The Agent Factor

[Michael Allen]

Ok...just throwing this "out there"

A proposition popped into my head today while listening to the Aug 30, 2009 Karl Mamer episode:

Proposition: An event is labeled "paranormal" if and only if the existence of the event implies a non-human conscious agent (sentient) or agency.
Corollary 1: The "paranormal" label on an event vanishes when an acting non-human sentient agent is ruled out.


I would like to know if there is one example of a persistently labeled "paranormal" event that does not in some way ultimately point to a non-human sentient being.

 

[tyder001]

I don't think I can answer this one. Not even sure I understand the question. :shy: But, I was just thinking today about a Lucid Dream I had a year or so ago. In the dream I actually talked with a female. (No this wasn't one of the sexy dreams. I keep those to myself.) Anyway, right at the end of the dream I actually look her right in the face (which in itself is a little odd for one of my dreams.) She then makes a statement (which came to pass the next day) and winks at me. Only problem is when I do have things like this I only have two kinds of folks that I know and that I talk to. One is the very religious and they see the devil. The other is the very skeptical and they (dispite all evidence to the contrary) either don't want to talk about it or shrug it off. But, anyway this post reminded me of something I was just thinking about today. I have been inwardly debating about that dream. Is it possible "another" mental/spritual being was interacting with me in my own dream? The only two choices (for me) is that I either was somehow projecting a part of my own Psyche or another "conscious being" was interacting with me. My logical mind just reels at the later possibility. I really wonder if we as a species are really ready for contact with an "other."

 

[Michael Allen]

I don't think I can answer this one. Not even sure I understand the question. :shy: But, I was just thinking today about a Lucid Dream I had a year or so ago. In the dream I actually talked with a female. (No this wasn't one of the sexy dreams. I keep those to myself.) Anyway, right at the end of the dream I actually look her right in the face (which in itself is a little odd for one of my dreams.) She then makes a statement (which came to pass the next day) and winks at me. Only problem is when I do have things like this I only have two kinds of folks that I know and that I talk to. One is the very religious and they see the devil. The other is the very skeptical and they (dispite all evidence to the contrary) either don't want to talk about it or shrug it off. But, anyway this post reminded me of something I was just thinking about today. I have been inwardly debating about that dream. Is it possible "another" mental/spritual being was interacting with me in my own dream? The only two choices (for me) is that I either was somehow projecting a part of my own Psyche or another "conscious being" was interacting with me. My logical mind just reels at the later possibility. I really wonder if we as a species are really ready for contact with an "other."

Thanks for sharing.

And your example makes sense.

(1) The religious fundamentalist will redirect the agent to one that fits in their doctrine or world view
(2) The "skeptic" redirects the agent to NULL --> reduce to physical or mechanical process which has no consciousness/sentience or awareness component.
Either way, when the non-human agent/agency is stripped from the event it is demoted from "para-normal" to "normal."

 

[Michael Allen]

To add another note:

Another paranormal -> normal reduction:
The psycho-social hypothesis regarding anomalous phenomena redirects the agency to components of the observer's own psychological state.

Again notice the status of "paranormal" evaporates when a non-human agent/agency is replaced with the human agent/agency.

 

[Xylo]

Ok...just throwing this "out there"

A proposition popped into my head today while listening to the Aug 30, 2009 Karl Mamer episode:

Proposition: An event is labeled "paranormal" if and only if the existence of the event implies a non-human conscious agent (sentient) or agency.
Corollary 1: The "paranormal" label on an event vanishes when an acting non-human sentient agent is ruled out.


I would like to know if there is one example of a persistently labeled "paranormal" event that does not in some way ultimately point to a non-human sentient being.

Sure...Telepathy is one thing. Deja Vu would be another. Deathbed visitations another...


I've been thinking about humans and our need to constantly classify, qualify and quantify everything. Life isn't necessarily a big box in which everything has to fit neatly stacked. It's more like an amorphous cloud of gas, of ether, if you prefer. It just is, and sometimes we humans just can't rationalize everything...what's worse is that not being able to rationalize some of these things bugs the shit out of us.

 

[Michael Allen]

Is "telepathy" a human capacity?

Deathbed visitations from what? A ghost? A ghost is not a human entity.

Deja vu is the only one that sticks (unless you consider telepathy as a human ability) - but some would argue deja vu is not a paranormal event.

 

[Xylo]

Is "telepathy" a human capacity?

Deathbed visitations from what? A ghost? A ghost is not a human entity.

Deja vu is the only one that sticks (unless you consider telepathy as a human ability) - but some would argue deja vu is not a paranormal event.

Telepathy or ESP or whatever you want to call it, certainly is a human capacity. Call it synchronicity if you wish but yes, it's very human.

Deathbed visitations are visits from someone that is dying, or in the process of dying that is visiting a relative, a friend or whomever.


I'm just providing examples that don't have a non-human causation.

 

[Michael Allen]

So to be clear

Telepathy
ESP
Synchronicity
Deathbed visitations (apparition or physical presence)

Are all human-sourced paranormal phenomena.

Very good...I will have to chew on this for a bit. My motivation on this line of inquiry is simple: why some humans strive so hard to debunk the paranormal--even when the facts of a particular case point toward something that truly is paranormal.

