A PARANORMAL CONSENSUS
Posted by anthonynorth on January 21, 2009
When a person is abducted by an alien, where do they go? Well, answers vary, but there are two polar opposites – they go to a real flying saucer; or they go nowhere other the fantasies of their own mind.
I’d air towards the latter, but with a proviso – is it really their ‘own’ mind, or something more collective? Could it be that they go on to exist within a kind of communal thought?
Can a person really experience a ‘past life’?
That’s another interesting question. It is becoming a virtual industry today, as people go to therapists to explore their previous incarnations.
In this way, they seem to find themselves. In other words, it seems to be just another form of therapy. However, past lives and alien abduction seem to be linked in a rather interesting way.
Both can be the result of therapy.
Indeed, it is usually under hypnosis, or other psychological system, that ‘evidence’ arises of the phenomenon. So could we be dealing with the same phenomena?
At a cultural level, clearly not. One involves an alien, the other a long dead person. But psychologically they are the same. And it prompts the question: if therapists had been around in the past, would therapy have conjured up demons, fairies or Greek gods?
Personally, I think they would.
What seems to be happening is that the belief system of a therapist can be transferred to the mind of the client. Indeed, it seems to be the case that those therapists who believe in a phenomenon are more likely to find it in the client.
As to the power of such a process, we are only just beginning to understand ‘false memory syndrome’, where a thought can be placed in the mind, and it is considered, by the person, to be an absolute truth.
But of course, this is just psychology.
Earlier I mentioned the ‘culture’ is different, even if the psychology is the same. Culture is not an individual element, as in psychology. Rather, it is communal – a product of collective minds.
Hence, we can see a therapist infecting a client, not so much with his own idea, but a collective idea – a consensual idea of what culture considers a particular phenomenon to be. And in this way, psychology is born from sociology.
The nature of paranormal entities changes over time, and it seems to be the case that such entities are more cultural in nature than supernatural. It is merely that a consensus of how we see the supernatural as ‘being’ makes it so.
Culture, it seems, is a process of dripping thoughts through a system of sublime mass hysteria to confirm the consensus. So what, we must ask, will the next popular paranormal entity be?
Whatever our collective imagination can create.
© Anthony North, January 2009
BEYOND THE BLOG 
SandyCarlson said
I have relatives who believe it is possible to realize past lives in the present. He believes this happens every time he has a sort of deja vu moment for no apparent reason. I wonder. I think it is strangely possible. I shudder that therapists think they can systematize the unknown. The arrogance of it makes the whole thing ridiculous.
whypaisley said
personally i always thought hypnosis was kind of a joke… until i allowed myself to be hypnotized… i consciously didn’t want to leave the place it allowed me to go……
Selma said
My sister (who is bipolar) suffers from false memory syndrome. We still don’t know if the memories were implanted by a wayward psychologist or are a result of the delusions she sometimes suffers as part of being bipolar. Some of them can be amusing – she came top of the year in Latin when she was 15 (trouble is, her school didn’t offer Latin as a subject). Some of them can be terrifying – the reason her first marriage broke up is that both my Mum and myself were sleeping with her husband. The odd thing is that the memories aren’t there all the time, but when they are they are vivid. I find the whole thing fascinating but also very upsetting.
anthonynorth said
Hi Sandy,
I’ve often thought that those deja vu moments could be part of my ’emergent esp’ idea, where I argue we naturally, and unconsciously, pick things up all the time from other people, but don’t realise we’re doing it.
Hi Paisley,
I’ve never been hypnotised, but some of the accounts are incredible. It CAN be a very nice place.
Hi Selma,
I’m sorry to hear about this. And the annoying thing is, there are literally millions of cases open for study within the reaches of the paranormal. But because of the ‘culture’ of the subject, academic researchers won’t touch it!
It makes my blood boil!!!
On a lighter note, I’ve just followed you on Twitter. Just taken the plunge, and I’m lovin’ it!
Twilight said
Fascinating topic, AN. There’s definitely something going on over and above simple imagination, I think. There are probably lots of instances of “copy-cat” experiences, but some genuine ones which ought to have been studied by doctors or scientists unconnected with paranormal beliefs.
