A hypothesis

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,

Here is a broad sketch of the Spiritual hypothesis. There are various stages of understanding in the hypothesis.

1. Separate spirituality from religion.  Anyone, regardless of religion, belief or affiliation can understand and progress spiritually....even atheists. Belief in God is not important.

2. Understand that the Self (Atman, Soul, Spirit, Consciousness)  is independent of the body/brain and has its roots outside the physical domain. This is a basic requirement.

3. Understand that spirituality is a part of reality as much as the physical world is and does not conflict with scientific discoveries.  Rather, they should be integrated to the extent possible.

4. Understand that Spirituality is not a precise area of study. It is somewhat more imprecise than psychology. Its a spectrum with Physics at one end  and Spirituality at the other end.

5. Spirituality is about evolution. Its about the evolution of the spirit from a state of ignorance and darkness to knowledge and Light.

6. Spiritual evolution has a purpose....to free the spirit from its bonded state.  Spirit is bound in Nature and seeks to become free. This happens  through gradual development. 

7. A Universal Spirit (or Common Consciousness) forms the substratum of the world and all life exists within it. The idea of Panpsychism is valid.

8. All life is connected and humans form a part of the chain of life along with animals and all life forms.

9. An energy field (biofield) exists all around us that gives life to organisms....like electricity gives power to many products. It works with spirit (or Consciousness). They go together.

10. There are probably other worlds outside the physical realm which connect to us and from which other worldly people can intervene and communicate.   

Just some thoughts.

Cheers.

Sriram

[Stranger]

Here is a broad sketch of the Spiritual hypothesis. There are various stages of understanding in the hypothesis.
...

We can safely add hypothesis to the list of things you don't understand. A list of evidence- and reasoning-free, untestable assertions surrounded by vague hand-waving, does not constitute a hypothesis.

[Gordon]

Hi everyone,

Here is a broad sketch of the Spiritual hypothesis. There are various stages of understanding in the hypothesis.

1. Separate spirituality from religion.  Anyone, regardless of religion, belief or affiliation can understand and progress spiritually....even atheists. Belief in God is not important.

2. Understand that the Self (Atman, Soul, Spirit, Consciousness)  is independent of the body/brain and has its roots outside the physical domain. This is a basic requirement.

3. Understand that spirituality is a part of reality as much as the physical world is and does not conflict with scientific discoveries.  Rather, they should be integrated to the extent possible.

4. Understand that Spirituality is not a precise area of study. It is somewhat more imprecise than psychology. Its a spectrum with Physics at one end  and Spirituality at the other end.

5. Spirituality is about evolution. Its about the evolution of the spirit from a state of ignorance and darkness to knowledge and Light.

6. Spiritual evolution has a purpose....to free the spirit from its bonded state.  Spirit is bound in Nature and seeks to become free. This happens  through gradual development. 

7. A Universal Spirit (or Common Consciousness) forms the substratum of the world and all life exists within it. The idea of Panpsychism is valid.

8. All life is connected and humans form a part of the chain of life along with animals and all life forms.

9. An energy field (biofield) exists all around us that gives life to organisms....like electricity gives power to many products. It works with spirit (or Consciousness). They go together.

10. There are probably other worlds outside the physical realm which connect to us and from which other worldly people can intervene and communicate.   

Just some thoughts.

Cheers.

Sriram

This isn't a hypothesis: it is, however, a muddled and fallacy-laden statement of personal faith in the form of a wish-list of what you'd like to be the case.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

That's not a hypothesis - it's incoherent guessing. You can't for example "understand" that something is "independent of the body/brain and has its roots outside the physical domain" unless you first demonstrate that there's even such a thing as "outside the physical domain".

You've had this explained many times already though, so why you repeat the same mistake over and over again is impossible to know.

[ekim]

I think you will find it difficult to separate spirituality from religion as spirit is a Christian concept.  It might be better to rename this thread as something like 'Jnana yoga' and relate what you have to say to this.

[Sriram]

I think you will find it difficult to separate spirituality from religion as spirit is a Christian concept.  It might be better to rename this thread as something like 'Jnana yoga' and relate what you have to say to this.

'Jnana Yoga' will make the thread completely Hindu and relegate it to the Eastern section.  I am trying to discuss certain philosophical matters in neutral English language. It is not connected to any religion though certain words could be commonly used in both spirituality and some religions. 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

'Jnana Yoga' will make the thread completely Hindu and relegate it to the Eastern section.  I am trying to discuss certain philosophical matters in neutral English language. It is not connected to any religion though certain words could be commonly used in both spirituality and some religions.

