Re: Non Physical Experience
Norman K. McPhail (norm@SOCAL.WANET.COM)
Tue, 30 Jun 1998 13:40:48 -0700
Ricardo Ribeiro Gudwin wrote:
>
> Norman K. McPhail wrote:
>
> > > Parapsychology
> > > The theory developed in this chapter about concepts and response rules
> > > accounts for more (possibly much more) than 90% of the daily mental
> > > activities that we can observe in human beings. Nevertheless, there are
> > > some activities that the author can't explain. There seem to be
> > > well-documented cases, where one brain senses some mental processes that
> > > had occurred in another brain in the past, also those occurring in
> > > another at the present (telepathy) and even mental processes that will
> > > occur in another brain (or in itself) at a future time. This last could
> > > be the process underlying clairvoyance.
> > >
> >
> > Clairvoyance and telepathy may be direct physical connections as opposed
> > to non physical phenomena. The notion of action at a distance is not
> > necessarily a non physical phenomenon. Still we probably will find ways
> > to model these phenomena in the near future. I understand that there
> > are as least six major labs located in several countries that are now
> > working on this very problem. If the person who told me this knows what
> > he is talking about, this work may not be made public for decades.
>
> This is an interesting example of the role of "Umwelt" in our minds. There are
>
> some individuals (called "psychics") that (may) have a larger "Umwelt" then
> the average individual. So, his perception of the world is different than of a
>
> normal individual. So, if we think that the world is only what we feel and
> what
> we see, maybe we are wrong. The world may be something that goes beyond
> this and only those individuals would be qualified to "sense" these aspects of
>
> the world. Of course, there are always those that simply deny that this
> "extended" world do exist. In the same sense that a bacteria would deny
> that anything beyond its own "Umwelt" would exist.
> Tricky and funny, didn't it ?
> Ricardo
Well said Ricardo. I think that one of the best ways to stretch our
understanding is to grasp how our own understanding tends to blind us to
much of what is going on. In fact, the very thought modes that we
humans think are so wonderful and productive in terms of enabling us to
manage our surroundings for our own benefit, are the very ones that
cause much of our blind spot. The worst thing about these thought modes
is that they keep us from seeing just how blind we are.
So I think that the best way to get around this blind spot is to first
understand how little we know. Once we do this we can begin to let some
of ouR other thought modes help us understand our selves, each other and
the world around us. Thus, I think that we are all capable of
understanding these things that now seem like such a mystery to most of
us. I think all it takes is a little "and" logic magic. Then, presto,
we're in an amazing new multiverse of human understanding.
Norm McPhail