Child prodigies are one facet of this which I find quite convincing. Is their early skill derived from a previous lifetime? Is it being chanelled from some other plane? Is it a simple quirk of fate and based on a fortunate physical departure from the norm in the brain of the child?
More questions than answers, as always. 🙂
anthonynorth said
Hi Twilight,
Thanks for that. And this is the beauty of such subjects. As soon as you tie one side down, the other releases something beautifully unexpected.
Twenty five years I’ve been researching such things, learnt a lot, but know that the answer to most things shift as understanding dawns.
And therein lies the beauty. The journey!!!
Comedy Plus said
You always make me think when I come over here. This sounds reasonable to me. I hadn’t thought about it before, but this makes a great deal of sense.
While I was still working we dealt with many psychologists. What a weird bunch they were. Rather superior to everyone else. The also seemed to have more problems with their kids and marriages than the rest of us put together. There was one that if a couple went for marriage counseling the rest of us knew that this very couple were headed for a divorce. Happened every single time.
I know this is a bit off track, but this post made me think about these folks. In the sense that they dictated what one was supposed to feel or act.
Have a terrific day Anthony. 🙂
anthonynorth said
Hi Sandee,
Thanks for that, and it’s not off-track at all. It is a classic example of the kind of influence I’m talking about – and the arrogance of many professionals.
Linda G said
Hi Anthony,
Your first paragraph brought to my mind “life is but a dream” (maybe a communal one at times). Years ago, while exploring the philosophy of individual existence & experience, I latched onto that concept. I didn’t explore it too deeply though as I found the concept too unnerving for me.
I understand Selma’s experiences. My sister has schizoaffective disorder & her reality is, at times, far different than those around her. Our family never met any of her psychiatrists- but over the past 40 years I have developed a dislike for the profession. I guess they helped her live in her world- but many times ours was hellish due to her illness. If anything they empowered her- & not in a good way for everyone else.
But I am open to the communal experience- the one that extends far beyond indivdual cultures & as J. Campbell has written, comes back to us in the development of common shared myths. I find that fascinating.
anthonynorth said
Hi Linda,
So often therapists concentrate only on the patient and not those around them. Often a terrible mistake, I think.
I’ve written before about the various consensual knowledge structures people live by – religious, scientific, etc – and they, too, seem to exist in a different world to each other. I’m sure this is related.
I’m a great fan of Campbell – our myths are, indeed, our inner psychological foibles and archetyes writ large, forcing psychology into society through culture.
alexjc38 said
“So what, we must ask, will the next popular paranormal entity be?”
It will be very interesting to find out. UFO/alien sightings went through many phases during the 20th century – ghost rockets, foo fighters, saucers and the grays (which were mostly a US phenomenon, as far as I know.) What next?
I’ve seen some very odd photos on the net of what appear to be flying people, in Mexico. These appear to date from about 2004, 2005 onwards. None from elsewhere, as far as I know, however, so maybe it’s a regional thing.
anthonynorth said
Hi Alex,
Nice to hear from you again. And of course, you can follow UFOs backwards, too, through mysterious airships back to flying galleons. Always they seem to follow our culture.
As to what comes next, coming up to the millennium some began seeing the Grim Reaper, and Guardian Angels are becoming popular – a by-product of the New Age. However, my best guess is devilish trident-wielding bankers, flying through the sky in fire-spurting Porsches 🙂
Chris said
Hi Anthony,
This is slightly off topic, but, I think, still relevant.
I am very sorry to hear about the others’ familial difficulties.I knew a pyschiatrist who used to do volunteer work at the prisons in Queensland especially with suicidal inmates. He perceived his role as being ‘bandaid work’ to stop the ‘bleeding’, but he couldn’t ‘repair’ them, he couldn’t change their physical circumstances.
I struggle to understand how a psychiatrist or a psychologist can have a definitive understanding of the real origin of (and solution to) the problem(s) of people with a mental ‘difference’ if they haven’t experienced it themselves and haven’t ‘come out the other end’.
If the mental health ‘system’ provided family support and therapy then the family, I think, are the best positioned to deal with the issue. They have lived with it most of their lives, certainly understand the issues, difficulties and ramifications better than anyone else and have the greatest commitment of all to ‘address the situation’, not professional care but loving care.
As an addendum, the psychiatrist I mentioned above gave up on his volunteer work because there was too much interference from bureaucracy and red tape.