No you're not discussing "certain philosophical matters". Philosophy requires rational argument, and you don't have that. If you insist on privileging your conjectures with the term "philosophy" nonetheless, then you must allow the same status for any other non-defined, non-investigable truth claims too (giant tomatoes included).   

[jeremyp]

Hi everyone,

Here is a broad sketch of the Spiritual hypothesis. There are various stages of understanding in the hypothesis.

1. Separate spirituality from religion.  Anyone, regardless of religion, belief or affiliation can understand and progress spiritually....even atheists. Belief in God is not important.

2. Understand that the Self (Atman, Soul, Spirit, Consciousness)  is independent of the body/brain and has its roots outside the physical domain. This is a basic requirement.

3. Understand that spirituality is a part of reality as much as the physical world is and does not conflict with scientific discoveries.  Rather, they should be integrated to the extent possible.

4. Understand that Spirituality is not a precise area of study. It is somewhat more imprecise than psychology. Its a spectrum with Physics at one end  and Spirituality at the other end.

5. Spirituality is about evolution. Its about the evolution of the spirit from a state of ignorance and darkness to knowledge and Light.

6. Spiritual evolution has a purpose....to free the spirit from its bonded state.  Spirit is bound in Nature and seeks to become free. This happens  through gradual development. 

7. A Universal Spirit (or Common Consciousness) forms the substratum of the world and all life exists within it. The idea of Panpsychism is valid.

8. All life is connected and humans form a part of the chain of life along with animals and all life forms.

9. An energy field (biofield) exists all around us that gives life to organisms....like electricity gives power to many products. It works with spirit (or Consciousness). They go together.

10. There are probably other worlds outside the physical realm which connect to us and from which other worldly people can intervene and communicate.   

Just some thoughts.

Cheers.

Sriram

Righty-ho.

I can accept point 1, it's just part of your definition of spirituality.

Point 2 makes an assertion about the nature of spirituality that it is not an emergent property of the brain but has existence independent of it. This is an assertion about the nature of the World. Please state how you intend to show that your assertion is correct.

[torridon]

Righty-ho (2).

OK, give us some reason to take these ideas seriously then.  We aren't going to accept them just on someone's say-so.

If it is a hypothesis, how can it be tested, what predictions does it make ?  What evidence do you have for disembodied souls, what is their nature ?  How can we detect a biofield ?

[Sriram]

Well...I have said this many times.... .  It can't be tested in the manner that you would like. Evidence is all around you, if only you can see it.

Or alternatively,  if you want, you can study spirituality, undertake spiritual practice and introspection over a few years. You'll get your evidence.

[torridon]

Well...I have said this many times.... .  It can't be tested in the manner that you would like. Evidence is all around you, if only you can see it.

Or alternatively,  if you want, you can study spirituality, undertake spiritual practice and introspection over a few years. You'll get your evidence.

If biofields were all around us, then it would be child's play to build a detector to measure them with.  If we cannot measure them then there is no way to discern the difference between a biofield and something that does not exist.

[Sriram]

If biofields were all around us, then it would be child's play to build a detector to measure them with.  If we cannot measure them then there is no way to discern the difference between a biofield and something that does not exist.

Gravity has been around us all along...but no one realized it till Newton came along.  Even today we know very little about its true nature.

[torridon]

Gravity has been around us all along...but no one realized it till Newton came along.  Even today we know very little about its true nature.

But, unlike biofields, we can measure gravity.  That is the difference. We know there is a real phenomenon of Nature there.

[Sriram]

But, unlike biofields, we can measure gravity.  That is the difference. We know there is a real phenomenon of Nature there.

Can't you get this...?! We can measure gravity TODAY. We couldn't do it for several millennia and we didn't even realize that there was something pulling us down..!!!  Is this so difficult to understand?!

Bacteria and viruses have existed around us all along but no one knew that till recent times.  If someone had suggested 1000 years ago, that we fall ill because of tiny living things in and around us that we cannot see, people would have laughed. Magnetic field too.

So, merely because  something exists all around us, we need not intellectually or even consciously KNOW that it is there ...even though we may be experiencing it every day.

[torridon]

Can't you get this...?! We can measure gravity TODAY. We couldn't do it for several millennia and we didn't even realize that there was something pulling us down..!!!  Is this so difficult to understand?!

Bacteria and viruses have existed around us all along but no one knew that till recent times.  If someone had suggested 1000 years ago, that we fall ill because of tiny living things in and around us that we cannot see, people would have laughed. Magnetic field too.

So, merely because  something exists all around us, we need not intellectually or even consciously KNOW that it is there ...even though we may be experiencing it every day.

That's just handwaiving.

