|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 23, 2024 7:01:32 GMT -5
C'mon guys, scientists document inexplicable things all the time. The placebo effect is a metric in every study for a start (how's that even a thing?) but over time the odds play out and we report comparisons, means, averages and degrees of statistical significance having accounted for variances between individuals and the area under the bell curve. I mean there are many different methodologies and statistical models, but generally speaking, that's how scientific inquiry goes.
Unlike miracle workers, I approach from a science based perspective and adjust according to an individual's response to stimulus. It's pretty deft, and I dare say my record of bringing long-term benefit and reversing chronic conditions outstrips that of any faith healer, but of course I also believe in faith healings, though they are quite rare and the factors are complex, so I can't pontificate from a paranormal place since the ideal isn't the same as the reality on the ground.
|
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 23, 2024 7:39:29 GMT -5
So Niz and RM died of cancer because of past karma? Seriously? I wouldn't presume to know. That's just a part of the meaning of karma. I would have thought you would have been thoroughly versed in karma. All people are intimately tied to their thoughts, but mostly their actions, karma means doing. It's like an immense spiderweb in space and time, connecting everything. So consequences, from the seeds of actions, is the meaning of karma. That's why the present moment is so significant, one can only-act-now. I don't know why inavalan doesn't get that (either). Reefs isn't well versed in Karma and has given no reason to think he is. Quite the contrary, but his LoA presentation is good enough and I'm down with it.
The word karma has different connotations in different contexts, 'action' being one. Someone earlier listed several other meanings, but as technical term in Buddhist philosophy karma is volition, and the reason for that is, that's how Buddha emphatically defined it. Karma theory is essentially the theory of volition, its origins, int consequences, its implications for self, the cessation thereof, liberation and anatta. However it is more nuanced because there is also goodwill vs. ill will, implying the entirety of ethics, and metta with origins in the genesis of existence itself, still affects outcomes for individuals and humanity at large, though exterior to the cycle of cause and effect.
Since I'm formally trained in mindfulness, which is primarily about purification, my bias is the masters contracted cancer at an unusually high frequency because they did not undertake the body/mind work. They seemed solely fixated on self-inquiry and almost deliberately neglectful of mind/body phenomena. But even if you really dedicated yourself mindfulness, there are some life issues that don't get resolved, and things that don't come unstuck can have health repercussions. Unfortunately, we don't get to control the purification process (apart from ceasing to), so we roll with the punches so to speak.
To say cancer was Nis's karma doesn't really make sense in Buddhist philosophy because events are not your karma. By all accounts, the masters are at peace with their cancer and don't generate karma because of it. Then again, to pretend a completely ambiguous answer like 'allignment' explains anything is preposterous, where cancer could be explained by sankaras that accumulated through past volitions.
In all likelihood, if there is an explanation at all to any question that begins with 'why', it's complex and multifactorial. I have my own little theory on it, but it's highly speculative an I'm not betting the house on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Feb 23, 2024 8:51:29 GMT -5
Actually, Reefs hasn't understood this properly. But that's okay. To clarify, the process isn't about actively creating something. When an individual chooses to embark on the creation journey, they utilize techniques like visualization and affirmations. However, it's essential to note that this isn't about bringing something into existence; instead, it signifies that the creation has already set in motion towards the desired reality. As one envisions that reality, it is already happening in their focus. Essentially, we aren't initiating creation; we are already part of the ongoing flow. I ‘sorta’ agree there, but I would say that with LOA we are not creating experiences as individuals, rather we are entering experiences but shifting our attention to the desired aspect of already existing creation. No, that's not the idea I was trying to convey. I'm not suggesting the existence of multiple realities where we can freely adapt whichever we want based on our feelings. What I meant is that there's a single path we're moving, and when our inner intent emerges, it serves as a sign of what lies ahead. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 23, 2024 10:33:17 GMT -5
Almost precisely how Bashar explains it. Maybe you have spent time on Essassani   Same as my 'look for flowers' idea, but I stole the idea from Monte Python's 'bright side of life'. Profound stuff. Your 'look for flowers' idea is 'everything already exists'? (love a Python reference) |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 23, 2024 10:35:02 GMT -5