Sorry if I’ve been overly verbose.
What comes next? I can see those devilish, trident-wielding bankers being pursued by Mother Nature with the Grim Reaper on her right shoulder and ‘Michael’ on her left! 🙂
anthonynorth said
Hi Chris,
That’s a sensible way to look at it. The problem with professionals in mental health have always been the same, going right back to Medieval times, when mental illness was the devil, unless you were a saint, where it was being touched by God.
At the beginning of the Industrial Revolution it was due to mental idleness, in Soviet Russia, inability to understand and love communism. Are you seeing the pattern?
Definitions of ‘madness’ are always socio-political.
As for the banker, I love that image. Would you credit it 🙂
Chris said
Hi Anthony,
That “P-ology” of yours is a pretty powerful tool. I’m up to England and Government in your “History of Man” and the patterns are pretty self-evident. This synopsis history of yours makes it much easier to ‘view’ them.
Oh, and no credit, in my book cash is still king and if that doesn’t work I’m sure that I’ve got some Cowry shells stashed away somewhere, so much for hyperinflation! 🙂
anthonynorth said
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the kind words about P-ology. As for credit, I’ve never had a credit card in my life, and wouldn’t want one.
James said
Question: Are there any truths found in philosophy even if they only speak of this world?
My Answer: There is no truth in philosophy because it engages in questions that it has invented for itself, or it tries to answer questions based on suppositions that are unrelated to practical experience (it tries to speak about the “abstract form”).
Even when philosophy speaks about our world, it doesn’t reason about it practically. That is to say, it speaks about something as a form or essence that’s separate from matter. Nature, on the other hand, speaks of the form or essence inside matter and about the form of the matter (see the “Introduction to the Book of Zohar”). Therefore, all the philosophical conclusions made throughout all of human history were erroneous at worst, or imprecise at best.
anthonynorth said
Hi James,
I won’t disagree with you, necessarily, but turn it round. ALL knowledge comes from the human mind, either through intuition or experience or education. Therefore your argument also goes for religion and science.
Thus, knowledge becomes our interpretation of what ‘is’, rather than a definite understanding of it. So why bother with knowledge at all?
Because, rather than defining the universe, it defines us!
James said
quote,”Therefore your argument also goes for religion and science.”
100% correct on religion but science is practical experience.
But theres a great question.
what are we? Maybe there something beyond knowledge? What drives our thoughts?
Simple answer “Desires”.
This answer leads to another question
Were does desires come from?
correct they come from society, from family, from the country you was born in.Yes from advertisements.
So now we get to a question which scares alot people.
If we are driven by desires and basically our envoriment gives us these desires, were is our free will?
I can hear you say well we can choose what desires to accept an which to reject. But can you?
What makes you choose a desire or reject it?
ill give you clue “lest about work for most amount pleasure”.
So do we really have free will?
So James your saying the mind is a simple weighting scale for pleasure an suffering? you got it.
There we have human nature. Sum it all up in a nice little box
“EGOISM” what is oppisite to this…. of course “ALTRUISM”.
But James theres loads people in world who do good deeds for humanity. Like mothers raising there young, no sorry this mother and child relationship is egotist in nature because mother gains pleasure for raising her child. Example give a mother a child whos not her own tell her to raise it as her own. See the responce you get. any example you like to think of comes back to egoism.
This is our nature as humans so dont feel bad about it.
Ok so what is “Altruism” im confused now. The closes thing in this world is how your body operates. Every part of the body operates for the good of the whole. Does your liver get pleasure from doing its job? lol no
Does your heart get pleasure from pumping blood? no
What if your heart one day said ok im refusing to pump until i get what i want. Cause the body would die and the heart would die as well.
All the part just work and every other part supports each other.Its a great design.
I could go on for hours talking about egoism an altruism. But i often hear people say im deeply spiritual.When in fact if they knew the true nature of spirituality,which by the way is under law of altruism unlike this universe which is under law egoism, they would be so terrified they would run a mile.
Why? because its totally oppisite to your current nature.
So james does that mean you will do anything for society you live in.Like hand out all the money you earn to people on the streets? No. Why?
because the body and this material world operates under a different program call “egoism” trying to be altrusic in this world,in a material sense, does nothing.