If we can experience a biofield, that indicates it is detectable.  So, build us a detector and then we'd have some basis to take the idea seriously.

[Gordon]

Can't you get this...?! We can measure gravity TODAY. We couldn't do it for several millennia and we didn't even realize that there was something pulling us down..!!!  Is this so difficult to understand?!

Bacteria and viruses have existed around us all along but no one knew that till recent times.  If someone had suggested 1000 years ago, that we fall ill because of tiny living things in and around us that we cannot see, people would have laughed. Magnetic field too.

So, merely because  something exists all around us, we need not intellectually or even consciously KNOW that it is there ...even though we may be experiencing it every day.

Both gravity and microbes were always 'there' but it took until curiosity and observation was formulated into theories that could be tested that eventually provided a reliable basis to begin to understand them, leading to refinements and new understandings: thus while those interested in astronomy in antiquity knew that certain bodies in the sky moved in certain ways it took centuries for gravity to be identified as a factor in that: but there was always indisputable phenomena that provided a start-point for investigation around which theories and methods could be developed - for example, people had always known that things tend to fall 'down' and not 'up' before Newton.

The problem with 'biofield' and 'aura' is the complete absence of any start-point phenomena, as opposed to personal conviction, around which theories and methods can be developed.

[Stranger]

So, merely because  something exists all around us, we need not intellectually or even consciously KNOW that it is there ...even though we may be experiencing it every day.

Yes, but that isn't a reason for anybody to take your hand-waving and baseless assertions seriously. There needs to be some solid, objective reason to do so. Even then it would only be a conjecture unless you could propose something with enough detail that it could, at least in principle, be (objectively) tested. Then you would have a hypothesis.

Or alternatively,  if you want, you can study spirituality, undertake spiritual practice and introspection over a few years. You'll get your evidence.

How it feels to you, or anybody else, when you "study spirituality, undertake spiritual practice and introspection over a few years" isn't evidence of anything other than how it feels like to people who study spirituality, spiritual practice and introspection over a few years.

Take Sam Harris - who has spent many years learning about spirituality (he mentions Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta) introspection and mediation practices (see his book Waking Up) who maintains that while it does provide benefits and insights into how consciousness works internally (I'm reserving judgement as I haven't finished reading the book yet), but flatly rejects any claim that it tells us anything about consciousness outside the body or any other claims about wider reality.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

Can't you get this...?! We can measure gravity TODAY. We couldn't do it for several millennia and we didn't even realize that there was something pulling us down..!!!  Is this so difficult to understand?!

Bacteria and viruses have existed around us all along but no one knew that till recent times.  If someone had suggested 1000 years ago, that we fall ill because of tiny living things in and around us that we cannot see, people would have laughed. Magnetic field too.

So, merely because  something exists all around us, we need not intellectually or even consciously KNOW that it is there ...even though we may be experiencing it every day.

So you’ve just made my argument for leprechauns again. Merely because they exist every time a rainbow appears, just because we don’t “intellectually or even consciously KNOW” they’re there doesn’t mean that they’re not. So...erm...leprechauns are real!

You’ve had this muddle-headedness explained to you many times already, so why on earth do you return over and again to exactly the same mistake? I’ll explain it to you yet again in the (probably vain) hope you’ll finally grasp it.

IF anyone argued that your conjectures “auras”, “biofield” etc were categorically impossible THEN the argument “ah, but other things that were once thought to be impossible are now known to be real so you cannot be sure about the impossibility of my claim” would be a legitimate reply.

Your problem though is that no-one does say that. Rather what’s actually being said is that you offer no good reasoning or evidence to suggest that your conjectures ARE real. If you want these claims to be privileged over my claim “leprechauns” for example then THE BURDEN OF PROOF is all with you. Just telling us that other phenomena for which there was once no evidence but now there is evidence are real tells us not one smidgin of a jot of an iota of an inkling of an anything about the likelihood of there ever being evidence for your claims and assertions.       

To quote you: “Can’t you get this?”

Really though?

[jeremyp]

Well...I have said this many times.... .  It can't be tested in the manner that you would like. Evidence is all around you, if only you can see it.

If evidence were really all around, you'd easily be able to find a way to test your hypothesis.

Since you can't even get beyond point 2, I think the discussion is at an end, for all intents and purposes. You just made this stuff up.

[jeremyp]

Gravity has been around us all along...but no one realized it till Newton came along.  Even today we know very little about its true nature.

This is such rubbish.

You can detect gravity easily by holding an apple in your hand and then letting go. Providing you are standing on the surface of the Earth, you will observe it accelerating towards the ground, every time. People knew things fall long before Newton.