C'mon guys, scientists document inexplicable things all the time. The placebo effect is a metric in every study for a start (how's that even a thing?) but over time the odds play out and we report comparisons, means, averages and degrees of statistical significance having accounted for variances between individuals and the area under the bell curve. I mean there are many different methodologies and statistical models, but generally speaking, that's how scientific inquiry goes. Unlike miracle workers, I approach from a science based perspective and adjust according to an individual's response to stimulus. It's pretty deft, and I dare say my record of bringing long-term benefit and reversing chronic conditions outstrips that of any faith healer, but of course I also believe in faith healings, though they are quite rare and the factors are complex, so I can't pontificate from a paranormal place since the ideal isn't the same as the reality on the ground. To be clear, I haven't seen much science talk about how far the 'placebo' effect can go, and exactly how it works i.e why and how does 'belief' have such powerful impact on the body? |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 23, 2024 11:54:26 GMT -5
What Is Minimally Required to Elicit Placebo Effects? C'mon guys, scientists document inexplicable things all the time. The placebo effect is a metric in every study for a start (how's that even a thing?) but over time the odds play out and we report comparisons, means, averages and degrees of statistical significance having accounted for variances between individuals and the area under the bell curve. I mean there are many different methodologies and statistical models, but generally speaking, that's how scientific inquiry goes. Unlike miracle workers, I approach from a science based perspective and adjust according to an individual's response to stimulus. It's pretty deft, and I dare say my record of bringing long-term benefit and reversing chronic conditions outstrips that of any faith healer, but of course I also believe in faith healings, though they are quite rare and the factors are complex, so I can't pontificate from a paranormal place since the ideal isn't the same as the reality on the ground. To be clear, I haven't seen much science talk about how far the 'placebo' effect can go, and exactly how it works i.e why and how does 'belief' have such powerful impact on the body? The Fascinating Mechanisms and Implications of the Placebo Effect (review) www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5953755/Placebo Analgesia in Rodents: Current and Future Research (in animals) www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5918296/What Is Minimally Required to Elicit Placebo Effects? (in intellectually impaired) pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29681325/scientific papers on placebo explanation (search engine) duckduckgo.com/?q=scientific+papers+on+placebo+explanation |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 23, 2024 12:42:51 GMT -5
To clarify, I'm not saying there's been no research, but the entire way the healthy industry/institution functions, tells me that they haven't deeply explored/understood the relationship between belief and 'form'. Or if they do have some understanding of it, then there must be other reasons why that understanding isn't expressed. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 23, 2024 13:29:00 GMT -5
Volition assumes doership. Doership assumes a doer. A doer is the personal context. Therefore, as soon as you bring volition into the mix, you are automatically talking in the deliberate creation context. Which is why you keep confusing LOA with deliberate creation. And then, of course, you don't see the difference to LOK, because LOK is all about deliberate creation. And the universe is not run on LOK, because the universe is not run by a personal creator. So, there is no self and there is no personal creator. It's all pure impersonal functioning. Which means, there's no basis for LOK, but there is for LOA. Surely a Buddhist can understand that? It's Buddhism 101. It is Buddhism 101.That's why your accounts are Dunning Kruger. Seems to me, from the outside looking in, that this is why Zen is so different from other Buddhist variants. "Beginner's mind", for example, turns Dunning Kruger inside out. Zen doesn't seem to me to negate or deny "Dunning Kruger", per se, but offers a radically shifted perspective on it. Same with what some might deride as "Neo-Advaita". I'd prefer, "direct path nonduality". It's not about gain or improvement. It's about subtraction. Traditional Advaita Vedanta has the same flavor: neti-neti. It's buried in Christianity as well. And this isn't a critique of scholarship, either. It's just that the existential truth is both sideways to all spiritual cultures and also buried within the "hidden center" of every specific genuine spiritual culture. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 23, 2024 13:48:10 GMT -5