But the key is desires. Buried under all your current desires is one true desire. Its like an apple it is best eaten when ripe. Apples of Gold set in silver.
this is quick summary of what i have discovered i dont want to talk about anything deeper as it will just confuse you.
James said
sorry i should added that we are more than simple weighting scales for suffering an pleasure. There are things that wait for us to discover them. They call to everyone of us if only we listen.
Linda G said
Hi Anthony,
Hope you don’t mind a comment re James’ comments.
If the parts of the body could only function for the greater good- ie the entire body- then we would never get cancer. And as a cancer survivor (5 years this April)- I know this not to be true. I also have IBS- so is my body then warring with itself?
Your genes are your genes, for good or bad & sometimes both. A dear friend just passed away just short of her 103rd birthday & her sister is 97 now. They have the good genes- I got the mixed lot.
anthonynorth said
Hi James,
Might I suggest if you want to write an essay you get your own blog. Some parts of this I agree with, others I don’t. But it is all irrelevant when you say:
‘i dont want to talk about anything deeper as it will just confuse you.’
You don’t get anywhere by patronising people. Let me end with a thought: Any knowledge that doesn’t begin with humility and moderation is wrong!!!
Hi Linda,
Of course I don’t mind.
I like to think I’ve led a good life, but have had cfs since 1982. And often it is such illness that actually makes you a better person.
As for altruism, the basic rule as I understand it is you get back what you give. Hence, there is self interest – ego – in selflessness.
James said
didnt mean to patronise anyone. Just simple fact. example Breaking of the Vessels and Their Fall to the Worlds of BYA
The Sefira Da’at is the GE de ZON of the world of Nikudim that rose to Aba ve Ima, for Aba ve Ima had received the light AB-SAG from the ZON de AK, which is called Shuruk. Then Malchut descends from Nikvey Eynaim to Peh, thus lifting the AHP de Aba ve Ima that fell to GE de ZON of the world of Nikudim. The vessels GE de Zat of the world of Nikudim rise together with them and form the Behinat MAN, which turns the Sefirot Aba ve Ima face to face (Panim be Panim).
how can i explain this to someone whos doesnt know the existance of these other worlds?. Its not possible.Its like trying to explain to a martian what a dog is by explaining what a dog house is. see what i mean.
anthonynorth said
Hi James,
Then get a blog and then you can explain to people. By the way, are you aware that Panim is a Jewish American centre for learning?
anthonynorth said
Hi James,
I’ve deleted your latest comment. After what I said about not posting essays, you post something three times bigger than your original.
Play the game and follow the blog rules or kindly go elsewhere.
James said
quote”Hope you don’t mind a comment re James’ comments.
If the parts of the body could only function for the greater good- ie the entire body- then we would never get cancer. And as a cancer survivor (5 years this April)- I know this not to be true. I also have IBS- so is my body then warring with itself?”
yes what is cancer of body this is good question.
this is difficult for me to answer but ill try. The fact i would have explain everything. Think of this way if all 7 billion people inthis world are one creature. This creature has sickness and all parts inside of this creature are only interested in themselfs. Its difficult one to understand.
James said
panim in hebrew means face.i am sure there lots of places that use the word.
James said
I am not jewish.I am catholic.
anthonynorth said
Hi James,
I think what you’re trying to say is we are too much into individuality and see everything in terms of the ‘self’. A wider understanding would see the entire species as the ‘whole’, with the individual person as nothing more than a ‘cell’ of the species-body.
If I’ve got it right, I would agree to a point, but we DO understand the individual, so we must have a balance between the two knowledge systems. To me, absolute belief in either would be an error.
James said
this is very true anthony and your 100% correct. we are individuals just need to look around at all different people in world we must retain that but we must also work as whole. But its nature egoism that stops us. just going back to cancer thing this might explain it bit better from friend mine.
Each cell takes care of the existence of the whole organism and acts according to the program that is common for all cells. It does not consume for its own sake, but works in order to give to all the other cells and organs. This ensures the life of the body and the correct relation between all of its parts.
Illnesses constitute a breach of interaction between cells and organs. Imagine how ill our society is? This organism is affected by a dreadful cancerous growth, when instead of giving the cell begins to devour surrounding cells and exist at their expense. As a result the environment collapses and the cell dies. This is cancer.
anthonynorth said
Hi James,
I can see this as a kind of metaphor, but nothing more. You obviously see it as a belief. You’d disagree with this view because in your knowledge structure it appears an objective fact.
