XPost: alt.dreams.lucid   
   From: david@edenroad.demon.co.uk   
      
   On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 23:41:48 -0800, RolandRB wrote:   
      
   >   
   > David Mitchell wrote:   
   >> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 06:20:32 -0800, h elmer | espeance wrote:   
   >>   
   >> > David Mitchell wrote:   
   >> >> On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 07:45:07 -0800, h elmer | espeance wrote:   
   >> From all the evidence I've seen, OB perceptions do not reflect an   
   >> objective reality; and since there is ample evidence that the brain is   
   >> capable and willing to form realistic fantasies under certain conditions,   
   >> at least some are usually met by the OB practitioner; and that these   
   >> experiences would have certain characteristics, which tend to be reflected   
   >> in OBE's; it is highly likely, IMO, that the OBE is little more than a   
   >> certain, unusual, form of hallucination.   
   >   
   > What is very odd and puzzling about it is its closeness to reality. Why   
   > shoudl this be? I am not suggesting that an OBE is real, it is just   
   > puzzling why it should seem so real. Whatever it was that happened to   
   > me when I "exteriorized with full perception" during Scientology   
   > "auditing" I was absolutely convinced that I was seeing the real room I   
   > was in. I reckoned that if the "auditor" had got out a pack of cards   
   > and turned some over where my body's eyes could not see them but show   
   > to me where I was then I am sure I could have read the cards. That's   
   > what I "feel" even to this day and I feel I was really out of my body   
   > and could do this, but this was never put to the test. If put to the   
   > test then I might have seen a card face and remembered it but it might   
   > have been the wrong one.   
   >   
   > When this happens to a person then their instincts tell them it was   
   > real and it is difficult to persuade them otherwise. But if the reality   
   > was tested in the fashion I describe then I doubt very much that the   
   > reality of the situation could be verified. In fact if it could, some   
   > people somewhere would be really "good at it" and somebody would have   
   > won the Randi million by now. In fact, it would be such common   
   > knowledge that no such prize would be on offer.   
   >   
      
   Yes, it is convincing; but I think that's mostly due to the brain   
   mechanisms which lie behind it.   
      
   We are hard-wired to believe that we _are_ our senses - most people think   
   of themselves as behind their eyes (to the extent that if you ask someone   
   to write something on their forehead, they will write it so that the   
   imaginary person behind their eyes will see it the right way round).   
      
   So it's not too surprising that when this mechanism is subverted it's   
   highly convincing.   
      
   >> Do you have _any_ evidence at all for your belief that  mass-belief   
   >> affects reality?   
   >>   
   >> Somehow I doubt it.   
   >   
   > If it could then Jesus would have come back in the Second Coming and   
   > the last pope would be happy and well.   
      
   Not to mention that the world (at least europe) would have ended at the   
   end of the first millenium, as almost everyone expected it to.   
      
   --   
   =======================================================================   
   = David    --- No, not that one.   
   = Mitchell ---   
   =======================================================================   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)