The meditations described by lolz and Pants' have much in common. I've written a story on here about a synch that involves the JC story and my thoughts on miracles (my take on it ultimately, is amusement). One of the objections to you presentation on the topic are based on that there are many charlatans that mimic what Pants is suggesting to fool people. One example is the walking on thorns or hot coals. There are rational explanations for those abilities. I find all of that blurred matters-of-degree along various spectra. My mind is open, although I understand the closed minds. That's not a valid objection though, it's a strawman. I agree with the spectrum perspective though, I've mentioned as much to Lolly already. So people tend to go with that logic up to a certain degree, but at some point they stop short and don't want to follow thru all the way, for whatever reason, as Patanjali does. One reason might be attachment to current scientific dogmas. Speaking from experience, the materialist assumption is embedded pretty deep. Even when it's being questioned, consciously, it's still influential on the overall perspective. The story I tell about debating E' on freewill a year after the bottom dropping out of "I" is a related example. During that time, I knew in my bones there was no intellectual explanation, but still, the existential questions would recur, centered around the interpretation of QM. I would respectfully disagree with the conclusion that noting the charlatans and the alternative rational explanations is a straw man. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Feb 23, 2024 14:46:40 GMT -5
Without a doubt if you eat the right foods and do certain exercises there would be certain results had every time. Everything has a signature in this reality that contains a certain quality for use of a better word. Putting certain beliefs aside for a minute, the trees in the forest will grow under certain conditions butt if a lightning bolt sets fire to it and burns it to the ground then the tree will no longer grow despite what anyone believes. However, it doesn't mean that beliefs can't move mountains but how many muscle men who are bursting at the seams eat junk food all day long and never exercise do peeps know? I don't know of any. Yes, eating the right foods does contribute to health, however, it's the chemical level, and that's the lowest level in terms of effectiveness. There are other factors, like intention, mood and state of being which usually get ignored because it's difficult to qualify, quantify and analyze them in scientifically satisfying terms. Nevertheless, those other factors are of a much higher order in terms of effectiveness and therefore have a lot more influence on health. And without considering these factors you cannot explain why some people who eat all the right food and do all the right exercises still get cancer and why some people who do the exact opposite remain healthy. As the basic rules of deliberate creation state, your actions don't matter much, what matters is your state of being while you perform those actions. Eating only healthy foods but from a state of fear of cancer will still get you cancer in the end (see Moorjani's story). Your mood and state of being is way more powerful, it can override everything, even those seeming 'laws' of physics, chemistry and biology (again, see Moorjani's story). So while food and exercise are factors to consider, they are not the main factor, or the only factor as some want us to believe. Butt... you have to somewhat radically depart from the default collective belief system in order to pull that off. And you can't talk to normies about that, not even to spiritually oriented people as we've seen here, because they will make you doubt with their realism and what-is-itis. So I'd say it's not by accident that the Patanjali yogis go into the forest or into the mountains to practice, so that these false belief systems that usually surround one in the company of others, are eliminated. My mum used to say that a peep in a certain mind set could consume poison and it wouldn't effect them, same as the yogis that would lower their heart beat enough so to almost be in a hibernated state where one's body temperature could withstand being naked in a blizzard. These are all mind over matter related states and go against the grain of normality for use of a better word. Ordinarily I am just saying that everything has a signature that reflects their quality, whether it be an orange or a quartz crystal. Without any mindful intervention such qualities will hit the mark time and time again, just like certain processes will that revolve around diet and fitness will. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Feb 23, 2024 14:52:53 GMT -5