[Sriram]

Both gravity and microbes were always 'there' but it took until curiosity and observation was formulated into theories that could be tested that eventually provided a reliable basis to begin to understand them, leading to refinements and new understandings: thus while those interested in astronomy in antiquity knew that certain bodies in the sky moved in certain ways it took centuries for gravity to be identified as a factor in that: but there was always indisputable phenomena that provided a start-point for investigation around which theories and methods could be developed - for example, people had always known that things tend to fall 'down' and not 'up' before Newton.

That's not the point. Even though something exists very commonly all around us, we could still be unaware of it. So, merely saying that 'if the biofield is around us why don't we know or why can't someone measure it?'....is rubbish.   Lots of things could exist all around us that we are unaware of even now and which we might come to know of by and by.

The problem with 'biofield' and 'aura' is the complete absence of any start-point phenomena, as opposed to personal conviction, around which theories and methods can be developed.

No. The biofield  is not just a cosmetic add on. It is the essence of mind itself. In advanced Yogic science, world over,  the biofield and chakras are an important part of understanding mental processes and used for healing and mind control.  That mainstream science does not know of it is neither here nor there. They may get there sometime....

[Stranger]

That's not the point. Even though something exists very commonly all around us, we could still be unaware of it. So, merely saying that 'if the biofield is around us why don't we know or why can't someone measure it?'....is rubbish.   Lots of things could exist all around us that we are unaware of even now and which we might come to know of by and by.

Like leprechauns.

No. The biofield  is not just a cosmetic add on. It is the essence of mind itself.

Baseless assertion.

In advanced Yogic science, world over,  the biofield and chakras are an important part of understanding mental processes and used for healing and mind control.

If "Yogic science" is really a science then you will have objective evidence for this "biofield", if you don't have objective evidence and "Yogic science" still asserts its existence, then "Yogic science" isn't a science.

That mainstream science does not know of it is neither here nor there.

Unless you actually care about reasoning and evidence when deciding what to believe...

[Walter]

Hi everyone,

Here is a broad sketch of the Spiritual hypothesis. There are various stages of understanding in the hypothesis.

1. Separate spirituality from religion.  Anyone, regardless of religion, belief or affiliation can understand and progress spiritually....even atheists. Belief in God is not important.

2. Understand that the Self (Atman, Soul, Spirit, Consciousness)  is independent of the body/brain and has its roots outside the physical domain. This is a basic requirement.

3. Understand that spirituality is a part of reality as much as the physical world is and does not conflict with scientific discoveries.  Rather, they should be integrated to the extent possible.

4. Understand that Spirituality is not a precise area of study. It is somewhat more imprecise than psychology. Its a spectrum with Physics at one end  and Spirituality at the other end.

5. Spirituality is about evolution. Its about the evolution of the spirit from a state of ignorance and darkness to knowledge and Light.

6. Spiritual evolution has a purpose....to free the spirit from its bonded state.  Spirit is bound in Nature and seeks to become free. This happens  through gradual development. 

7. A Universal Spirit (or Common Consciousness) forms the substratum of the world and all life exists within it. The idea of Panpsychism is valid.

8. All life is connected and humans form a part of the chain of life along with animals and all life forms.

9. An energy field (biofield) exists all around us that gives life to organisms....like electricity gives power to many products. It works with spirit (or Consciousness). They go together.

10. There are probably other worlds outside the physical realm which connect to us and from which other worldly people can intervene and communicate.   

Just some thoughts.

Cheers.

Sriram

Hi Sriram
You've finally done it
That's more WOO WOO than a Suffolk county Steam Engine rally   

Well done 😝😝😝

[Walter]

I think you're just taking the piss now to see how far you can go with it .
You reached the far end of a fart a long time ago friend 😱😤

[Gordon]

That's not the point. Even though something exists very commonly all around us, we could still be unaware of it.

Nobody disputes that there could be unknown unknowns.

So, merely saying that 'if the biofield is around us why don't we know or why can't someone measure it?'....is rubbish.

Nope - as soon as you say 'biofield' the burden of proof is yours, and asking on what basis you've established this 'biofield' exists is a perfectly reasonable request.

Lots of things could exist all around us that we are unaware of even now and which we might come to know of by and by.

So they could, unknown unknowns again: but when you make the specific claim 'biofield' you are referring to something you say you are aware of, and if you can't demonstrate a basis for your awareness that is other than personal conviction then your claim fails.     

No. The biofield  is not just a cosmetic add on. It is the essence of mind itself. In advanced Yogic science, world over,  the biofield and chakras are an important part of understanding mental processes and used for healing and mind control.  That mainstream science does not know of it is neither here nor there. They may get there sometime....

In essence, this is just the NPF.