enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Re: the thin fiction of neural stimulation
by wittgenstein
I've read with interest all of the posts in this subject. As I have personally experienced OBE's, and have read extensively on the subject, I might have a different point of view on the subject. The experiment does in no way replicate the experience as I and others have described it. It seems that the researchers have constructed a 'disconnect' that simulates autoscopy or some similar ilk. The real experience can be quite overwhelming, and involves a myriad of levels of result. What it is, I will not speculate, other than it is not dreaming nor is it hallucination. I've also experienced both (as have many others) and can verify that these latter categories are not OBE's. What I can say is that one experiences awakeness at a level more intense and real than everyday awareness. The information being 'received' often lacks the normal visual parameters of our eye perception, but is not even a little like dreams or hallucinatory experiences. It is persistent, within full xyz axis, with depth of field, color etc. A. Huxley once famously said that the brain is a kind of filter or editor of input that is so overwhelming that we need a kind of 'limiter' to simply function. Perhaps he was right, perhaps not. But the simplistic reductive paradigm that brains somehow 'squeeze' consciousness into existence by virtue of some electrical/chemical interactions and that awareness is merely a local field phenomenon are two notions that seem hopelessly archaic in light of the last centuries research in such areas as quantum physics etc. Much more intellectually satisfying would be some larger field interactions, perhaps that there is only one field with modifications? The post about not having organs powerful enough to do the electrical work necessary for ESP et al assumes that we are ourselves the only producer/receiver, limited to our physical descriptive entity. A naive view, once again a product of the old school reductive scientific norm. Science is the one and only tool for much of how we understand and manipulate our world. But it is not a complete description yet, and I'd say without hesitation that some day we'll be accepting the OBE part of our being as readily as chewing food.
View complete thread