C'mon guys, scientists document inexplicable things all the time. The placebo effect is a metric in every study for a start (how's that even a thing?) but over time the odds play out and we report comparisons, means, averages and degrees of statistical significance having accounted for variances between individuals and the area under the bell curve. I mean there are many different methodologies and statistical models, but generally speaking, that's how scientific inquiry goes. Unlike miracle workers, I approach from a science based perspective and adjust according to an individual's response to stimulus. It's pretty deft, and I dare say my record of bringing long-term benefit and reversing chronic conditions outstrips that of any faith healer, but of course I also believe in faith healings, though they are quite rare and the factors are complex, so I can't pontificate from a paranormal place since the ideal isn't the same as the reality on the ground. To be clear, I haven't seen much science talk about how far the 'placebo' effect can go, and exactly how it works i.e why and how does 'belief' have such powerful impact on the body? For sure, it really doesn't go far enough does it. There are trials that happen in a controlled way where the placebo works butt that's where things seem to come to a grinding halt. There isn't really much else that is put forward to put this placebo effect into mainstream practice when dealing with ailments. Obviously one has to take into consideration there isn't any money to be gained by peeps using this technique. I mean my mum used to take yeast tabs daily that would cause a niacin flush. One day she thought about the niacin flush without taking the tablets and she had a hot flush nevertheless |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Feb 23, 2024 15:00:26 GMT -5
LOA is the larger context. LOK is the smaller context. LOK is limited to the personal context, but does not apply in the impersonal context. LOA, however, does apply both in the personal and impersonal context. As an example, LOK does not apply in the dream state, or to so-called ‘inanimate’ objects, but LOA still does. Which is why LOK, at best, is only a special case of LOA. .. Well LOK can apply to the personal and the impersonal depending on what one refers too as being both. There is personal Karma and there is collective Karma and there is Global Karma. Collective Karma can relate to soul groups and it can refer to individual countries. Global reflecting the universe as a whole. That's why what happens on Earth has a knock on effect to everywhere else. At the end of the day like said a few times without reply, Karma has to stick to something like mud has to stick to something in order to stick. If the person is just an illusion then LOK is dead in the water with nowhere to go. No foundation that carries any weight. LOA works in the same vein. Something has to attract something otherwise the illusory peep is just wasting their breath trying to convince another illusory peep that LOA works for them. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 23, 2024 15:40:39 GMT -5
To be clear, I haven't seen much science talk about how far the 'placebo' effect can go, and exactly how it works i.e why and how does 'belief' have such powerful impact on the body? For sure, it really doesn't go far enough does it. There are trials that happen in a controlled way where the placebo works butt that's where things seem to come to a grinding halt. There isn't really much else that is put forward to put this placebo effect into mainstream practice when dealing with ailments.
Obviously one has to take into consideration there isn't any money to be gained by peeps using this technique. I mean my mum used to take yeast tabs daily that would cause a niacin flush. One day she thought about the niacin flush without taking the tablets and she had a hot flush nevertheless , there is. If you browse the links I've posted today, you'll see that they say that you can use the placebo effect to make medical assistance and treatments more effective. That is what Pavlov's experiments showed. Now, scientists' interpretations of the placebo and Pavlov's results seem to me to be largely wrong, because I disagree with their beliefs about the nature of reality. So, even if the implementations of their conclusions seem to work, even if only statistically, that is applied wishful thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 23, 2024 22:55:30 GMT -5
C'mon guys, scientists document inexplicable things all the time. The placebo effect is a metric in every study for a start (how's that even a thing?) but over time the odds play out and we report comparisons, means, averages and degrees of statistical significance having accounted for variances between individuals and the area under the bell curve. I mean there are many different methodologies and statistical models, but generally speaking, that's how scientific inquiry goes. Unlike miracle workers, I approach from a science based perspective and adjust according to an individual's response to stimulus. It's pretty deft, and I dare say my record of bringing long-term benefit and reversing chronic conditions outstrips that of any faith healer, but of course I also believe in faith healings, though they are quite rare and the factors are complex, so I can't pontificate from a paranormal place since the ideal isn't the same as the reality on the ground. To be clear, I haven't seen much science talk about how far the 'placebo' effect can go, and exactly how it works i.e why and how does 'belief' have such powerful impact on the body? They measure how far it goes and compare that to the effect of the tested substance. For some treatments there is no detectable placebo effect and for others it is significant. I'm pretty sure scientists have investigated the placebo effect and there's probably plenty of literature out there.