This is the problem with any objective fact. It is only relevent to a particular knowledge system, and can seem to have a totally different meaning to others. For instance, your view can come over as cold and a little cruel to those who are ill, or have suffered illness.
James said
Disagree when you say belief, i only talk of things i have first hand experience with.
what is a belief ?
religion is a belief system. The church or what every you religion tells you this is how is and you have no way proving if it correct view.
Dont we as humans look down on the animal kingdom see say a lion killing baby gazelle or springbok antelope think its cruel but we know it natures way.
Who is the cruel one? the observer or the observed.
Linda G said
Hi Anthony,
Re James’ posts- Neither the observer nor the observed is cruel. Most see the lion’s meal as necessary- we do/should not expect him to ever become a vegetarian. Human predators, although, do & should evoke an entirely different reponse.
Anthony, re “As for altruism, the basic rule as I understand it is you get back what you give. Hence, there is self interest – ego – in selflessness.” I agree with you- although I had never thought of it in those terms before. The act of selflessness does satisfy the self/ego.
I will think on this for awhile- to understand what about 24 hour caregiving to both of my parents before they passed away did to satify me- beyond my return of their love of me back to them. I think it’s a fairly complex exploration of self. Will be interesting!
anthonynorth said
Hi James,
How can I put it? The philosopher Kant is a good example. He decided the world is how it is, but we all have a mind filter which places our own values upon it.
There is the example of the farmer, builder and painter looking at the same piece of land. Each sees it different: productive value, building possibilities and aesthetic value respectively.
To me, all knowledge is like this. The world IS how it is, but objective facts are nothing more than how our particular mind or consensus sees it. There IS, then, no objective fact. Just interpretation.
Due to this, I’m all about moderation and tolerance.
Hi Linda,
Is altruism the same as duty, I wonder? Possibly, but they intermix. Does such caring constitute duty, when given with love? Interesting points to ponder, I agree.
James said
another example that close to true altruism is when a baby is developing inside mother, everything the baby needs food , oxygen, waste is taken care for by the mothers body. Does mother have to think about any of this (ie perform a calculation)?nope, it just happens. Now we getting close to defining altruism.
any action requiring you to think about it makes it egoistic, why? because mind is totally immersed in egoism. Duty can not be same as altruism.
but what is love?
but searching inside your self for answers is the best way forward.
anthonynorth said
Hi James,
Of course it doesn’t just happen. It appears to now, but nature would almost certainly have gone through various stages to perfect the system as it changed from asexual to sexual reproduction.
As life became more complex, certain abilities would naturally have been cut off from conscious mentation. Instinct is a classic example. For the body, the autonomic nervous system provides the ability.
Altruism is a concept. Are you suggesting nature knew this so long ago?
Now, the question you are now asking is this: how do I know this?
Easy. I don’t. I’m just offering a different alternative to the same objective facts. Which rather proves MY point.
Linda G said
Hi Anthony,
This has been a very interesting exchange. Re: “Is altruism the same as duty, I wonder? Possibly, but they intermix. Does such caring constitute duty, when given with love?”
I didn’t consider becoming a “parent to my parent”- which I did eventually become as their illnesses progressed- as duty. Neither parent made me feel obligated to them, but I knew that they each needed care (my sisters “help” was not wanted by them). They only each expressed a strong desire to die with dignity at home. That I managed to give to them by moving in to their home & bringing in hospice near the end.
But I was always the responsible child (the eldest), so I think duty must have been in the back of my mind even if I did not recognize it then. And while it was at the end one of the most emotionally trying experiences of my life, it was also the most rewarding. And I came to know my father in a way I had never before- I learned his weaknesses & shared his fears. Before this he was Dad- strong, quiet & always there when I needed advise. The roles reversed near the end.
anthonynorth said
Hi Linda,
Many thanks for that honest comment. Children see their parents differently when young, I think. I certainly did. It is only as a parent myself that I realised all that parental front hid a cauldron of emotions – am I doing this right, etc.
