objective evidence for auras even when they try to test people's claims about them?

[bluehillside Retd.]

ekim,

The conversation has moved on now (or rather Sriram has repeated the same mistakes) but briefly:

(1) Yes you have and you've done it again.  Firstly you confuse what I say with what Sriram has said, then you add a bit of loaded language with the word 'magic' just to bias the statement.  If you want me to answer your question you will first need to define 'aura' (which as I said to you before, nobody has done so far) and then define 'real'.

No, I made clear that I was talking about your response to Sriram and not confusing you, and I have no idea what he means by “aura” – you’d need to ask him that. He does though seem to think that (whatever they are) they exist “out there”, and I was commenting on the lousy reasoning he attempts to validate that claim.   

(2) Yes we will have to disagree.  I can live quite joyfully without the need to logically analyse it.

No-one said you had to analyse anything. Rather what I said was that there’s no reason to think that whatever it is that makes you joyful isn’t a material, logically explicable (at least in principle) group of processes.

As regards the second paragraph, I 'm not quite sure what you are asking but if un-evidence outcome A is to win an Olympic gold medal in the 100 metres and B to win a crossword competition a person might invest the appropriate time, training and energy to achieve that end.  There is no guaranteed outcome as success or failure could result.  The motive for doing so is probably varied from parental pressure/encouragement, financial reward, ego trip or it might even be driven by what this thread indicated ... Newberg's postulate of a 'self transcendence basic function of the brain (“How do we continue to evolve and change ourselves as people?”)'

Category error. Winning Olympic gold and finishing a crossword are known a priori to be objectively real things. The analogy would be better put along the lines why you would invest time in practices that (supposedly) lead to experiencing leprechauns rather than invest time in practices that (supposedly) lead to experiencing Jack Frost, not least when you have no means to verify whether either is what you’d actually be experiencing in any case.     

(3)I think they use a variety of electronic imaging and recording equipment.  There may be something here if you are really interested ...... https://www.parapsych.org/articles/34/39/united_kingdom.aspx

If they have reliable instruments then they can do science with them. Why haven’t they? 

(4)Jumping to conclusions again.  I think you have a Sriram obsession.  I was not defending him, that is your inference.  I said this at the beginning 'I may be mistaken over what Sriram means but I see what he is saying differently. '  I can't defend what I am not clear about and in any case Sriram doesn't need defending even though there is 5 to 1 balance of attack against him.

Nope. I was merely explaining to you that your defence fails because of the failings in his arguments. A wrong argument is a wrong argument – that the supposed inability of others to perceive claim X means that his asserted ability to perceive X must be correct for example.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

Frankly, I don't know what this discussion is about anymore.....

Let me clarify my point.

ippy had raised the matter about how he moves into a house after identifying how he 'feels' about it.  That is a very common occurrence, perhaps in all countries. Almost everyone does that. 

While most of you would dismiss it as just a feeling (based on external conditions that we sense), I and most people like me would attribute it to the Aura that exists in and around us (in addition to normal sensory matters. They have their contribution too). 

Now...what is this aura?

1. It is not a religious belief.  Let us get that clear.  Nor is it anything 'supernatural' or something connected to God or Jesus or angels..... It is a natural part of our being.

2. The Aura is a energy system that exists everywhere connecting all objects, similar to the magnetic field.  It also has its individual component just as individual magnets have their own magnetism, which is our individual aura.

3. This energy system keeps moving about in and around us all the time and is the principle component of what we call the Mind. It connects to the brain and other organs and influences physiological reactions. The Mind is not just brain generated.  The Aura is deeply connected with the body also (Mind - body connection).

4. The movement of the energies in the Aura decides our health and mental makeup at any point of time.

5. What is the Aura and what is its chemical composition, specific gravity etc. etc.?  No Idea. No one knows any great detail about it. We only know that it exists all around us and influences us in various ways, as part of our mind.

6.  How do I know it exists? I can feel it around me all the time and sometimes even see it visually. So can many others. Nothing extraordinary or 'supernatural'about all this.  No need to go all 'Ooh..haa' about it. Just as I can feel my body, I can feel the Aura also. I can feel it expanding and depleting at various times.  I have always felt it from as far back as I can remember. I learnt about it much later and started working on it. 

7. The Aura obviously (mind - body) influences the body and generates chemical changes that make the body behave in certain ways. The body in turn influences the Aura and any changes in the health or chemical balance of the body can change the aura. Besides normal medication, working on the chakras and energizing them can add to health benefits.