I know psychological advantages are a big thing in sports science, including but not limited to increased performance with music, pre-lift rituals, visualisations and self-talk. That's not to say we can replace training with a ritual or something, but as a complement, it works for near enough everyone and the effect is significant.
Spiritual people are like, 'it's all belief you don't even need to lift' and I'm like, how come these no training people aren't at the olympics (irrelevant according to Reef)? I have an open mind, but eventually you have to show me the money. Lets say the the woo magic approach is possibly superior, given ideal circumstances, now lets test it in the real world and look at statistical significance. 0 woo trainees have shown superior outcomes, so what works given the actual circumstances?
I both believe in miracles and understand statistical significance, so my rate of success is high. A Woo practitioner like Jesus Christ did 3 or 4 healings out of, like what, maybe 100,000? I mean, obviously I'm way more amazing than JC and don't even delusions of grandeur over it.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 23, 2024 23:06:52 GMT -5
To be clear, I haven't seen much science talk about how far the 'placebo' effect can go, and exactly how it works i.e why and how does 'belief' have such powerful impact on the body? They measure how far it goes and compare that to the effect of the tested substance. For some treatments there is no detectable placebo effect and for others it is significant. I'm pretty sure scientists have investigated the placebo effect and here's probably plenty of literature out there. They almost certainly talk about it a whole bunch. I know psychological advantages are abigthing in sports science, including but not limited to increased performance with music, pre-lift rituals, visualisations and self-talk. That's not to say we can replace training with a ritual or something, but as a complement it works for near enough everyone .
Spiritual people are like, 'it's all belief you don't even need to lift' and I'mlike,how come these no training people aren't at the olympics? I mean I have an open mind, but eventually you have to show me the money. In fact if anyone want to take me upon a challenge, you train your guy with the woo magic and I'll train my guy on routine training and we measure perfomance metrics for 3 months, Let's make a bet. Lets say the the woo magic approach is possibly superior,give ideal circumstances of belief or whatever the woo is, now lets test it in the real world and look at statistical significance. 0 woo trainees have shown superior outcomes. I both believe in miracles and understand statistical significance, so my rate of success is high. The Woo practitioner like Jesus Christ did what, 3 or four healings out of, like what, maybe 100,000? I mean, obviously I'm way more amazing than JC and have no delusions of grandeur at all.
What gives the game away about where we are culturally on the subject, is that you'll very often hear people say, 'Oh that was JUST the placebo effect'. Like....it's a 'fake' thing. Like....it's of no real value. They'd RATHER have medicine, than placebo. Culturally, we don't understand, appreciate and accept the power of our mind yet (it even seems like a segment of our culture has been regressing further into dependency on medicine in the last couple of years....with the endless succession of vaccines and masks etc) I consider it a fact that a 'placebo' can be used to cure every illness on the planet. But there are limitations on that. First we have to believe that's possible, AND believe the mind is that powerful. We'd have to be congruent in our belief in the power of mind. And I'm not even congruent in the belief myself. I'll still take a headache pill occasionally if I have a headache....I can feel physically off color sometimes or have an aching back. I know I'm not congruent, and that's okay. I wonder...would we even create illness if we could heal it instantly? Seems unlikely doesn't it? Jesus was able to heal when the individual was ready. Jesus merely set the stage, he didn't 'perform' a healing. He held a space, and held a solid faith that made the potential of healing possible. Potentials are not always realized though. There's a great Christian street healer I used to watch on youtube. Some might say it's a scam, but I don't believe it is at all. The only thing I would say, is that the healings might not 'stick'. The person goes home, another person says, 'don't be ridiculous', and they wake up the next morning back at square one. 'Readiness' is everything. Where we are 'at', as individuals, and as a collective, is everything. And yeah....where we are individually and collectively 'at' right now, is that being a super-athlete at the Olympics requires an absolute commitment to physical training. And that's cool. We have to enjoy and appreciate where we are at. I'm on the treadmill a fair bit lately, and enjoy the sense of physicality, the sense of getting a bit out of breath, the sense of pushing limits. It's part of my own exploration right now. |
|