Chris said
Hi Anthony,
In relation to Linda’s comment (hope you don’t mind), when family are concerned, I think that if one feels that one has to do something for them, then it is a duty, but, if one feels that one WANTS to do something for them, then it is a gift of love and that is far more than altruism.
anthonynorth said
Hi Chris,
A valid point. And it is true that ego does not enter into decisions concerning my family. Which now gives us three factors – altruism, duty and love.
Far more complicated than any single knowledge system can emcompass, I think.
Chris said
Hi Anthony,
We could also throw the survival of family, genetic lineage into the mix, so that makes it at least four and there are probably more! 🙂
Time for another cup of coffee, hope that you have an enjoyable evening.
anthonynorth said
Hi Chris,
Is that coffee altruistic? 🙂
Chris said
Hi Anthony,
Yes, its helping to wake me up, how caring is that? 🙂
James said
quote”Hi James,
Of course it doesn’t just happen. It appears to now, but nature would almost certainly have gone through various stages to perfect the system as it changed from asexual to sexual reproduction.
As life became more complex, certain abilities would naturally have been cut off from conscious mentation. Instinct is a classic example. For the body, the autonomic nervous system provides the ability.
Altruism is a concept. Are you suggesting nature knew this so long ago?
Now, the question you are now asking is this: how do I know this?
Easy. I don’t. I’m just offering a different alternative to the same objective facts. Which rather proves MY point.”
see how confused you have become i used it as an example so your mind could understand.But instead you are on the attack.
repeat my question
what is love?
quote”Hi Chris,
A valid point. And it is true that ego does not enter into decisions concerning my family. Which now gives us three factors – altruism, duty and love.
Far more complicated than any single knowledge system can emcompass, I think.”
interesting you now seem to know true meaning of the ego and have three factors. Were did you pull those out of anthony?.
You know what dont answer it you taken to mockery as well you have losted my respect.
Childern mock not 50+ year old men. sad.
Linda G said
Hi Anthony,
This string has been full of interesting & unusual comments. For me, its the most unique of your blogs I have participated in.
I’m childless by circumstance, not choice. And I know there is a big part of the human experience I have missed out on. I wonder if I am a somewhat childish/naive person because I did not have to rear a child & therefore behave “adultlike” for the benefit of their proper upbringing.
Just finished watching a good tv program on S. Hawkings & his black hole theories- more to follow tomorrow- totally engrossing. Have a good night- or maybe good morning at this hour (my time zone).
anthonynorth said
Good morning James,
Let’s get something very clear. So far you have tried to patronise me. Then you decided to ignore the methodology on this blog resulting in me having to delete a comment. Now you accuse me of mockery and round off by insulting me.
I have not mocked you or attacked you. Indeed, I have allowed you to take this thread well away from the subject of the post.
Why did you come to this blog? Was it to simply place your ideas here, or to debate? If the former, get your own blog; if the latter, then all I am doing is debating. When this is viewed as mockery or an attack, the problem is with you, my friend.
I do not claim to know anything for certain. I’m simply putting counter arguments to your views. That is what debate is all about.
What is love? Are you talking about love for partner, family, a cause, brotherhood, platonic? Overall, my view is that love is always emotionally based and a specifically human characteristic. And again, this is my view from the evidence as I see it.
Hi Linda,
Thanks for that. I think different life experiences can bring out different qualities, but all are similar if they end up with reasoned humility and moderation.
I think that is what life’s lessons are all about.
James said
comments like “A valid point. And it is true that ego does not enter into decisions concerning my family. Which now gives us three factors – altruism, duty and love.
Far more complicated than any single knowledge system can emcompass, I think.”
this is not debate its mockery. plain an simple.
you said “Let’s get something very clear. So far you have tried to patronise me.” as it appears to you. you said “Then you decided to ignore the methodology on this blog resulting in me having to delete a comment.” please. you said “Indeed, I have allowed you to take this thread well away from the subject of the post.” please this poor attempt.
There is difference between debating a subject and arguing for agruement sake. Again to make it clear here is example you said “A valid point. And it is true that ego does not enter into decisions concerning my family. Which now gives us three factors – altruism, duty and love.
Far more complicated than any single knowledge system can emcompass, I think.”
here we have clear example of you making conclusions on unfounded evidence i rest my case.
anthonynorth said
Hi James,
If that is what you think, fair enough. As far as I’m concerned I’ve indulged in fair debate. Other people reading this thread will make up their own mind, as everyone does.