8. How can anyone know about it? Well...if you can't feel it around you, you can learn about it in Yoga (or Pranic healing) classes. Its easy.

9. Why don't people know about it normally? We don't know about our brain, liver, kidneys and lungs also...till we learn about them.  Its the same. 

10. Why hasn't science found out anything about it? Science did not find gravity waves till very recently.  Does not mean they didn't exist all along.  X-rays and Gamma rays have always existed but we did not know about them till recent centuries. Even now we don't know anything about Dark Matter or Dark Energy....and many other things.

You people can keep battering on and on about evidence, proof, logic and so on and so forth.....but the Aura is not going to go away.  It is there around you as you read this.  Every time you feel joyful about something, it is the heart chakra expanding . Every time you feel  fear or envy in the pit of your stomach, it is the solar plexus chakra  depleting.  Every time you feel a strong sexual urge towards someone, it is your sex chakra expanding. Every time you have a eureka moment, it is the forehead chakra expanding.

Nothing to get alarmed about. The aura is part of the same mind that you have been having all along. It is not some ghost from external sources that is suddenly taking over your personality.  It is just a deeper understanding of the mind without confining ourselves only to the workings of the brain.

This repeated collection of mistakes in reasoning has been dismantled point-by-point by others already so I won’t repeat that. From a crowded field of egregious logical errors however, I’ll rebut one that you return to over and over again.

You keep saying that lots of phenomena once weren’t known to be real, and now are known to be real. You seem to think that this truism in some way opens the door to accepting your claim “auras”. It doesn’t though.

No-one disputes that there is a great deal we don’t know. That’s why people spend a lot of time and resources trying to discover new things, scientists most notably. Here’s the thing though: there’s no logical path of any kind from “lots of things aren’t known about” to “claim X is therefore true”. All it does give you is the possibility that claim X might be true, but that’s not something anyone disputes in any case. It’s a straw man to suggest otherwise.

Does the argument “claim X (eg auras) might be true” help you? No, of course not because you can equally say “claim Y (eg, leprechauns) might be true” or “claim Z (eg, unicorns) might be true” etc.

Anything you or I or anyone else can conceive of might be true – your epic mistake though is to imply that a “might be true” also gives you an “is true” when it does no such thing.

Do you not think it would help you at least a little if you dropped your repeated errors in thinking one at a time at least, perhaps starting with this one?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

You people can keep battering on and on about evidence, proof, logic and so on and so forth.....but the Aura is not going to go away.

Just noticed this absolute doozy of irrationality by the way. People ask for “evidence, proof, logic and so on and so forth.....” (well, not proof – that’s another of your mistakes but ok) as a means to investigate whether your assertion “the Aura is not going to go away” is more likely to be true than it is to be bullshit.

Without these things all you have is argument by assertion – which is no argument at all as even you should realise by now. 

[Gordon]

As I have said....visual seeing is not automatic.  It happens only sometimes when I am particularly focused. I see it as a fuzzy moving thing like one sees steam rising.  Otherwise I normally feel it around me like a thin shawl. It is normal to me and I cannot unfeel it.

This still sounds odd: on one hand you are describing something along the lines of someone standing in fog, where you can see them but mistily, and this would be a visual experience - if you and I were standing side-by-side (assuming we have comparable vision) then we'd see the same thing; a figure surround by fog. If fog, being a physical phenomenon, was analogous to this 'aura', since you say you can see it, then why can't everyone see these 'auras' too?

The Aura and the body are interconnected. They work together (mind-body). But lot of concentration is required for such matters because the conscious mind is otherwise engaged.

But now you seem to be saying that your visual awareness of 'aura', which you'd be consciously aware of since you can see it (like you'd be aware of fog by seeing fog) isn't sufficient when it comes to 'aura'. There is risk that people claiming to see 'aura', and however sincere they are, might be imagining they are so it would be important to have a basis to eliminate that risk.

It seems to me that the 'aura' claim is an intensely subjective one, and an 'it's true for me' one, and like all such claims it struggles to become a serious proposition for the rest of us because there is no basis to assess the claim that is independent of the perspective of the person making the claim. 

[ekim]

ekim,

(1) The conversation has moved on now


(2) If they have reliable instruments then they can do science with them. Why haven’t they? 

(1) I agree, and so have I. 

(2) If by science you mean this quote from the link I gave you "Parapsychology is supported by twin pillars: open-minded scientific study and rigorous doubt." then they probably do do science.