It seemed to me that the category paranormal = unexplained or paranormal = anomalous doesn't quite fit. There's more to the paranormal that fascinates (and simultaneously disgusts) human beings--and I think it may be genetic.

 

[Xylo]

So to be clear

Telepathy
ESP
Synchronicity
Deathbed visitations (apparition or physical presence)

Are all human-sourced paranormal phenomena.

Very good...I will have to chew on this for a bit. My motivation on this line of inquiry is simple: why some humans strive so hard to debunk the paranormal--even when the facts of a particular case point toward something that truly is paranormal.

It seemed to me that the category paranormal = unexplained or paranormal = anomalous doesn't quite fit. There's more to the paranormal that fascinates (and simultaneously disgusts) human beings--and I think it may be genetic.

Because people prefer that the world conform to their own paradigm, and that they can classify, quantify and qualify everything within that paradigm. (If you'd like you can substitute the words "belief" or "religion" into that sentence instead of "paradigm.")

 

[Michael Allen]

Because people prefer that the world conform to their own paradigm, and that they can classify, quantify and qualify everything within that paradigm. (If you'd like you can substitute the words "belief" or "religion" into that sentence instead of "paradigm.")

Sure, but do you think this explanation encompasses the entire bracket of neurotic knee-jerk *denialism* (for lack of a better term) regarding paranormal phenomena? Sure we can find similar neurotic behavior when one adherent of a particular religion tries to proselytize the adherent of another -- picture two "grids" of numerous pigeonholed mental artifacts crashing together in one big mess.

I propose the theory that humans have a fundamental phobia of *signs* (signals) denoting non-human awareness or sentience. Being that a large subset of paranormal phenomena presents this type of signal (potential) to humans, it would explain this excessive (and unscientific) denialism.

I would even go as far as to strike an equivalency between paranormal phenomenon and signals/patterns emanating from non-human *sentients*--Sometimes the counterexamples of a hypothesis actually help build a more interesting hypothesis.

Contrast HAADS (hyper-active agency detection syndrome), whereby a human being locks itself into a temporary state of rage or insanity and begins yelling at inanimate objects that frustrate it (users and malfunctioning computers and/or printers, for example). Interestingly enough this fits with natural selection--since it is better for prey to assume an active thinking agent behind a phenomenon (a moving lion or carnivorous animal) and run away, than to calculate its "intention" based on mere physics or mechanics.

I find it difficult to believe that all the skeptical fury against the paranormal is sourced in their abhorrence of human superstition--there has to be more.

 

[boomerang]

Ok...just throwing this "out there"

A proposition popped into my head today while listening to the Aug 30, 2009 Karl Mamer episode:

Proposition: An event is labeled "paranormal" if and only if the existence of the event implies a non-human conscious agent (sentient) or agency.
Corollary 1: The "paranormal" label on an event vanishes when an acting non-human sentient agent is ruled out.


I would like to know if there is one example of a persistently labeled "paranormal" event that does not in some way ultimately point to a non-human sentient being.

A very thought provoking proposition. It seems related to the flow chart in reasoning that asks whether something paranormal is beyond what we can ever know, or a technology appearing as magic only to the uninitiated. Although I don't see how participation of a non-human sentience could be ruled out in either case.

Paranormal phenomena in general seem to demonstrate a kind of 'hit and run' conscious awareness that intrudes upon our reality in a credible way, only to vanish when attempts at consistent study and understanding are attempted. But again, is this due to the inherent nature of things like telepathy, ufos etc, or a sentient 'trickster' playing cat an mouse? The crux of this might be in defining the nature of sentience and where it resides. And in understanding what differentiates one sentience, human or otherwise, from another.

 

[trainedobserver]

The only two choices (for me) is that I either was somehow projecting a part of my own Psyche or another "conscious being" was interacting with me. My logical mind just reels at the later possibility. I really wonder if we as a species are really ready for contact with an "other."

For an interesting take on what that other might be read Anthony Peake's Life after Death and The Daemon.

 

[tyder001]

For an interesting take on what that other might be read Anthony Peake's Life after Death and The Daemon.


I'm familar with Mr. Peake. But, his theories just don't answer "my" experience. (imo) <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: ad_showthread_firstpost_sig --><!-- END TEMPLATE: ad_showthread_firstpost_sig -->

 

[Michael Allen]

Concerning the nature of sentience, I found Thomas Metzinger's observations most helpful:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mthDxnFXs9k

As far as the distinction of human vs non-human sentience, I think the underlying mechanism would be the same for all. Consider the differences between a certain animal awareness and our own, I don't buy into the Aristotelian categories that separate the two. If all living organisms past and present were arrayed in front of us in a vast array, we'd probably see a continuum of "sentients" (or near that) which would defy our own categories (may actually defy categorization altogether). The question of homo sapien vs not-so-sentient ancestors might not add much more than bewilderment to our own understanding.
I highly recommend readers watch the above video -- i.e. those who are interested in the underlying questions regarding consciousness and the nature of our own self-awareness (if one could call it a "nature")

I am of the view that the collective unconscious (including what Jung considered as the "theriomorphic" or animal form elements ) contain much which have discarded out of the "rational" or "self-aware" human component. Also, I think these primordial archetypal components of the unconscious are encoded forms of what can only be our best model of alien agencies. As all such forms which are extinct are by definition alien to us--today as we are evolved.