Obviously, if that is your opinion, and it will not change, then there is nowhere else for you to go on this blog.
I will point out I do not argue for arguments sake. At the core of my ideas is the idea that there are no absolute facts when it comes to conceptual thinking.
Linda G said
Hi Anthony,
I found one of James’ posts so unusual- I googled some of the phrases to see if they were real. They are & are from the Kabbalah & ?? perhaps Mormon mysticism.
I didn’t know Catholics followed the Kabbalah. Maybe he’s Madonna in disguise?
anthonynorth said
Hi Linda,
I hinted at Kabbalah with highlighting ‘panim’, but I didn’t want to come straight out with it.
Such is life …
Chris said
Hi Anthony,
My perception of the methodology (we can’t call them rules now can we?) of your blog site are: humility, moderation, manners and mutual respect, and I reckon that they are four pretty good ‘rules’ to apply to life as well. Who knows, if we all applied them it would probably only change the destiny of the human race, no war would be good for starters! 😉
anthonynorth said
Hi Chris,
Thanks for those kind words. I guess that’s about right, with one proviso. A touch of humour is also an essential ingredient 🙂
James said
let me start by saying Kabbalah has nothing to do with religion,jewish, mystism. What is Kabbalah? its science. Yes a science. It deals with spiritual worlds and its structures how to obtain that level of development. Every in spiritual worlds is as real as any object in this world. 6 volume of 1000’s page of text have been written for people to study the structures.Madonna studys one side of Kabbalah thats practical kabbalah which talks about everything in this world. Yes it explains everything our friend here Anthony does little talks about paranormal events, nature everything.. basically its forbidden to use the sceince of kabbalah in this way. Why? baecause its used for ones own gain. Kabbalah can be potion of Death or potion of life.
then we have the red string kabbalist again this is practical form Kabbalah. Kabbalah is internal process and powers you gain in this world must not be used for self gain or harm other people. You can keep your faith ie religion because Kabbalah is science and not a belief.
if want to know more about Kabbalah let me know glad to give links to free matrial and lessons.
James said
quote “Hi James,
If that is what you think, fair enough. As far as I’m concerned I’ve indulged in fair debate. Other people reading this thread will make up their own mind, as everyone does.
Obviously, if that is your opinion, and it will not change, then there is nowhere else for you to go on this blog.
I will point out I do not argue for arguments sake. At the core of my ideas is the idea that there are no absolute facts when it comes to conceptual thinking.”
thats assuming im talking about conceptual thoughts.
James said
quote “Hi Anthony,
My perception of the methodology (we can’t call them rules now can we?) of your blog site are: humility, moderation, manners and mutual respect, and I reckon that they are four pretty good ‘rules’ to apply to life as well. Who knows, if we all applied them it would probably only change the destiny of the human race, no war would be good for starters!”
then you failed on all 4 counts. dont feel about bad about yourself its in your nature to be like that. If you cant see that then whos wrong me or you?
anthonynorth said
Hi James,
If you want to think of Kaballah as science, that’s certainly okay by me, but I disagree. However, that’s neither here nor there. As to what is, or is not, a conceptual idea, I think a good basis is this: a non-conceptual idea is that which is self-evident to all simply through experience.
For instance, throw something up, it will fall back down. This is self-evident (on this planet, in these conditions). Explaining why this is so, such as gravity, is a different matter. That is conceptual thinking. Indeed, Newtonian gravity has been redundant for almost a century.
A final point or two, James. Your comments on the ‘Carl Jung’ and ‘Obama Swears’ posts are good, and you are welcome here any time commenting like that.
But I must point out that 3 adequately sized comments one after the other on the same thread still equals a large comment, in 3 parts. Also, I do not like the final paragraph of the last comment. There is no need for it. Please refrain from insult.
James said
why do you disagree?
james said
Proof can come only from a clear sensation, as well as the ability to repeat this sensation and to compare it with what others perceive. In other words, it must abide by the rule, “A judge has no more than what his eyes can see.”
Only the wisdom of Kabbalah enables man to reveal the Upper World or the Creator with such clarity. That’s because Kabbalah creates new qualities in man that are equal to Creator’s qualities, and then one perceives the Creator inside these qualities, according to the law of equivalence of form.
