COVID-19 Conspiracy

[bobjob]

Originally Posted by Heightend-Awareness

That would be like someone pointing and saying I just saw God. Then those who question ask for proof. How would they prove that?

The individual CAN'T prove it of course - it's exactly what you're rhetorically asking. But if a sufficiently large number of individuals were to do the same, and if it were to happen repeatedly over decades and centuries, I'd say it would be sound evidence they were experiencing an identically similar phenomenon. Whether it would be accepted God was being seen each time is debatable.

When no other explanation or evidence can be given other than that of the individual's own experience and the knowledge obtained.

When that happens the individual may justifiably be totally persuaded of the authenticity of her/his experience but it's not necessarily proof and it's not necessarily evidence for others.

[Heightend-Awareness]

Originally Posted by bobjob

The individual CAN'T prove it of course - it's exactly what you're rhetorically asking. But if a sufficiently large number of individuals were to do the same, and if it were to happen repeatedly over decades and centuries, I'd say it would be sound evidence they were experiencing an identically similar phenomenon. Whether it would be accepted God was being seen each time is debatable.

When that happens the individual may justifiably be totally persuaded of the authenticity of her/his experience but it's not necessarily proof and it's not necessarily evidence for others.

This is where the problem lies is your asking for large numbers over decades to experience it repeatedly. When there are only possibly hundreds if not less that can at the moment. As part of the awakening phenomna certain indivduals are granted abilities to gain access and some who have practiced techniques to do so. But, as you say, it will take time and by that stage it won't be a unique phenomna, it will be something everyone will be able to access and do as naturally as breathing.

[bobjob]

Originally Posted by Heightend-Awareness

This is where the problem lies is your asking for large numbers over decades to experience it repeatedly. When there are only possibly hundreds if not less that can at the moment. As part of the awakening phenomna certain indivduals are granted abilities to gain access and some who have practiced techniques to do so. But, as you say, it will take time and by that stage it won't be a unique phenomna, it will be something everyone will be able to access and do as naturally as breathing.

I'm not asking anything. I was simply responding to what you'd talked about - proof cf. evidence. Where experiences are small in number, where they're spread thinly across humankind, they remain personal hence still not sound evidence.

The word 'awakening' can mean many things to many people. It may, or may not, be a phenomenon that is new and recent, something emerging gradually, something understandably persuading individuals of its veracity. Equally it might be nothing more than another small step along a continuous path of spiritual awakening, one that's always been happening. A revelation for those experiencing it but simply one aspect in a wide spectrum of changes.

Such changes understandably feel revelatory for those experiencing them but most are only parts of a very large picture.

[Challenger007]

Originally Posted by bobjob

The format of sound evidence is one where ideally there is more than a single source for the information. Ideas, thoughts, beliefs, hypotheses, theories are not necessarily sound evidence.

Even personal experiences that unshakeably persuade a single experiencer is still not evidence but the more people telling of similar experiences the more that information could be considered evidence - in my approach. For example my own speciality is afterlife but my personal experience is not evidence we survive the death of our bodies. But I can point to abundant evidence because so many other people have had similar experiences.

It's not proof but untold numbers consider it sound evidence.

Personal experience is very individual. One cannot draw conclusions about the general from the particular. In my practice, there was a woman who was cured of cancer without chemotherapy. But this is an isolated case, which does not indicate that this is possible in every case. It seems to me, believing in spiritual strength, we should not forget about our physical component.

[bobjob]

Originally Posted by Challenger007

Personal experience is very individual.

by definition

One cannot draw conclusions about the general from the particular.

I disagree if there are significantly large instances of "the particular". In my example, the one you have quoted when responding, it was the notion of survival evidence. About that there is abundant evidence consisting of many personal experiences.

In my practice, there was a woman who was cured of cancer without chemotherapy. But this is an isolated case, which does not indicate that this is possible in every case.

Of course a single case is not evidence of a general principle - let alone 'sound evidence', the issue earlier under discussion. It's in multiplicity of such examples that a general principle might emerge.

It seems to me, believing in spiritual strength, we should not forget about our physical component.

agreed

Originally Posted by Heightend-Awareness

Of course, sorry, my bad... When I think fish, I automatically think omega 3
Cod liver = eat fish, true. You don't get that if you don't catch it yourself

You can't get a basic fish oil source fact correct, and I am supposed to believe your
stance on a mutating viral lifeform.

Sorry I am not biting.

Fake news ain't nothing new
typing fingers til your fingers blue
Blah, Blah, Blah.

[Challenger007]

Originally Posted by bobjob

Of course a single case is not evidence of a general principle - let alone 'sound evidence', the issue earlier under discussion. It's in multiplicity of such examples that a general principle might emerge.

This is true on the one hand. But very often, such special cases are effective only for a small percentage of people, while for the rest there are severe general statistics with little dynamics in one direction or another.

[bobjob]

Originally Posted by Challenger007

This is true on the one hand. But very often, such special cases are effective only for a small percentage of people, while for the rest there are severe general statistics with little dynamics in one direction or another.

As I pointed out earlier, my reference was very specific and was actually a response to another member's posting. You quoted part of my response on that point.

When - if - similar multiplicity is evident in other situations then the principle I referred to MIGHT apply similarly. I stress 'might' because there is no other example under consideration in this thread.

An old dog bobjob,is never too old to deprogram from the falsehoods of false beliefs,programming and illusions etc.

Look at defense mechanisms.

[bobjob]

Originally Posted by ant

An old dog bobjob,is never too old to deprogram from the falsehoods of false beliefs,programming and illusions etc.

Look at defense mechanisms.

I don't understand any of that.