Bartholomew wrote:Perhaps everyone is just waiting in the wings to give Bartholomew a good bashing if she sticks her neck out on this forum. Let's see how sarcastic and condemning the group collective can be. I find that in so called "intellectual circles" everyone has to step up to the mark and try to impress each other with their put downs.
No, it is not a conspiracy against you.
You choose to voice your opinion here, on this island of reason, rational thought and science. And your opinion is challenged in a healthy discussion.
You choose to stick your neck out by presenting personal experiences, as proof for facts. And we warned you that that isn't really working here, so don't act so victimized now.
You are the missionary chopping away at our Sacred Tree of Knowledge with your articles of faith. So don't be suprised to be smited by the lightning of our God of Reason.
Like Carl Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I can't proof that souls don't exist, like I can't proof that santa Claus doesn't exist, like I can't proof that it is little pink fuzzy aliens that hide my car keys all the time.
And that I cannot proof the non-existence of things does not make them existing, real, or even plausible. In science it works the other way around.
You make the extraordinary claims in here, about souls and past lives, so, back it up with some hard evidence, or expect to be ridiculed by DJ
You've got to understand that a rational and scientific approach is used to uncover only a certain aspect of Truth. The objective and detached aspect that describes our physical reality for instance. And in that truth-finding mode it is doesn't mean anything what you or your clients believe or experience. That is just not a valid approach in this particular way of investigating Truth. Hypotheses and experiments are.
Believe it or not, apart from working on a science institute, I'm also a druid. I have spiritual understandings based on my personal experiences also. But a sound understanding of our physical world, investigated and uncovered through these objective methods, helps in finding a balance. And that Knowledge keeps us from believing unnecessary nonsense that would only take us away further way from reality and truth. Which for me is an important part of bonding to the natural world as a human being. The sword of the intellect and reason is used to cut away the chaff so to speak.
In certain mindsets I too communicate with the spirit-world. But after numerous attempts (by others) to proof the physical existence of these things have failed, it would be a bit silly to still proclaim that it all really exists, no matter what anybody says. That attitude gets us stuck in the land of superstition. Which is fine for many religions, but not for me as a neo-druid. I want something better.
A step forward is to accept that it probably isn't physically real, so that perhaps it is just in our imagination.
And another step forward (but not perse forward in a scientific sense) is to simply don't define it as existing or non-existing at all. To accept 'Not Knowing' and leave things open.
And if we then still experience meaning and value in these things, like I do, then does the 'reality' of it matter?
To me that makes a lot more sense than stubbornly proclaiming "I believe in souls, afterlife, omni-blabla gods almighty, no matter what others say, no matter the evidence or the lack of it".
That attitude can perhaps be a good trait in the context of human interaction, bonding to groups, maintaining a sense of spiritual stability (cults). But in seeking honest Truth in reeks of stupidity, because it moves us away from truth, instead of towards it.