Everything else is like playing hide-and-seek in a dark room – instead of relying on clear sensations, people play around with numbers and philosophize using the earthly logic.
anthonynorth said
Hi James,
Why do I disagree? Because I do not feel the sensations you speak about. The vast majority of people don’t. Therefore it cannot be objective fact, but subjective or consensual fact.
I’m not particularly bothered what knowledge system a person lives by along as they are peaceful, and if you had never come to this blog, I would never have had this debate with you. But you did, which gives me the right to join in debate. It’s as simple as that.
So to answer your question: because I do.
James said
😀
James said
source of wisdom.
www kabbalah info
Michael said
“However, past lives and alien abduction seem to be linked in a rather interesting way.
Both can be the result of therapy. ”
Pure twaddle.
Automobiles and napkins can both be the result of factories.
t'mara said
i don’t know if past lives can be accessed thru regression therapy, there seems to be too much possibility of the subject creating the memories in an effort to “please’ the therapist, however i have noticed that some people seem to have unreasoning fears and phobias that might be related to the unconscious memory of a past life experiences. who can say?
doing something out of duty or obligation does not preclude that it is also done out of love. it’s not easy to separate these things.
Jamie said
I would be interested in your views on partial or transient amnesia and can you be “missing” from your own life and it’s relationship to multiple personalities and brain function.
James said
this is a kabbalist view on past life experiences
Question: How do you explain it when a person has memories of a past life?
My Answer: These aren’t memories of a past life, but fantasies of this life
anthonynorth said
Hi Michael,
Thanks for that. You said:
‘Automobiles and napkins can both be the result of factories.’
But do they go to the same therapist? 😉
Hi T’mara,
A couple of good points. Pleasing the therapist is a perfect vehicle through which a therapist could ‘transmit’ his beliefs. This certainly seems to be the case in some episodes of multiple personality.
And similarly, past life therapy is proving marvellous at curing people of phobias, by identifying the phobia with a particular past life.
Hi Jamie,
I wouldn’t class myself as qualified to speak about amnesia as such. As for multiple personality, I’ve looked at dozens of cases, and it seems to me that it could be caused by the fragmentation of a person’s emotions, with each emotion taking on a ‘character’.
So to answer the question, I would argue that the host personality is partially there in each character – a fragment, as it were.
Hi James,
Yes, that would seem to be a Kabbalist understanding.
KKJ said
Have you ever considered the idea that it may be impossibe for us to “create” anything that has not been,on one level or another, experienced?
Where does all this “creativity” come from anyway? Why is it even a part of us?
I am not sure that there exists at this time an “original” thought. I mean completely pure of any similar thoughts or ideas.
It is easy to sit behind a computer, using it to push forward one’s opinions, thoughts, beliefs, ideas, and realities.
I am sure that even in the case of this author, people are in awe of how wise and intelligent he is.
Unfortunantly a lot of people remain very impressionable and are willing to jump on any band wagon that passes by. I believe that the reason for this is that these people, for whatever reason, are unable or unwilling to think for themselves.
There could even be a person or even some people that are so sold on what is written, they begin to see the author as one of the very “archetype” so often mentioned.
True, I have found that reading, paying attention to all aspects of a person, questioning and giving each side its say, has helped me to grow quite a bit. But I have never taken anyone or thing and layed it down as “the truth”. My perception does not allow for that, and since my reality is certainly a make up of my perceptions, there can be no “truth.” Unless every person in the world is ready to admit that they are “truth.”
That will never happen because most people are so busy looking for the “truth” that they remain blind, grasping at straws and just not able grasp their own “reality”.
KKJ said
But, I did forget to add that you and so many people who share their thoughts, ideas, and beliefs, do such a great job at making the entirely obvious appear to be something out of the ordinary.
Keep up the good work.
anthonynorth said
Hi KKJ,
Perhaps, before speaking about me using ‘truth’, you should find out a little more about me. For instance, the intro to this blog is the ABOUT page, top left. Here I explain my methodology, including the following:
‘It can never offer truth, but patterns for the specialist to consider, placing them in a holistic jig saw that constantly remodels the picture’
I never speak of ‘truth’. I speculate, nothing more. As for your last comment, is that a compliment or sarcasm?